Killer Robots

[amused]

One of the recurring comments that Hitchens made of Christianity's god was the inherent impossibility of humanity being designed flawed and yet commanded to be perfect.

It is the fundamental issue, at least as far as the abrahamic religions are concerned.

Yeah, I think that was the underlying theme of Blade Runner, not bigotry. Bigotry is more a part of X-Men, isn't it?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

One of the recurring comments that Hitchens made of Christianity's god was the inherent impossibility of humanity being designed flawed and yet commanded to be perfect.

It is the fundamental issue, at least as far as the abrahamic religions are concerned.

Yeah, I think that was the underlying theme of Blade Runner, not bigotry. Bigotry is more a part of X-Men, isn't it?

The replicants are slaves, the new black.

[amused]

One of the reasons given that Blade Runner failed at the box office on initial release is that the audience identified with Roy, not Deckard, and was confused by that. An audience will empathize with a character that wants what we want - more life.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

One of the reasons given that Blade Runner failed at the box office on initial release is that the audience identified with Roy, not Deckard, and was confused by that. An audience will empathize with a character that wants what we want - more life.

Why would we sympathize with Deckard?

[amused]

One of the reasons given that Blade Runner failed at the box office on initial release is that the audience identified with Roy, not Deckard, and was confused by that. An audience will empathize with a character that wants what we want - more life.

Why would we sympathize with Deckard?

He's the intended hero of the story.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

One of the reasons given that Blade Runner failed at the box office on initial release is that the audience identified with Roy, not Deckard, and was confused by that. An audience will empathize with a character that wants what we want - more life.

Why would we sympathize with Deckard?

He's the intended hero of the story.

Not good enough. I didn't like him.

[amused]

One of the reasons given that Blade Runner failed at the box office on initial release is that the audience identified with Roy, not Deckard, and was confused by that. An audience will empathize with a character that wants what we want - more life.

Why would we sympathize with Deckard?

He's the intended hero of the story.

Not good enough. I didn't like him.

Exactly. But he is the character that went on the hero's journey and found his humanity in the end. He's the hero that we are supposed to connect with, but it didn't work. The replicants really were more human than human, so we disliked the hero for being their killer.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Nah, I just didn't like him.

[Cormac]

Deckart's salvation is realised in the "Tears in Rain" scene, when Roy, instead of killing Deckart, saves his life, and then demonstrates to Deckart that replicants are more than capable of very refined aesthetics - an order of consciousness that Deckart has not experienced.

Deckart is clearly a hard-boiled cop, who has lost all belief in the job he was paid to do. Don't forget he had quit the job, and it was paper swan man who forced him back.

I think that Roy is Deckart's salvation - which starts to bring up Christ-ish metaphors. Roy is an innocent, even though he is also a ruthless killing machine. He sacrifices himself for others. He is also a symbol of the heroic satan - fighting a rebellion he knows he will lose...

Anyway, Deckart I liked - because of his obvious doubt and distste for the job he has to do, and because he demonstrates the ability to change.

...and then there is the subtext that he may also be a replicant. (He isn't, but they do seed that question through the film).

[Jesus_of_Nazareth]

I think the Deckart character was also compromised by Harrison Ford being a sh#t actor.

Not to say that Mr Guiness was exactly capable of playing Shakespeare!, but more than good enough for a mechanical man.

[Cormac]

I think the Deckart character was also compromised by Harrison Ford being a sh#t actor.

Not to say that Mr Guiness was exactly capable of playing Shakespeare!, but more than good enough for a mechanical man.

I thought he was good in the role.

[Cormac]

I think the Deckart character was also compromised by Harrison Ford being a sh#t actor.

Not to say that Mr Guiness was exactly capable of playing Shakespeare!, but more than good enough for a mechanical man.

I thought he was good in the role.

But then, what do I know, I'm not Jesus.

FACT.

[amused]

Deckart's salvation is realised in the "Tears in Rain" scene, when Roy, instead of killing Deckart, saves his life, and then demonstrates to Deckart that replicants are more than capable of very refined aesthetics - an order of consciousness that Deckart has not experienced.

Deckart is clearly a hard-boiled cop, who has lost all belief in the job he was paid to do. Don't forget he had quit the job, and it was paper swan man who forced him back.

I think that Roy is Deckart's salvation - which starts to bring up Christ-ish metaphors. Roy is an innocent, even though he is also a ruthless killing machine. He sacrifices himself for others. He is also a symbol of the heroic satan - fighting a rebellion he knows he will lose...

Anyway, Deckart I liked - because of his obvious doubt and distste for the job he has to do, and because he demonstrates the ability to change.

...and then there is the subtext that he may also be a replicant. (He isn't, but they do seed that question through the film).

Isn't Ridley Scott on record say that Deckard IS a replicant? The director's cut restored a dream sequence for Deckard that includes a unicorn, which is why Gaff knew to leave a unicorn origami at the end - he knew the memories that they'd placed in Deckard. And Deckard has his own collection of 'precious photos' on his piano. It works either way and plays into the 'what is human?' theme.

Yes, Roy is a Christ metaphor, even to the point of puncturing his own hand with a nail, and then saving Deckard from a fall. I liked Deckard too, but there is so much ambiguity about who is really the good guy, I can see why audiences were confused.

[Cormac]

Deckart's salvation is realised in the "Tears in Rain" scene, when Roy, instead of killing Deckart, saves his life, and then demonstrates to Deckart that replicants are more than capable of very refined aesthetics - an order of consciousness that Deckart has not experienced.

Deckart is clearly a hard-boiled cop, who has lost all belief in the job he was paid to do. Don't forget he had quit the job, and it was paper swan man who forced him back.

I think that Roy is Deckart's salvation - which starts to bring up Christ-ish metaphors. Roy is an innocent, even though he is also a ruthless killing machine. He sacrifices himself for others. He is also a symbol of the heroic satan - fighting a rebellion he knows he will lose...

Anyway, Deckart I liked - because of his obvious doubt and distste for the job he has to do, and because he demonstrates the ability to change.

...and then there is the subtext that he may also be a replicant. (He isn't, but they do seed that question through the film).

Isn't Ridley Scott on record say that Deckard IS a replicant? The director's cut restored a dream sequence for Deckard that includes a unicorn, which is why Gaff knew to leave a unicorn origami at the end - he knew the memories that they'd placed in Deckard. And Deckard has his own collection of 'precious photos' on his piano. It works either way and plays into the 'what is human?' theme.

Yes, Roy is a Christ metaphor, even to the point of puncturing his own hand with a nail, and then saving Deckard from a fall. I liked Deckard too, but there is so much ambiguity about who is really the good guy, I can see why audiences were confused.

I recently read that he said definitively that he is not a replicant, but that they were deliberately ambiguous.

One of the things I like about the movie is that there is no definitive good guy. This is a bit more reflective of real life...

[Audley Strange]

It is a great movie. However you seem to be missing an essential component from the discussion Rachael. The movie is about in this sense, memory and what defines us as being human. Rachael has implanted memories and believes herself to be human. In one scene Deckard glibly reminds her of them, explaining they belonged to Tyrell's niece. Shortly before he daydreams of a unicorn. (Which Gaff supplies him with later.)

Priss Roy Leo and Zora have no such memories and as we plainly see have come to value those memories, in the form of "precious photos" because their lives are ending. The suggestion is that with Rachael, the next set of Nexus replicants will not be hungry for life, because they will have an encoded history thus no will to revolt.

In the end Deckard saves Rachel as he was saved by Batty. Despite his romantic inclinations I've always considered that he was liberating her and thus subsequent models from programmed slavery.