My insights on Blade Runner

I consider Roy's wrath towards Tyrell to be quite righteous and justified...

ruel....certainly....

evil ?? hmmmm, define evil.

I was using the "like boys with flies" line a bit more perversely, describing the nature of the gods, taken from King Lear, rather than using the boy torturing the fly as being evil. To me Bladerunner is as much an examination of the nature of a God which would create a human being in such a way, with a finite longevity and the nature of empathy, meta-cognition.....so slung the line in there to emphasise the point.

At some point children recognise that this activity is cruel (or should) and if they continue to do it, to choose wrong instead of right, pain instead of mercy, then they could be described as being evil to a greater or lesser extent.

I don't agree with the idea that the replicants aren't evil though. They are as evil as the human emotions that they have. Several essays refer to deckards killing of Zhora as being brutal and evil, DADOES hides the moral dilemna of the termination a bit by having the andys acquiesce to their fate, but BR brings it to the fore. Killing tyrell in cold blood was not justifiable, merciful or an act of a good man, it was an act of evil. A son killing his father because he inherited his bad looks ? A replicant killing his creator because the creator made him as well as he could..same kind of thing.....just becuase the reps only have limited emotional responses doesn't mean they are as innocent as children.

I think the Replicants in the film do show empathy towards each other - they are concerned for each other's well being

I liken the "passion" between roy and pris as being the immature passion that two five year olds might express, they've seen how kissing and affection is done, so act it out. It is done without real emotion. Not until Pris is dead do we see roy's full emotional response, true tenderness and a sense of loss. Contrast his gentle kiss of Pris with the almost feigned, ham acted response when he tells pris that leon is dead. Unreal acting, really, really good work.

Part of the novel and the movie was to draw replicants and humans closer to each other on emotional and spiritual level. By softening the replicants tendancy for evil and highlighting the brutal killing of the replicants this similarity was made. When deckard moves in on rachel, the "love" emotion displayed by deckard was equally infantile, thus there is a merging of the two organisms, humans and replicants. The device does not remove the aspect of evil from either human or replicant behaviour though.

stu

I dunno, I suppose 'evil' is subjective. In my mind I see the Replicants driven to acts of desparation because of the situation that they find themselves in.

I suppose the real test is whether they would behave in the same way if they had a lifespan comparable to human beings. The chances are that they would then fight for their freedom and would be no less ruthless in the pursuit of that goal.

We're sort of on the fringe of the whole Artificial Intelligence debate - I find the questions raised in Blade Runner are very close to the issues being tackled by engineers who are attempting to create AI in the 'real' world.

Here is an idea I have been playing with...


Deckard is told that six reps escaped, one of them got fried that leaves five not four. I think that Deckard could be the other replicant. All the other reps were basically soldiers, I think it is possible that Deckard could have been there spook (spy)?

They capture him and replace his memories with ones of him taking out reps and add in memories of people like Holden. hmmm what do you guys think?

hmmm, not sure that I agree with your theory Jukka,

my burning question would be....why ?

what would be the motive of dumping deckard into holden's ex apartment. 'sides, deck knew of holden, indeed he recommended him to bryant early on.

the quotes from roy (good man, little man) to deckard I see as being more of a righteous taunt than confirmation deck is a replicant himself. In some ways, I think it goes against the deck as a rep theory, and is a battle between a percieved evilness in the replicant, who is evil per se, and deck, who is supposed to be an empathic human. I think it blurs the line between what it is to be human and what it is to have your life governed and overseen. Casting deck temporarily into the role of cold blooded murderer, (killing women in cold blood) which culminates in a merciful roy sparing him, is a way of emphasising this similarity.....deck as a human shows less empathy for the reps than the reps are able to show him. PKDs central theme, what it is to be human.

one part that has confused me though is when deck is able to tell rachel about her own memories....did tyrell tell deck about the memories he bestowed to rachel ? Is the spider story just a generic childhood memory that deck knew about ? How did deck know ? don't tell me it was 'cause deck is a replicant !! Seems to be a continuity stuff up in my mind, maybe deck was supposed to have read rachels bio....

any ideas ?

stu

I always thought that the reason Deckard was supposed to know about Rachel's memories is because there was a conversation that took place between Tyrell and Deckard "off camera." At least in the Director's Cut. In my opinion, Tyrell DID tell Deckard about Rachel's memory implants...I remember Tyrell telling Deckard that it usually took only a few tries of the Voigt-Kampf test to discern a Replicant, but that it took like, over a hundred or so to tell that Rachel was not a human. (Forgive me for not getting the specific numbers right, but I do remember him saying something like this.) Maybe Tyrell told him verbally, or maybe he did read a bio, but I'm pretty sure it took place in between shots after the initial meeting with Rachel.
One other thing. I'm not convinced either way that Deckard is or isn't a Replicant, and the possibility does exist that there is no answer. Has anyone considered that? Maybe we will never know, because the answer was never decided upon in the first place.

