Definitely Yes! And before doing it be sure to watch the 3 short stories prepared as a bridge between the 2 films (Blade Runner 2022, Blade Runner 2036 and Blade Runner 2048), there are some important information in there.
I think the 'crazy chase' at the end was Roy living to the utmost and going out with a roar. But it was also a not so passive aggressive message, which he finally verbally conveyed to Deckard with his "Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave." It's maybe an odd way to do it, but with that message and with his saving Deckard and sharing his final thoughts I think he had 'evolved' to a point where he could feel empathy, which is exactly what the Voight-Kampf test looked for (rather, the lack thereof) in ferreting out replicants. I like to think that, in the final moments before he died, Roy would have passed the test.
I think that from the moment Priss dies, Roy ascends to a state of enlightenment that he knows he must pass to Deckard before his imminent shutdown. Showing him what replicants feel before 'retirement' gives Deckard empathy for the replicants finally.
It should be noted 4 yr shelf life ... Roy is 4 yrs old. While he has the body of an adult and a genius mind, he still is in essence emotionally a 4 yr old. And when you look at that and how he acts (like a child... you have nice toys and other child like references). This alone should make you look at this film in a different light.
In 1982, it seemed like movies like this could be made at will, the music, the visuals, the sci-fi concepts, the tragic moments. Only a few have matched it's scope since. Truly worth watching over and over.
Ranking movies is all but an impossible task, but to me, this is possibly the best movie ever made. It shaped me as a person, like which hobbies/interests I have pursued throughout my life.
Remember, Roy and his crew are only a few years old. They have the emotional growth of a child; hence, every emotion is heightened. They've been designed and grown to be superior at their specific skills (off-world slave work, whether combat or pleasure or whatever models). The "fix" from Tyrell for the new generation of replicants (al Rachel) was the implantation of memories to even out their emotions so that there becomes no actual difference between a person that is designed and grown versus one born naturally. In the end, the question of "is Deckard a replicant" becomes meaningless as we've just watched a story where he is as human as any of us.
It's always interesting to see people watch this for the first time, to see if they understand what the movie is going for. I figure it's easy to just think it's a very unique sci-fi detective/action movie, but it really goes deeper than that and I think it only reveals its true nature at the very end with Roy's final act. You're prepared for the bad guy to do the bad guy thing...and then he uses his last moments to just make another person understand him. Can't get much more human than that.
Rutger Hauer essentially essentially wrote his own lines for that death scene on the roof. Originally, he was just supposed to say 'time to die' or something, and he hated it for the character. So he wrote up that really evocative sci-fi swan song on his own.
I was blessed to grow up in a 80s household where we would listen to Vangelis and Tangerine Dream and Queen on vinyl records on summer days so when we rented movies like Blade Runner and Legend and Highlander I was transported to another place, to a world that opened me to read sci fi and fantasy and have a deep appreciation for my childhood ❤ its a kind of magic
"That's the spirit!" Is my second favorite Roy-ism in this film. IMO, he just wants the person sent to kill him to feel, to be engaged, to give it his all to the very end. This material is so deep on a very basic level, more life. Something most people will always want. Ones own mortality is a hard thing to face. And for the record, Roy's monologue at the end is my favorite quote from the movie. So much weight is in that incredibly poignant speech. A brilliant moment in cinema history. RIP Rutger Hauer.
If I was Deckard I would have been scared witless by that statement. He just hit Roy across the skull with all his strength only for Roy to laugh at the attempt. Then later Roy stops to think and admits “That…hurt”
Once you accept the replicants' humanity, you realize it is a film about a slave catcher (who possibly is unknowingly a slave himself) hunting down escaped slaves. With this realization, it's hard for me not to consider the replicants the true heroic figures of the film. Sure they commit multiple murders in their escape, but violence in the pursuit of emancipation from slavery is morally justifiable.
I think you missed that a lot of the reactions of the replicants were exaggerated, this is because they have the emotional maturity of 4 years olds. Roy's reactions would go from laughter to tears and Pris's death was like a childs tantrum. It's a very sublte and elegant way to show a being, still wrestling with learning emotional responses.
Love this film! The director’s cut leaves it open whether Deckard is a replicant - but with the unicorn scene, the Final Cut pretty much removes all doubt. Gaff knows about the unicorn from Deckard’s dreams the same way Deckard knew about Rachel’s dreams. The eyes are an indicator, but I feel not as definite as the origami unicorn. The music is beautiful, the story has philosophical depth (as stories inspired by Philip K Dick usually do), and the sets, costumes and cinematography are some of the best ever.
The unicorn is in the director's cut too. It's only missing from the original theatrical releases. But I think the unicorn dream is longer in the final cut.
@Gerald H I mean, the movie is only very loosely based on the novella anyway. Personally, I like both variations as they each add their own angles, but obviously YMMV.
@@stefanforrer2573 You are wrong. I just popped in the old Director's cut dvd I have. It's at time 0:40:55 to 0:41:08. And the origami unicorn is there at the end as well.
@@demopem yes i know the origami scene is there..... maybe there are multiple director's cuts, because it certainly was not in the vhs version of the director's cut.... i explicitly remember buying the final cut dvd and being angry about it taking away pretty much every ambiguety because of that damn unicorn dream 😜
Classic Frankenstein story. Man brings life to inanimate monster. Monster begins to think for itself. Monster terrorizes villagers. Monster returns to creator. Monster kills creator. Monster has to die. They just did a damn good job of it. (In the theater the unicorn dream was not part of the movie.) But unicorn was at the end. We took it to mean, he was there, she's one of a kind, he let her live.
My two favoriet moments are when Deckard stops for noodles and when he puts it together thay they are artificially adding memories. The lighting, color temperature, background music, vocals and the grin on Tyrell's face, its just perfect.
The movie that gave birth to Cyberpunk genre glad you’re watching the final cut. Please do watch it’s sequel, one the best sequel of all time in my opinion.
This, and William Gibson's Sprawl Trilogy (Burning Chrome, set in the Sprawl world, was published in '82), which, despite being developed entirely independently could have almost been set in the same world as this film (though without replicants and with more computers). There were also previous works, if not in the genre, at least very influential in its development, going all the way back to the sixties, with the term "Cyberpunk" first appearing in 1980... but Blade Runner and the Sprawl Trilogy certainly influenced _everything_ that came after in the genre, much like you can't write fantasy without being influenced by Tolkien (even if you purposely try to avoid any influence, that in itself _is_ a form of influence).
@Gerald H That doesn't make sense. Yes, Cyberpunk is older than Blade Runner but what Cyberpunk actually is, especially from a visual perspective, was largely shaped by Blade Runner. How could the visuals OR the design OR the atmosphere of this movie come from the book? Have you even read it? Because while it's influential, no one who has thinks it's even in the genre of cyberpunk, rather it was a noir with sci fi elements.
@Gerald H If we follow your argument to it's conclusion noone invents anything in creative arts. Everything is a combination of elements each of which has been seen before.
It was science fiction : the photos are holographic (3D). He zooms around the back of a mirror. So the first instance of it was imaginative predictive fiction, though future (also fictional) uses tend to be a shortcut in a modern day crime drama.
Harrison Ford said the eye shine effect on himself was accidental and he considers Deckard to be human. Scott thinks Deckard is a replicant. Most of the other people involved in the film think he is human or it should remain ambiguous. I'm surprised you noticed that effect as I didn't see it until after many rewatches.
