40:00 Deckard being a Replicant wasn't intended by the authors and screenwriters of this movie, and it makes no sense at all. The movie contrasts Roy, undoubtedly a replicant, being humane, and Deckard, undoubtedly a human, being more of a killing machine than the replicants. Perhaps that's the reason why the "You and me are not so different!"-trope nowadays is so comically overwrought and on the nose when it's used, because doing it subtly can even confuse the director of the movie. If Deckard is a replicant, then what? Replicants fighting one another, i.e. doing exactly what they were programmed to. Big reveal at the end that humans went extinct 5,000 years ago and the world is solely populated by replicants and replicant animals since? That was another movie. The unicorn is seen at many times in the movie, so it is a cultural icon (that nobody analysed WHY that's the case). If you walk across cat pictures, your co-workers send you pictures of a cat named "Dick" (thus economically sending you cat- and dick-pics at the same time), and you dreamt of a cat, you aren't a replicant, but you live in a world where domesticated Toxoplasmosis-spreading animals with their territoriality bred out are fetishised. So Blade Runner is a story of replicants much more humane than most humans and humans much more inhumane than most replicants, which is obsessed by horses with horns glued to them (real Unicorns are artiodactyla, even-tongued ruminants, most likely Hippotratini (grazing antelopes), while horses are Perissodactyla, odd-toed ungulates). It means that you aren't fixed by what you are born with, but can overcome your predispositions - or fail to meet them. If Roy was born a replicant and is human so much that he's more humane that "cis-humans", it also means that being born in a male body doesn't mean you can't be a woman in all but body, which would be an important argument in today's TERF wars. Only problem is that nobody talks about it because of the director's (not screenwriter's, and even not actors') fetish of horses with phallic symbols glued to their foreheads.
You left out Hungarian in cityspeak. After Deckard says “you’ve got the wrong guy, pal” Gaff replies “Lófaszt, nehogymár! Te vagy a Blade …” I think here he forgot the line so he just mumbles something.
@nrezmerski Unicorns originated in descriptions in "travel literature", if I remember correctly about "Arabia Felix" (Jemen). They are described quite extensively; it seems the author saw an Oryx antelope and only saw one horn because of perspective. Look at medieval drawings of "elephants", "hippopottami" and "rhinoceri" or other exotic animals like "lions" to see the problem - travelers described an animal, possibly other "travelogue"-authors repeated and changed the paragraph, and suddenly the ostrich puts its head into the sand or the Oryx antelope only has one horn.
@@enysuntra1347 In the book he is not a replicant. A Unicorn is a symbol for something that can't be obtained and the horn itself was from a drucken,if not scurvy induced as well, dementia of someone on a ship seeing a Narwhale. And in this movie the Unicorn meant the possiblity that the person in question could be a replicant because that person's dreams and memories were programed into their mind.
@nrezmerski Yes, it it possible that several were seen during Ocean voyages and the person could be suffering from dehydration, be drunk and/or suffering from scurvy then saw and mistaken a Narwhale for one in the same way dolphins were mistaken for mermaids under similar conditions.
I don't believe Batty is "spiraling into insanity in the final sequence." Per se. I think he is very lucid but he knows that he has only brief minutes left so he wishes to experience as much as he can before he dies. He sings, he howls, he inflicts pain on himself, he stops to feel the rain. And finally he saves a life. The chaos of a Batty living at 100% in the climax of the film is part of what makes his quiet "tears in rain" speech so effective.
Im of the thought that Batty was neither totally insane nor sane. But definitely troubled and stuck for a time at some point in both realms for a time. As a living being, replicant or not, from his "birth," he had been a brutalized, traumatized, tortured, and manipulated creature. And it would have been interesting to have explored more of his back story. Maybe even finding out at what point he started questioning his existence and began questing for more time to live. He and his cohorts merely use what humans had taught them in order to survive and live. It's only at the end of the film when Batty understands that his time being alive is drawing to a close, and thus, his quest is completely over, that he decides to eschew that quest and the emotions and teachings that had driven and empowered him for so long.....for one brief moment to surpass his "programming" and exist as a more evolved, sentient, free, creation. Opting to save Deckards life, when he had every reason and capability to end it. Proving perhaps that HIS "replicant" race of beings could perhaps be more enlightened, evolved, and perhaps more worthy of life....than Deckards.
@@ravenrise320 Really good take on it. I also share the same thoughts. Replicants are like children, who need social integration and interaction. But since they didn’t grow up amongst humans, therefore their behaviour was uncontrolled. More chaotic and basic, the same as a child’s. Watch how the ‘adults’ interact with one another at Sebastian’s venue, where Pris and Roy meet up. They tend to be more passionate, out of control. At the end, absolutely agree with you, he realises how tenuous life is and thus how precious. Also, he recognised that Deker was fragile as all humans are, and made him really fight for his life. Also, he showed his superiority. That he can take his life away really easily, but chose to save him, and perhaps show Deker that you can be better!
No he is spiraling, they filmed him reacting to killing his father, that's when he lost it, so the intent was all along that he was unhinged. Also in the lift when he descends, it is said the angel that has fallen from heaven.
The movie at the time was a massive flop and wasn't liked by critics or audiences film audiences hadn't matured enough to appreciate it till some time later after exposure to other sci-fi projects. It's now been chosen to be preserved in the library of Congress, I don't think there's has been such a drastic change in an opinion on film ever
@@sofaninja0552it doesn't matter if it was a flop. Rutger Hauser gave an awesome performance that was better than John Gielgud, who won that years Oscar.
@@michaelmalott9925 I'd have to go back and look at some reviews from its initial release but I don't think critics had anything good to say about it whatsoever including Siskel and Ebert, I think one of them liked it,...it is literally the very definition of something that just came out years before it's time
My stepdad let me watch it in 85 when it premiered on network tv. LOVED this movie and Roy saving Deckard shocked me as an 8 year old. The visuals have been imitated by many but never equaled.
Unfortunately these types of videos of older works may not generate as many views/likes with the general YT audience, hence avoided by most breakdown channels with less carrot incentives. Yes, the work is much appreciated Paul. Coincidentally watched reactions of Bladerunner 2049 recently, and just loved the world this film takes place.
16:47 Most of what Gaff says is actually in Hungarian with a word of French and German. He says, _"Sir, please follow me immediately."_ Gaff's next line, when Deckard pretends not to understand, is entirely in Hungarian and means _"Horse dick! Don't give me that! You're a Blade Runner."_ I saw the director's cut while in Budapest and the audience had a great laugh.
IMO the most convincing, albeit trivial argument for Deckard being human, is that he is so much physically weaker than any Replicant he had to face. He was absolutely helpless against them when unarmed, just like a human.
I agree! But also on the flip side it could be because Deckard is a different model of replica which thus in turn his makeup is weaker? God this movies ability to just grip you and keep you hooked on thinking about it is such a treasure
That’s actually a point I never thought of. The physical aspect. I mean he could be a replicant made for other purposes / having a different structure. But the thought has a nice appeal to it. I always took him for a replicant. But it’s nice to have some arguments for doubts. 🫡😁
@@DJChrisArgueta if they made Decker like Rachel. With false memories in order to trick him into thinking he was human then they of course would have to make him physically weaker too in order to keep the charade. He's a cop and would incounter physical altercations all the time. which his above avrege strength would quickly give it away to himself that he isn't a real human.
I always assumed that Tyrell used JF's DNA in order to incorporate the rapid aging defect into the replicants. And that was one of the reasons Tyrell let him be that close that he was allowed up into his personal apartment.
Not sure. The replicants don't age fast, they live, and then they suddenly die. In fact, that is a stark contrast to the rapid aging of JF Sebastian, who wastes away from a young age while replicants don't age ever (because they die before they can age).
That's really not too far-fetched of a possibility. If Tyrell had been able to break apart and separate what drove the disease that Sebastian had to ultimately kill its host. Then he could have maybe brought it under control and utilized it as a "clock" so to speak, that would attach itself to the hosts major organs and then shut them down one by one until the host died. Or. Even more likely. In order to get the most "shelf life" from his company's "products". Tyrrell might have bio-engineered such a disease to specifically target the hosts brain, synapsis, and heart and then maybe die once the hosts bodily functions had ceased. Since it's these two organs that provide major functions for the rest of the body. And these two organs that humans can't live without. At least not for very long. That could account for Roy's hands trying to "lock up" in the film as his brain began to maybe first be attacked, and nerve paralysis began to set in to Roy's immediate extremities. And then Roy's heart was being attacked, which caused him to collapse after having used his last bit of winded strength to pull Deckard back up to safety. All in all. Bio-engineered diseases aren't really touched on in Blade Runner. But IF the world of Blade Runner is a kind of high-tech, post-apocalyptic, post-war world?? Then that would account for Sebastians' uncureable illness and the Tyrell Corp.'s replicant "of switch".
