Amen, brother. I first watched this scene when I was 23 in a movie theater long ago. Roy Batty’s words brought me and others to tears back then. And they still do. And… it made me think of when MY time would come. And when all of my experiences and wonders, thoughts and emotions and deeds, and every hint of ME will be wiped away, “like tears in rain.” Will they matter? Will I have mattered? I’m now 65. The end is a lot closer. 42 years went by so, so fast. And, yes, it does hit very hard now.
I think most of the people doing the reactions missed the significance of the scene. In the end, the dying replicant values life, all life, even the life of the Bladerunner trying to kill him. The dove represents the soul, and flies away when he dies. In the end, the replicant is more humane than the human.
I cut them some slack seeing as it's their first time watching (supposedly) but yeah, some of them are just too aware that they're making a video and are too busy cracking jokes and just not paying attention to what's going on. It's like watch the movie and stop playing to your camera because this is important.
I was going to write a comment saying exactly what you had said, then I saw your comment and then deleted it. Your words are correct. Couldn't have said better myself.
Even more importantly. It was the Replicant that was created specifically to kill that chose to save the life of the one that was trying to kill him. I also feel its significant that a Replicant built for war is holding a dove-the symbol of peace.
There is so much religious allegory in this scene, it is astounding. The nail in one hand, the dove in the other, the leap of faith, choosing to save his oppressor, sharing last words of wisdom. The more I examine the message, the more impressed I become by the layers of meaning encoded in it.
I love Rutger Hauer's monologue, one of the greatest ever put on film. But I also love Gaff's follow up line - "It's too bad she won't live. But then again, who does?"
I thought that was such a beautiful line. It was such a wise and kind thing to say. Gaff even let them have a head start before he begins hunting them as the final shot of the film suggests. Even then, he probably didn’t try too hard.
This was my Mom's favorite movie. She thought Rutger Hauer was extremely handsome. She died in October. these scenes are hard to watch now. It's too bad she won't live; but then again, who does?
He was too based for Hollywood. They rejected him. I watched video when he told that you had to be nice with all people around you in Hollywood. Cause it's easy to get on a bad side with the wrong person. He said that with some kind of regret. My guess he messed with the wrong people.
If Rutger was rejected by those abusers of Hollywood who have destroyed the life of many children and adults, then it's because he was a good person. Who cares about the opinion of thrashy idiots who must be in jail.
I feel like Harrison Ford doesn't get enough credit for his work in this scene. He doesn't have any dialogue, but you see desperation, terror, shock, surprise, regret, and resignation all in his face. Phenomenal performance.
Roy saved Deckard because he knew he was about to die and he wanted *_someone_* to remember him. Roy realized that humans die, too, but we live on in other people’s memories.
I think Roys attitude is beyond a selfish pride on someone remember him, instead, for me, he saved Decard because, in the end, he have found a value of Life life by sparing one
@insanidadeEspelhada yea the entire fight he really didnt want dekard to d¡e . he could have done way more than dislocate some fingers. he just wanted someone to feel his pain for once.
@@JPB-cp4ok seriously! Roy’s final speech to Deckard wasn’t about the value of human life (of which Roy definitely didn’t value) but rather about himself, his own experiences, his own memories. He knew that if he died alone, his entire existence would “disappear like tears in rain” so he shared his memories with someone. I can’t believe people think he actually had a change of heart or something.
Too many people don't understand the replicants. They are not evil or malicious they are children experiencing emotions for the first time with no idea how to cope because their only experiences have been as objects used and abused for the benefit of their creators. Is it really surprising they want vengance. Roy was a combat model built and taught only to kill the fact that in the end he outgrew his origins enough to feel empathy for Decker and save his life is the whole point of the movie.
I also think Roy hopes that by not killing Deckard he might somehow help to change the future for other replicants. He talks to him to prove that he's just as human as anyone and how his and other replicants effective enslavement is inherntly wrong.
Replicants are human. The movie notes this multiple times by mentioning them having emotions (but not having the time to learn to regulate them), RNA (only within living beings), susceptible to a genetically engineered disease (only living things are affected by diseases). They bleed, they sweat, they suffer pain, they need to eat. One of the biggest themes of this film--and the following one, for that matter--is how easily humans are manipulated into dehumanizing one another.
Roy realises that after his death, nothing will remain of him but memories. THIS is why he saves Deckard, and tells some of his life-experiences in his final moments. Deckard will remember him, and that's his only legacy.
@@redwick00 - Possibly. The thing is his behaviour seems to indicate something deeper. Ultimately the replicants simply wanted to live and whilst they failed in that goal he perhaps understands that he may still be able to live on in someone's memory and also change the future a little. I think their motivations are so much more complex and nuanced than normal villains (if they can even truly be called that). The simple fact is they are programmed for violence and killing and do that but often choose not too unless they need too. The first two seem to simply be living peacefully when encountered and while Pris and Roy are more proactive and menacing in moments they too seem more focused on life than death.
Rutger Hauer, who played Roy Batty wrote that final monologue on the final night of shooting and Ridley Scott liked it so much they shot it with a skeleton crew before everyone left.
Me either. 'Where did he get the bird?' Focus people, focus. 🙄It doesn't take too much of a stretch of the imagination that this superhuman replicant could catch a damned bird inside a building. Their gears are grinding about that and they miss the important parts.
@@mardroidmk1393 It was written by someone else as a much longer monologue. It didn't work well and Rutger cut it down some and added his own touch to it.
Watching the reaction of younger people I wonder: why do they all get so fixated on the bird. "Where he get a bird?" They are flying all around the building as they chase each other. In the end, the android had the same fear we humans have: death. Been older, I wonder today what he wondered: all that I have seen, done, will be forgotten once I am gone. And even I will disappear in time. Maybe we humans have to get older to truly understand that fear/pain/sadness.