I believe Harrison Ford said in an interview that the whole story is about a man who has been reduced to be emotionless and cold and "robots" teach him to feel alive and love again. That is better story than "I guess he is replicant too". Also, with wide enough aperture in low light situations you can accidentally get the eye effect, so it is likely that Ford is right in that also (it is same effect as red pupils with flash photography).
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die." Deckard is NOT a Replicant. First off, he gets his ass handed to him by other Replicants. Two, Deckard's arc starts with him hating Replicants and then ends with him falling in love with one. That arc would be meaningless if Deckard is himself a Replicant. Three, even the book makes it very clear he's human. By the way, I love Rachel (Sean Young). She has this WWII secretary aesthetic style that is REALLY doing it for me. 😍 Fun Fact: Zhora was at ease with the snake around her neck because it was actually Darling, Joanna Cassidy's actually pet Burmese Python. Shine Job Fact: Director Sir Ridley Scott and director of photography Jordan Cronenweth achieved the famous "shining eyes" effect by using the "Schüfftan Process" technique invented by Fritz Lang. Light is bounced into the eyes off of a piece of half mirrored glass mounted at a forty-five-degree angle to the camera. Authentic Battle Damage Fact: After Pris (Daryl Hannah) first meets J.F. Sebastian (William Sanderson), she runs away from him, skidding into his car and smashing the window with her elbow. This was a genuine mistake caused by Hannah slipping on the wet ground. The glass wasn't breakaway glass, it was real glass, and Hannah chipped her elbow in eight places. She still has the scar from the accident.
Consider this possibility: Since Roy is only four years old, he's not developed emotionally and is just learning about life. When he realizes that his death is imminent, he begins to understand the value of all life and he can't kill Deckart, he saves him. Roy has learned to love all life too much to destroy it. - And understand the meaning of the origami unicorn. Deckart dreamed of a unicorn . . . How could the Edward James Olmos character have known about the unicorn dream unless he knew it was placed into Deckart's mind when he was constructed? It's entirely possible that Deckart was constructed for this one mission, and he had no past other than the one constructed for him. - Conjecture to be sure; but that's the beauty of this film; the more you think about it, the more possibilities begin to appear.
Stuff 1. Joe Turkel/Tyrell played Lloyd (bartender) in the original Shining. 2. Roy/Rutger Hauer😇 plays in Blind Fury a great first time/share. 3. Leon/ Brion James in Tango and Cash. Much bigger role first time/share also. 4. Deckard/Harrison Ford two overlooked must first time/share "Witness" and "Force 10 from Naverone". 5. In the original Roy tells Tyrell, "I want more life FUCKER" not father. 6. Ford disliked almost everything about this movie (including Sean Young). He mostly disliked the voiceover. He refused to even watch it until it was "fixed". 7. Daryl Hannah cut her elbow when she ran into that van window 8. Philipe K Dick first came up with the idea for his novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? 9. You must watch Blade Runner 2049.
The white unicorn is an unused clip from another excellent Ridley Scott film, Legend. It's like the ultimate 80s dark fantasy film and if you guys haven't seen it, you HAVE to watch it. Released in 1985 and starring Tom Cruise, Mia Sara, and Tim Curry. Probably the best costumes, makeup, and set design of any fantasy film ever released in my opinion. There's really no other film like it.
I'm pretty sure it is a common misconception that it was old Legend footage. It has a much shorter mane than the Legend unicorns. This misconception may have been reinforced by the fact that in the theatrical cut Ridley Scott took unused footage he got from Kubrick's The Shining for the final scene of Deckard and Rachel driving away through the woods.
@@lanolinlight The unicorn dream sequence first appeared in the 1992 director's cut, so that isn't really an issue. However, I think it was actually shot for the original release, but just never made the cut.
I like this reaction very much. You guys were completely invested in the storyline and the editing was on point. A lot of times the editing for some reactors is so cut up that it doesn't even make sense and this is such a complex, thought-provoking storyline, so Kudos for doing such a good job with that.
I think the eyes were just the lighting and not a sign of a replicant (intentional misdirection). It seems to me the unicorn was a symbol of Rachael being a "unicorn" (a rare, magical beast), being the one Replicant without a four-year expiration and with a full capacity for human interaction. "It's too bad she won't live! But then again, who does?" I think he was being a bit sarcastic because he already knew, and that was his brash way of wishing them both a long and happy life.
Deckard is not a replicant. The glint you see in his eyes at the end are there because both him and Rachel are in the same shot/frame when the director (Ridley Scott) uses the practical/optical effect they use to get the "cat eye" on Rachel and the rest of the replicants. R.Scott's explanation: th-cam.com/video/vDkFncZG3yE/w-d-xo.html
The director does, indeed, think he's a replicant, but the head writer (as I understand) doesn't. My 2-cents-worth: that disagreement might be a pre-planned thing to heighten interest in the film. (Harrison Ford didn't think Deckard was a replicant either.)
@@yougoattube I agree. In Philip K. Dick's novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?", Deckard tests himself, confirming that he is human but has a sense of empathy for certain androids. So I call BS on R. Scott 😁
This and Alien made me fall in love with Ridley Scott, so far ahead of its time.. before cyberpunk there was blade runner, the beginning of a genre..I have this soundtrack on vinyl its awesome, also RIP Rutger Hauer what a great performance that final speech was part improve such a sympathetic villan.. loving these reactions guys
There is a version with narration by Deckard and no unicorn dream. There was enough existential crisis for both humans and replicants without getting into dreams.
Philip K. Dick, the author of the source material, wrote Deckard as a Human. Harrison Ford played Deckard as a Human being. Ridley Scott, the Director, believed that Deckard being a replicant was more interesting so he edited the movie that way. The central question of Blade Runner is what makes a human a human.
Agreed that the main point of the movie is to generate thoughts about what it means to be human. For myself, I don't see much point in Deckard being a replicant. Why would it be important for him to be a replicant? We already know 2 replicants can fall in love (Roy and Priss). To me, much more interesting if a human falls for a replicant and, maybe more importantly, vice versa. But what do I know... I still have trouble figuring out where the coyote got all that dynamite he used on the roadrunner...
@@yougoattube I think there is a totally different perspective of 'what makes a human be human', when you live the entirre film with Deckard being human, from inside his head, only to 'reveal' he's not in the end. Just viscerally it's a different experience than 'knowing' Rachel is a replicant who doesn't know it, and I feel it adds immeasurably to the weight of the message. I'm glad there's enough ambiguity for those who want to live by the original novel, but for me the power of the film comes from the likelihood that Deckard is a replicant, or at least that his life is no different from that of a replicant.
Deckard uses the bookish voice during the backstage Johnny sequence with Zora. It's a nod to the '40's noir " The Big Sleep", in which Humphrey Bogart's character ducks into a bookstore and talks like s bookworm to get info from the clerk, who is called " the nymphomaniac" in the credits.
I'm way older than you guys, but I love "FIRST TIME WATCHING" reactions because that's how we all saw it too, it doesn't matter how old! Whether I saw it during its release, or later, it doesn't matter. I thought you both had perfect reactions and very wise questions. It's a beautifully made puzzle.
Did you notice that the *only* time Deckard was ever in a flying cop car, he was chauffeured by Gaff? All other times he was in a regular squad car. They didn't want him straying too far, so kept him on a leash.
