Blade Runner Question

[SSgt Burton]

They basicaly ride off into the sunset... their new status is better than they were in the film, it is "Happier", and since they don't show a spinner hot on their tail, like it was in one script, this by every means fits the description of what a "Happy Ending" is. Especially since it was shown that Gaff let them both go.

Indeed. Not to mention the music is the love theme and not foreboding (No the end credits music doesn't count- the credits are rolling; the film has ended :lol). There is nothing to indicate they are being followed/hunted and the scene itself is just telling you to "forget about it" even if you do think another Blade Runner (other than Gaff) might be after them.

The whole point is that they are going to live out the remainder of their lives as if everyday might be their last. Deckard is finally going to show love and passion and stop being a "cold fish" (and the ultimate irony is that it has taken a machine to make Deckard want to change).

Again the V.O. reinforces this theme as Deckard says, "Four years (Gaff) figured; he was wrong"... "I didn't know how long we would have together... who does?"

And they lived happily ever after.


Kevin

 

[Larry Young]

And they lived happily ever after.

But so what? According to Ridley, they're both toasters. I don't care if two toasters live happily ever after, or if a toaster learns what it's like to be human after another toaster doesn't kill him at the end of its toaster life as he drives off with another toaster.

Honestly, this interpretation is the biggest pro for "Deckard is not a replicant" I've read on this forum for a while.

 

[rodneyfaile]

But so what? According to Ridley, they're both toasters. I don't care if two toasters live happily ever after, or if a toaster learns what it's like to be human after another toaster doesn't kill him at the end of its toaster life as he drives off with another toaster.

Honestly, this interpretation is the biggest pro for "Deckard is not a replicant" I've read on this forum for a while.

What is the difference between "toaster" and human?

To me the point is that the concept of "being human" or being a "person" is called into question.

 

[Larry Young]

What is the difference between "toaster" and human?

Well, of course I was talking about emotional resonance for myself as an audience member, so there's that. But if you want to talk what's the difference between a mechanism and an organic being, I should think that is obvious and I will leave as an exercise for the student.

To me the point is that the concept of "being human" or being a "person" is called into question.

That's cool, and I agree that's (broadly) the theme of the film. I was speaking merely to the emotional resonance to me as an audience member that if Deckard is a replicant, Blade Runner might as well be Wall-E, in terms of my emotional engagement in the story as an audience member.

 

[rodneyfaile]

I would think the "emotional resonance" would be that those "toasters" are just as human as we are, so therefore the definition of "life" or "soul" or whatever we think makes a human "unique" would need adjusting, at least in the world of the Blade Runner. Maybe in the real world one day too.

 

[Larry Young]

First, I'd ask when putting forth a point, you don't characterize what you would think my personal emotional resonance with a particular story might be, please. I find that borderline insulting, what with you not knowing me at all. But, still; carry on. :lol

I would think the "emotional resonance" would be that those "toasters" are just as human as we are...

Yeah? Well, not for me. Maybe if it was made more clear that those toasters (no quotations, please; that turn of phrase is from the TNG ep "Measure of a Man" where the Starfleet JAG summarily rules [briefly] "Fine; Data is a toaster." That's where the Cylon slang came from in nuBSG as well and is used specifically for effect) could reproduce themselves, I might conditionally agree with you, but a construct that feels ennui is still a construct.

...so therefore the definition of "life" or "soul" or whatever we think makes a human "unique" would need adjusting, at least in the world of the Blade Runner. Maybe in the real world one day too.

Long after my bones are dust.

 

[Serenity]

I'm not sure what version it will be, but Blade Runner starts on SyFy in about 12 minutes...

 

[SSgt Burton]

Honestly, this interpretation is the biggest pro for "Deckard is not a replicant" I've read on this forum for a while.

I'm in the "he's human" camp.

The story is meaningless otherwise.


Kevin

 

[d_jedi1]

I'm not sure what version it will be, but Blade Runner starts on SyFy in about 12 minutes...

Theatrical... it had it in red letters under "Blade Runner" :lol
I'll probably leave it on so my wife can soak some of it up. I can't get her to sit and watch the film "proper".

 

[Serenity]

Theatrical... it had it in red letters under "Blade Runner" :lol

:lol Thanks; my DirecTV doesn't have that listed in the info, just the normal spiel on "specialized detective terminates obsolete android slaves"...