Less to do with age so much as growing up with the ADHD chaos and literal-mindedness of social media. Expecting instant, pat answers for almost everything. Youngins who experienced more books and life than phone screens are better at grasping the esoteric and profound.
Thank you Serg. Their fixation on the bird was really distracting them from paying attention to the film. A lot of bad filmmakers have trained audiences to focus on minutia as a "hidden mystery box" that will become important later on. The audience is often taught that the origin of something like this is really, really important when it isn't. I think the ability of audiences to understand metaphor has diminished a lot.
This man made history of cinema. His speech is sad, depressing, inspirational, heart-breaking, dreaming, is Sci-Fi itself. And, what a Hell of irony, Roy Batty died on November 2019: Rutger Hauer died in July 2019. Barely a few months apart. RIP.
RIP Hauer🕊 RIP Vangelis🕊 Ed Olmos (Gaff) and Hauer's performances were legendary! The endings were out of this world! They don't make movies like they used to.😢❤🕊 Harrison was also great in the movie! Ridley Scott made a masterpiece of a movie! 👏
The version with the voice over is my favorite. This is what Deckard says "I don't know why he saved my life. Maybe in those last moments he loved life more than he ever had before. Not just his life - anybody's life; my life. All he'd wanted were the same answers the rest of us want. Where do I come from? Where am I going? How long have I got? All I could do was sit there and watch him die." Rutger Hauer Improvised the Iconic "Tears in Rain" Monologue 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.
@@christopherscott8272the opposite, actually. The voice over was added for TV audiences by studio execs who thought that people wouldn’t understand the ending otherwise, against the wishes of director Ridley Scott. Hence, that cut is referred to as the ‘TV cut’.
Not quite. The original monologue was much longer, but everyone thought it'd be more effective if it was shorter, so Hauer cut the original down to size until it was, in a word, perfect. The "tears in rain" was indeed ad-libbed, though.
Some of the reactors in this video had some of the most shallow, non-insightful comments I've ever heard. They totally weren't paying attention to what was happening, or if they were, the meaning of Batty's speech was lost on them
@@gazoontight Yep. Short attention spans. I give them kudos for at least watching it, and other movies, despite a long run time, and what they might view as too many "slow moments."
It makes me want to reach through the screen and slap some sense into them. Then again if i tried to explain the film was an allegory for the human condition they would think i was talking about a crocodile and go and turn their brains off by watching the MCU shite.
Amazing thing is that Rutger Hauer wrote this monolouge the night before shooting, because he didn't feel the two sentences in the script would express the feelings of Roy becoming a human while dieing
Im 53. I named my youngest son "Orion," with a nod to this scene. When he got grown, I explained to him why I did it. "You should get a tattoo of attack ships on fire" on your shoulder 😘🙏💯👍 The voice over version helps the depth of this scene immensely. I was the proudest dad when my son enjoyed this movie also. 💯👍
I find it funny that all of these GenZ kids are focusing on the dove. I mean there was a bird house in the building with them. I've used that quote "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.." so many times as a joke before. Now that I'm older, nobody gets it anymore.
2 หลายเดือนก่อน +22
I'm in the minority here but I actually prefer the original theatrical release version with Deckard's narration. I felt it added to the film noir feel they had going, like the old B&W detective stories. Many fans don't like it as Harrison Ford's voice is pretty flat but to me it adds to his dead inside, tired of life persona. It also explained some things that viewers might not otherwise get if they weren't hardcore sci-fi fans. Also, I'm old enough to have seen this in college long before any other "editions" came out. Sorry, Ridley. "Where did he get a dove?" - It was in a case on the wall that had "IN CASE OF DRAMATIC DEATH SCENE BREAK GLASS" printed on it. ☺
As much as I love this film, I really wish it didn't ignore the novel's reason as to why Roy Batty and the other "andies" (not "replicants") were targeted for "retirement". The film essentially just turned them into the "technology gone haywire" trope. When in the novel, it was because Roy (a more advanced model) was teaching the other andies how to understand empathy and to be better than simply what they were built for. To be more human. And the humans of their society didn't want machines with emotions. Again, great film, but a lot of the philosophical and morality themes of the novel were glossed over or abandoned.
I think you're the first person I've heard from who also read the book. I was beginning to think my girlfriend and I were the only ones. I actually found a pair of socks with the book covers graphics on them. I had to explain them to everyone "they're electric sheep!!!"
@@SteveMccart Yeah. I have never met anyone that has read it. It's the same with Starship Troopers. Everyone has seen the 1997 film, but basically no one read the book.
I think Roy saved Deckard because through the whole film, he wanted more. More life. He was designed to be a combat model. That's all. By saving Deckard, it was one last way of defying his makers. Designed to kill, he moved beyond his program. He proved that he was a thinking individual, and in that one moment, he defined his own legacy. Also, I think he recognized that Deckard would remember him for life. In addition, it brings Deckard to the final realization that he has been on the wrong side, which he knew deep down a long time ago. But it finally got through to him that he can't beat his conscience down with booze anymore.
@@mattmanw54301 That's exactly why Roy tortured and terrorized Deckard, but kept him alive - so Deckard would never forget him. He realised the only way he could live on was in Deckard's memory.
Funny nobody hears what Roy uttered when he caught Deckard. Roy said "kinship" because Deckard finally understood what it means to live in fear of dying. The monologue is just haunting.
Roy, the replicant started his dying state, and he was using the nail to impale it through his hand, I guess, to stimulate it to functioning better through inflicting pain. His "model" Nexus 6 was designed to live only for a 4 years, so the replicants wouldn't live long enough to start developing emotions, and a strong sense self identity, making it harder to keep them under control, more obedient. They are literally grown, enhanced humans designed to be slave labor and to fight and die on behalf for whoever buys them.