I enjoy the theory that Deckard has just been 'activated' when we meet him, either a fresh model or dusting off a relic, and he has to run through the motions - arrested and bullied into taking the 'job' so he can be given the info dump - before being turned loose after being pointed straight at Rachel. I think Roy recognizes what Deckard is and saves him to impart what knowledge he can before passing.
Are there any hints or suggestions in the movie that Deckard was only recently activated? Based on Edward James Olmos' earlier origami efforts, I enjoy the theory that Deckard was actually a chicken.
The use of the Voight-Kampff test strongly implies that differences in light reflectivity between human and replicant eyes aren't a reliable way to differentiate the two - at least not at the level where human eyes can reliably discern the difference. Otherwise there would be a much faster and more subtle reflectivity-based test. It might even use an undetectable amount of light or just slightly different frequencies. A target would enter a specially lit room or area and a separate monitoring device would almost instantly identify its nature. If the red eyes are used by the film to hint at who is a replicant, then it attacks the internal consistency of the film. The circumstances around the presence of the origami unicorn and Deckard's dream are probably a better indicator that he is indeed a replicant.
Things to ponder: 1. Leon was first tested by another Bladerunner, who resembles Decker and has same voice. (Harrison Ford) 2. Eye reflection 3. Unicorn dream, unicorn origami…unicorn was implanted, origami was the clue. Nice reaction. New sub.
1998's Soldier starring Kurt Russell is loosely connected to Blade Runner. The Shoulder of Orion and Tannhauser Gate battles appear on Kurt Russell's characters combat history.
The novel was written in the 60s by Philip K Dick - who has also given us Total Recall, A Scanner Darkly, The Man in The High Castle, The Adjustment Bureau, Minority Report among others. A key feature of his work is the ambiguity that leads to different interpretations. I prefer not to solve the riddles and enjoy the uncertainty.
The building where Sebastian lives is the Bradbury Building in LA. It has been used as a shooting location many times, including the Outer Limits episode "Demon with a Glass Hand."
This is my alltime favourite movie. I first saw this when I was maybe 14 (1985). I loved the mood and style of this. Years later I kept coming back to it. After getting Degrees in Philosophy and Literature, I still keep coming back to it. It's truly genius. In the book upon which this is based, Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, by Philip k. Dick, Deckard is assuredly not a replicant.
"If only you could see what ive seen wirh your eyes" “I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.” Such beauty
My ex paid 1100 for her Leica binoculars. I paid 700 for my Pentax Binoculars So yeah 300 is about as little as you’d like to spend on decent binoculars for birding. Don’t shortchange yourself it’s literally the only thing you need to go birding so splurge on very clear ones.
This didn't do as well as it deserved in 1982. Many consider it the best year and summer for movies. The likes of E.T, The Thing, Poltergeist and Tron were released, amd sequels Star Trek II and Rocky III as well, Thankfully VHS helped make the classic that it is.
Everyone wants Deckard to be a replicant, I dont buy it. The unicorn is Rachel. The Director says Deckard is a replicant , Harrison Ford says he's human. Rachel dosent have the 4 year life span thus a unicorn. Any way thats my theory , Watch 2049 immediately.
Apparently Ridley Scott woke up one day with a drunken stupor convinced Deckard was a replicant, but the writters and the book contradict that statement
So great to see you reacting to this movie! Its so clever and I love the "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe...." speech.😢 Its my 2nd favourite movie of all time! (after another Ridley Scott movie - Alien - Would love to see you guys rescting to that btw!).
ERIC and SARAH should watch the original theatrical release (1982), known as the *voice-over version* or the *narrated version* , narrated by Deckard (Harrison Ford). His narration answers all of Eric and Sarah's questions.
I prefer the theory that there was a human blade-runner called Deckard who has retired and left Earth, and the Deckard we see is a brand new replicant given his memories (and Deckard's old apartment, which is why it is full of clutter). Gaff is not fit for active duty but is watching Deckard closely to see if the experiment works ("you've done a man's job" at the end). It is noteworthy that Deckard has no friends.
ENHANCE!!! ENHANCE!! The best part of this reaction was watching the two of you crack up lol!!! I truly enjoyed this reaction. This was actually one of my favorite movies as a teenager (I'm 56). It was decades before its time (as was the book it is based on which I think was "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" (or something close to that). I believe the author was Philip K. Dick who wrote some fantastic science fiction back then. Yes! Definitely do the recent sequel. It does not disappoint and is extremely good. Speculation over the end of this film for THIRTY YEARS!!! The sequel answers a lot.
This movie and the sequel are movies that you need to view multiple times to fully understand. They're movies that make you think which I like. When this first came out, I didn't get it, I was a young kid and I expected something on the Star Wars level, because its science fiction. I watched it again when I was much older and fully appreciate it.
4:50 Back in the day, many old rundown hotels were essentially rooming houses with fairly cheap rent. Most (if not all) are gone to make way for condos, ie gentrification of downtown areas. This is one of the reasons why homelessness is a crisis these days.
This was the 1st movie I bought for my new Sanyo Beta recorder way back then. That copy then at the end showed Decker & Rachel driving off in the countryside with Decker's voice over saying that Rachel was Different.. No expiration date! "We don't know how long we would live. Then again who does?" I can't find that version anywhere now.
Worth noting, with the tortoise, turtle, owl, snake, etc....most common animal species are highly endangered, if not extinct, in this world. Synthetic animals are produced, but are expensive. Real animals are very, VERY expensive. So much so that even Eldon Tyrell, likely the richest man on earth, cannot have a real owl. This is also why it's not THAT unusual for Leon to have never seen a turtle, or not know what a tortoise is. It's a hint that he may be a replicant, but since the world is largely devoid of such creatures, it's not a dead giveaway.
Roy and his friends were not given artificial memories like Rachael was, just language work skills. They were created as labor. Without memories & experiences to form mature emotional responses they were 4 year olds in adult bodies. Look at how they like Sebastian's toys and how Roy liked playing with Deckard. Of course they want more life, being expected to salve away their 4 years of existence then die is cruel.
You mentioned Detroit: Become Human. There actually is a Blade Runner game. An ol' school point and click. It was divisive, although, I liked it well enough
Roy simply wanted what we all want - to be remembered. In the end, he realized that he was about to die and that life itself was precious. In saving Deckard, Roy knows that he will NEVER be forgotten, or lost to time ... like tears in the rain. Concerning Deckard's perceived weakness, recall that replicants are not all the same. Roy is a soldier with superior strength, speed and intelligence. Leon is a loader. He required only strength. Zora is an assassin. She is seductive and cunning. Priss is a "basic pleasure model". She is agile and attractive but not that sharp. She relies on Roy for direction.
I read a nice story recently about how Rutger Hauer (Roy) rewrote his own dialogue for the final scene because he found it too rubbish to do - so I'm guessing the whole "tears in rain" bit was his own creation.
Having seen a couple of reactions to this movie and the struggle with its concept most viewers had eversince, makes me wish for the power to change the past in one simple way: Changing "advancement in robotics" to "advancement in genetics" in the opening titlescroll. It wouldn't change much about the perception of it back then, since robotics and genetics were both concepts the general public had little concerns about, in contrast to present times.