I thought the same...but they didn't age and die from that specific ailment- they died when they hit their time mark 4 yrs-this was to prevent the formation of emotions- rachel was different -implanted memories- which almost helped her pass the voight Kamf test "You know the score pal-if you're not cop...you're little people!" "You've done a mans job sir!"
@scottprendergast5262 If Tyrell had modified the disease, then used it as a shelf life determinant, so to speak, then that would've been the biological device that ended a Replicants life if nothing else did. We must assume that by the time Replicant humans had become a reality. Tyrell and possibly other companies had succeeded in becoming masters or at least practitioners of genetic and biological manipulation. Or that mankind now had the capability to do such things on a far vaster scale than ever before in human history. This capability and the misuse of it could even account for the dreary and dystopian landscape that seems to be future L.A., where Bladerunner takes place.
38.27 One of my long held thoughts about the replicants is that because they are only a few years old, emotionally they are more like young children. They haven't refined their responses and their emotions. They are physically powerful, but prone to emotional storms like toddlers are. Leon's rage, Pris' stunted emotional responses to Sebastian, even Roy until near the very end. They have knowledge and understanding, but lack an adult empathy. So for me, it isn't pity Roy displays, it's mercy. A subtle difference, but mercy is more in keeping with the rest of your description of Roy in his final moments. In that act of mercy, actively rescuing Deckard, Roy displays the fullness of his humanity.
I agree. Especially when you see Roy battys exagerrated expression when telling pris that they're the last 2 left. He's designed to be a leader of soldiers yet he makes a real outward display of sadness as if he's a kid showing off he's sad to get attention and coddles from mom.
Deckard drinks constantly when he's at home, to dull the pain, he actually does show emotion when ending a replicant, and at the end of that stirring speech
My theory has always been that Deckard is not only a Replicant, but he is modeled after Gaff, who was the original Blade Runner, but eventually got too old and couldn't physically compete against the more militant Replicants he had to hunt down. That's why he stalked Deckard to make sure he continued with the Blade Runner programming/training and kept hunting down the targets Gaff couldn't.
Roy Batty had a vested interest in letting Deckard. He gave himself a legacy. He passed his memories on to Harrison Ford. He also passed on the legacy of forgiveness and kindness. He had an Existential moment, and he figured out a way to get his life meeting. I love your channel and the breakdowns!
In his own small way, he gave life. If he had let Deckard fall, he would have died. By saving him, every moment of the rest of Deckards life was due to Batty’s choice. He killed his creator, Tyrell, but by saving Deckard he became as close as possible to being a ‘God’ that a sentient being can achieve - giving Deckard another chance at life. He showed more compassion and humanity at the end than the humans who created and used him. More human than human, after all.
I always also thought Roy saved him in part so that he would be remembered by someone, living on at least as a memory of Deckerd’s, it’s partly what his dying monologue was about, and he’s out of options to extend his life
Deckard's activation date was the same day he was sitting at the noodle stand. This is why Holden looks at him with some amazement and surprise. 'Creeps me out every time..' is most likely what he was thinking.
13:02 The city scape in the opening took a lot of inspiration from the ICI plant at Billingham. Scott was from Stockton and went to art college in Teeside, seeing the view of the massive chemical plant on his commute. Aldus Huxley was also inspired by the site when he worked there in the 1920s, with some of its modern manufacturing processes influencing Brave New World. Scott has also said that part of the gloomy feel of Blade Runner came from growing up in the North East, where it always seemed to be grey and raining. Looking out of my window on a particularly wet, grey, and foggy view of the Tyne, I can totally see the inspiration.
Certainly Rutger Haur's best performance. "Like tears in the rain" will forever be his shining moment. Ford's wonky narration still makes me chuckle now and then but it's just part of why I love the film😅... and, Deckard's human.
I watched it when it came out at 25 yrs old, I was mesmerized by it but didn't truly appreciate or understand it. I've watched it numerous times over the years and understood more of it's complexities each time. It changed the type of movies I watched ever since, for the most part. I was drawn to movies with more substance and originality. I watched this one after seeing your breakdown of 2049 (watched numerous times also). Both excellently done so thank you.
@@mafianoodles I agree but I enjoy it because of it. Denis Villnueve said if BR was built out of Scott's time in the soggy UK, BR2049 was the product of a Canadian used to cold winters, snow etc. I think Denis carried that over to the film itself(For better or worse of course, and i respect your opinion.) My main gripe with 2049 is the same as Scott's... It's definitely too long. Easily could've been 2hrs-15min. Otherwise I love it.
2049 is BETTER than the original, in my humble opinion. Builds on the original themes masterfully, and avoids any form of nostalgic pandering - while still feeling like a continuation of the first.
Great video. In case anyone cares, Blade Runner had a deep effect on anime creators. Hideaki Anno used the Taunhauser Gate for Aim for the Top Gunbuster, arguably making that epic acı-do anime part of the Blade Runner universe. And of course there’s an anime series that’s nothing but a long homage to Blade Runner, called Bubblegum Crisis. Right down to the main characters forming a rock band called Priss and the Replicants.
13:38 " Leon murders the interviewer " incorrect, Leon shoots the interviewer, but does not kill him. The interviwer is named Holden that Bryant refers to when first speaking to Deckard. Also, in deleted scenes, Deckard visits Holden in the hopspital.
Blade Runner is visually, moving artwork. Everything looks like a painting. There is nothing like it. It's stunning from the opening scene to the closing scene. I was totally mesmerized when I first watched it on the scene and loved every minute of it. This movie showed that Scott is a genius. Thanks for the review.
Great breakdown of a Sci-Fi Noir masterpiece. One thing I was surprised at not briefly being mentioned, was that a key sequence was clearly shot in a different order (and meant to be shown that way) but then, for whatever reason, re-ordered. This is the scenes of Deckard's fight with Leon and Rachel saving him, occuring straight after Zhora is shot, while the scenes of Gaff and Bryant, telling Deckard about Rachel absconding, would have followed on from that. Perhaps it was felt the story flowed better this way, when it came to editing the finished film... There is a a visual cue in both the Theatrical and the Directors Cut, in the wound on Deckard's right cheekbone, following his fight with Leon, being present while he is buying liquor and talking with Gaff and Bryant, but is absent, when Leon initially grabs him on the street, leading to their fight. This wound is actually digitally removed from the scene with Deckard buying drink and speaking with Bryant in the Final Cut, like some of the other "corrections" mentioned, like removing Tyrell's thumb from the flipped shot of Batty, as well as the background and lighting matching the phone booth he is standing in, when Leon first meets up with him. And of course, having the dove fly off at the end, with a backdrop that matches the cityscape. Scott also did something similar in Alien, when he repurposed a shot from Brett's death - the alien's tail coming up between his legs, not Lambert's, who wears boots, not sneakers, as Brett does, during the alien's attack on her. IMO, the ambiguity of whether Deckard is, or is not a replicant, is better to a definitive answer either way. And both Deckard and Gaff, seeing Rachel as a unicorn, is something that can explain the significance of the origami unicorn, other than it pointing to Deckard being a replicant. Awesome work Paul, and loving these breakdowns so far, with you covering no less than 3 of my all-time favourite films in the last few breakdowns (Alien, Aliens and now Blade Runner).
Just a phenomenal job with this Paul. I saw this when it opened and I was 23. It is testament to both the film and to your analysis that we can still discover things we hadn’t realized after more than 30 years. It has always been one of my favorites, and I still can’t come to a firm conclusion about Deckard. Cinema doesn’t have to bank a billion to be influential and lasting. (Ironically Leon and I share a birthday)
I always figured that the term Blade Runner worked for the title of the position because they have to ride the "knife edge" of discerning between (and thus "retiring") replicants and humans.
Excellent analysis of this groundbreaking film. Yes, it’s slow at times but performances, concept, production design, score are spectacular. Roy’s death scene is iconic. One of the most influential films of all time.❤️The Final Cut is my favorite.
Ironic you released this Easter weekend since the storyline of salvation runs throughout. Brilliant work. Very much enjoying the deep dive into “older” films!