Yeah. When I heard they were making a movie out of 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" I was so worried they would screw it up. I'm so glad I was wrong.
It's funny that so many just don't get the nail in the hand or the releasing of the dove at the point of death. I watched this film the first time as a literal child and always understood why he'd want to put off the inevitable by driving a nail through his hand for focus and that the dove was him holding onto his life and releasing it was his way of marking his passing. Love this film. Even the inferior cuts, with dumb voiceover etc. can't ruin it. It is a classic for a reason.
I was honestly expecting more from the people reacting. But I guess this is were we can draw the line with those videos. When there is depth or meaning behind lines.
A point that is seldom addressed is Roy Batty's (Rutger Hauer) smile, as he says, "Time to die." It's significance lies in the clear, simple, truth that anything that dies must have been, however briefly, alive. He, and his comrades, were not just empty machinery, facsimiles of people, but actual beings. With lives, loves & ultimately deaths. .. and so it goes.
I am old enough to remember seeing this film for the first time in the theater. I was very young and did not know exactly what was going on. When Batty saved Deckard everyone gasped. I could hear people crying when Batty died. It was the first time I experienced a collective emotional response to a movie. It was the moment I fell in love with the cinema.
The villains of this story aren't the replicants or even the Blade Runner . The villain is Tyrell the slave master and he gets exactly what he deserves.
This is just amazing! Most of the people in this video ask: "Why did he save him?" I want to ask them, if you were about to fall off a roof, would you want to be saved? And from Roy's side, if you knew that you were about to die, would you want your last words to be heard by anyone? It seems that such concepts as compassion, sympathy, respect for other people's lives do not occur to you. It seems that you are sincerely surprised that someone, dying, saves the life of his enemy, proving to him that he is also a human being, albeit an artificial one? And you people - are you human beings? Or maybe you think that only you are human beings...
I remember at the time people didn't get it at first - that the person they had thought of as the villain is actually the hero, simply trying to find a way to live after a lifetime of slavery and oppression and that he proves his inherent goodness by choosing to try to make his enemy understand the reality of the situation.
Another youtuber explained that in this story, the humans are trapped in their jobs like robots, content to be stuck in their miserable lives. It's these biosynths that are taking initiative, showing agency to try to break out of their programming and actually live.
And her reactions are faked (she's already watched the movies and prepared her 'theatrical' reactions, then pretends to be reacting spontaneously.) I stopped paying attention when I clued in to that.
This is one of my all time favorite movies. It's a shame that this powerful scene was completely lost on some of these TH-camrs. Hopefully they will revisit it again and have a deeper appreciation for this masterpiece.
This is so actual. If our IA reaches singularity, so what is it to be a human? Metal skeleton IA is a robot? Meat made IA is a robot? And at the end, the other cop says “…but then again who does…” about dying. He is not talking only about Rachel, but EVERYONE!!!! Including humans!
I was getting so pissed at everyone reacting while I was shedding some tears, like "what do these people have running through their veins? Kombucha?", until Bunnytailsreact turn, faith in humanity slightly restored. Same unfair judgement goes for people who watches all of Cowboy Bebop and doesn't cry like a b**ch at the end.
To other comments about "Tears in the Rain," Rutger wrote this in his trailer during the filming and asked Ridley to come to his trailer to hear it. Ridley stated, "Oh God," he thought it would be the worst thing...but no, one of the greatest adlibs
Rutger Hauer's Blade Runner "Tears in Rain" speech was largely improvised by the actor, without the prior knowledge of director Ridley Scott or credited screenwriters Hampton Fancher
Little known fact. Rutger was bailed out from jail the day prior to shooting this scene when he went on a huge cocaine bender and caused damage to a local bar. He was still feeling the effects on that day and that was why he still had the shakes.
I have read book and a ton about the making of this film and the story you posted has never mentioned, nor even hinted at. No results about Rutger Huaer ever being arrest turn up isn Goggle either. I call b.s. on your claim.
Batty truly became human in his feelings and thoughts, in these final scenes.He knew the only way to express that to humanity was to spare Deckard’s life.
The monologue is the essence of and a hat tip to the novel which is a hat tip to and the essence of the philosopher Deckard's name is alluding too. Pris even quotes him at some point.
I was so afraid is was going to be crap. I was like, 'No, please,' when I heard they were making a sequel. I was very pleasantly surprised at the result. Villeneuve became my favorite director. Dune part 1 & 2 are awesome also.
No, they don't. I have noticed that some reactors do not really focus on the movie. They focus more on the talking. And yes I know there are reasons why they talk and it would not make a very interesting reaction if they just sat there quietly. The problem is that they talk during important dialogue without listening, they focus on stuff that is not important unless the movie more or less tells them what they should be focusing on. if there's a character or two on the screen they focus solely on them but don't see what is around them, their expressions and mannerisms, what is being said, how it is said or why, and so forth. Reactors are no longer just saying out loud what they are thinking about what just happened, they are talking about EVERYTHING. Asking stupid questions that has been already, or would be eventually answered, talking about something that has nothing to do with the movie, fixating on stuff that is not relevant and the list goes on. They are watching but they don't really seem to understand what they are seeing. They may let some really stupid and ridiculous dialogue, plot points, scenes etc. slide in movies, but somehow that dove is supposedly weird. They miss obvious stuff (like, in this case, the room full of pigeons and doves), everything has to be spelled out for them, and symbolism flies really high above their heads. Marvel movies are good fun but some of these reactors pretty much tells a story why we nowadays get more and more movies where the plot and it's flow was an afterthought, where you don't have to think or feel anything other than happy thoughts. Just sit on the rollercoaster and enjoy the ride. And I suppose I should put some kind of a disclaimer here just in case that I don't think this is the case with ALL of them. In this collection there are a few I know that are "deep thinkers" so to speak but some of them really makes me wonder how the hell do they get views.
