Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

15

Maybe this Wikipedia site is of help. To sum up the most important things: 1982 Original workprint (failed in audience tests, not released): no voice over no happy ending no unicorn dream 1982 US theatrical release: voice overs happy ending (Deckard and Rachel drive through the countryside) no unicorn dream 1982 International release: more violence ...


13

Actually, the movie is quite ambiguous about whether Deckard is actually a human or a replicant, Ridley Scott takes him as a replicant, while Harrison Ford believes he is human. Even though Deckard shows more and more emotions as the movie goes on, the same is true about the other replicants. The ambiguity is IMHO, indeed an important part of the point of ...


10

Summary: Yes, he probably should have seen it coming. But, it was a good plot device to highlight Roy's mental superiority. Detailed: It's worth pointing out that, although Ridley Scott denied it was intentional, this game uses the conclusion of the Immortal Game: The Immortal Game is a chess game played by Adolf Anderssen and Lionel Kieseritzky on ...


10

One of the main themes of the movie is the question, what makes us human and especially, if the replicants in their desperate struggle for survival are in the end not more human than the cold blooded killing Blade Runner. In this way this scene may be interpreted as Roy showing a humanitiy, Deckard would have probably not shown to him. And I also think Roy ...


10

Maybe it's because with origami you can go from a simple non living material such as a simple sheet of paper and mold it into something that is a representation of a living thing. Although this might never get a true answer I like to think it has something to do with the artificial creation of something representing life or dreams. When thinking further ...


8

Lots of reasons: Books and movies are different art forms - direct and strict conversions from one form to the other rarely work (unless they have large fan bases, such as LoTR, Harry Potter, etc). The movie was written and re-written several times by several screen-writers. You can imagine they all brought their own visions and ideas to the screenplay. ...


7

Roy and the other replicant have been engaged in a desperate struggle to live, and Roy has been running most of the show. The struggle was Roys and though it has been carried out on the cerebral level where he is the most able (i.e. get to Earth, find Tyrel, get access, force him to provide a fix...) it has been a desperate time nonetheless. When he finds ...


6

I think that has to do the book, the movie adapts. In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? all people are a bit like zombies, they only want to go away from earth or follow a strange religion like Deckards wife does. In a scene in the book, another Blade Runner suspects Deckard to be a replicant and makes a test with him. I think, Philip K. Dick wanted to ...


6

Since there is no VK test to, well test, there can be no definitive disproval, but... The stated purpose of the test is merely an effective ruse. In such a way that is how "lie-detector" tests are employed. The placebo is better than no seemingly objective leverage. Obviously "blade runners" are judge, jury and executioners. So yes! Simply put, all ...


6

The novel is less subtle about posing the question about who is an android or not. In the novel Deckard goes to retire an android who makes a phone call for help before being killed. The police who show up are from a 'shadow' police department who are nearly all androids themselves living under cover. Deckard escapes with a blade-runner who works with ...


4

atleast someone recognise that he was trying to be a mere human trying to survive Roy and the other replicants have not been shown to be a 'violent' variety. It is only when they realise the impending doom carried by their bodies that they become * rebellious* and decide to gain life at any cost. When Roy learns from his maker that there is possibly no ...


4

It is unfortunately a very difficult question to answer from the movie alone. Yes, the VK test is challenged in the movie by Rachel - and that it takes very many more questions for Deckard to conclude that she is a Replicant - but that is about the extent of the analysis of the test in the movie. One can imagine from this scenario where a Replicant with ...


4

Whether Deckard is himself a replicant is left deliberately ambiguous. In the original novel, a security force exists in addition to the regular police force in Los Angeles, whose operatives are termed 'blade runners' and who are actually replicants, created to do that special job of locating and terminating replicants that go 'rogue'. It's a kind of 'set a ...


3

Although the three points you identify as being omitted from the screenplay are interesting concepts, within the terms of Philip Dick's dark vision of the world in the 21st Century, in terms of the movie all three points amount only to padding. They do not bear directly on Deckard's hunt for the missing replicants, but are merely incidental points that seek ...


2

The fictitious kind. Deckard was human. : ) EDIT - below @Nobby - PKD himself, Hampton Fancher, Harrison Ford, and the producers of the film all state clearly, and consistently, that Deckard was human, from the beginning and to this very day. Think about that. To say he is not human undermines much of the movie when you look closely. As cool as it is, ...


2

There is no indication he was anything special in terms of replicant creation (a test subject etc). I think he was made to do a job, Bladerunning and was customised to have abilities and skills which suit that role. That is what he does, he was given a personality as well which fuzzes things up. However, the question we really should be asking is how ...


2

This is a difficult philosophical question. We, the audience, are asked to judge Roy's motivations from observing his actions. And the fact that there are so many differing versions of this movie makes this a somewhat more than usually difficult thing to do. Nevertheless, my opinion is that Roy, and the other replicants, long to be human. It seems to me ...


2

I cannot speak definitely but it might be that Ridley Scott wanted to tell a slightly different story or thought he could tell it in a better way? Also, bear in mind that books and films are very different media. What makes an exciting book might not work if translated directly to film due to pacing, audience expectations etc. The hunt for Red October is ...


2

Other than the well known ones, ie. removal of voice over, removal of 'happy ending', inclusion of unicorn from Legend, mapping of Joanna Cassidy's face onto Zhora etc etc, there are a TON of changes that have been made from edit to edit. I think you'll find all your answers here.


1

The Wikipedia page referred to gives an exhaustive list of the differences, in terms of deleted scenes. There are indeed many scenes in the Final Cut which were omitted from earlier releases. But this is not really to the point. The answer to the question is what differences those changes have made to the plot. The Final Cut (2007) is a very different ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible