Blade Runner Message Board
olso1713 posts on 2/4/2009 10:59:44 PM
Gaff is one of the most interesting characters to me in Blade Runner. He is very mysterious and very observant. He is quiet, but very visible and present in the film. I am particularly fond of his oragami creations when he is around Deckard. First, he seems to call Deckard a "chicken" when he and Deckard are in Bryant's office and Deckard is trying to back down from Bryant's request. Then Gaff makes a little man out of a match when Deckard is checking out Leon's room. Before I read more information on some related websites, I kind of thought that match man represented the idea that Deckard was about to destroy himself in his quest to retire these renegade Replicants. AFter reading more I realized the small stick figure had an extra appendage near the groin area, and decided it could possibly also signify Deckard's overindulgance in the whole quest. Last was Gaff's oragami unicorn. I understand that this could mean that Deckard was a Replicant himself, and I'm really not trying to negate that idea. However, I think this oragami unicorn could also simply symbolize the subjective nature of reality. There is definitely a theme of unicorns throughout the movie, but a unicorn is theoretically a mythical creature. I think the unicorn symbolized more than just the fact that Deckard himself was a Replicant, and was yet another suggestion of the quest for reality that we all struggle with.
Samantha Kelly - UMD posts on 2/3/2009 10:19:36 PM
This was also my first viewing of Blade Runner and overall, I found it interesting. I can see how state of the art and ahead of its time it would have been in 1982. I found the plot a little confusing to follow, especially with the photos and the snake deal. In response to the idea that Deckard is a replicant - I read that the director Ridley Scott thought Deckard to be a replicant, but the author of the book says he was meant to be human. He thinks the idea of Deckard being a replicant is interesting, although this was not his intention. Opinions about it also differ whether you watched the original version or the directors cut. On that note, I thought it would be funny to mention the only copy my movie rental store had was the VHS. I can't remember the last time I rented a VHS and I thought it was incredibly appropriate for the 80's film.
tara0051-UMD posts on 2/1/2009 3:20:33 PM
After reading many of the posts, I think the discussion over whether or not Deckard is a replicant is fascinating. First off, I would like to say that I personally believe Deckard is a replicant. It is great how Ridley Scott leaves subtle hints at this throughout the movie, such as the unicorn origami and Rachel asking him if he's been tested. But this brings me to the question of whether we should view the characters different because they are replicants. For example, Deckard and Rachel lived lives no different than the humans, so why should they be treated as any less. They were just as intelligent and physically capable, and obviously showed that they too feel real emotion. Additionally, should we see Roy negatively, just because he feels cheated by the fact that he is forced to live such a short life. How is this any different that someone who is terminally ill, and also feels like they have been cheated out of a full life? I just think this is an interesting thing to think about when looking at the film, and in some ways shed new light on it for me.
spaulso posts on 1/20/2009 10:53:33 PM
When you consider that Blade Runner was released in 1982- well first I shudder a bit at the stuff put out now, but after I recover I think about the strength of this movie. So many movies now are driven by focus groups and geared to mass appeal- where this is gritty, smart, and still relevant. It, to me, was a study of basic human fears and questions. The replicants quest to understand where they come from, where they are going, and how long before death(and like humans the desire to slow that fate). What I am particularly drawn to is the dark atmosphere of the film, the technological advancements that have not solved age old issues but may have actually just brought us more. Creating beings for slavery, beings that we should be able to ethically justify, but then making them more and more like us to the point where you can't help but be sympathetic to their plight(because it is also ours). As Roy points out, he has seen more than most could imagine, so why is that knowledge disposable? Thinking about the details of this film, I probably could be trapped for days in thought. Mankind, technology, environment, and the underlying questions of souls. It is kind of how I feel watching Battlestar Galactica (I wonder if, or how much Blade Runner influenced the show).
nagilum posts on 1/19/2009 11:48:58 PM
Yes, book and film are very different: there are other androids other names and other stories. For example the secound police station, Rita Luft, the guntyps and other technical things, the places, the Russians and the war!!!