@@xkepakko Yes, absolutely. Some of the reactors are great and interesting, and it's a joy for me to watch them react showcasing their understanding of visual aspect of movie storytelling and just the enjoyment and enthusiasm they have watching something new to them. The reactors I cannot watch, add nothing of true insight nor do they offer any concept of discovery of theme within in the movie. Many of the movies reviewed are not difficult to understand nor are based esoteric ideas or full-on art-house niche films, and still some of the basic metaphors or visual storytelling gets lost on them. I myself am no staunch film connoisseur of particular style of type of movie; I enjoy great variety of genres. Maybe some of these reactors have only experienced movie watching as a lesser pastime, possibly within a narrow range of styles previously before starting their reacting channels.
one other interesting thing; it has been argued that Soldier and Alien take place in the same universe as this movie. they contain reference to places and events in common with each other.
The theatrical release had a voiceover because the producers thought that American audiences wouldn't understand the movie and needed the story explained to them. At t he time i thought that was quite insulting to the average American...but after watching these reactions i owe that producer an apology. 'Who's that then...why is he doing that...where did he get a bird...why does he have a pen through his hand...is he dead...who is Rachael...why don't i have a brain?'
VKunia coming up with something that - in all the years since I first saw this movie on general release, all the years in which I have considered it the best movie ever made - I never though of. Roy saves Deckard because he doesn't want to die alone.
The speech the final replicant gives was not in the script, it was all done on the fly. They loved it so much they kept it in the film and it became an Epic seen for all time.
I am glad someone finally noted how this film does have religious/spiritual imagery. Oh, and Deckard and Batty were in a room filled with pigeons and other birds. Maybe he wanted a symbol...I mean, souvenir? ;)
The older you get, the harder that line hits.
That is why most of these people don't get it they are not yet aware of their mortality.
so true
I'm not afraid of death. I'm afraid of dying.
@@anathardayaldarLife is wonderful, death is peaceful, it's the transition that's disturbing.
Amen, brother. I first watched this scene when I was 23 in a movie theater long ago. Roy Batty’s words brought me and others to tears back then. And they still do. And… it made me think of when MY time would come. And when all of my experiences and wonders, thoughts and emotions and deeds, and every hint of ME will be wiped away, “like tears in rain.” Will they matter? Will I have mattered? I’m now 65. The end is a lot closer. 42 years went by so, so fast. And, yes, it does hit very hard now.
I’m in tears because this scene is so powerful, the music so perfect.
RIP Rutger Hauer
RIP Vangelis
Also RIP Jordan Cronenweth, cinematographer
Love rutger haurer! R.I.P🌹🌹🌹🌹🥀🥀🥀🥀☘️☘️☘️
I think most of the people doing the reactions missed the significance of the scene. In the end, the dying replicant values life, all life, even the life of the Bladerunner trying to kill him. The dove represents the soul, and flies away when he dies. In the end, the replicant is more humane than the human.
I cut them some slack seeing as it's their first time watching (supposedly) but yeah, some of them are just too aware that they're making a video and are too busy cracking jokes and just not paying attention to what's going on. It's like watch the movie and stop playing to your camera because this is important.
I was going to write a comment saying exactly what you had said, then I saw your comment and then deleted it. Your words are correct. Couldn't have said better myself.
Even more importantly. It was the Replicant that was created specifically to kill that chose to save the life of the one that was trying to kill him. I also feel its significant that a Replicant built for war is holding a dove-the symbol of peace.
There is so much religious allegory in this scene, it is astounding. The nail in one hand, the dove in the other, the leap of faith, choosing to save his oppressor, sharing last words of wisdom. The more I examine the message, the more impressed I become by the layers of meaning encoded in it.
Because most reactors are braindead normies.
I love Rutger Hauer's monologue, one of the greatest ever put on film. But I also love Gaff's follow up line - "It's too bad she won't live. But then again, who does?"
I thought that was such a beautiful line. It was such a wise and kind thing to say. Gaff even let them have a head start before he begins hunting them as the final shot of the film suggests. Even then, he probably didn’t try too hard.
This was my Mom's favorite movie. She thought Rutger Hauer was extremely handsome. She died in October. these scenes are hard to watch now. It's too bad she won't live; but then again, who does?
Rutger Hauer was a criminally underrated actor imo.
He was too based for Hollywood. They rejected him. I watched video when he told that you had to be nice with all people around you in Hollywood. Cause it's easy to get on a bad side with the wrong person. He said that with some kind of regret. My guess he messed with the wrong people.
If Rutger was rejected by those abusers of Hollywood who have destroyed the life of many children and adults, then it's because he was a good person. Who cares about the opinion of thrashy idiots who must be in jail.
He was Dutch and did a lot more holes in the Dutch language.
Have you seen blind fury?
@@StompGojiStomp aye, and how about Hobo with a Shotgun!! :)
I feel like Harrison Ford doesn't get enough credit for his work in this scene. He doesn't have any dialogue, but you see desperation, terror, shock, surprise, regret, and resignation all in his face. Phenomenal performance.
Roy saved Deckard because he knew he was about to die and he wanted *_someone_* to remember him. Roy realized that humans die, too, but we live on in other people’s memories.
I think Roys attitude is beyond a selfish pride on someone remember him, instead, for me, he saved Decard because, in the end, he have found a value of Life life by sparing one
@insanidadeEspelhada yea the entire fight he really didnt want dekard to d¡e . he could have done way more than dislocate some fingers. he just wanted someone to feel his pain for once.