I understand the frustration of new audiences either dismissing or misenterpreting replicant biology. they are biologically human, superior in many aspects. however genetics infer the passing down of genes from one generation to another. these replicants are wholly manufactured. so robotics is technically correct, but puts the android/machine prejudice on the replicants
@@woeshaling6421 To me it seems that "robotics" in context of the movie is more a relic of its inspiration "Do androids dream of electric sheep?". How replicants are produced and if they are able to procreate is nerver touched on or hinted at in Blader Runner, nor is the prejudice you speak of, except this one time use of the term "robotics". It is irrelevant for the plot of the movie but makes suspention of disbelief so much harder today. PS.: btw, genetics only inferes selfreplication like bacteria but implies the passing down of the genome ... in short the struggle of this movie, concepts and the perception of them in the public eye ;)
Darryl Hannah when she runs from JF Sebastian put her hand through a sheet glass window on his vehicle lacerating her arm. Like a trooper she bundled her bloodied arm into her jacket and finished the take which is in the film.
It occurred to me while watching you react that there is a common theme with Conquest of the Planet of the Apes, and that is the ethics of slavery. Both societies had groups that they enslaved. In Blade Runner, the humans' excuse was that they were grown in a lab, and therefore were not human, and in Conquest of the Planet of the Apes that they were apes.
The name of the original book was DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP? written by the inestimable Philip K Dick. The title BLADE RUNNER is actually from another book about smugglers who specialize in medical supplies. Movie makers. What are ya gonna do?
I think both Rachel and Deckard are both Nexus 7 models, the only one's in existence and where Tyrells new model. Tyrell didn't get the governments approval to extend life for more than 4 years but did get it for the Nexus 7. Blade Runner is considered the first film noir science fiction.
If you love James Olmos you must watch Battlestar galactica the 2000s version by Ron D Moore some of the best sci fi ever made ..the mini series is a 2 eps intro and would make a great reaction..😂 so say we all
@Darkstar Oh, sure; you can get perfectly servicable binoculars for 300 (catch a good clearance sale and you can even beat that a fair bit) that will work great. For hobby use, it would probably be silly to spend much more. It's just amusing to hear that in a sentence with adjectives I'd associate with glass that has another 0 on the price :)
Blade Runner is that rare film that tells you flat out what it's about, right from the outset...runaways slaves, and a man who hunts them down and kills them...but still manages, through the conventions of genre, to present the former as monsters, and the latter as a hero...only to remind us, as it progresses, of that original framework. The replicants are slaves...they've escaped, and it's Deckard's job to kill them. And he hates it. And he hates himself for it. He's the bad guy. HE is the monster. And he knows it. We may be persuaded to forget it temporarily, but he NEVER does. The only way forward for him, after the death of Roy Batty, is to never do it again. To never again let the powers that be tell him that he has to kill, in order to live. It's a wonderful, powerful film. And 2049 is a perfect sequel. A must.
The term "blade runner" has roots in the African American culture. Most recent usage people, especially older people, might be familiar with is as a greeting; example " Say young blade". The "friendliness" of the greeting has to be seen in the context in which it's spoken. It may be spoken in an alarmed context; example "Watch it young blade!". The root of the word blade leads into slavery where it was common, not by far universal, to call young male slaves blades. Some slave catchers (a colorful culture they have) called themselves "Blade Runners" in a few books written by themselves about themselves. The documentary trail goes cold older than then for use of the blade/slave idiom.
I always thought that Harrisson Ford should've used his film Blade Runner as an example for what we don't want our environment to turn out to be, for his Environmental Activism group.
The film is based on a book by Philip K. Dick. "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" Here are a few more films and TV series based on his works. -- The Man in the High Castle (TV Series) Electric Dreams (TV Series) The Adjustment Bureau A Scanner Darkly Paycheck Minority Report Total Recall -- The list goes on. And yes he knew she was with Deckard and did nothing. He left the unicorn to let Deckard know he had been there. As we say here in Texas; Y'all be safe.
Always thought the eye flash thing is a red herring. Otherwise, they'd just flash some torches in their eyes to tell rather than going through the whole voidcomp test.
Thank you all for watching! Should we react to the sequel??
Yes
yes, It is incredible. Even for visuals alone 2049 is worth watching.
Definitely
Yes please!
Definitely Yes! And before doing it be sure to watch the 3 short stories prepared as a bridge between the 2 films (Blade Runner 2022, Blade Runner 2036 and Blade Runner 2048), there are some important information in there.
A common misunderstanding is that they're mechanical. Replicants are organic and have human biology.
Thank you…someone understanding they are engineered super human slaves.
More human than human 🙂
@@nflr92 FINALLY, someone said it! THANKS!!
Roy Batty says it himself to J.F. Sebastian
“We are not computers. We are physical.”
I think the 'crazy chase' at the end was Roy living to the utmost and going out with a roar. But it was also a not so passive aggressive message, which he finally verbally conveyed to Deckard with his "Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave." It's maybe an odd way to do it, but with that message and with his saving Deckard and sharing his final thoughts I think he had 'evolved' to a point where he could feel empathy, which is exactly what the Voight-Kampf test looked for (rather, the lack thereof) in ferreting out replicants.
I like to think that, in the final moments before he died, Roy would have passed the test.
Amen to this 👏 🕊️
I think that from the moment Priss dies, Roy ascends to a state of enlightenment that he knows he must pass to Deckard before his imminent shutdown. Showing him what replicants feel before 'retirement' gives Deckard empathy for the replicants finally.
It should be noted 4 yr shelf life ... Roy is 4 yrs old. While he has the body of an adult and a genius mind, he still is in essence emotionally a 4 yr old. And when you look at that and how he acts (like a child... you have nice toys and other child like references). This alone should make you look at this film in a different light.
“The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. And you have burned so very bright, Roy.”
That glib bs pretty much sealed Tyrell’s fate. Roy is dying and this rich old geezer is trying to make him feel okay about it.
In 1982, it seemed like movies like this could be made at will, the music, the visuals, the sci-fi concepts, the tragic moments. Only a few have matched it's scope since. Truly worth watching over and over.
Agree, it's part of my collection and i still watch it from time to time... it's like putting on a cool record.
I miss the mood of the late 70s early 80s
Next should be Akira!
+1!
1982 was one of the best years for movies (Tron, Conan, The Thing, ST:Wrath of Khan, Poltergeist, ET, many more) :)
Ranking movies is all but an impossible task, but to me, this is possibly the best movie ever made. It shaped me as a person, like which hobbies/interests I have pursued throughout my life.
Remember, Roy and his crew are only a few years old. They have the emotional growth of a child; hence, every emotion is heightened. They've been designed and grown to be superior at their specific skills (off-world slave work, whether combat or pleasure or whatever models). The "fix" from Tyrell for the new generation of replicants (al Rachel) was the implantation of memories to even out their emotions so that there becomes no actual difference between a person that is designed and grown versus one born naturally. In the end, the question of "is Deckard a replicant" becomes meaningless as we've just watched a story where he is as human as any of us.
Yes, i hate the old 'is Deckard a replicant or not?' question. The actual question of the film is 'Does it matter..?'
It's always interesting to see people watch this for the first time, to see if they understand what the movie is going for. I figure it's easy to just think it's a very unique sci-fi detective/action movie, but it really goes deeper than that and I think it only reveals its true nature at the very end with Roy's final act. You're prepared for the bad guy to do the bad guy thing...and then he uses his last moments to just make another person understand him. Can't get much more human than that.
