Page Summary
pathia.livejournal.com - (no subject)
araquan.livejournal.com - (no subject)
mythos-amante.livejournal.com - (no subject)
mythos-amante.livejournal.com - (no subject)
araquan.livejournal.com - (no subject)
mythos-amante.livejournal.com - (no subject)
araquan.livejournal.com - (no subject)
athelind.livejournal.com - (no subject)
araquan.livejournal.com - (no subject)
paka.livejournal.com - (no subject)
hafoc.livejournal.com - (no subject)
athelind.livejournal.com - (no subject)
athelind.livejournal.com - (no subject)
cpxbrex.livejournal.com - (no subject)
kynn.livejournal.com - (no subject)
kynn.livejournal.com - (no subject)
twentythoughts.livejournal.com - (no subject)
hafoc.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wy.livejournal.com - (no subject)
Style Credit
- Style: Sunset for Stepping Stones by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 04:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 04:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 05:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 05:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 05:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 05:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 06:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 07:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 07:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 07:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 12:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 05:12 pm (UTC)Deckard IS strong enough to pull himself up from a ledge one-handed -- with a hand that's had two fingers dislocated. That's pretty good for a professional free-climber, much less a washed-up cop with a history of alcoholism.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 05:14 pm (UTC)Crap. I didn't include an option for "it's ambiguous, you can't give a definitive answer".
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 06:43 pm (UTC)Sure, there's a lot of hints that Deckard is a replicant, but there is also a far greater body of contrary evidence that he isn't, I think.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 07:39 pm (UTC)They evolved.
They rebelled.
There are many copies.
And they have a plan.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 07:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 08:58 pm (UTC)Anyway, as has already been mentioned, the point is that the movie doesn't tell you outright. You're left wondering, thinking, and thus remembering the movie a lot better than if there was some definite revelation scene where the fast food guy goes "He say you repricant!", and Deckard tears away his restraints, takes a couple of heavy steps forwards, and screams "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"
(That said, someone needs to take all the silly "No!" moments from the six Star Wars movies and put them into one Youtube video.)
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 11:53 pm (UTC)Deckard is a replicant. Replicants are illegal on Earth, to be shot on sight. Deckard quits the force and goes on alcoholic benders, exhibiting all the symptoms of escalating emotional instability. The obvious solution? Kill him and make another Deckard.
You want to save his experience? You want to save his abilities? If he's a replicant, those were implanted in him anyway. You need only feed the same file into Version 2.0. Or Version 112.0, whatever.
No, if he's a replicant, the only logical choice is that they kill him some time before the movie starts.
But another "problem" is that the movie doesn't go into the further consequences of the advances in replicant tech. Specifically, we are told that Rachel, we are told, is an experimental model who was given real human memories in order to make her more predictable. This raises myriad complications.
The theme of the movie is "What is human?" Giving Rachel human memories only blurs the line further, so it points up the theme. But it also brings up the obvious problem that if you can give a replicant SOME of a human's memories, you can also give a replicant ALL of them.
Since our memories make us what we are, a replicant with all of a human's memories would effectively BE that human. We are talking "immortality" here; so long as your Life Insurance bill to the Tyrell Corporation gets paid each month, they'll keep your brain tape updated and load it into a new body upon hearing of your unfortunate demise.
This is nowhere given in the movie, but it's implicit in the technology. You think someone like Tyrell wouldn't have thought of it? If not he, certainly the Kenneth Lays and Robert Byrds of the world would have. How much would a rich S.O.B be willing to pay for something like that? Is there any question they'd jump at the chance?
I've always had a sneaking suspicion that this is what Deckard really is. Say you have a top cop who, shortly after recovery from a bout of alcoholism, was the most deadly and effective Blade Runner ever. But all good things must end. He takes one risk too many and gets killed, or rebels completely and runs away.
So you reload his mind into a human ability-level replicant body. You stop loading his experiences at a point where he was coming off a bender and had stopped at a street vendor's place to buy some cheap noodles. You prop him up there, start the program, and send your hatchet man to bring him in...
no subject
Date: 2006-12-02 09:12 am (UTC)