@@insanidadeEspelhada i think he always knew the value of life, but until the end he was desperate to find a way to live. killing was never the point.
You get it! Very few do, judging by the comments :/
@KevyNova
@@JPB-cp4ok seriously! Roy’s final speech to Deckard wasn’t about the value of human life (of which Roy definitely didn’t value) but rather about himself, his own experiences, his own memories. He knew that if he died alone, his entire existence would “disappear like tears in rain” so he shared his memories with someone. I can’t believe people think he actually had a change of heart or something.
Too many people don't understand the replicants. They are not evil or malicious they are children experiencing emotions for the first time with no idea how to cope because their only experiences have been as objects used and abused for the benefit of their creators. Is it really surprising they want vengance. Roy was a combat model built and taught only to kill the fact that in the end he outgrew his origins enough to feel empathy for Decker and save his life is the whole point of the movie.
I also think Roy hopes that by not killing Deckard he might somehow help to change the future for other replicants. He talks to him to prove that he's just as human as anyone and how his and other replicants effective enslavement is inherntly wrong.
Replicants are human. The movie notes this multiple times by mentioning them having emotions (but not having the time to learn to regulate them), RNA (only within living beings), susceptible to a genetically engineered disease (only living things are affected by diseases). They bleed, they sweat, they suffer pain, they need to eat.
One of the biggest themes of this film--and the following one, for that matter--is how easily humans are manipulated into dehumanizing one another.
Roy realises that after his death, nothing will remain of him but memories. THIS is why he saves Deckard, and tells some of his life-experiences in his final moments. Deckard will remember him, and that's his only legacy.
I think there's a much simpler explanation. He just doesn't want to die alone.
@@redwick00 - Possibly. The thing is his behaviour seems to indicate something deeper. Ultimately the replicants simply wanted to live and whilst they failed in that goal he perhaps understands that he may still be able to live on in someone's memory and also change the future a little. I think their motivations are so much more complex and nuanced than normal villains (if they can even truly be called that). The simple fact is they are programmed for violence and killing and do that but often choose not too unless they need too. The first two seem to simply be living peacefully when encountered and while Pris and Roy are more proactive and menacing in moments they too seem more focused on life than death.
Rutger Hauer, who played Roy Batty wrote that final monologue on the final night of shooting and Ridley Scott liked it so much they shot it with a skeleton crew before everyone left.
Genius.
We all will be forgotten in time, like tears. In rain
I’ve watched this movie more times than I can remember … not once did I wonder where Roy got his dove from.
Me either. 'Where did he get the bird?' Focus people, focus. 🙄It doesn't take too much of a stretch of the imagination that this superhuman replicant could catch a damned bird inside a building. Their gears are grinding about that and they miss the important parts.
I guess some people have never been on a rooftop before?
There were birds in the unoccupied rooms in the top floor of the Bradbury.
I sometimes wonder if the paint that Pris sprayed across her eyes was enamel or acrylic.
@@Murdo2112 I suspect it was make up, but who knows? (I mean makeup within the film character, not just on the actress)
The dove was symbolic of his soul flying to heaven.
The dove/pigeon represents Roy's spirit after death flying to heaven.
A short monologue but one of the greatest monologues in movie history R.I.P Rutger 🌹
Agree. Apparently Rutger came up with the poetry himself.
@@mardroidmk1393 It was written by someone else as a much longer monologue. It didn't work well and Rutger cut it down some and added his own touch to it.
RIP Rutger Hauer, you were one the greatest. See you in the Afterlife, choom.
By far the best role of Rutger's career. The Hitcher is a close second. R.I.P.
Have you seen Ladyhawke?
Have you seen Turks Fruit?
Turkish delight? @@carlosariza30
I'll add one more...Have you seen Blind Fury ?
The Hitcter is on youtube for free, many people who watched it didn't like it, bunch of weirdos lmao 😂
One of my favorite motion pictures. It's so gratifying to see new audiences discover and appreciate this film.
One of the most beautiful scènes ever. Thank you Rutger, RIP ❤
Watching the reaction of younger people I wonder: why do they all get so fixated on the bird. "Where he get a bird?" They are flying all around the building as they chase each other. In the end, the android had the same fear we humans have: death. Been older, I wonder today what he wondered: all that I have seen, done, will be forgotten once I am gone. And even I will disappear in time. Maybe we humans have to get older to truly understand that fear/pain/sadness.
Exactly. Thanks for saying this
Less to do with age so much as growing up with the ADHD chaos and literal-mindedness of social media. Expecting instant, pat answers for almost everything. Youngins who experienced more books and life than phone screens are better at grasping the esoteric and profound.
The Nataly girl was obsessed to the friggin nth degree. Yet again that girl’s always been a little “extra”. ❤
Thank you Serg. Their fixation on the bird was really distracting them from paying attention to the film.
A lot of bad filmmakers have trained audiences to focus on minutia as a "hidden mystery box" that will become important later on. The audience is often taught that the origin of something like this is really, really important when it isn't. I think the ability of audiences to understand metaphor has diminished a lot.
Cinemasins ruined them.
This man made history of cinema. His speech is sad, depressing, inspirational, heart-breaking, dreaming, is Sci-Fi itself. And, what a Hell of irony, Roy Batty died on November 2019: Rutger Hauer died in July 2019. Barely a few months apart. RIP.
when you're younger you think this is a cool movie. when you get older you understand it and Roy. RIP Rutger
Thats why I like the movie version with Deckard's narration. It kinda explains things through out the whole movie and especially at the end.
RIP Hauer🕊
RIP Vangelis🕊
Ed Olmos (Gaff) and Hauer's performances were legendary! The endings were out of this world! They don't make movies like they used to.😢❤🕊 Harrison was also great in the movie! Ridley Scott made a masterpiece of a movie! 👏
That is why the Tyrel corporation 's motto was more human than human. All any of us can hope for is to be remembered after we are gone.
