tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7102083477633345540.post2007821793005592021..comments2023-05-07T11:31:28.136-04:00Comments on Lindsey's Film Odyssey: Blade Runner (1982)Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00172446849111712883noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7102083477633345540.post-8802714273257540172014-05-17T19:37:44.200-04:002014-05-17T19:37:44.200-04:00I think I realized that Deckard was human when it ...I think I realized that Deckard was human when it said he was coming out of retirement to find the replicants. If he was a replicant himself, how could he be retired if they only live 4 years? So he would have to be a human. As for the Thing, I dont want to think about it because it's too scary. And if they were both human, they would die anyway because they burned up all their supplies. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00172446849111712883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7102083477633345540.post-43596247623085736712014-05-16T22:34:02.787-04:002014-05-16T22:34:02.787-04:00The whole "Deckard is a replicant" thing...The whole "Deckard is a replicant" thing is an example of a director using a trend from fans to drive interest back into his film. When it came out, and for about 10 years afterwards, there was nothing on this front at all. Then people started talking about how great would it be if he was. Then a new version of the film got released - the "Director's Cut" - that just happened to include new things that seemed to point to Deckard being one. This fired up the fanboys, added strength to that argument, and drove interest back to the film again. Now there's been a third version of the film released. Repeat cycle.<br /><br />Personally? I'm going with the original version of the film: Deckard's human.<br /><br />(By the way, something similar happened with the John Carpenter version of The Thing where many years later a theory that one the two guys left at the end was the shapeshifting alien took hold and is now the prevalent line of discussion for the film.)Chip Laryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00787403805554027107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7102083477633345540.post-1657840855181456612014-05-16T20:27:26.053-04:002014-05-16T20:27:26.053-04:00That's very interesting, I never considered it...That's very interesting, I never considered it a film noir before. But now I notice that it is a very "dark" movie.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00172446849111712883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7102083477633345540.post-73559125280539341852014-05-15T01:20:48.597-04:002014-05-15T01:20:48.597-04:00I never thought of Deckard as a replicant. That is...I never thought of Deckard as a replicant. That is an interesting angle. <br />You are right, there are so many interesting themes at play here and then it is a very good take on a postmodernistic film noir. TSorensenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12208153011927807857noreply@blogger.com