I was blown away when i first saw this film on vhs in the early 80s, complete with narration, was blown away the first time I saw it in a cinema, in Paris, still with narration, was blown away when i first saw the director's cut and still love it to this day. For me, at least, it is possibly the best sci-fi film of all time and in the top 10 best movies of all time. Lightning in a bottle. Proper sci-fi, that us. Not space knights.
my take on why the replicant saves the bladerunner from falling to his death is this... I think the replicant loved life and saw it as something valuable, so it would have no point knowing that he was going to die, to let another one die as well... the nice thing about this movie, you make of it what you want... also it doesn't matter if the bladerunner is himself a replicant, all conscious life is beautiful.
I have seen this film hundreds of times in the last 30 years. I had NEVER spotted that Rachael's photos moves! How did I miss that? Thank you for making great videos.
It is neat when there's overlap, either character or story, and it works out properly. Six was a lot like Rachel. Especially in light of Baltar having her in-his-head. That is never explained. Also, Eddie (Adama) loses his love at the very end. Juxtaposed to Deckard and Rachel making it through. Six and Baltar are together (a thousand years later) reading the newspaper over Moore's shoulder as if they too are timeless replicants. BSG starts out saying this has happened before and will happen again. It's a reference to the circle of life but it's not Lion King. It's technology. Bliss my friend!
I’m so grateful I watched this. I had no knowledge till now that Rutger Hauer actually wrote his dying speech. What a phenomenal performance he gave, and really fitting that he acts opposite Harrison, given that Harrison made Han Solo the legendary film character he is with his own personal touches as well. Probably my favorite moment in any media, Roy’s death.
My personal take on the message in the film is that life is truly precious and too short. that it is sometimes unfair and cruel but struggling, fighting and loving are meaningful. that in the end we become a memory and dust
Nice review, thanks. I was thinking of something that Shakiespeare wrote, from the Merchant of Venice: If you prick me do I not bleed? If you tickle me do we not laugh? If you poison me do I not die? And if you wrong me shall I not revenge? At thye end of that movie I remember thinking this . . . TOO HEAVY FOR THOUGHTS.
Very interesting and comprehensive analysis Paul. Watched this film for over 40 years, and you've shown many aspects that I've missed. One other thing that strikes me is the sound during Leon's Voight-Kampff test - his increased heart beat and echo/reverb on Holden's questions - representing his heightened state of anxiety and fear; reminiscent of Michael Corleone's pre-murder anxiety train screeches in the Godfather. Just a thought. 👍
I agree with the sentiment regarding is he/isn't he a replicant. I don't think Deckards character arc is as strong if he's not human. Great breakdown btw!
you could say he got really badly injured on a run that he did and has replicant parts like bits of his brain tissue his eyes and some other parts of his body and thats why he can take a beating from leon and batty.
13:00 No mention of the opening scene being based on the view from Ridley's walk from Redcar to Hartlepool, past the ICI Wilton Works and British Steel there? First time I saw the movie I thought it looked so much like the view from my bedroom window growing up, and as it turned out, it was based on it.
I’ve literally been considering rewatching these movies lately and now after I this I think I’m gonna have to. Thanks for the push, and thanks for another great review
I always interpreted it as Deckard is in fact Gaff. Deckard is a replicant based off Gaff and this was a field test to see if the new model of replicants, given memories, can be more effective. That isn't Deckard's apartment, it's Gaff's. The test isn't complete, them running off is the final test that Tyrell set up. That is why the chief is always rocking that shit eating grin when dealing with Deckard, he's watching a copy of Gaff, a replicant hunting down their own kind. To him, it's funny as hell to watch. For all we know Deckard didn't exist until he woke up in that alley with the paper. Gaff on the other hand is looking at himself, and perhaps wanted Deckard to have a life he didn't. He didn't get to live, but Deckard can. With Tyrell dead, the only people that know of the 'project' is Gaff and the Chief... I wager Gaff might have covered for Deckard, or the Chief and Gaff figured they'd just time out, unaware Tyrell didn't build in the self termination into them.
I thought about that as well. Nothing else really explains his fascination with deckard. If he was just his superior in the police force I'd imagine him more detached like the chief. But he's always shown with a huge interest and insight into deckard. It never said he was some replicant expert sent by tyrell to keep and eye on how things go too. Just being the more seasoned cop/bladerunner doesn't explain his role and interaction with deckard. That, or he's just the previous model or attempt so he knows what deckard is going through.
For me, Rutger Hauer saving Harrison at the end wasn't about forgiveness, it was that with his impending death, Rutger overwhelmingly cherished life... even if that meant saving his enemy. Also for me, the nail though his hand didn't signify Christ... it was Rutger wanting to experience as many sensations as possible... even pain. And of course the bird flying away represented his soul leaving.
Man for real this movie gets better with every rewatch......and blade runner 2049 was also soooo good I don't know how it flopped....yeah the pacing was slow but the story needed the pacing....as of the og one I might not take out any flaws as for the time the movie released it still is ahead of its time compared to movies nowadays...
It might be that is shouldn't have ever been made. . . . I am not sure how anyone missed the entire point of Blade Runner. Honestly this is troubling. RACHEL AND DECKER ARE SYNTHETIC SHORT LIVED ANDROIDS. The point of it all is that your life has value no matter how long it lasts or doesn't. Get out and experience etc. When the android at the end talks about the wonder he has seen in such a short lifespan we are supposed to be envious and in awe. Decker similarly chose to leave and spend his life with Rachel even knowing it won't last because that isn't as important as being human. The last line is so important. None of us know how long we have but no.matter what it isn't all that long really. My point is that Decker should be long dead and that is okay because of how Blade Runner ends. It is perfect and this movie completely ignores everything Blade Runner is all about.
When Ray grabs Deckard and saves him, he uses his seizing hand. The one with the nail. I kinda see this as Ray leaving it to chance. If his hand works, and he can grab Deckard and save him - he will. But if he doesn’t have the strength anymore… then oh well.
Thank you for posting this! The movie came out when I was in high school and I read the book in anticipation of it, so excited to see all of the story’s intricate details in live action. I was so disappointed in the vague hints and lack of explanations about the world that I hated the movie for decades. I eventually made my peace with it but, damn, wasted potential. So nice to see you comparing this to the original story. Time for me to reread it, I think!
I rewatched this recently and its more and more becoming a favourite. Its from the time they knew how to create atmosphere in a film. The shots, the architecture, interior design of the homes abd buildings, music etc they take you away while watching. I havnt found a modern movie do that as well.
Me too. My biggest take away was realizing Rachel was played by the same actress that played lieutenant Einhorn from Ace Vent. It only took like 30 years for that to click in my head.
This is my favorite movie of all time and you are becoming my favorite TH-cam recap channel. One thing I wanted to add is that in the Final Cut they used Harrison Ford’s son Ben to do the voiceover in the snake dealer scene. The real Harrison sounded too old and that bit being out of sync always annoyed me.
One "clue" that no one ever seems to mention is that Roy beats the crap out of Deckard at the end of the film. If Roy is a combat model with enhanced strength and Deckard is a normal human, he likely would have killed him. But if they're BOTH replicants...
If they were both replicants, Deckard would have been able to put up more of a fight. If they used replicants as bladerunners in those days, of course they would have used a combat model for that purpose. But Deckard gets beaten up by Pris, who is a pleasure model.
Replicants DO have emotions. That's the whole point of the movie. They're not "like any other machine", as Deckard puts it.Tyrell explicitly states that: "After all, they are emotionally inexperienced with only a few years in which to store up the experiences which you and I take for granted. If we gift them with a past, we create a cushion, a pillow for their emotions, and, consequently, we can control them better."
Yaasss! Another banger 😊 also, If you haven't seen yet, I think a revist of the Rise of the Planet of the Apes trilogy would be perfect for this series
So I guess it wasn't over a year ago but here's the proof! I was sooo looking forward to the trilogy getting broken down for this series! MT is good but... it's just not the same 😔
I remember seeing a preview for this movie when it came out and immediately knew I wanted to see it. Knew I was seeing something amazing from the first frame. Like Alien it was groundbreaking and became a classic.
Maybe pretentious but I always felt the point was you’re not supposed to know if Deckard is a replicant or not….which puts you in the same shoes as him. PKD wrote loads of stories about perception. If you were a replicant how would you know? There was a great story about a guy who was accused of being a robot wired with a bomb inside of him. The trigger for the bomb was his realisation that he wasn’t human as he thought he was. That messed with my mind.
