Posted on 12/19/2016 10:30:48 AM PST by C19fan
Was it the director’s cut or the original screen version that had the multiple hints that Deckard was a replicant. Hints like a flare to his eyes when he looks in the mirror and Roy Batty saying “kinship” when he saves Deckard from falling off the building.
I saw what you did.
Roy sure had a lot of emotions for being a replicant. So did Leon.
In the original movie, didn’t they say that six replicants had come to earth? One was fried and we see the other four, but where is the sixth?
I’ve gone thru both movie & book at least 3 times each. They’re suitably close until about half way thru, where the movie takes a very different turn and plays that out.
They’re two sides of the same character, following the what-if either way.
Only in the theatrical release. (The one with Harrison Ford droning on in voice overs) The studio insisted on a happy ending. In the extended/director's cut versions, she is not described as having a long lifespan. They only thing they say is "It's too bad she won't live... but then again, who does?"
Blade Runner is a deep, deep movie.
Roy kills Sebastian even though Sebastian suffers from the same problem he suffers from.
Is Earth the off-limits Eden to the replicants?
There are layers upon layers in this movie.
I think it was killed when the ship they hijacked crash landed on earth. It's explained in the first briefing Deckard gets.
Thanks.
I’ll have to pay closer attention to that scene the next time I watch the movie.
I never understood that. One of the unanswered questions in the movie is "who is the bad guy"? Is it Deckard or Batty? But for the killing of Sebastian, I think you could make a very strong argument that Deckard is more of a bad guy than Batty.
That's why it's my favorite science fiction movie. I've seen it well over a dozen times and I can still watch and pick up on nuances or issues I'd never considered before. A true classic. Masterfully directed and despite being surrounded by a cast of really good actors, Ruter Hauer gives an absolutely haunting performance.
"If you could only see what I've seen with your eyes."
I think the movie shows Ridley Scott’s own questions about God and man.
The serpent.
Roy releasing the dove.
Deckard & Rachel being replicants without expiration dates:
Rachel is of course a replicant, and there is a question of whether or not she had an expiration date - negative in the theatrical release, possibly yes in the director’s cut.
Deckard being a replicant was never explored in the theatrical release; it was assumed he was human. However, in the director’s cut, there are many clues that he is a replicant.
The movie explores what makes us human, and if humans could be duplicated. Implanted memory is where the rubber meets the road.
It’s a philosophical question at least as old as Locke - have you as a human being existed for a certain number of years, or were you fabricated and all those years are actually memory data somehow downloaded into you?
The big question in the film is why would Tyrell Corp create replicants having memories and no expiration dates?
Simple. Immortality. If you can fabricate a body and download memories into it, then the human experience can hypothetically be extended into infinity.
Then it becomes a matter of control, of power. He/She who controls access to immortality controls sentient life.
Rachel is an illustration of the first principle. Deckard (whom you notice comes into the world fully formed, with no memories depicted on screen) illustrates the second by being an enforcer replicant.
Why will it take so long to release the movie? In 2049 I’ll be 94 years old.
Man! I'd never even considered that angle. So, if he hadn't gotten his head crushed, Tyrell may have eventually been able to download his memories into a new and improved body and lived on and on. "More human than human."
I never understood the reasoning behind making the replicants physically and mentally superior if you were just using them for grunt work, but if there was a long-range goal then it makes more sense.
“I’ve done ... questionable pings” PING
Ok, I give. What’s the commonality?
What movies do you enjoy?
What movies do you enjoy?
To be clear, I meant “belated” sequels...IOW, a sequel that comes out at least 10 years or more. Yes, some sequels are great and can be even better than the original (Empire, Wrath of Khan, etc). But I can’t think of a single decades-later sequel or prequel that wasn’t a massive disappointment. Star Wars prequels, Indiana Jones 4, the list goes on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.