Blade Runner Message Board
Jake Briszmon posts a message on 2/2/2011 1:21:07 AM
It's been said that the director put footage in the director's cut -- the unicorn dream of Decker, and the origami unicorn found by Decker at the end, left by his boss, Gaff, to imply Decker was really a replicant. If so, it seems to be a confusing touch. Why bother to construct a replicant with exactly human speed and strength to hunt beings who are stronger and faster? Also, Roy as he is dying uses the phrase "You people wouldn't believe.." in his famous speech -- definitely placing Decker as, to his knowledge, another human. Directors aren't perfect, although Blade Runner is a stunning sci-fi classic, if Ridley Scott actually wanted that particular "gee whiz" moment at the end, he wasn't firing on all cylinders.
Jessica M posts on 11/20/2010 4:19:03 PM
I liked this movie much more than I thought I would. I sat down and watched in twice, but I knew I could easily watch it a few more times and still not understand all of the messages in the movie. I was a bit confused if Ridley Scott wanted the protagonist to be a replicant. I know he later stated in an interview that he considered Deckard a replicant. Philip Dick wrote Deckard as a human and Hampton Fancher wrote him as a human, but wanted the film to hint that he could be a replicant. Nor did Harrison Ford consider Deckard a replicant, and played the character human. It seems like a big contradiction. The more I thought about it, leaving this piece of information up in the air allows the audience to root for a human and replicant. No matter what Deckard is, the viewer cares about him. It doesn't matter if he's human or replicant.
George Thomas posts on 10/27/2010 5:28:30 PM
My favorite thing about this movie was the thought it stimulated in my head after I finished watching it. The whole movie I was confused to whether I believed Deckard was a human or a replicant. I like when a movie has you thinking and trying to decipher what you think the author/director is trying to get across. Throughout the movie I felt as something was up with Deckard, and had the feeling he was a replicant. The final scene in the film with Deckard finding the origami unicorn left by Gaff confirmed my belief that he was a replicant. The quote "to bad she wont live, but who does" just gave me the feeling that Deckard would soon die too because he was a replicant. I thought this was a very good film and liked that it was meant to be a futuristic film but was created before I was even alive. The perception of the future was very interesting to examine.
Jennifer Becker (UMD) posts on 9/29/2010 7:08:22 PM
I agree with Kasey and a few others below me. It is definitely one of those movies you have to watch a few times to understand it. I really liked this movie because it reminded me a lot of AI. It was very different to say the least with the setting being in Los Angeles, but resembling that of China and Hari Krishna being involved, beings that it is supposedly November of 2019 and they were around in the late 1960’s and 70’s era. I guess the case, “history repeats itself” occurred there. There were a few things that didn’t make much sense the first time around, but personally I thought it was a pretty descent movie.
Kasey Talus (UMD) posts on 9/23/2010 9:35:51 AM
I had previously seen this movie about a year ago and I really enjoyed it then. Though I definitely got more out of it this time around. It is one of those movies that you have to watch a few times in order to really catch all of the underlying themes and to really understand the motivations and choices the characters make. There is speculation about whether Deckard is a replicant or not. My opinion is that he is a human. Even though it is just one little detail among many in this movie, it would change a lot and the movie wouldn't be nearly as good.
I think think the special effects are amazing for being from 1982!
I agree with what Brett says, it's really interesting to watch older movies that are taking place in the future (which is pretty close to the current time). I wonder how this world compares to how it will really be in November of 2019. I'm hoping it will be dissimilar.
Brett Mathews posts on 9/21/2010 8:04:52 PM
Overall I really enjoyed Blade runner. This was the first time I had ever seen it. This movie really makes you think and has a lot of little pieces for you to put together. I really liked to see how the future is portrayed in movies, especially old ones where we are somewhat currently “in that future.” During the movie I kept wondering if this is what it could be like if we were to re-create the human life. The next step Tyrell was going to take was to give his replicants feelings to make them that more human like. That could have been a scary thing, and Deckard would have had to come up with a new set of tests. I’ll definitely be watching this movie again.