According to an interview with someone at ILM in an issue of Star Wars: INSIDER when Episode 1 came out, they mentioned that a police spinners was one of the ships flying around in the establishing shots of Coruscant; reason being that one of the buildings in Blade Runner is the Millennium Falcon
Not only many of Philip K. Dick's novels and short stories were used as basic plots for film scripts, but even some of his "secondary" ideas , like advertising flying machines ( drones) , personal advice AI chatbots, , "Virtual reality" devices etc , were decades ahead ...
"Almost all" is to sell Phillip K. Dick short. He has written a lot of novels and short stories, but only a handfull has been made into movies. In my opinion, a lot more of his works should be made into movies.
Good work ✌️✌️✌️✌️✌️. I only really got into films in my 30s and love the sci fi genre. I didn't watch blade runner until last year (when I was 40) final cut, but I do think in a way, that was probably for the best. My mate showed me the final monologue many years ago at his house and was saying how amazing it was "lost in time, like tears in rain" but I felt nothing from it really. Now, I've rewatched the film at least 10 times, and also enjoyed 2049. Completely fell in love with Vangelis too. Amazing piece of work, definitely not for everyone tho. It's a film I enjoy watching alone at night and just immerse myself in it. A true classic indeed. ✌️
And as for the replicant question. I'm such a person who loves ambiguity and the bravery of doing this. I'm happy for it to be either he is human or a replicant, depending on my mood as I watch it that time. It's not necessarily important for me to have that in concrete. And probably helps me to go back and watch it time after time, as it's still a mystery....
One of the best films ever. This And 2049 are masterclasses in Sci-Fi. Ford And Howard deserved Oscar Noms. Tears In The Rain is one of the best speeches ever.
Paul, thank you for coving one of my all-time favourite films of all time. After watch and owning a three official version of this film I side with you the Deckard is human and not a bot. The film has so many layers to it. Each version yes has something new to add or remove.. But the Final version is for me the best and most watched. Your break down was epic and very specific and for anyone who has not see the film this would be the best guide. I cant want to see how you do the sequel.
I took the whole Asian influence thing as them being mainly in LA's Chinatown. I really didn't see too much beyond that. In the 80's there was a big Asian influence in American pop culture, from Big Trouble in Little China to The Karate Kid, the rise of Japanese cars in the US, etc.
Seems to me that the "clue" left by Gaff that reveals that Deckard is a replicant - the origami unicorn (which is associated with the one in his dream) - has one flaw in it, in that his dream is not a memory - implanted or otherwise. No one has a memory of a unicorn running through the forest. Maybe it comes from a movie he has seen. If anything, it is Gaff signaling his understanding that Deckard, beneath the hard-boiled detective surface, is a romantic at heart.
There were three things in my opinion that made people think Deckard was a replicant. 1. The unicorn. 2. The eye shine. 3. Ridley Scott. Both two and three were accidents meant to drive up the discussion for the fans. Poor lighting and fat Director's "Director's" cuts milked millions off this movie. The unicorn though... Gaff mocked Deckard the entire movie in how he approached his job, chicken. How he liked Rachael, the stickman. And... Ultimately, how Deckard thought he found love with Racheal, the unicorn. An elusive mystical creature that escapes all that try to catch it. I think he knew Deckard was in love with Racheal and that is why he gave them a chance. They found love or the unicorn.
If Deckard is also a replicant it diminishes the impact of the ending. I know Ridley Scott "canonically" thinks that Deckard is one, but despite him being the director he really can be wrong about this (as with other mistakes, like much of Prometheus etc.)
I really liked the ambiguity of Deckard, and I'm glad they kept it that way. I think being human would have a bigger impact, and that's how I viewed Deckard about 30 years ago. I own and have watched all 3 versions, but I think I need to watch them again...
I'm glad I'm not the only one who felt that way about it being maybe boring or flat and not able to hang onto the plot. I never really watched the movie properly, I've seen it, but I'll just space out or get distracted and not know what's going on. That's partly why I even clicked this video, to see if it would help me understand the material better so I can grasp it.
Deckard is not a replicant in the movie: Note that in the movie Deckard is dragged back to the Force for one last job; ie: he was a Blade Runner before the movie - probably for some time, if he had time to impress his old boss ("I need the old magic" and referring to him as the best). The Nexus models have a 4-year lifespan, which is not compatible with the line above. Moreover, the memory implant stuff is supposed to be a fairly recent development at the time of the movie ("Rachel is special", and "We found that gifting them with a past makes them more controlable" yet no others have had it.) The short story, otoh, is far more ambiguous.
Thanks a million for d brake down, always found this a difficult move to take all or most in,, , ya WELLLLLL explained to comprehend, as agreed, or to accumulate different retrospectives on comparison still, unanimously agreed, a superbly ionic allegorical profound fable, with attributes to consume an brake down too, this opened new ways of filming to our love off cinematic creations. Took time to fully appreciate this as Scott was infamously creating experiences via movie's crating, not just making movie's but experiences with such. Still don't get d whole lot but am happy were I'm at, thanks a million again @Heavy Spoilers, @RidleyScott, crew and everyone who contributed to us relishing ye hard to view 👌😎🙏😁🤘
Leon didnt kill "that interviewer". That guy's name is "Holden" and he was the blade runner on the case before Deckard. The movie explains he's "on a ventilator" from the shooting.
Check out our breakdown of Blade Runner 2049 - th-cam.com/video/6d5LPwzEzyQ/w-d-xo.html
40:00 Deckard being a Replicant wasn't intended by the authors and screenwriters of this movie, and it makes no sense at all. The movie contrasts Roy, undoubtedly a replicant, being humane, and Deckard, undoubtedly a human, being more of a killing machine than the replicants.
Perhaps that's the reason why the "You and me are not so different!"-trope nowadays is so comically overwrought and on the nose when it's used, because doing it subtly can even confuse the director of the movie.
If Deckard is a replicant, then what? Replicants fighting one another, i.e. doing exactly what they were programmed to. Big reveal at the end that humans went extinct 5,000 years ago and the world is solely populated by replicants and replicant animals since? That was another movie.
The unicorn is seen at many times in the movie, so it is a cultural icon (that nobody analysed WHY that's the case). If you walk across cat pictures, your co-workers send you pictures of a cat named "Dick" (thus economically sending you cat- and dick-pics at the same time), and you dreamt of a cat, you aren't a replicant, but you live in a world where domesticated Toxoplasmosis-spreading animals with their territoriality bred out are fetishised.
So Blade Runner is a story of replicants much more humane than most humans and humans much more inhumane than most replicants, which is obsessed by horses with horns glued to them (real Unicorns are artiodactyla, even-tongued ruminants, most likely Hippotratini (grazing antelopes), while horses are Perissodactyla, odd-toed ungulates). It means that you aren't fixed by what you are born with, but can overcome your predispositions - or fail to meet them.
If Roy was born a replicant and is human so much that he's more humane that "cis-humans", it also means that being born in a male body doesn't mean you can't be a woman in all but body, which would be an important argument in today's TERF wars. Only problem is that nobody talks about it because of the director's (not screenwriter's, and even not actors') fetish of horses with phallic symbols glued to their foreheads.
You left out Hungarian in cityspeak.
After Deckard says “you’ve got the wrong guy, pal” Gaff replies
“Lófaszt, nehogymár! Te vagy a Blade …” I think here he forgot the line so he just mumbles something.
@nrezmerski Unicorns originated in descriptions in "travel literature", if I remember correctly about "Arabia Felix" (Jemen). They are described quite extensively; it seems the author saw an Oryx antelope and only saw one horn because of perspective.
Look at medieval drawings of "elephants", "hippopottami" and "rhinoceri" or other exotic animals like "lions" to see the problem - travelers described an animal, possibly other "travelogue"-authors repeated and changed the paragraph, and suddenly the ostrich puts its head into the sand or the Oryx antelope only has one horn.
@@enysuntra1347 In the book he is not a replicant. A Unicorn is a symbol for something that can't be obtained and the horn itself was from a drucken,if not scurvy induced as well, dementia of someone on a ship seeing a Narwhale. And in this movie the Unicorn meant the possiblity that the person in question could be a replicant because that person's dreams and memories were programed into their mind.
@nrezmerski Yes, it it possible that several were seen during Ocean voyages and the person could be suffering from dehydration, be drunk and/or suffering from scurvy then saw and mistaken a Narwhale for one in the same way dolphins were mistaken for mermaids under similar conditions.