Rutger Hauer essentially essentially wrote his own lines for that death scene on the roof. Originally, he was just supposed to say 'time to die' or something, and he hated it for the character. So he wrote up that really evocative sci-fi swan song on his own.
I was blessed to grow up in a 80s household where we would listen to Vangelis and Tangerine Dream and Queen on vinyl records on summer days so when we rented movies like Blade Runner and Legend and Highlander I was transported to another place, to a world that opened me to read sci fi and fantasy and have a deep appreciation for my childhood ❤ its a kind of magic
Sounds like a wonderful time to grow up in :)
The Tangerine Dream score on Risky Business is sublime.
"That's the spirit!" Is my second favorite Roy-ism in this film. IMO, he just wants the person sent to kill him to feel, to be engaged, to give it his all to the very end. This material is so deep on a very basic level, more life. Something most people will always want. Ones own mortality is a hard thing to face.
And for the record, Roy's monologue at the end is my favorite quote from the movie. So much weight is in that incredibly poignant speech. A brilliant moment in cinema history. RIP Rutger Hauer.
If I was Deckard I would have been scared witless by that statement. He just hit Roy across the skull with all his strength only for Roy to laugh at the attempt. Then later Roy stops to think and admits “That…hurt”
Roy - "Cmon Deckard, show me what you're made of " . . . so many layers to this film.
Tyrell also played the bartender in " The Shining " .
I was a 9 year old kid when I first saw this in the theater in 82 and was blown away. Had to wait over 35 years for the freakin' sequel!? WTF?
Once you accept the replicants' humanity, you realize it is a film about a slave catcher (who possibly is unknowingly a slave himself) hunting down escaped slaves. With this realization, it's hard for me not to consider the replicants the true heroic figures of the film. Sure they commit multiple murders in their escape, but violence in the pursuit of emancipation from slavery is morally justifiable.
Coincidentally Rutger Hauer who played Roy died in 2019.
faaaak, didn't know that... 😥
And yet he will live on through film with a most iconic death scene ❤
That's crazy when you think about it...same date
I think you missed that a lot of the reactions of the replicants were exaggerated, this is because they have the emotional maturity of 4 years olds. Roy's reactions would go from laughter to tears and Pris's death was like a childs tantrum. It's a very sublte and elegant way to show a being, still wrestling with learning emotional responses.
Love this film! The director’s cut leaves it open whether Deckard is a replicant - but with the unicorn scene, the Final Cut pretty much removes all doubt. Gaff knows about the unicorn from Deckard’s dreams the same way Deckard knew about Rachel’s dreams. The eyes are an indicator, but I feel not as definite as the origami unicorn.
The music is beautiful, the story has philosophical depth (as stories inspired by Philip K Dick usually do), and the sets, costumes and cinematography are some of the best ever.
The unicorn is in the director's cut too. It's only missing from the original theatrical releases. But I think the unicorn dream is longer in the final cut.
@Gerald H I mean, the movie is only very loosely based on the novella anyway. Personally, I like both variations as they each add their own angles, but obviously YMMV.
@@demopem nope, the unicorn DREAM is only in the final cut...... at that's the reason why i like the dc waaaay more
@@stefanforrer2573 You are wrong. I just popped in the old Director's cut dvd I have. It's at time 0:40:55 to 0:41:08. And the origami unicorn is there at the end as well.
@@demopem yes i know the origami scene is there..... maybe there are multiple director's cuts, because it certainly was not in the vhs version of the director's cut.... i explicitly remember buying the final cut dvd and being angry about it taking away pretty much every ambiguety because of that damn unicorn dream 😜
SUCH a great movie! "All these moments will be lost in time, like... tears in the rain Time to die."
The actor who plays Roy , was also in the 1986 " The Hitcher "
Classic Frankenstein story. Man brings life to inanimate monster. Monster begins to think for itself. Monster terrorizes villagers. Monster returns to creator. Monster kills creator. Monster has to die. They just did a damn good job of it. (In the theater the unicorn dream was not part of the movie.) But unicorn was at the end. We took it to mean, he was there, she's one of a kind, he let her live.
My two favoriet moments are when Deckard stops for noodles and when he puts it together thay they are artificially adding memories. The lighting, color temperature, background music, vocals and the grin on Tyrell's face, its just perfect.
The movie that gave birth to Cyberpunk genre glad you’re watching the final cut.
Please do watch it’s sequel, one the best sequel of all time in my opinion.
This, and William Gibson's Sprawl Trilogy (Burning Chrome, set in the Sprawl world, was published in '82), which, despite being developed entirely independently could have almost been set in the same world as this film (though without replicants and with more computers).
There were also previous works, if not in the genre, at least very influential in its development, going all the way back to the sixties, with the term "Cyberpunk" first appearing in 1980... but Blade Runner and the Sprawl Trilogy certainly influenced _everything_ that came after in the genre, much like you can't write fantasy without being influenced by Tolkien (even if you purposely try to avoid any influence, that in itself _is_ a form of influence).
@Gerald H sure, novels set the world, futurism, existentialism, but bladerunner gave cyberpunk its enduring visuals, design and atmosphere.
@Gerald H Gibson didn't write anything about the tech noir lighting or the synth score.
@Gerald H That doesn't make sense. Yes, Cyberpunk is older than Blade Runner but what Cyberpunk actually is, especially from a visual perspective, was largely shaped by Blade Runner. How could the visuals OR the design OR the atmosphere of this movie come from the book? Have you even read it? Because while it's influential, no one who has thinks it's even in the genre of cyberpunk, rather it was a noir with sci fi elements.
@Gerald H If we follow your argument to it's conclusion noone invents anything in creative arts. Everything is a combination of elements each of which has been seen before.
17:08 fun fact: very first use of "zoom and enhance" in the movies.
And it was used effectively!
It was science fiction : the photos are holographic (3D). He zooms around the back of a mirror. So the first instance of it was imaginative predictive fiction, though future (also fictional) uses tend to be a shortcut in a modern day crime drama.
Harrison Ford said the eye shine effect on himself was accidental and he considers Deckard to be human. Scott thinks Deckard is a replicant. Most of the other people involved in the film think he is human or it should remain ambiguous. I'm surprised you noticed that effect as I didn't see it until after many rewatches.
He's Nexus 5.
I believe Harrison Ford said in an interview that the whole story is about a man who has been reduced to be emotionless and cold and "robots" teach him to feel alive and love again. That is better story than "I guess he is replicant too". Also, with wide enough aperture in low light situations you can accidentally get the eye effect, so it is likely that Ford is right in that also (it is same effect as red pupils with flash photography).
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die."
Deckard is NOT a Replicant. First off, he gets his ass handed to him by other Replicants. Two, Deckard's arc starts with him hating Replicants and then ends with him falling in love with one. That arc would be meaningless if Deckard is himself a Replicant. Three, even the book makes it very clear he's human.
By the way, I love Rachel (Sean Young). She has this WWII secretary aesthetic style that is REALLY doing it for me. 😍
Fun Fact: Zhora was at ease with the snake around her neck because it was actually Darling, Joanna Cassidy's actually pet Burmese Python.