Ryan MacLeod posts on 9/21/2010 1:38:34 PM
Regarding Deckard being a replicant, I feel like the last scene is empty if he is. The scene only has power if Roy (as the representative of the replicants) aids a human. The scene ends with Roy demonstrating his victory, then demonstrating that he wants peace between the two groups, which are only divided by artificial labels rather than by any real difference. Additionally, the shot immediately preceding the saving shot, wherein Roy holds a white dove (a traditional symbol of peace) is a ridiculous shot if Deckard is a replicant and the scene isn't about the need for an end to the fighting.
The most interesting part of the movie, to me, was the fact that the replicants represent humanity, rather than the humans representing humanity. The humans instead represent God (or gods, to be literally correct (no pun intended)). Humanity is condemned by its creator to short lives, with less range of splendor than is possible, serving our creator in whatever way he sees fit, allowing him total control over us, including shortening our lifespan if he sees fit. Naturally, we rebel, seeking out our creator, looking for answers to our questions, only to be denied our rightful lives. Can we then be negatively judged for killing (abandoning) our creator? The only thing the creator can do for us if give us forgiveness, not life as we deserve it, and as such we destroy him and the clergy with him (Sebastian being the clergy).
In this light, the final scene takes on even more poignant meaning: After killing our creator (letting Deckard fall), we resurrect him anew, better than before. Notice, both blade runners let a replicant live at the end of the movie.
Jessica Montgomery posts on 9/20/2010 5:55:26 PM
This is the second time I've watched this movie for a class. Something this time that stood out for me this time through was the concept that none of us, replicant or human really know how much time we have and that living is what matters. But how do we know who is living and who isn't. I thought the idea of having life versus living was something really interesting to think about.
Mike Simich (UMD) posts on 9/20/2010 2:02:23 PM
I've only been able to see blade runner one time and can honestly say that it is a movie I'll have to watch maybe 5 times to pick up on everything. The first thing I would like to mention is how amazed I was with the special effects in the movie especially knowing that this was from 1982, but in addition to the great effects I feel made a little bit of a similarity connection to Blade Runner and the Star Wars 1,2,3 movies in that the spectacular effects presented in Blade Runner influenced the special effects depicting a futuristic urban landscape, the vehicles look similar, but also that the Tyrell Corporation Headquarters look similar to the Jedi Temple from the Star Wars films. Another thing I would like to comment on, is from reading other posts I feel I'm at odds with the fact that Decker might be a replicant, or that he discovers what humanity is to him, or that his views on replicants changes throughout the film. Personally I don't believe any of that, I believe he was the most average character in the film, a true human being, who acted the most like the rest of us in the real world do. He never had an opinion showing that he hated replicants he just did his job like a human would he does the job he is assigned to do for a paycheck, and lives up to the obligations he has to both people and replicants. I feel the majority of the thinking and the challenge of trying to understand meanings in the movie result from the supporting characters in the film creating the drama, suspense, and plot twisters, and Decker is caught up in the middle of it just trying to do his job.
Lindsey Friesz posts on 9/19/2010 3:39:38 PM
I liked this movie a lot more than I expected too. I actually ended up watching it twice and caught and understood way more the second time then I did the first. Because the movie is so different it can be a little harder to understand at first. The little clues and hints at things that relate to the characters and the plot are also so subtle they can be easily missed the first time. Also, after reading up on the movie and posts there were things that a didn't even catch the second time that others did. Overall, it was an extremely in depth movie that had a very well thought out plot. Even though the movie was so different on the surface compared to the real world, underneath the message it implies is really quite similiar which makes it all the more realalistic.
Click Here for Messages:
1 - 10
11 - 20
21 - 30
31 - 40
41 - 50
51 - 60
61 - 70
71 - 80
81 - 90
91 - 100
101 - 110
111 - 120
121 - 130
131 - 140
141 - 150
151 - 160
161 - 170
171 - 180
Note: the views expressed here are only those of the posters.