I don't believe Batty is "spiraling into insanity in the final sequence." Per se. I think he is very lucid but he knows that he has only brief minutes left so he wishes to experience as much as he can before he dies. He sings, he howls, he inflicts pain on himself, he stops to feel the rain. And finally he saves a life. The chaos of a Batty living at 100% in the climax of the film is part of what makes his quiet "tears in rain" speech so effective.
Spot on.
Im of the thought that Batty was neither totally insane nor sane.
But definitely troubled and stuck for a time at some point in both realms for a time.
As a living being, replicant or not, from his "birth," he had been a brutalized, traumatized, tortured, and manipulated creature.
And it would have been interesting to have explored more of his back story. Maybe even finding out at what point he started questioning his existence and began questing for more time to live.
He and his cohorts merely use what humans had taught them in order to survive and live.
It's only at the end of the film when Batty understands that his time being alive is drawing to a close, and thus, his quest is completely over, that he decides to eschew that quest and the emotions and teachings that had driven and empowered him for so long.....for one brief moment to surpass his "programming" and exist as a more evolved, sentient, free, creation. Opting to save Deckards life, when he had every reason and capability to end it.
Proving perhaps that HIS "replicant" race of beings could perhaps be more enlightened, evolved, and perhaps more worthy of life....than Deckards.
Nicely put !
@@ravenrise320
Really good take on it.
I also share the same thoughts.
Replicants are like children, who need social integration and interaction.
But since they didn’t grow up amongst humans, therefore their behaviour was uncontrolled. More chaotic and basic, the same as a child’s.
Watch how the ‘adults’ interact with one another at Sebastian’s venue, where Pris and Roy meet up.
They tend to be more passionate, out of control.
At the end, absolutely agree with you, he realises how tenuous life is and thus how precious.
Also, he recognised that Deker was fragile as all humans are, and made him really fight for his life.
Also, he showed his superiority. That he can take his life away really easily, but chose to save him, and perhaps show Deker that you can be better!
No he is spiraling, they filmed him reacting to killing his father, that's when he lost it, so the intent was all along that he was unhinged.
Also in the lift when he descends, it is said the angel that has fallen from heaven.
Rutger Hauer should got an Oscar. His monologue still gives me goosebumps
The movie at the time was a massive flop and wasn't liked by critics or audiences film audiences hadn't matured enough to appreciate it till some time later after exposure to other sci-fi projects. It's now been chosen to be preserved in the library of Congress, I don't think there's has been such a drastic change in an opinion on film ever
@@sofaninja0552it doesn't matter if it was a flop. Rutger Hauser gave an awesome performance that was better than John Gielgud, who won that years Oscar.
@@michaelmalott9925 I'd have to go back and look at some reviews from its initial release but I don't think critics had anything good to say about it whatsoever including Siskel and Ebert, I think one of them liked it,...it is literally the very definition of something that just came out years before it's time
And that was some improv stuff too, epic...
@@ralphtijtgat3233Which makes it all the more iconic.
My stepdad let me watch it in 85 when it premiered on network tv. LOVED this movie and Roy saving Deckard shocked me as an 8 year old. The visuals have been imitated by many but never equaled.
These breakdowns of older movies are an awesome change of pace and are appreciated. Keep up the awesome work.
Unfortunately these types of videos of older works may not generate as many views/likes with the general YT audience, hence avoided by most breakdown channels with less carrot incentives. Yes, the work is much appreciated Paul. Coincidentally watched reactions of Bladerunner 2049 recently, and just loved the world this film takes place.
40:46 Awaiting Paul's breakdown for 2049 with high anticipation.
16:47 Most of what Gaff says is actually in Hungarian with a word of French and German. He says, _"Sir, please follow me immediately."_
Gaff's next line, when Deckard pretends not to understand, is entirely in Hungarian and means _"Horse dick! Don't give me that! You're a Blade Runner."_
I saw the director's cut while in Budapest and the audience had a great laugh.
There's also Japanese thrown into that combination, as well:
Deckard: Bryant, Huh?
Gaff: Hai
Karen Allen played?
?
IMO the most convincing, albeit trivial argument for Deckard being human, is that he is so much physically weaker than any Replicant he had to face. He was absolutely helpless against them when unarmed, just like a human.
I agree! But also on the flip side it could be because Deckard is a different model of replica which thus in turn his makeup is weaker? God this movies ability to just grip you and keep you hooked on thinking about it is such a treasure
That’s actually a point I never thought of. The physical aspect. I mean he could be a replicant made for other purposes / having a different structure. But the thought has a nice appeal to it. I always took him for a replicant. But it’s nice to have some arguments for doubts. 🫡😁
Good point, but it’s emphasized Roy’s gang is a new model
Yup, I agree, he’s weaker, he’s human. Pris was kicking his butt.
@@DJChrisArgueta if they made Decker like Rachel. With false memories in order to trick him into thinking he was human then they of course would have to make him physically weaker too in order to keep the charade. He's a cop and would incounter physical altercations all the time. which his above avrege strength would quickly give it away to himself that he isn't a real human.
I always assumed that Tyrell used JF's DNA in order to incorporate the rapid aging defect into the replicants. And that was one of the reasons Tyrell let him be that close that he was allowed up into his personal apartment.
Not sure. The replicants don't age fast, they live, and then they suddenly die. In fact, that is a stark contrast to the rapid aging of JF Sebastian, who wastes away from a young age while replicants don't age ever (because they die before they can age).
That's really not too far-fetched of a possibility.
If Tyrell had been able to break apart and separate what drove the disease that Sebastian had to ultimately kill its host.
Then he could have maybe brought it under control and utilized it as a "clock" so to speak, that would attach itself to the hosts major organs and then shut them down one by one until the host died.
Or.
Even more likely.
In order to get the most "shelf life" from his company's "products".
Tyrrell might have bio-engineered such a disease to specifically target the hosts brain, synapsis, and heart and then maybe die once the hosts bodily functions had ceased.
Since it's these two organs that provide major functions for the rest of the body.
And these two organs that humans can't live without. At least not for very long.
That could account for Roy's hands trying to "lock up" in the film as his brain began to maybe first be attacked, and nerve paralysis began to set in to Roy's immediate extremities.
And then Roy's heart was being attacked, which caused him to collapse after having used his last bit of winded strength to pull Deckard back up to safety.
All in all.
Bio-engineered diseases aren't really touched on in Blade Runner.
But IF the world of Blade Runner is a kind of high-tech, post-apocalyptic, post-war world??
Then that would account for Sebastians' uncureable illness and the Tyrell Corp.'s replicant "of switch".
I thought the same...but they didn't age and die from that specific ailment- they died when they hit their time mark
4 yrs-this was to prevent the formation of emotions- rachel was different -implanted memories- which almost helped her pass the voight Kamf test
"You know the score pal-if you're not cop...you're little people!"
"You've done a mans job sir!"
@scottprendergast5262
If Tyrell had modified the disease, then used it as a shelf life determinant, so to speak, then that would've been the biological device that ended a Replicants life if nothing else did.
We must assume that by the time Replicant humans had become a reality. Tyrell and possibly other companies had succeeded in becoming masters or at least practitioners of genetic and biological manipulation.
Or that mankind now had the capability to do such things on a far vaster scale than ever before in human history.
This capability and the misuse of it could even account for the dreary and dystopian landscape that seems to be future L.A., where Bladerunner takes place.
@@ravenrise320 Makes no sense, replicants have existed longer than JF had been alive regardless of the rapid aging
38.27 One of my long held thoughts about the replicants is that because they are only a few years old, emotionally they are more like young children. They haven't refined their responses and their emotions. They are physically powerful, but prone to emotional storms like toddlers are. Leon's rage, Pris' stunted emotional responses to Sebastian, even Roy until near the very end. They have knowledge and understanding, but lack an adult empathy.
So for me, it isn't pity Roy displays, it's mercy. A subtle difference, but mercy is more in keeping with the rest of your description of Roy in his final moments. In that act of mercy, actively rescuing Deckard, Roy displays the fullness of his humanity.
Agreed entirely, perfect.
I agree. Especially when you see Roy battys exagerrated expression when telling pris that they're the last 2 left. He's designed to be a leader of soldiers yet he makes a real outward display of sadness as if he's a kid showing off he's sad to get attention and coddles from mom.
35:38
The last name of René Descartes is actually pronounced very similar to Deckard. (very interesting)
Cool story, bro!