This movie deserves better reactors.
RIP Rutger
Amen brother these people are morons!!!
This ain't the MCU kids...This was back when movies made you THINK. Allegory isn't some sort of crocodile you know.
The version with the voice over is my favorite. This is what Deckard says "I don't know why he saved my life. Maybe in those last moments he loved life more than he ever had before. Not just his life - anybody's life; my life. All he'd wanted were the same answers the rest of us want. Where do I come from? Where am I going? How long have I got? All I could do was sit there and watch him die."
Rutger Hauer Improvised the Iconic "Tears in Rain" Monologue
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.
I too prefer the version with the voice over. I can't watch this film without it.
What version is it? Director's cut or something?
@@christopherscott8272the opposite, actually. The voice over was added for TV audiences by studio execs who thought that people wouldn’t understand the ending otherwise, against the wishes of director Ridley Scott. Hence, that cut is referred to as the ‘TV cut’.
@@omegastar19 - Not "t.v" audiences" as the voice over was done for the original theatrical release.
Well we all get it wrong sometimes. The voiceover version is objectively retarded bro. XD
Rutger Hauler ad-libbed that little speech at the end. One of the greatest moments in movie history.
Not quite. The original monologue was much longer, but everyone thought it'd be more effective if it was shorter, so Hauer cut the original down to size until it was, in a word, perfect. The "tears in rain" was indeed ad-libbed, though.
I knew some loser would write that comment like it wasn't already commonly known.
Damn he's really strong...he's a bloody replicant your berk!
Finally the replicant obtained his Soul, which flies to his eternity when he dies.
Some of the reactors in this video had some of the most shallow, non-insightful comments I've ever heard. They totally weren't paying attention to what was happening, or if they were, the meaning of Batty's speech was lost on them
Both, I’d say. Younger people need to have things spelled out for them.
@@gazoontight Yep. Short attention spans. I give them kudos for at least watching it, and other movies, despite a long run time, and what they might view as too many "slow moments."
I’m sure that people in the comments section probably pointed out the meaning.
Bunnytails was one of the (very) few who really got, and felt, the significance of that moment
It makes me want to reach through the screen and slap some sense into them. Then again if i tried to explain the film was an allegory for the human condition they would think i was talking about a crocodile and go and turn their brains off by watching the MCU shite.
Amazing thing is that Rutger Hauer wrote this monolouge the night before shooting, because he didn't feel the two sentences in the script would express the feelings of Roy becoming a human while dieing
There arent many science fiction movies that stand the test of time but , this is still one of my all time favorite movies.
Im 53. I named my youngest son "Orion," with a nod to this scene. When he got grown, I explained to him why I did it. "You should get a tattoo of attack ships on fire" on your shoulder 😘🙏💯👍 The voice over version helps the depth of this scene immensely. I was the proudest dad when my son enjoyed this movie also. 💯👍
I find it funny that all of these GenZ kids are focusing on the dove. I mean there was a bird house in the building with them.
I've used that quote "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.." so many times as a joke before. Now that I'm older, nobody gets it anymore.
I'm in the minority here but I actually prefer the original theatrical release version with Deckard's narration. I felt it added to the film noir feel they had going, like the old B&W detective stories. Many fans don't like it as Harrison Ford's voice is pretty flat but to me it adds to his dead inside, tired of life persona. It also explained some things that viewers might not otherwise get if they weren't hardcore sci-fi fans. Also, I'm old enough to have seen this in college long before any other "editions" came out. Sorry, Ridley.
"Where did he get a dove?" - It was in a case on the wall that had "IN CASE OF DRAMATIC DEATH SCENE BREAK GLASS" printed on it. ☺
Watching ALL versions of Blade Runner is on my bucket list. I do like the hardboiled tired man on a mission trope myself.
Same...that's the version I saw in the theater
Philip k. Dick was a great writer. Minority report, total recall, paycheck, blade runner were great movies based on his books
His brain must have been an interesting place.
Screamers was inspired by one of his novel too, and the movie (the first one) is rather good too.
As much as I love this film, I really wish it didn't ignore the novel's reason as to why Roy Batty and the other "andies" (not "replicants") were targeted for "retirement". The film essentially just turned them into the "technology gone haywire" trope. When in the novel, it was because Roy (a more advanced model) was teaching the other andies how to understand empathy and to be better than simply what they were built for. To be more human. And the humans of their society didn't want machines with emotions.
Again, great film, but a lot of the philosophical and morality themes of the novel were glossed over or abandoned.
Not only to be more human, but to be more human than human.
I think you're the first person I've heard from who also read the book. I was beginning to think my girlfriend and I were the only ones. I actually found a pair of socks with the book covers graphics on them. I had to explain them to everyone "they're electric sheep!!!"
@@SteveMccart Yeah. I have never met anyone that has read it. It's the same with Starship Troopers. Everyone has seen the 1997 film, but basically no one read the book.
Me and my friends rented this on VHS when I was about 12 or 13 around 1984/5 maybe and it blew us away. Absolutely stunning film.
One of my top two favorite movies of all time.
People are watching it for plot but it was always philosophical. They never seen cyberpunk or noir
The first girl had zero clue about the movie despite watching it to the end 🤨.
I think Roy saved Deckard because through the whole film, he wanted more. More life. He was designed to be a combat model. That's all. By saving Deckard, it was one last way of defying his makers. Designed to kill, he moved beyond his program. He proved that he was a thinking individual, and in that one moment, he defined his own legacy. Also, I think he recognized that Deckard would remember him for life. In addition, it brings Deckard to the final realization that he has been on the wrong side, which he knew deep down a long time ago. But it finally got through to him that he can't beat his conscience down with booze anymore.