Shine Job Fact: Director Sir Ridley Scott and director of photography Jordan Cronenweth achieved the famous "shining eyes" effect by using the "Schüfftan Process" technique invented by Fritz Lang. Light is bounced into the eyes off of a piece of half mirrored glass mounted at a forty-five-degree angle to the camera.
Authentic Battle Damage Fact: After Pris (Daryl Hannah) first meets J.F. Sebastian (William Sanderson), she runs away from him, skidding into his car and smashing the window with her elbow. This was a genuine mistake caused by Hannah slipping on the wet ground. The glass wasn't breakaway glass, it was real glass, and Hannah chipped her elbow in eight places. She still has the scar from the accident.
9:59 and somewhere in the world someone watching Detroit: Become Human says "this is kinda like Blade Runner."
Consider this possibility: Since Roy is only four years old, he's not developed emotionally and is just learning about life. When he realizes that his death is imminent, he begins to understand the value of all life and he can't kill Deckart, he saves him. Roy has learned to love all life too much to destroy it.
- And understand the meaning of the origami unicorn. Deckart dreamed of a unicorn . . . How could the Edward James Olmos character have known about the unicorn dream unless he knew it was placed into Deckart's mind when he was constructed? It's entirely possible that Deckart was constructed for this one mission, and he had no past other than the one constructed for him.
- Conjecture to be sure; but that's the beauty of this film; the more you think about it, the more possibilities begin to appear.
Stuff
1. Joe Turkel/Tyrell played Lloyd (bartender) in the original Shining.
2. Roy/Rutger Hauer😇 plays in Blind Fury a great first time/share.
3. Leon/ Brion James in Tango and Cash. Much bigger role first time/share also.
4. Deckard/Harrison Ford two overlooked must first time/share "Witness" and "Force 10 from Naverone".
5. In the original Roy tells Tyrell, "I want more life FUCKER" not father.
6. Ford disliked almost everything about this movie (including Sean Young). He mostly disliked the voiceover. He refused to even watch it until it was "fixed".
7. Daryl Hannah cut her elbow when she ran into that van window
8. Philipe K Dick first came up with the idea for his novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
9. You must watch Blade Runner 2049.
Rutger's best film was LadyHawke.
@@markwilkins6013 Haven't seen it, but if you say so.
The white unicorn is an unused clip from another excellent Ridley Scott film, Legend. It's like the ultimate 80s dark fantasy film and if you guys haven't seen it, you HAVE to watch it. Released in 1985 and starring Tom Cruise, Mia Sara, and Tim Curry. Probably the best costumes, makeup, and set design of any fantasy film ever released in my opinion. There's really no other film like it.
Oh yes please watch Legend with Tangerine Dream soundtrack, it's fantastic
I'm pretty sure it is a common misconception that it was old Legend footage. It has a much shorter mane than the Legend unicorns. This misconception may have been reinforced by the fact that in the theatrical cut Ridley Scott took unused footage he got from Kubrick's The Shining for the final scene of Deckard and Rachel driving away through the woods.
@@lanolinlight The unicorn dream sequence first appeared in the 1992 director's cut, so that isn't really an issue. However, I think it was actually shot for the original release, but just never made the cut.
Nope. It was shot for the original film, then cut prior to the second workprint during the test audience phase.
Depending on the version, Legend is incredible. It's all about the score for me. Tangerine Dream only.
I like this reaction very much. You guys were completely invested in the storyline and the editing was on point. A lot of times the editing for some reactors is so cut up that it doesn't even make sense and this is such a complex, thought-provoking storyline, so Kudos for doing such a good job with that.
I think the eyes were just the lighting and not a sign of a replicant (intentional misdirection). It seems to me the unicorn was a symbol of Rachael being a "unicorn" (a rare, magical beast), being the one Replicant without a four-year expiration and with a full capacity for human interaction. "It's too bad she won't live! But then again, who does?" I think he was being a bit sarcastic because he already knew, and that was his brash way of wishing them both a long and happy life.
@@isabellapierre5977, excellent observation! She was quite unique in many ways! I now have a deeper appreciation for her character. Thank you!
Deckard is not a replicant. The glint you see in his eyes at the end are there because both him and Rachel are in the same shot/frame when the director (Ridley Scott) uses the practical/optical effect they use to get the "cat eye" on Rachel and the rest of the replicants.
R.Scott's explanation: th-cam.com/video/vDkFncZG3yE/w-d-xo.html
Scott thinks he's a replicant.
@@znk0r But Harrison Ford says he isn't 😅
Sorry Pal, no choice... th-cam.com/video/zOgq51ldJ2o/w-d-xo.html
Deckard is a Replicant. Scott made it perfectly clear on many occasions.
The director does, indeed, think he's a replicant, but the head writer (as I understand) doesn't. My 2-cents-worth: that disagreement might be a pre-planned thing to heighten interest in the film. (Harrison Ford didn't think Deckard was a replicant either.)
@@yougoattube I agree. In Philip K. Dick's novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?", Deckard tests himself, confirming that he is human but has a sense of empathy for certain androids. So I call BS on R. Scott 😁
The unicorn origami is definitely a clue that that guy knows Deckard's dreams and therefore Deckards is a replicant - which Ridley Scott confirmed.
Rutger Hauer was such an incredible presence in this. RIP
This and Alien made me fall in love with Ridley Scott, so far ahead of its time.. before cyberpunk there was blade runner, the beginning of a genre..I have this soundtrack on vinyl its awesome, also RIP Rutger Hauer what a great performance that final speech was part improve such a sympathetic villan.. loving these reactions guys
There is a version with narration by Deckard and no unicorn dream. There was enough existential crisis for both humans and replicants without getting into dreams.
Eye glow was just a product of the low-light lighting.
Philip K. Dick, the author of the source material, wrote Deckard as a Human. Harrison Ford played Deckard as a Human being. Ridley Scott, the Director, believed that Deckard being a replicant was more interesting so he edited the movie that way. The central question of Blade Runner is what makes a human a human.
Agreed that the main point of the movie is to generate thoughts about what it means to be human.
For myself, I don't see much point in Deckard being a replicant. Why would it be important for him to be a replicant? We already know 2 replicants can fall in love (Roy and Priss). To me, much more interesting if a human falls for a replicant and, maybe more importantly, vice versa.
But what do I know... I still have trouble figuring out where the coyote got all that dynamite he used on the roadrunner...
@@yougoattube I think there is a totally different perspective of 'what makes a human be human', when you live the entirre film with Deckard being human, from inside his head, only to 'reveal' he's not in the end. Just viscerally it's a different experience than 'knowing' Rachel is a replicant who doesn't know it, and I feel it adds immeasurably to the weight of the message. I'm glad there's enough ambiguity for those who want to live by the original novel, but for me the power of the film comes from the likelihood that Deckard is a replicant, or at least that his life is no different from that of a replicant.
Deckard uses the bookish voice during the backstage Johnny sequence with Zora. It's a nod to the '40's noir " The Big Sleep", in which Humphrey Bogart's character ducks into a bookstore and talks like s bookworm to get info from the clerk, who is called " the nymphomaniac" in the credits.
I'm way older than you guys, but I love "FIRST TIME WATCHING" reactions because that's how we all saw it too, it doesn't matter how old! Whether I saw it during its release, or later, it doesn't matter. I thought you both had perfect reactions and very wise questions. It's a beautifully made puzzle.
the idea that he was a replicant was shot down for years ,,, then sort of left open to feed the roomer hype
Did you notice that the *only* time Deckard was ever in a flying cop car, he was chauffeured by Gaff? All other times he was in a regular squad car. They didn't want him straying too far, so kept him on a leash.