AFyre posts on 1/15/2009 2:34:09 PM
After watching the movie, I happened to turn on the Directors comments at the credits. Ridley Scott talks about how while hunting replicants that it would only be natural to wonder if you were one to. He also mentions the unicorn origami found at the end, leading Deckard to believe that Duff knows his memories. It hadn't occurred to me to consider this but reminded me when he was asked it he had ever taken the test, and how he had photographs like the others. I think the movie also addresses a huge question in to basis of being human. "I think, therefore I am" is quoted by Pris, and is the beginning of the question. I think having emotions is also questioned in the movie, at the end, Deckard asks Rachael if she loves him, and Roy prevents Deckard from falling from the roof top. It shows that even the Replicants are capable of emotions, even if they are not quite the same as humans. Deckard even finds that the newer model, Rachael is harder to detect, when given memories of a childhood to draw from. Over all the movie seems to question, what really keeps the Replicants from being human? It seems the only answer given in the movie is that they are created artificially. I will agree with a previous post regarding the notion that the closer to average the Replicant is made, the more human they seem, as in Rachael and Deckard's case.
rose0594 posts on 1/5/2009 11:36:50 AM
After watching the movie I was confused about the fact that Harrison Ford ran away with a replicant. He spent all his time trying to kill the replicants that came to earth yet ended up being with one. After he left the lab and knew that she was a replicant he still brought her home and fell in love with her. It has always made me think anout the fact that she was his true love. He gave up his life to run away with her. The thing that gets me is that she will only live for about four years so why is he running with her and just giving up on killing replicants. It makes me question what he is going to do once she dies? Will he continue to risk his life and keep killing replicants although he once was attached? Or will he leave and stay where they resided?
After looking at the different web sites I noticed that there were many different things about the book that people loved and also had questions about like the same as I did. There were others that had different information on how the book goes about repliants and him falling in love with her. It is very interesting to read about the view of others.
Sarah S-UMD posts on 12/20/2008 1:07:10 PM
After reading the different websites I came to a realization about Bladerunner that I hadn’t seen before. People view each other on what they know and won’t figure anything else out. Either you are a replicant or you’re human. Deckard spends his time finding the empathy in people to determine if they are human but the humans have no empathy towards the repilcants. It struck me as such an odd juxtaposition. Are human supposed to feel empathy towards the replicants or are they supposed to shut down and not see that about them
Matt J. UMD posts on 12/19/2008 4:09:30 PM
This was my second viewing of Blade Runner, the first only being last spring, and I have to agree with the last poster that I caught a lot more the second time through. For instance I didn't connect the unicorn in Deckards dream to the little folded unicorn the first time. Also, I was able to notice a lot more of the emotional chords that were lost to me the first time because I was so busy trying to guess out the plot. Furthermore, it never even crossed my mind that Deckard could in fact be a replicant himself. I actually like what the last poster said about it making sense that a Blade Runner would be a replican since it's a job that most humans wouldn't want to do. It would also explain why they got Deckard hunting down all of the replicants rather then splitting the task among several Blade Runners. The don't want to many extra repicants running around after all :)
Al K - UMD posts on 12/8/2008 1:19:44 AM
When I watched Blade Runner for the first time, I did not notice all of the detail that was in the movie. I was more focused on the plot of retiring the replicants. After visiting some of the websites and watching the movie again, I noticed a lot more detail. When I watched the movie the first time, the thought of Deckard being a replicant did not cross my mind, because he was so lifelike. I did find it intriguing when Roy met Tyrell. The conversation between the maker and the prodigal son.The quest for worldly life and the conflict in one's life that turns a person against their maker. The human emotion that Roy expressed when he was asking for forgiveness for the terrible acts that he committed, because he understood right from wrong, but was praised instead, added conflict to his beliefs. Also, when Roy was with Deckard before he retired, he spoke with Deckard like a father would speak to a son when his days were numbered. He was passing on information to help Deckard understand life. I did not tie the origami unicorn to Deckard's dream,until I watched it the second time. However, it made sense that Gaff was the basis for Deckard's memories, Blade Runners would also be a dangerous job that humans would likely delegate to a replicant, especially if the replicant thought it was human. The movie definitely carried more meaning for me when I watched it the second time.
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.