Deckard drinks constantly when he's at home, to dull the pain, he actually does show emotion when ending a replicant, and at the end of that stirring speech
My theory has always been that Deckard is not only a Replicant, but he is modeled after Gaff, who was the original Blade Runner, but eventually got too old and couldn't physically compete against the more militant Replicants he had to hunt down. That's why he stalked Deckard to make sure he continued with the Blade Runner programming/training and kept hunting down the targets Gaff couldn't.
I would add the physical clue of his limp and cane reveals this.
Roy Batty had a vested interest in letting Deckard. He gave himself a legacy. He passed his memories on to Harrison Ford. He also passed on the legacy of forgiveness and kindness. He had an Existential moment, and he figured out a way to get his life meeting. I love your channel and the breakdowns!
He also knew that his monologue would become an instant existential classic amongst humans. In short, he was a selfish fuck, a very human feature.
In his own small way, he gave life. If he had let Deckard fall, he would have died. By saving him, every moment of the rest of Deckards life was due to Batty’s choice.
He killed his creator, Tyrell, but by saving Deckard he became as close as possible to being a ‘God’ that a sentient being can achieve - giving Deckard another chance at life.
He showed more compassion and humanity at the end than the humans who created and used him. More human than human, after all.
@@javelinXH992Great points!
I always also thought Roy saved him in part so that he would be remembered by someone, living on at least as a memory of Deckerd’s, it’s partly what his dying monologue was about, and he’s out of options to extend his life
Tears in the rain... what a moment!!!
Tears in rain
*The tears in the rain
@@fredbloggs5902 Correct, yes.
Deckard's activation date was the same day he was sitting at the noodle stand. This is why Holden looks at him with some amazement and surprise. 'Creeps me out every time..' is most likely what he was thinking.
😮 how did you come up with that? 😮
13:02 The city scape in the opening took a lot of inspiration from the ICI plant at Billingham. Scott was from Stockton and went to art college in Teeside, seeing the view of the massive chemical plant on his commute. Aldus Huxley was also inspired by the site when he worked there in the 1920s, with some of its modern manufacturing processes influencing Brave New World. Scott has also said that part of the gloomy feel of Blade Runner came from growing up in the North East, where it always seemed to be grey and raining. Looking out of my window on a particularly wet, grey, and foggy view of the Tyne, I can totally see the inspiration.
Certainly Rutger Haur's best performance. "Like tears in the rain" will forever be his shining moment. Ford's wonky narration still makes me chuckle now and then but it's just part of why I love the film😅... and, Deckard's human.
I watched it when it came out at 25 yrs old, I was mesmerized by it but didn't truly appreciate or understand it. I've watched it numerous times over the years and understood more of it's complexities each time. It changed the type of movies I watched ever since, for the most part. I was drawn to movies with more substance and originality. I watched this one after seeing your breakdown of 2049 (watched numerous times also). Both excellently done so thank you.
Blade runner is a sci fi masterpiece that is ahead of its time the sequel is also a masterpiece and I would like to see you do a video on that one.
that one left me cold. how many times have you rewatched the sequel? apologies for disagreeing with you
@@mafianoodles I personally watched the sequel 11 times. I plan to watch it again soon.
@@mafianoodles I agree but I enjoy it because of it. Denis Villnueve said if BR was built out of Scott's time in the soggy UK, BR2049 was the product of a Canadian used to cold winters, snow etc. I think Denis carried that over to the film itself(For better or worse of course, and i respect your opinion.) My main gripe with 2049 is the same as Scott's... It's definitely too long. Easily could've been 2hrs-15min. Otherwise I love it.
I've watched the sequel over 10 times. It's good.
2049 is BETTER than the original, in my humble opinion. Builds on the original themes masterfully, and avoids any form of nostalgic pandering - while still feeling like a continuation of the first.
Great video. In case anyone cares, Blade Runner had a deep effect on anime creators. Hideaki Anno used the Taunhauser Gate for Aim for the Top Gunbuster, arguably making that epic acı-do anime part of the Blade Runner universe. And of course there’s an anime series that’s nothing but a long homage to Blade Runner, called Bubblegum Crisis. Right down to the main characters forming a rock band called Priss and the Replicants.
13:38 " Leon murders the interviewer " incorrect, Leon shoots the interviewer, but does not kill him. The interviwer is named Holden that Bryant refers to when first speaking to Deckard. Also, in deleted scenes, Deckard visits Holden in the hopspital.
Blade Runner is visually, moving artwork. Everything looks like a painting. There is nothing like it. It's stunning from the opening scene to the closing scene. I was totally mesmerized when I first watched it on the scene and loved every minute of it. This movie showed that Scott is a genius. Thanks for the review.
Really enjoying these retro breakdowns. You both remind me of things I loved, and show me things I may have missed! Thanks for your diligent work!
Ey thanks so much
Great breakdown of a Sci-Fi Noir masterpiece. One thing I was surprised at not briefly being mentioned, was that a key sequence was clearly shot in a different order (and meant to be shown that way) but then, for whatever reason, re-ordered. This is the scenes of Deckard's fight with Leon and Rachel saving him, occuring straight after Zhora is shot, while the scenes of Gaff and Bryant, telling Deckard about Rachel absconding, would have followed on from that. Perhaps it was felt the story flowed better this way, when it came to editing the finished film...
There is a a visual cue in both the Theatrical and the Directors Cut, in the wound on Deckard's right cheekbone, following his fight with Leon, being present while he is buying liquor and talking with Gaff and Bryant, but is absent, when Leon initially grabs him on the street, leading to their fight. This wound is actually digitally removed from the scene with Deckard buying drink and speaking with Bryant in the Final Cut, like some of the other "corrections" mentioned, like removing Tyrell's thumb from the flipped shot of Batty, as well as the background and lighting matching the phone booth he is standing in, when Leon first meets up with him. And of course, having the dove fly off at the end, with a backdrop that matches the cityscape.
Scott also did something similar in Alien, when he repurposed a shot from Brett's death - the alien's tail coming up between his legs, not Lambert's, who wears boots, not sneakers, as Brett does, during the alien's attack on her.
IMO, the ambiguity of whether Deckard is, or is not a replicant, is better to a definitive answer either way. And both Deckard and Gaff, seeing Rachel as a unicorn, is something that can explain the significance of the origami unicorn, other than it pointing to Deckard being a replicant.
Awesome work Paul, and loving these breakdowns so far, with you covering no less than 3 of my all-time favourite films in the last few breakdowns (Alien, Aliens and now Blade Runner).
Just a phenomenal job with this Paul. I saw this when it opened and I was 23. It is testament to both the film and to your analysis that we can still discover things we hadn’t realized after more than 30 years. It has always been one of my favorites, and I still can’t come to a firm conclusion about Deckard. Cinema doesn’t have to bank a billion to be influential and lasting. (Ironically Leon and I share a birthday)
My father took me to see it as a teen, and I elbowed him when Leon said mine too.
I always figured that the term Blade Runner worked for the title of the position because they have to ride the "knife edge" of discerning between (and thus "retiring") replicants and humans.
Excellent analysis of this groundbreaking film. Yes, it’s slow at times but performances, concept, production design, score are spectacular. Roy’s death scene is iconic. One of the most influential films of all time.❤️The Final Cut is my favorite.
Ironic you released this Easter weekend since the storyline of salvation runs throughout. Brilliant work. Very much enjoying the deep dive into “older” films!
I was blown away when i first saw this film on vhs in the early 80s, complete with narration, was blown away the first time I saw it in a cinema, in Paris, still with narration, was blown away when i first saw the director's cut and still love it to this day. For me, at least, it is possibly the best sci-fi film of all time and in the top 10 best movies of all time. Lightning in a bottle. Proper sci-fi, that us. Not space knights.
Sounds like you blow a lot.
my take on why the replicant saves the bladerunner from falling to his death is this... I think the replicant loved life and saw it as something valuable, so it would have no point knowing that he was going to die, to let another one die as well... the nice thing about this movie, you make of it what you want... also it doesn't matter if the bladerunner is himself a replicant, all conscious life is beautiful.
Thank you so much for making this video❤Blade Runner is one of my favorite movies!
I have seen this film hundreds of times in the last 30 years. I had NEVER spotted that Rachael's photos moves! How did I miss that? Thank you for making great videos.
"Time is the fire which we all burn!" will always be one of the most iconic lines from the movie
Edward James Olmos first movie with replicants and later dealing with Cylons not knowing if they are human or not. It’s all connected.