I enjoy the theory that Deckard has just been 'activated' when we meet him, either a fresh model or dusting off a relic, and he has to run through the motions - arrested and bullied into taking the 'job' so he can be given the info dump - before being turned loose after being pointed straight at Rachel.
I think Roy recognizes what Deckard is and saves him to impart what knowledge he can before passing.
Are there any hints or suggestions in the movie that Deckard was only recently activated?
Based on Edward James Olmos' earlier origami efforts, I enjoy the theory that Deckard was actually a chicken.
Roy did shout “kinship” when he saved Deckard
The guy who is the main bad guy is rutguer huer a great actor watch his performance in the hitcher
It's Rutger Hauer. +1 to The Hitcher from 1986, not the worse remake.
@@platinumspider7859 I enjoy the remake, but for different reasons. Rutger and JJL are the best part of the original.
The use of the Voight-Kampff test strongly implies that differences in light reflectivity between human and replicant eyes aren't a reliable way to differentiate the two - at least not at the level where human eyes can reliably discern the difference. Otherwise there would be a much faster and more subtle reflectivity-based test. It might even use an undetectable amount of light or just slightly different frequencies. A target would enter a specially lit room or area and a separate monitoring device would almost instantly identify its nature. If the red eyes are used by the film to hint at who is a replicant, then it attacks the internal consistency of the film. The circumstances around the presence of the origami unicorn and Deckard's dream are probably a better indicator that he is indeed a replicant.
21:48 "Oh. Sh*t."
sure, couples complete each other's sentences but come on! 😆
Things to ponder: 1. Leon was first tested by another Bladerunner, who resembles Decker and has same voice. (Harrison Ford) 2. Eye reflection 3. Unicorn dream, unicorn origami…unicorn was implanted, origami was the clue. Nice reaction. New sub.
They also say that the original BR survived what Leon did to him...🤔 That's pretty tough, even if he was messed up.
@@LordVolkov Yes Holden survived. There is this deleted scene: th-cam.com/video/QpLoDADYF5g/w-d-xo.html
The Unicorn origami at the end suggests Gaff knew that Deckard dreamt of Unicorns too suggesting he knew it was an implanted memory for Deckard.
Hope you two are having an great and awesome day ❤
Thanks John, you too!
1998's Soldier starring Kurt Russell is loosely connected to Blade Runner. The Shoulder of Orion and Tannhauser Gate battles appear on Kurt Russell's characters combat history.
The novel was written in the 60s by Philip K Dick - who has also given us Total Recall, A Scanner Darkly, The Man in The High Castle, The Adjustment Bureau, Minority Report among others. A key feature of his work is the ambiguity that leads to different interpretations. I prefer not to solve the riddles and enjoy the uncertainty.
Super Movie , and the final poetic death of Roy🤙🤙🤙🤙
The building where Sebastian lives is the Bradbury Building in LA. It has been used as a shooting location many times, including the Outer Limits episode "Demon with a Glass Hand."
This is my alltime favourite movie. I first saw this when I was maybe 14 (1985). I loved the mood and style of this. Years later I kept coming back to it. After getting Degrees in Philosophy and Literature, I still keep coming back to it. It's truly genius. In the book upon which this is based, Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, by Philip k. Dick, Deckard is assuredly not a replicant.
"If only you could see what ive seen wirh your eyes"
“I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.”
Such beauty
I have watched this film so many times and you always will find something new and special every watch.
My ex paid 1100 for her Leica binoculars. I paid 700 for my Pentax Binoculars So yeah 300 is about as little as you’d like to spend on decent binoculars for birding. Don’t shortchange yourself it’s literally the only thing you need to go birding so splurge on very clear ones.
This didn't do as well as it deserved in 1982. Many consider it the best year and summer for movies. The likes of E.T, The Thing, Poltergeist and Tron were released, amd sequels Star Trek II and Rocky III as well, Thankfully VHS helped make the classic that it is.
Everyone wants Deckard to be a replicant, I dont buy it. The unicorn is Rachel. The Director says Deckard is a replicant , Harrison Ford says he's human. Rachel dosent have the 4 year life span thus a unicorn. Any way thats my theory , Watch 2049 immediately.
Apparently Ridley Scott woke up one day with a drunken stupor convinced Deckard was a replicant, but the writters and the book contradict that statement
@@TheLaFleur Everyone involved with the movie disagrees with Scott.
Of course he is...its in the eyes. And replicant were designed to do dangerous jobs humans didnt want to do..ie bladerunners.
This calls for a Cyberpunk 2077 play through! It’s different from this but takes place in a similar world
So great to see you reacting to this movie! Its so clever and I love the "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe...." speech.😢
Its my 2nd favourite movie of all time! (after another Ridley Scott movie - Alien - Would love to see you guys rescting to that btw!).
ERIC and SARAH should watch the original theatrical release (1982), known as the *voice-over version* or the *narrated version* , narrated by Deckard (Harrison Ford). His narration answers all of Eric and Sarah's questions.
34:43 There is a theory that Deckard is a Replicant and he has Gaff’s memories. That is why Gaff always seems to know what he is thinking.
I prefer the theory that there was a human blade-runner called Deckard who has retired and left Earth, and the Deckard we see is a brand new replicant given his memories (and Deckard's old apartment, which is why it is full of clutter). Gaff is not fit for active duty but is watching Deckard closely to see if the experiment works ("you've done a man's job" at the end). It is noteworthy that Deckard has no friends.
ENHANCE!!! ENHANCE!! The best part of this reaction was watching the two of you crack up lol!!! I truly enjoyed this reaction. This was actually one of my favorite movies as a teenager (I'm 56). It was decades before its time (as was the book it is based on which I think was "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" (or something close to that). I believe the author was Philip K. Dick who wrote some fantastic science fiction back then. Yes! Definitely do the recent sequel. It does not disappoint and is extremely good. Speculation over the end of this film for THIRTY YEARS!!! The sequel answers a lot.
This movie and the sequel are movies that you need to view multiple times to fully understand. They're movies that make you think which I like. When this first came out, I didn't get it, I was a young kid and I expected something on the Star Wars level, because its science fiction. I watched it again when I was much older and fully appreciate it.
33:14 "oh that sneaky fu*k!" 😮
4:50 Back in the day, many old rundown hotels were essentially rooming houses with fairly cheap rent. Most (if not all) are gone to make way for condos, ie gentrification of downtown areas. This is one of the reasons why homelessness is a crisis these days.
This was the 1st movie I bought for my new Sanyo Beta recorder way back then. That copy then at the end showed Decker & Rachel driving off in the countryside with Decker's voice over saying that Rachel was Different.. No expiration date! "We don't know how long we would live. Then again who does?" I can't find that version anywhere now.
Worth noting, with the tortoise, turtle, owl, snake, etc....most common animal species are highly endangered, if not extinct, in this world. Synthetic animals are produced, but are expensive. Real animals are very, VERY expensive. So much so that even Eldon Tyrell, likely the richest man on earth, cannot have a real owl. This is also why it's not THAT unusual for Leon to have never seen a turtle, or not know what a tortoise is. It's a hint that he may be a replicant, but since the world is largely devoid of such creatures, it's not a dead giveaway.