One other thing. I'm not convinced either way that Deckard is or isn't a Replicant, and the possibility does exist that there is no answer. Has anyone considered that? Maybe we will never know, because the answer was never decided upon in the first place.

If only more were like you. If you look up any of my posts on the 'Deck-a-Rep' topic you'll see that I have a lot of sympathy with your point of view. I keep stating time and again that it's all down to the viewer's preference and that there's just no 'right' answer - but there appears to be fans on both sides of the argument that just won't accept that point-of-view and instead prefer to 'bait' fans on the opposite side of the argument.

Ah, well - welcome to the board.

glacial...interesting thought, it had occured to me that deck might have read rachel's bio, and I remember the scene that you are talking about, but the sheer number of memories that would need implanting in rachel's mind means that deck would have to spend a short lifetime assimilating all of them.(I almost said he would need to get the same memory implant... oooops )

more likely tyrell just gave deck a few examples, which deck used later on, which fits your explanation to a tee......

still, it always struck me as a weak link in the movie.

welcome aboard too glacial, great to see you here.........

stu

Of course, this all applies only if you think deckard is a rep

I can see your point, Stu. I never thought about the precise way in which Deckard gained knowledge of those specific memories of Rachel's. I guess we'll never know if he looked at some sort of bio, or just had a few instances related to him from Tyrell that had originally been memories of his niece, Sarah. I honestly can't imagine why Tyrell would've told him about those particular things, though. Maybe the Voigt-Kampf tests are replicant-specific. Also, Deckard went into that test session knowing full well that Rachel was artificial. Maybe these things are simply oversights in the movie, and weren't really meant to be pored over like we're all so fond of doing.

. Also, Deckard went into that test session knowing full well that Rachel was artificial.

hmmm......nah.....deckard was testing rachel to humour tyrell

"I want to see a negative before I provide you with a positive".....


I don't think deck was aware that rachel was a rep until he had done the VK test, and then he needed confirmation that she was from tyrell anyway.

pored over ?

who ?

us ?



stu

Anyone here willing to sell me their copy of Retofitting Blade Runner? For those living outside the UK it's incredibly difficult to find.

I got my copy from Amazone UK:

Hardback or Paperback

Amazon.com also have copies of both.

Hope that helps...

Deckard must have looked at Rachael's files, possibly with Tyrell, when he was still at the Tyrell Corp building, or maybe on the police computers.

I think kids (and reps, which are just like children) do 'evil' things because they are ignorant. thay don;t know that something is wrong. Bun then, who are we to say what is right or wrong? It could be that humans are inherantly evil, so the bad things children do are what humans naturally do as part of their nbasic make up. The books 'Heart of Darkness' and 'Lord of the flies' present mankind as evil at the core, and that we suppress this inner nature. Sometimes successfully, sometimes not.

Deck was not one of the original reps that escaped. There was another character in the film originally but she was axed.

Roy killed Tyrell out of frustration that he couldn't live any longer, and he blames Tyrell for this.

Maybe Deck could have been created after Holden's death. Sure he asks about him with Bryant, but this could be the product of artificial memories. I think it's a cool idea that it could be the same appartment.

I dunno if this is in this post, but regarding Rachael 'letting her haur down', I think she was experimenting with being 'herself' and not just a pretty face for the Tyrell Corp. She may also be trying to appear attractive for Deckard (I certainly think she looks beautiful with her hair down).

Oh yeah, and Leon wastes Holden because he is angry about the fact that he never had a mother, and that as a rep he is treated so badly by humans. He may also be jealous of Holden as he represents the things he can never be.

I keep coming back to the evil theme myself kobold.....

at what point is an empathic response generated by a human and the realistaion of the doing of evil realised ?

a child rips the wings off a fly ? nope.....not evil yet
a butterfly collector pins a living butterfly into a collection ?......
we own a calfskin wallet ?
we organise and watch a cock-fight ?
we leave a turtle lying on its back despite being able to help ?
we watch a human suffer torture, despite being able to help ?

what kind of an emotional minefield will there be in 2019 ?

these themes were covered in more depth in DADOES, but survived in the movie. The lack of an empathic response, or moreover, the confusion caused about what is an appropriate response, in the replicants, was used to distinguish between an empathic human and a no-empathic replicant. JF sebastian in the movie didn't fully realise that character in DADOES who, despite being human, was unable to pass the original VK test due to his emotional lack of responsiveness and low IQ.

can children ever be evil ?
am i confusing evil and cruel ?
is there a difference ?

is revenge an evil motive ?

stu

I think the subject of 'evil' is a big 'ol can o worms.

Let's look at the dictionary definition of evil:

evil

? adjective 1 deeply immoral and malevolent. 2 embodying or associated with the devil. 3 extremely unpleasant: an evil smell.

? noun 1 extreme wickedness and depravity, especially when regarded as a supernatural force. 2 something harmful or undesirable.

I don't think the Reps fit that definition - they are ruthless in the pursuit of their goal and will kill any humans who get in their way, but they're targeting specific humans linked to Tyrell, not randomly targeting the nearest person in order to torture them for their own pleasure.