Another good way of think about it. 👍
@@mattmanw54301 That's exactly why Roy tortured and terrorized Deckard, but kept him alive - so Deckard would never forget him. He realised the only way he could live on was in Deckard's memory.
Rutgar came up with that terrific line himself (like tears in rain) brilliant actor one of my favourite. R I P.
Funny nobody hears what Roy uttered when he caught Deckard. Roy said "kinship" because Deckard finally understood what it means to live in fear of dying.
The monologue is just haunting.
Roy, the replicant started his dying state, and he was using the nail to impale it through his hand, I guess, to stimulate it to functioning better through inflicting pain. His "model" Nexus 6 was designed to live only for a 4 years, so the replicants wouldn't live long enough to start developing emotions, and a strong sense self identity, making it harder to keep them under control, more obedient. They are literally grown, enhanced humans designed to be slave labor and to fight and die on behalf for whoever buys them.
This scene made the movie better than the novel.
The dove could be interpreted as Roy's soul. A symbol of his humanity, which leaves when he dies.
I'm old enough to have gone to the UK premier of this, still my favourite film of all time 👍🏼
Yeah. When I heard they were making a movie out of 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" I was so worried they would screw it up. I'm so glad I was wrong.
One of my all time favorite scenes and monologue.
It's funny that so many just don't get the nail in the hand or the releasing of the dove at the point of death. I watched this film the first time as a literal child and always understood why he'd want to put off the inevitable by driving a nail through his hand for focus and that the dove was him holding onto his life and releasing it was his way of marking his passing. Love this film. Even the inferior cuts, with dumb voiceover etc. can't ruin it. It is a classic for a reason.
I was honestly expecting more from the people reacting. But I guess this is were we can draw the line with those videos. When there is depth or meaning behind lines.
Yeah, most of these people seem to have the depth of a mud puddle, or maybe they are just unwilling to show it on camera.
They just want vacuous Disney/MCU 'nanotech' flashing lights crap now.
His line before this is so sadly overlooked, quite a thing to live in fear isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave 😢
Epic monolouge. RIP Rutger.
A point that is seldom addressed is Roy Batty's (Rutger Hauer) smile, as he says, "Time to die."
It's significance lies in the clear, simple, truth that anything that dies must have been, however briefly, alive.
He, and his comrades, were not just empty machinery, facsimiles of people, but actual beings. With lives, loves & ultimately deaths. .. and so it goes.
I am old enough to remember seeing this film for the first time in the theater. I was very young and did not know exactly what was going on. When Batty saved Deckard everyone gasped. I could hear people crying when Batty died. It was the first time I experienced a collective emotional response to a movie. It was the moment I fell in love with the cinema.
One of the better films ever made. This scene is quite something to view, as well. The script is pretty perfect & a little majestic, too. Thank you!
The villains of this story aren't the replicants or even the Blade Runner . The villain is Tyrell the slave master and he gets exactly what he deserves.
I like this movie about a thousand times more than I did in 1982.
This is just amazing! Most of the people in this video ask: "Why did he save him?" I want to ask them, if you were about to fall off a roof, would you want to be saved? And from Roy's side, if you knew that you were about to die, would you want your last words to be heard by anyone? It seems that such concepts as compassion, sympathy, respect for other people's lives do not occur to you. It seems that you are sincerely surprised that someone, dying, saves the life of his enemy, proving to him that he is also a human being, albeit an artificial one? And you people - are you human beings? Or maybe you think that only you are human beings...
RIP Jordan Cronenweth, Rutger Vangelis, and Vangelis.
Rutgers Hauer a improvisé son texte,
Il a rendu cette scène magistralement poétique.
Respect ✨
I remember at the time people didn't get it at first - that the person they had thought of as the villain is actually the hero, simply trying to find a way to live after a lifetime of slavery and oppression and that he proves his inherent goodness by choosing to try to make his enemy understand the reality of the situation.
Another youtuber explained that in this story, the humans are trapped in their jobs like robots, content to be stuck in their miserable lives.
It's these biosynths that are taking initiative, showing agency to try to break out of their programming and actually live.
All people who watch this movie for the first time will never understand that Deckard was a villain.
This is such an evocative scene. That loud laugh from Natalie Golds' overreaction channel is jaring.
And her reactions are faked (she's already watched the movies and prepared her 'theatrical' reactions, then pretends to be reacting spontaneously.) I stopped paying attention when I clued in to that.
This is one of my all time favorite movies. It's a shame that this powerful scene was completely lost on some of these TH-camrs. Hopefully they will revisit it again and have a deeper appreciation for this masterpiece.
Such an iconic film that is becoming even more relevant as time goes on. The dialogue and the soundtrack are just so spot on.
This is so actual. If our IA reaches singularity, so what is it to be a human? Metal skeleton IA is a robot? Meat made IA is a robot? And at the end, the other cop says “…but then again who does…” about dying. He is not talking only about Rachel, but EVERYONE!!!! Including humans!
He came up with that speach in the dinner hour because Ridley Scott didn't have a ending so the Dutch legend made it up.
Eyes rolling at some of the reactions here.
I was getting so pissed at everyone reacting while I was shedding some tears, like "what do these people have running through their veins? Kombucha?", until Bunnytailsreact turn, faith in humanity slightly restored. Same unfair judgement goes for people who watches all of Cowboy Bebop and doesn't cry like a b**ch at the end.
To other comments about "Tears in the Rain," Rutger wrote this in his trailer during the filming and asked Ridley to come to his trailer to hear it. Ridley stated, "Oh God," he thought it would be the worst thing...but no, one of the greatest adlibs
Rutger Hauer's Blade Runner "Tears in Rain" speech was largely improvised by the actor, without the prior knowledge of director Ridley Scott or credited screenwriters Hampton Fancher
Little known fact. Rutger was bailed out from jail the day prior to shooting this scene when he went on a huge cocaine bender and caused damage to a local bar. He was still feeling the effects on that day and that was why he still had the shakes.
