Blade Runner Message Board
Danielle Pajari (UMD) posts on 1/31/2010 6:29:08 PM
I am not a huge fan of science fiction films, because they always portray the future as this bleak and destitute place where no one would ever want to be. This notion is very sad for me, to not see the beautiful green of the grass or trees would just be sad. After saying that I have to say, I did enjoy this movie. The plot was interesting, and really made you think. As I was watching it I didn't really think at all that Deckard could be a replicant, but as I read this forum I found the people discussing this plot point had intriguing ideas. I really enjoyed reading other people's perspective on this movie.
Daniel Owings posts on 1/25/2010 2:46:26 AM
I'm going to take the side that enjoyed the movie. I thought the story, the messages, and cinematography were very entertainingly unique. First of all, for the times it was made in this film was very innovative in terms of movie-making and the messages and themes that go along with it. I love how it portrayed society and how corporate America is holding a firm grip on the world. Blade Runner is filled with themes that intertwine with each other and my favorite has to do with the replicates. This film portrays a future America and the main difference that it points out is that humans have assembled technology so alike to humans that they are now worthy of fearing, banishment from Earth, and a 4-year lifespan. So what do the replicates mean? To me, even though they are not biologically sound humans, they symbolize human life in terms of transpersonal development. They simulate the motivations of people and the actions that are carried out, but with a shortened lifespan. The film is about the shortness of life and that choice and mindset are truth. Based on other posts, I think that the film was purposely made to be very open to interpretation. It stirring and the focus and definitions are subjected to the being that encompasses them.
Elizabeth Mann posts on 1/22/2010 1:40:42 AM
I really enjoyed watching Blade Runner from a more critical eye than the first time I watched it. I noticed many of the symbolic cues of owls and doves etc. and I understand some of the meaning but am still confused at their exact intent. I've always enjoyed when symbolism is explained to me but have a difficult time of interpreting it on my own. I definitely don't understand why Roy started howling for one thing. I guess with Blade Runner it seems there isn't one correct interpretation which is fun for the debate yet frustrating because I kind of like cut and dry movies, or at least ones that have a more definite meaning.
Lorri Ibach (UMD) posts on 1/21/2010 12:21:14 PM
I found Blade Runner to be depressing. As with many depictions of the future (even the not so distant future), man is the “bad guy”. The world is depicted as dark and dirty, and as an earlier comment pointed out, virtually void of plant or animal life. Obviously these things are due to man’s presence. I believe the lesson from this movie, is how man can create and destroy, and how if not checked by the rest of society the “bad guys”, like Tyrell can take over. Is Deckard a replicate? I don’t think it matters. Do any of us really know who we are, and why are we here?
haupt014(umd) posts on 1/13/2010 7:52:47 PM
After having read some of the previous posts I have learned I may need to go back and watch the film again. I do agree with most people on the stance that it was enjoyable to have a movie left up to my own mind and what i interpreted from it. It can make the movie more fun for the viewer and also more fun for conversations following the movie. As we know it is nearly impossible to watch a movie with someone and not ask "what did you think?" after the movie. This is what made Blade Runner so exciting. When the movie was over and the question was raised each of my roommates had their own take on what had happened. Which ordinarily after a movie one person would be right while the others would all be wrong, however, nobody could disprove what the other had to say and we all had to just believe what we wanted after we discussed the movie.
I will need to re-watch the movie in order to catch the scene one of the posts discusses about Deckards eyes glowing like the replica's in the dark. Maybe it was subtle or maybe I just missed it but I did not notice that happen when I watched it the first time.
I like the way it was implied throughout that Deckard was indeed a replica yet never actually stated. He was the "best" at what he did and it could make sense that because he was a replica he thought as well as they did, moved as quick as they did, and was better suited to defeat them than any humans were. Seeing as though he was like Rachel, an advanced version of the Replica's.
dunn0195(umd) posts on 12/22/2009 6:39:04 PM
I think the movie was ahead of it's time. The most interesting discussion about the movie to me was whether or not Deckard was a human or a replicant. I personally think he was a replicant. The Tyrell corp. in the movie showed how it could create a replicant and make it think it was a human by giving it human memories. In the movie there was not really any memories of Deckard's past other than them talking about him having used to being a Blade Runner. I think that it's very interesting that Roy Batty lets Deckard live at the end which I think he does because he recognizes Deckard as a fellow replicant. Deckard also sees what they have done to Rachel and I think he realizes that they could have done the same thing to him without him ever knowing it.
Josh Duerr posts on 12/21/2009 11:34:56 AM
I loved how complex the movie was, how Scott left so much up to the viewer to interpret while dropping subtle hints throughout the movie that makes you question what you think about what is going on. I normally don’t like movies that leave things up to you, but the way in which this movie tied together set it apart from other sci-fi films I’ve seen. The ideas and technologies created to achieve their goals was far ahead of other movies produced in the early eighties. If I have any complaints is at times the movie went on a little slowly. The dialogue was pretty good but I was hoping for a little more action. The movie didn’t expand too far beyond the central characters, and most of the action scenes were rather brief or maybe not very creative. Don’t get me wrong, I believe that the story is executed very well and was like anything I’ve seen before, being a relative newcomer to the sci-fi world. There were many questions that were left unanswered but it translates well into our society seeing how we don’t really know the true nature of many of the people that are closest to us; almost everyone has something to hide yet we have the ability to bypass this and let love conquer all.
kadl0031-UMD posts on 12/18/2009 1:55:38 PM
I really enjoyed how much in this movie is left open to interpretation and debate; I think this is truely the mark of a good movie. There isn't definitive evidence one way or the other, but I sure would like to believe that Deckard was a replicant. Since he was a superior blade runner to his colleagues, it would make sense that he would be a replicant, as they are faster, stronger, and better. Little information is given about Deckards' past, and when asked if he has ever taken 'the test' he skirts around the question.
trosi003-UMD posts on 12/16/2009 7:21:37 PM
This movie was rather impressive for being produced in the early ‘80s; Harrison Ford may have helped a little. The technology appeared to be semi-advanced for its respected time period, while the science fiction action kept me engaged throughout the whole movie. The story itself touched on some themes that deserve to be reflected on such as genetic engineering, religion and humanity as a whole. All of the replicants in the movie have been genetically engineered which still remains a fairly controversial topic in our society today. From watching the movie, I was left with the impression that the creator of the replicants played a similar role as God, and appeared to leave the other characters with minimal free will. This feeling of having a predestined fate leads to the concept of what can be considered humanity or simply androids dreaming of electric sheep. This movie captured the audience’s attention through technology and offering themes to be contemplated further, which remain key components to becoming an all-time science fiction classic.
James M posts on 12/4/2009 11:59:50 AM
I really liked this movie! I really liked the symbolism of this movie, especially when tied in to the topic of humanity. It seems to me that how Deckard refers to killing the replicants as retiring them it is a way for him to hide from his humanity, or the humanity of the replicants. When Rachel asks if he would follow her if she went north, he said he wouldn't but someone would. Hiding humanity is throughout the movie. Making the replicants able to have emotions and memories, gives them what everyone hopes for in life. Picture perfect families and emotions that can be controlled to a certain extent. Then when Roy uses Sebastian's empathy to get what he want, it shows how some people in life will continue to use others.
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.
