Chaank
Sr Member
Sorry dude, I'm terrible at making jokes on here. I was trying to make a bladerunner funny. You talking about memory and things you think you remembered was fantastic in this thread. Awesome pic!:thumbsup
Blade Runner 2049
- Thread starter ghostryder
- Start date
Sorry dude, I'm terrible at making jokes on here. I was trying to make a bladerunner funny. You talking about memory and things you think you remembered was fantastic in this thread. Awesome pic!:thumbsup
Ha... nah my bad... I've only seen the movie 200 times since I discovered it 2 years ago. Obviously I'm slow on everything Blade Runner!
I actually thought it was a strangely worded comment. heh
I always imagined that the bulk of humans lived Off-World and the Earth remained as a place of refuse where people too poor or chronically ill remained to be forgotten. When Pris asks JF Sebastian why he's still on Earth he said he couldn't pass the physical because of Methuselah Syndrome. That line implies that anyone of means, like JF Sebastian, wouldn't be expected to be on Earth. I imagined the Earth was falling into disrepair while the centers of power were Off-World. That idea is loaded with pathos. I hope they don't abandon that idea.
Nth
Sr Member
That's almost how it was in the book. In fact there are entire sections of cities overrun by kipple and abandoned and people can just walk into abandoned buildings and apartment complexes and live in relative isolation. Like the Bradbury building. In the Blade Runner game a certain politician (Governor Kolvieg???) is mentioned to be campaigning to allow replicants on earth to be used to clean up the kipple and keep cities from falling into complete disrepair.
I don't know if you're in the minority or not, I just know that I never liked it. Some of the lines were simply distractingly bad (IMO). The worst one being right after after Roy Batty's iconic death scene which derailed the perfect moment ("All he wanted was the same answers as the rest of us. Where do I come from? What're am I going?" *ughh*). I groaned but more than one person laughed in that theater.
I've met plenty of folks who didn't agree with me. FWIW it gave me some validation to discover Harrison Ford didn't like it either. In one of the outtakes of the voiceover recording he complains how terrible he thought it was.
I grew up with it, even in the directors cut I hear him talking in my head so it's always there one way or the other.
I never hated the narration. I still will quote it for fun. But I can watch either now without preference.
I saw the one with Voice Over first... I didn't know ANYTHING about Blade Runner at the time (which was just over 2 years ago)
so I hit the original cut first, and HATED every time the voice came on. He sounded so bored... especially that last scene.
Then I watched the directors cut, and was pleasantly surprised there was no voice over.
HOWEVER, I do think the voice over helped with understanding certain scenes I may not have fully grasped on a first viewing without voice over....
so I hit the original cut first, and HATED every time the voice came on. He sounded so bored... especially that last scene.
Then I watched the directors cut, and was pleasantly surprised there was no voice over.
HOWEVER, I do think the voice over helped with understanding certain scenes I may not have fully grasped on a first viewing without voice over....
bwayne64
Master Member
That was exactly what I thought about the narration, old detective movie. I never noticed how phoned in Harrisons narration was until I read that on a forum, ;-)
And I also don't like the Deckard as replicant idea. He was just a cop, a human cop. Anything else is just speculation. So your not alone, there's at least two of us, LOL.
Haha. Me too
iv the mercy
Member
I love the subtle hints and nods to the the "Speculation" of Deckard being a replicant. I've always viewed it as a nod of sub conscience paranoia. The idea of peeking and seeing the man behind the curtain and realizing that reality and fantasy are separated by a very fine line. To be haunted with an idea that you may, in fact, be the thing you've been trained to detach yourself from and exterminate........... BUT....... In the end I picture my Deckard as a 9lb 7oz baby Deckard, wearing a tuxedo t-shirt.....
Last edited:
I think I like the thought of Deckard as a replicant because I watched the movie so many times without thinking he was more than a human. But then I joined the RPF and someone mentioned that they thought Deckard was a replicant and it totally changed the movie for me. It was almost like a completely different movie for me.
But that was the whole point of the first movie. Replicants aged at an accelerated rate due to their enhanced abilities.
"The light that burns twice as bright lasts half as long."
Ostensibly, Deckard was "more human than human" and would age normally just like everyone else -- so would Rachel.
So why is Deckard pointing a gun at another Blade Runner if he doesn't think it's possible the agent is coming after him?
And K indicating that "things were simpler then," might imply that all Blade Runners are now replicants (Deckard may have been the first) tasked with hunting down illegal replicants.
As a dubious replicant, is Deckard hiding from Blade Runners?
The opening monologue also states that if replicants are a benefit, they aren't a Blade Runner's problem. But if they're a hazard...
Just thinking out loud.
And K indicating that "things were simpler then," might imply that all Blade Runners are now replicants (Deckard may have been the first) tasked with hunting down illegal replicants.
As a dubious replicant, is Deckard hiding from Blade Runners?
The opening monologue also states that if replicants are a benefit, they aren't a Blade Runner's problem. But if they're a hazard...
Just thinking out loud.
Deckard could still be in hiding for making off with illegal Tyrell property ie. Rachel. I do agree tho' that an aging Deck is no proof of humanity. Also thinking out loud, Hampton Fancher pretty much hated the idea of Deckard being a replicant, IIRC. I doubt he would write that into the new script unless Ridley was insistent on it,
Nth
Sr Member
On the Dangerous Days making of documentary of Blade Runner, Hampton Fancher says he is completely against Deckard being a replicant and he was never written that way or even intended to be hinted at being a replicant. That was entirely a Ridley thing whose retort to Fancher was that anyone who doesn't realize Deckard is a replicant is an idiot.
Hampton Francher - During a discussion panel with Ridley Scott for Blade Runner: The Final Cut: He cuts Scott off during the replicant talk saying "Ridley's off, he's totally wrong!" and that "[Scott's] idea is too complex" and prefers the film to remain ambiguous saying "So the question [is Deckard a replicant] has to be an eternal question. It doesn't have an answer, and what I always say about that is what Pound says: 'Art that remains news is art in which the question 'what does it mean'' has no correct answer. I like asking the question [about Deckard] and I like it to be asked but I think it's nonsense to answer it...that's not interesting to me."
https://darthmojo.wordpress.com/2008/06/18/scott-on-blade-runner/
https://darthmojo.wordpress.com/2008/06/18/scott-on-blade-runner/