Roy and his friends were not given artificial memories like Rachael was, just language work skills. They were created as labor. Without memories & experiences to form mature emotional responses they were 4 year olds in adult bodies. Look at how they like Sebastian's toys and how Roy liked playing with Deckard. Of course they want more life, being expected to salve away their 4 years of existence then die is cruel.
The unicorn origami, which pertains to Deckard's dream, signifies he is a replicant.
The book that inspired Blade Runner is called Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Philip K. Dick. First published in 1968.
An 80's neo-noir science fiction masterpiece film!
Still not bettered even today !
A classic sci-fi film !
You mentioned Detroit: Become Human. There actually is a Blade Runner game. An ol' school point and click. It was divisive, although, I liked it well enough
it is a pretty good game..... if you actually manage to finish it on account of all the bugs 😕
Each of those lights in that building - were all real lights in a model. 4:32
Roy simply wanted what we all want - to be remembered. In the end, he realized that he was about to die and that life itself was precious. In saving Deckard, Roy knows that he will NEVER be forgotten, or lost to time ... like tears in the rain.
Concerning Deckard's perceived weakness, recall that replicants are not all the same. Roy is a soldier with superior strength, speed and intelligence. Leon is a loader. He required only strength. Zora is an assassin. She is seductive and cunning. Priss is a "basic pleasure model". She is agile and attractive but not that sharp. She relies on Roy for direction.
I read a nice story recently about how Rutger Hauer (Roy) rewrote his own dialogue for the final scene because he found it too rubbish to do - so I'm guessing the whole "tears in rain" bit was his own creation.
Having seen a couple of reactions to this movie and the struggle with its concept most viewers had eversince, makes me wish for the power to change the past in one simple way:
Changing "advancement in robotics" to "advancement in genetics" in the opening titlescroll.
It wouldn't change much about the perception of it back then, since robotics and genetics were both concepts the general public had little concerns about, in contrast to present times.
I understand the frustration of new audiences either dismissing or misenterpreting replicant biology. they are biologically human, superior in many aspects. however genetics infer the passing down of genes from one generation to another. these replicants are wholly manufactured. so robotics is technically correct, but puts the android/machine prejudice on the replicants
@@woeshaling6421 To me it seems that "robotics" in context of the movie is more a relic of its inspiration "Do androids dream of electric sheep?".
How replicants are produced and if they are able to procreate is nerver touched on or hinted at in Blader Runner, nor is the prejudice you speak of, except this one time use of the term "robotics". It is irrelevant for the plot of the movie but makes suspention of disbelief so much harder today.
PS.: btw, genetics only inferes selfreplication like bacteria but implies the passing down of the genome ... in short the struggle of this movie, concepts and the perception of them in the public eye ;)
Darryl Hannah when she runs from JF Sebastian put her hand through a sheet glass window on his vehicle lacerating her arm. Like a trooper she bundled her bloodied arm into her jacket and finished the take which is in the film.
Ridley Scott: Deckard is a Replicant.
Harrison Ford: Deckard is not a Replicant.
It occurred to me while watching you react that there is a common theme with Conquest of the Planet of the Apes, and that is the ethics of slavery. Both societies had groups that they enslaved. In Blade Runner, the humans' excuse was that they were grown in a lab, and therefore were not human, and in Conquest of the Planet of the Apes that they were apes.
You should have watched the original Theatrical version instead of a later released version. 2049 is totally worth the watch.
This is one of thebbest sci-fi movies ever. The atmosphere, world building, and score are excellent.
The name of the original book was DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP? written by the inestimable Philip K Dick. The title BLADE RUNNER is actually from another book about smugglers who specialize in medical supplies.
Movie makers. What are ya gonna do?
I was struck by how Deckard was retired from being a Blade Runner, but he was forced to re-enlist. Like a slave…
Like he didn’t have a choice.
IT'S TOO BAD SHE WON'T LIVE
BUT THEN AGAIN, WHO DOES
I think both Rachel and Deckard are both Nexus 7 models, the only one's in existence and where Tyrells new model. Tyrell didn't get the governments approval to extend life for more than 4 years but did get it for the Nexus 7. Blade Runner is considered the first film noir science fiction.
If you love James Olmos you must watch Battlestar galactica the 2000s version by Ron D Moore some of the best sci fi ever made ..the mini series is a 2 eps intro and would make a great reaction..😂 so say we all
High-grade $300 binoculars? Wow... somebody's in for some sticker shock.
@Darkstar Oh, sure; you can get perfectly servicable binoculars for 300 (catch a good clearance sale and you can even beat that a fair bit) that will work great. For hobby use, it would probably be silly to spend much more. It's just amusing to hear that in a sentence with adjectives I'd associate with glass that has another 0 on the price :)
The unicorn was to show that Deckard is a replicant and Olmos was aware.
Blade Runner is that rare film that tells you flat out what it's about, right from the outset...runaways slaves, and a man who hunts them down and kills them...but still manages, through the conventions of genre, to present the former as monsters, and the latter as a hero...only to remind us, as it progresses, of that original framework. The replicants are slaves...they've escaped, and it's Deckard's job to kill them. And he hates it. And he hates himself for it. He's the bad guy. HE is the monster. And he knows it. We may be persuaded to forget it temporarily, but he NEVER does. The only way forward for him, after the death of Roy Batty, is to never do it again. To never again let the powers that be tell him that he has to kill, in order to live. It's a wonderful, powerful film. And 2049 is a perfect sequel. A must.
The term "blade runner" has roots in the African American culture. Most recent usage people, especially older people, might be familiar with is as a greeting; example " Say young blade". The "friendliness" of the greeting has to be seen in the context in which it's spoken. It may be spoken in an alarmed context; example "Watch it young blade!".
The root of the word blade leads into slavery where it was common, not by far universal, to call young male slaves blades. Some slave catchers (a colorful culture they have) called themselves "Blade Runners" in a few books written by themselves about themselves. The documentary trail goes cold older than then for use of the blade/slave idiom.
I always thought that Harrisson Ford should've used his film Blade Runner as an example for what we don't want our environment to turn out to be, for his Environmental Activism group.
The film is based on a book by Philip K. Dick. "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?"
Here are a few more films and TV series based on his works.
--
The Man in the High Castle (TV Series)
Electric Dreams (TV Series)
The Adjustment Bureau
A Scanner Darkly
Paycheck
Minority Report
Total Recall
--
The list goes on.
And yes he knew she was with Deckard and did nothing. He left the unicorn to let Deckard know he had been there.
As we say here in Texas; Y'all be safe.
Great reaction guys! One of my favorite movies.
Just remember there wasn't any CGI then.. you get a whole new appreciated
If Dekard is a replicant, his super power must be he has a buzillion hit points, lol.
Always thought the eye flash thing is a red herring. Otherwise, they'd just flash some torches in their eyes to tell rather than going through the whole voidcomp test.
for me Roy and the other Replicants are the heroes of this movie, nothing wrong with slaves freeing them selves.
03:32 BTW guys, _Vangelis_ (R.I.P.) is pronounced with a hard _G._
IVE SEEN THINGS.
THINGS YOU... PEOPLE WOULDN'T BELIVE.
Thank you, thanks to you I discovered that Blade Runner was also a comedy.