It is neat when there's overlap, either character or story, and it works out properly.
Six was a lot like Rachel. Especially in light of Baltar having her in-his-head. That is never explained. Also, Eddie (Adama) loses his love at the very end. Juxtaposed to Deckard and Rachel making it through. Six and Baltar are together (a thousand years later) reading the newspaper over Moore's shoulder as if they too are timeless replicants. BSG starts out saying this has happened before and will happen again. It's a reference to the circle of life but it's not Lion King. It's technology.
Bliss my friend!
No, it isn't.
And they're all called "skin jobs"...
I’m so grateful I watched this. I had no knowledge till now that Rutger Hauer actually wrote his dying speech. What a phenomenal performance he gave, and really fitting that he acts opposite Harrison, given that Harrison made Han Solo the legendary film character he is with his own personal touches as well.
Probably my favorite moment in any media, Roy’s death.
Brilliant analysis for this genius movie. I never realized so much meaning was hidden it in. It's very "new order of the ages".
Glad you made video on it 🙂. Movie was ahead of it's time with very futuristic plot👍
Having a great time knocking off all the old break downs.
Thx.
I loved it from the first moment. Everyone else in my family hates the movie, but it's one of my favorites.
My personal take on the message in the film is that life is truly precious and too short. that it is sometimes unfair and cruel but struggling, fighting and loving are meaningful. that in the end we become a memory and dust
Nice review, thanks. I was thinking of something that Shakiespeare wrote, from the Merchant of Venice: If you prick me do I not bleed? If you tickle me do we not laugh? If you poison me do I not die? And if you wrong me shall I not revenge? At thye end of that movie I remember thinking this . . . TOO HEAVY FOR THOUGHTS.
Very good job!
Very interesting and comprehensive analysis Paul. Watched this film for over 40 years, and you've shown many aspects that I've missed. One other thing that strikes me is the sound during Leon's Voight-Kampff test - his increased heart beat and echo/reverb on Holden's questions - representing his heightened state of anxiety and fear; reminiscent of Michael Corleone's pre-murder anxiety train screeches in the Godfather. Just a thought. 👍
I want to thank you for doing videos on older movies as well as new stuff.
I agree with the sentiment regarding is he/isn't he a replicant. I don't think Deckards character arc is as strong if he's not human. Great breakdown btw!
Yeah I agree, film just works better if it’s not some big programme by Tyrell. Also Thank you and thank you for the membership support.
you could say he got really badly injured on a run that he did and has replicant parts like bits of his brain tissue his eyes and some other parts of his body and thats why he can take a beating from leon and batty.
@@Doc-Jon It's still a thoughtful movie about the meaning of being human. Deckard being a replicant (which he is) makes it even more powerful.
I know Ridley Scott thinks Deckard is a replicant, but Fancher and Ford both wrote and acted the character as a human
@@newton2105 In the original movie Deckard is a replicant.
13:00 No mention of the opening scene being based on the view from Ridley's walk from Redcar to Hartlepool, past the ICI Wilton Works and British Steel there? First time I saw the movie I thought it looked so much like the view from my bedroom window growing up, and as it turned out, it was based on it.
I’ve literally been considering rewatching these movies lately and now after I this I think I’m gonna have to. Thanks for the push, and thanks for another great review
Much appreciated
Been enjoying the classic SiFi movie breakdowns so keep up the excellent work 👏 👍
I always interpreted it as Deckard is in fact Gaff. Deckard is a replicant based off Gaff and this was a field test to see if the new model of replicants, given memories, can be more effective. That isn't Deckard's apartment, it's Gaff's. The test isn't complete, them running off is the final test that Tyrell set up. That is why the chief is always rocking that shit eating grin when dealing with Deckard, he's watching a copy of Gaff, a replicant hunting down their own kind. To him, it's funny as hell to watch. For all we know Deckard didn't exist until he woke up in that alley with the paper.
Gaff on the other hand is looking at himself, and perhaps wanted Deckard to have a life he didn't. He didn't get to live, but Deckard can.
With Tyrell dead, the only people that know of the 'project' is Gaff and the Chief... I wager Gaff might have covered for Deckard, or the Chief and Gaff figured they'd just time out, unaware Tyrell didn't build in the self termination into them.
Very interesting interpretation. Thank you!
I thought about that as well. Nothing else really explains his fascination with deckard. If he was just his superior in the police force I'd imagine him more detached like the chief. But he's always shown with a huge interest and insight into deckard.
It never said he was some replicant expert sent by tyrell to keep and eye on how things go too. Just being the more seasoned cop/bladerunner doesn't explain his role and interaction with deckard.
That, or he's just the previous model or attempt so he knows what deckard is going through.
Beautifully done!!! What an amazing movie. Might be time to watch this one again
For me, Rutger Hauer saving Harrison at the end wasn't about forgiveness, it was that with his impending death, Rutger overwhelmingly cherished life... even if that meant saving his enemy.
Also for me, the nail though his hand didn't signify Christ... it was Rutger wanting to experience as many sensations as possible... even pain.
And of course the bird flying away represented his soul leaving.
The movies of bladerunner have changed my life. I love movies like this. I wish there were more like it
Man for real this movie gets better with every rewatch......and blade runner 2049 was also soooo good I don't know how it flopped....yeah the pacing was slow but the story needed the pacing....as of the og one I might not take out any flaws as for the time the movie released it still is ahead of its time compared to movies nowadays...
It might be that is shouldn't have ever been made. . . . I am not sure how anyone missed the entire point of Blade Runner. Honestly this is troubling. RACHEL AND DECKER ARE SYNTHETIC SHORT LIVED ANDROIDS. The point of it all is that your life has value no matter how long it lasts or doesn't. Get out and experience etc. When the android at the end talks about the wonder he has seen in such a short lifespan we are supposed to be envious and in awe. Decker similarly chose to leave and spend his life with Rachel even knowing it won't last because that isn't as important as being human. The last line is so important. None of us know how long we have but no.matter what it isn't all that long really.
My point is that Decker should be long dead and that is okay because of how Blade Runner ends. It is perfect and this movie completely ignores everything Blade Runner is all about.
Thanks for tat video. I really enjoyed it.
Thank you
When Ray grabs Deckard and saves him, he uses his seizing hand. The one with the nail. I kinda see this as Ray leaving it to chance. If his hand works, and he can grab Deckard and save him - he will. But if he doesn’t have the strength anymore… then oh well.
Thank you for posting this! The movie came out when I was in high school and I read the book in anticipation of it, so excited to see all of the story’s intricate details in live action. I was so disappointed in the vague hints and lack of explanations about the world that I hated the movie for decades. I eventually made my peace with it but, damn, wasted potential.
So nice to see you comparing this to the original story. Time for me to reread it, I think!
I agree RE Deckard: as much as I enjoy the ambiguity that fuels the conversation, he’s definitely a human. That’s the point of the story.
Great review with lots of insights and easter eggs for an awesome sci fi classic.
In the book, Rachel and Pris look identical. When he’s hunting Pris he’s already rooted Rachel so he struggles with it a bit.
One of my favourite movies ever, great breakdown. The dark days doco on the bonus disk which I have is amazing too.
I rewatched this recently and its more and more becoming a favourite. Its from the time they knew how to create atmosphere in a film. The shots, the architecture, interior design of the homes abd buildings, music etc they take you away while watching. I havnt found a modern movie do that as well.
Me too. My biggest take away was realizing Rachel was played by the same actress that played lieutenant Einhorn from Ace Vent. It only took like 30 years for that to click in my head.
This is my favorite movie of all time and you are becoming my favorite TH-cam recap channel. One thing I wanted to add is that in the Final Cut they used Harrison Ford’s son Ben to do the voiceover in the snake dealer scene. The real Harrison sounded too old and that bit being out of sync always annoyed me.
One "clue" that no one ever seems to mention is that Roy beats the crap out of Deckard at the end of the film. If Roy is a combat model with enhanced strength and Deckard is a normal human, he likely would have killed him. But if they're BOTH replicants...
If they were both replicants, Deckard would have been able to put up more of a fight. If they used replicants as bladerunners in those days, of course they would have used a combat model for that purpose. But Deckard gets beaten up by Pris, who is a pleasure model.