 

[d_jedi1]

:lol Thanks; my DirecTV doesn't have that listed in the info, just the normal spiel on "specialized detective terminates obsolete android slaves"...

ohhhh lol o.k. I was watching the ad on syfy, not looking at the "guide" listing. (hits guide on his remote)
Yeah, that doesn't say anything about the theatrical cut. :lol

edit: strangely enough.. I haven't heard a voiceover yet and when they played it the other day, it did have them.
I KNOW it said "Theatrical Cut" under "Blade Runner" on the ad that popped up. Wierd...

 

[Larry Young]

The story is meaningless otherwise.

I agree with you. This might pain micdavis, but they lived happily ever after. If they didn't, we might as all well be French.

...

...

Sorry, Thibault. :lol

 

[Nwerke]

LOL. Yeah, it's a happy ending for mine, in both versions.

Just a literal-minded point of clarification: replicants may be constructs, but they're chiefly or fully organic ones. Tyrell appears to have come up with some sort of reverse-engineered human genome, or something close enough to one to produce effectively humanlike results. Who knows? They have to be artificially prevented from developing emotions, perhaps they have to be artificially prevented from conceiving, too. No evidence for that of course, just seems a stretch to say they're only toasters. One of the points of the movie is that Tyrell has taken things several notches past that point...

 

[Bobtherocker]

I will never understand why the screenplay writers omitted one of the more salient themes of the book. Spirituality - Is the soul an intrinsic part of the human biological make-up or is it developed through experience by any form of higher intelligent life regardless?.
Also, little elements such as the penfield mood organ, used by humans to artificially reprogram their emotions juxtaposed with the android's desire to be able to develop emotion. That and Mercer's struggle up the mountain. Spiritual enlightenment through hardship and perseverance. Something Roy and his fellow androids might achieve were it not for the failsafe Tyrell imposed.
There is also the stigma attached to owning artificial animals as opposed to owning a real one. While I understand it to be as much about social standing than it is about anti android sheep sentiments, Deckard would rather have owned an artificial sheep than a real mouse.
Bladerunner for me failed to convey the underlying point of the book. The writers latched on to the Detective, film noir aspect and throttled the life out of the rest of the story. That's why it needs narration. It lost it's coherence through poor adaptation (as far as I'm concerned).

 

[micdavis]

Just because someone does not interpret the movie the same as you does not mean someone did not "get it".

That is what pains me from the Film school wannabes.

It's such BS.

...and Boba Fett (another new voice to add to the list) has more lines in the New Star Tours than he did in ROTJ.

 

[JPolacchi]

Rarely does any film adapted from a book to screen get translated precisley as the book was written.I can't really think of one that has.The main basis from the book is in there in the film and none of it(at least what you are referring to) is in any of Ford's voice overs/narration speaking of spirituality.

 

[TheRealMcFly]

Guys... why call replicants toasters when you can type skinjob? I thought we were sticklers for accuracy here, Lol.

I just sat through the 2 hour snoozefest called Never Let Me Go It might possibly be the dullest way to explore the majority of themes of Blade Runner.

When I finally saw Blade Runner I was suprised by how slow it moved and the lack of big action. Granted I was a teenager at the time, but I feel like any first time viewer has expectations associated with just the title. It sounds fast paced, but isnt.

To me it is a mostly visual experience, especially the first time. Forget about which version and make sure you're not watching it on a tiny screen with tiny sound.

 

[Larry Young]

Guys... why call replicants toasters when you can type skinjob?

Because I was making a point about them being mechanisms, not using an in-universe epithet.

 

[CessnaDriver]

An accurate to book film would be an interesting watch.
Though grimmer and slower. Now what would people say? LOL

 

[androidandy]

The point in the book is that there is a fine line between human and android, and humans can easily move across into their territory, if they lose their soul in their work. The movie also says they are both pretty much the same thing, just one is not legally human and therefore can be a slave. Maybe that is why Batty saves Deckard at the end, because he realizes he is a slave too, not a replicant. The question at the end should be not who is human or not, but are the replicants more like humans with a soul, or the humans more like replicants without one? We as a people always seem to need someone to dehumanize, be it because of their race, culture, nationality, political standing, or just plain being different than us in any way. Why not just take humans, wipe out most of their memories, and say they are manufactured so you can sell them as slaves*


Andy

*This idea is copyrighted by me for the use in any possible sequels/prequels/and sidequel movies