I have read book and a ton about the making of this film and the story you posted has never mentioned, nor even hinted at. No results about Rutger Huaer ever being arrest turn up isn Goggle either. I call b.s. on your claim.
@lestatdelc that's why it's a little known fact. If you ever meet Ridley Scott ask him about it
@@brucef310 I call bullshit.
Batty truly became human in his feelings and thoughts, in these final scenes.He knew the only way to express that to humanity was to spare Deckard’s life.
The only way he could live on was in Deckard's memory.
When the rain comes, and the night dark, tears sting, and the winds cold
The white dove throws everyone. The film is more literary than most are used to.
The first girl just completely cut out the entire monologue. Some of the edit decisions from reactors are mindblowing.
The monologue is the essence of and a hat tip to the novel which is a hat tip to and the essence of the philosopher Deckard's name is alluding too. Pris even quotes him at some point.
Incredible film. But then my brother and I went to see Blade Runner 2049 in IMAX and we both walked out utterly speechless. Quite the experience.
I was so afraid is was going to be crap. I was like, 'No, please,' when I heard they were making a sequel. I was very pleasantly surprised at the result. Villeneuve became my favorite director. Dune part 1 & 2 are awesome also.
A scene that separates the thoughtful from the ADHD.
Did some of these reactors not watch the movie, even by the end some were clueless to the meaning of Batty's actions and monologue at the end.
No, they don't. I have noticed that some reactors do not really focus on the movie. They focus more on the talking. And yes I know there are reasons why they talk and it would not make a very interesting reaction if they just sat there quietly. The problem is that they talk during important dialogue without listening, they focus on stuff that is not important unless the movie more or less tells them what they should be focusing on. if there's a character or two on the screen they focus solely on them but don't see what is around them, their expressions and mannerisms, what is being said, how it is said or why, and so forth.
Reactors are no longer just saying out loud what they are thinking about what just happened, they are talking about EVERYTHING. Asking stupid questions that has been already, or would be eventually answered, talking about something that has nothing to do with the movie, fixating on stuff that is not relevant and the list goes on.
They are watching but they don't really seem to understand what they are seeing. They may let some really stupid and ridiculous dialogue, plot points, scenes etc. slide in movies, but somehow that dove is supposedly weird. They miss obvious stuff (like, in this case, the room full of pigeons and doves), everything has to be spelled out for them, and symbolism flies really high above their heads.
Marvel movies are good fun but some of these reactors pretty much tells a story why we nowadays get more and more movies where the plot and it's flow was an afterthought, where you don't have to think or feel anything other than happy thoughts. Just sit on the rollercoaster and enjoy the ride.
And I suppose I should put some kind of a disclaimer here just in case that I don't think this is the case with ALL of them. In this collection there are a few I know that are "deep thinkers" so to speak but some of them really makes me wonder how the hell do they get views.
@@xkepakko Yes, absolutely. Some of the reactors are great and interesting, and it's a joy for me to watch them react showcasing their understanding of visual aspect of movie storytelling and just the enjoyment and enthusiasm they have watching something new to them. The reactors I cannot watch, add nothing of true insight nor do they offer any concept of discovery of theme within in the movie. Many of the movies reviewed are not difficult to understand nor are based esoteric ideas or full-on art-house niche films, and still some of the basic metaphors or visual storytelling gets lost on them. I myself am no staunch film connoisseur of particular style of type of movie; I enjoy great variety of genres. Maybe some of these reactors have only experienced movie watching as a lesser pastime, possibly within a narrow range of styles previously before starting their reacting channels.
We are all just tears in rain.
If this had been a soliloquy on Broadway, he would have won a Tony. Absolutely powerful and moving.
BunnyTailsReact was the best reaction to this epic scnéne. She was the onlyone that understood...
Rutger Hauer's speech at the end was total adlib too.
one other interesting thing; it has been argued that Soldier and Alien take place in the same universe as this movie. they contain reference to places and events in common with each other.
The theatrical release had a voiceover because the producers thought that American audiences wouldn't understand the movie and needed the story explained to them. At t he time i thought that was quite insulting to the average American...but after watching these reactions i owe that producer an apology.
'Who's that then...why is he doing that...where did he get a bird...why does he have a pen through his hand...is he dead...who is Rachael...why don't i have a brain?'
THE EPIC SCENE
I like that one reactor,”beautiful writing!” before the comments section mentions that Rutger Hauer improvised that monologue.
All these reactors seem to miss the greatness of that monologue...
Its been my fave movie since my teens. I think the story is that Rutger wrote the monologue himself the day before they shot that scene.
VKunia coming up with something that - in all the years since I first saw this movie on general release, all the years in which I have considered it the best movie ever made - I never though of.
Roy saves Deckard because he doesn't want to die alone.
You kind of understand why the 4 under Hauer did what they did, they wanted to live but couldn't, he let decker live to remember him
The speech the final replicant gives was not in the script, it was all done on the fly. They loved it so much they kept it in the film and it became an Epic seen for all time.
I love how people keep commenting on the “writing.”
Rutgur Hauer didn’t like “the writing,” and improved the most iconic line in the movie…
I am glad someone finally noted how this film does have religious/spiritual imagery.
Oh, and Deckard and Batty were in a room filled with pigeons and other birds. Maybe he wanted a symbol...I mean, souvenir? ;)
Just like the stars that we only see photographs of, death is so far away, yet is always with you.
Once I finally saw this, I asked myself, "Why haven't I seen this already!?"