My all time favorite sci-fi movie. Thanks for doing such a fantastic breakdown of this amazing film
Replicants DO have emotions. That's the whole point of the movie. They're not "like any other machine", as Deckard puts it.Tyrell explicitly states that:
"After all, they are emotionally
inexperienced with only a few years in which to store up the experiences which you and I take for granted. If we gift them with a past, we create a cushion, a pillow for their emotions, and, consequently, we can control them better."
Fantastic breakdown Paul, I’m a huge Bladerunner fan and have read a lot about it, yet still managed to learn / see some new things. THANK YOU!!!
Ey thanks so much
4:24 That's Zhora, not Pris.
Damm straight!👍
this is a impressively well researched and insightful breakdown of a very influential movie. appreciate!
Thank you
Yaasss! Another banger 😊 also, If you haven't seen yet, I think a revist of the Rise of the Planet of the Apes trilogy would be perfect for this series
Yeah got it on the list no doubt
@@heavyspoilers 🫵🤘
So I guess it wasn't over a year ago but here's the proof!
I was sooo looking forward to the trilogy getting broken down for this series!
MT is good but... it's just not the same 😔
@@heavyspoilers❤
I remember seeing a preview for this movie when it came out and immediately knew I wanted to see it. Knew I was seeing something amazing from the first frame. Like Alien it was groundbreaking and became a classic.
Maybe pretentious but I always felt the point was you’re not supposed to know if Deckard is a replicant or not….which puts you in the same shoes as him.
PKD wrote loads of stories about perception. If you were a replicant how would you know? There was a great story about a guy who was accused of being a robot wired with a bomb inside of him. The trigger for the bomb was his realisation that he wasn’t human as he thought he was. That messed with my mind.
I thought the Father line was done for the TV broadcast, and Ridley Scott loved it so much he included it in the changes of the director's cut.
Is it only me who think the movie doesnt look like it was made in 1982? It looks so good
According to an interview with someone at ILM in an issue of Star Wars: INSIDER when Episode 1 came out, they mentioned that a police spinners was one of the ships flying around in the establishing shots of Coruscant; reason being that one of the buildings in Blade Runner is the Millennium Falcon
You should do career perspectives for all your favorite directors. I’d watch those multiple times.
I don't think the narration is bad. When I hear the narration, it reminds me of a 1950's film noir detective movie and it works for me.
You know a guy's a boss, when almost ALL of his books have been taken to film.
Not only many of Philip K. Dick's novels and short stories were used as basic plots for film scripts, but even some of his "secondary" ideas , like advertising flying machines ( drones) , personal advice AI chatbots, , "Virtual reality" devices etc , were decades ahead ...
@@dimitrispapadimitriou5622 I'll tell ya, I love me some Dick. 😄
"Almost all" is to sell Phillip K. Dick short. He has written a lot of novels and short stories, but only a handfull has been made into movies. In my opinion, a lot more of his works should be made into movies.
Good work ✌️✌️✌️✌️✌️.
I only really got into films in my 30s and love the sci fi genre. I didn't watch blade runner until last year (when I was 40) final cut, but I do think in a way, that was probably for the best.
My mate showed me the final monologue many years ago at his house and was saying how amazing it was "lost in time, like tears in rain" but I felt nothing from it really.
Now, I've rewatched the film at least 10 times, and also enjoyed 2049.
Completely fell in love with Vangelis too.
Amazing piece of work, definitely not for everyone tho.
It's a film I enjoy watching alone at night and just immerse myself in it.
A true classic indeed.
✌️
And as for the replicant question. I'm such a person who loves ambiguity and the bravery of doing this.
I'm happy for it to be either he is human or a replicant, depending on my mood as I watch it that time.
It's not necessarily important for me to have that in concrete.
And probably helps me to go back and watch it time after time, as it's still a mystery....
One of the best films ever. This And 2049 are masterclasses in Sci-Fi. Ford And Howard deserved Oscar Noms. Tears In The Rain is one of the best speeches ever.
Hauer.
@@brmbkl Yeah.
Haur The Duck.
Paul, thank you for coving one of my all-time favourite films of all time. After watch and owning a three official version of this film I side with you the Deckard is human and not a bot. The film has so many layers to it.
Each version yes has something new to add or remove.. But the Final version is for me the best and most watched. Your break down was epic and very specific and for anyone who has not see the film this would be the best guide.
I cant want to see how you do the sequel.
I took the whole Asian influence thing as them being mainly in LA's Chinatown. I really didn't see too much beyond that. In the 80's there was a big Asian influence in American pop culture, from Big Trouble in Little China to The Karate Kid, the rise of Japanese cars in the US, etc.
Loved it! Great work
Seems to me that the "clue" left by Gaff that reveals that Deckard is a replicant - the origami unicorn (which is associated with the one in his dream) - has one flaw in it, in that his dream is not a memory - implanted or otherwise. No one has a memory of a unicorn running through the forest. Maybe it comes from a movie he has seen. If anything, it is Gaff signaling his understanding that Deckard, beneath the hard-boiled detective surface, is a romantic at heart.
Yeah, it came from Legend.
Gaff signalin... what?
I've always seen the significance of the unicorn as representing Rachel.
@@stringfellowlocke2214 That's a good theory.
I saw blade runner the first time i was 10 yrs old, still one of the best movies ever 30 years later.
I saw your Star Wars breakdown earlier today, lovely work. I adore Blade Runner thanks for doing this. Hope you can relax with your family now.
Thank you
You rock. Keep up the great work
There were three things in my opinion that made people think Deckard was a replicant. 1. The unicorn. 2. The eye shine. 3. Ridley Scott. Both two and three were accidents meant to drive up the discussion for the fans. Poor lighting and fat Director's "Director's" cuts milked millions off this movie. The unicorn though... Gaff mocked Deckard the entire movie in how he approached his job, chicken. How he liked Rachael, the stickman. And... Ultimately, how Deckard thought he found love with Racheal, the unicorn. An elusive mystical creature that escapes all that try to catch it. I think he knew Deckard was in love with Racheal and that is why he gave them a chance. They found love or the unicorn.
One of your best ones. Thanks, mate.
By far my favourite film since I was a teenager and still is I’m 50 now
If Deckard is also a replicant it diminishes the impact of the ending. I know Ridley Scott "canonically" thinks that Deckard is one, but despite him being the director he really can be wrong about this (as with other mistakes, like much of Prometheus etc.)
nah he pulled himself up the building with broken fingers, def not human
One of my top five movies. Definitely my favorite sci-fi film.
I really liked the ambiguity of Deckard, and I'm glad they kept it that way. I think being human would have a bigger impact, and that's how I viewed Deckard about 30 years ago. I own and have watched all 3 versions, but I think I need to watch them again...
I'm glad I'm not the only one who felt that way about it being maybe boring or flat and not able to hang onto the plot. I never really watched the movie properly, I've seen it, but I'll just space out or get distracted and not know what's going on. That's partly why I even clicked this video, to see if it would help me understand the material better so I can grasp it.
Deckard is not a replicant in the movie: Note that in the movie Deckard is dragged back to the Force for one last job; ie: he was a Blade Runner before the movie - probably for some time, if he had time to impress his old boss ("I need the old magic" and referring to him as the best). The Nexus models have a 4-year lifespan, which is not compatible with the line above. Moreover, the memory implant stuff is supposed to be a fairly recent development at the time of the movie ("Rachel is special", and "We found that gifting them with a past makes them more controlable" yet no others have had it.)
The short story, otoh, is far more ambiguous.
Thanks a million for d brake down, always found this a difficult move to take all or most in,, , ya WELLLLLL explained to comprehend, as agreed, or to accumulate different retrospectives on comparison still, unanimously agreed, a superbly ionic allegorical profound fable, with attributes to consume an brake down too, this opened new ways of filming to our love off cinematic creations. Took time to fully appreciate this as Scott was infamously creating experiences via movie's crating, not just making movie's but experiences with such. Still don't get d whole lot but am happy were I'm at, thanks a million again @Heavy Spoilers, @RidleyScott, crew and everyone who contributed to us relishing ye hard to view 👌😎🙏😁🤘
Check out our breakdown of ALIEN here - th-cam.com/video/yn7lSsE-sA0/w-d-xo.html
epic deep dive--thank you!
Leon didnt kill "that interviewer". That guy's name is "Holden" and he was the blade runner on the case before Deckard. The movie explains he's "on a ventilator" from the shooting.
In the deleted scenes of the Final Cut Deckard even visits Holden in hospital.
Welp. Bought my copy of Directors Cut 4k thanks to you. Great job on this, I love your stuff.