• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Blade Runner & Blade Runner 2049

Coastaljames said:
This might be an incredibly dumb question so, please excuse me if it is...

I understand "Bladerunner" was based on a K.Dick novel. Was Deckard a replicant in that?
Click to expand...
Supposedly based on 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?'. I don't remember that being the case.
I should re-read the book, because I don't remember it being at all like the Wikipedia plot summary...
 
Mythopoeika said:
So...you're saying that Sebastian was simply a plot device (to be used and then cast aside), and not actually central to the origin of the replicants?
I find that surprising and I don't think it makes a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

So you think a multi-trillion dollar industry that make perfect organic machines that surpass humans needs to employ a guy just so they can harvest his DNA to stop their perfect androids? That's soap opera and even a simpler plot device than Sebastain showing the replicants "human" side.
 
Coastaljames said:
This might be an incredibly dumb question so, please excuse me if it is...

I understand "Bladerunner" was based on a K.Dick novel. Was Deckard a replicant in that?
Click to expand...


No the book is very different. Rick is a bounty hunter who kills androids so he can replace his electric pet sheep with a real one. Basically the world is radioactive and very few animals or children are born. Real animals are enormously expensive but are valued because they are real and can be loved.

The book looks at the concept of empathy, religion and humanity.
 
I've found 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?' online here
http://www.larevuedesressources.org/IMG/pdf/dadoes.pdf
A fascinating, and very weird, look at the future. Bladerunner is only tangentially related to this story, which is set in the future year 1992. How Dick expected all those changes to take place in a mere 25 years is beyond me, but he describes a consistent and deeply disturbing world.
 
Naughty_Felid said:
No the book is very different.
Click to expand...

eburacum said:
Bladerunner is only tangentially related to this story...
Click to expand...


Ok, that's cool, thanks. All I need to know. I was puzzled by the "Is Deckard a replicant" debate if presumably it was all laid out in the book. Your replies answer that.

Dick is most definitely on my list of writers I need to get stuck into. The bits and pieces I've read about him all seem fascinating. Particularly in regards to his work and Gnosticism. Any recommendations as to where to start folks? Thanks.
 
Naughty_Felid said:
So you think a multi-trillion dollar industry that make perfect organic machines that surpass humans needs to employ a guy just so they can harvest his DNA to stop their perfect androids? That's soap opera and even a simpler plot device than Sebastain showing the replicants "human" side.
Click to expand...
Yeah, why not? Maybe the reason why they used his DNA was because it could be re-engineered for such a purpose.
What do genetic engineers do right now? They find sequences of DNA that do certain things, then re-use them like building blocks. Sometimes, this has been used to cure genetic conditions.
Maybe J.F. came up with the idea himself?
What's wrong with simple?
 
eburacum said:
I've found 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?' online here
http://www.larevuedesressources.org/IMG/pdf/dadoes.pdf
A fascinating, and very weird, look at the future. Bladerunner is only tangentially related to this story, which is set in the future year 1992. How Dick expected all those changes to take place in a mere 25 years is beyond me, but he describes a consistent and deeply disturbing world.
Click to expand...
You mean 37 years? From 1982 to 2019. Happens a lot with movies set in near future.
A movie that was really wrong was Strange Days, made in 1995. Storyline was new years eve 1999/2000. It was about memory virtual reality where you can experience a person's death and other illegal things.
 
that movie hasnt aged well ... an x of mine used to talk it up constantly until we tracked down the vhs and found it to be truly cringeworthy, pj harvey aside
 
Vardoger said:
You mean 37 years? From 1982 to 2019. Happens a lot with movies set in near future.
Click to expand...
The book was written in 1968. The future depicted was in 1992. 24 years.
 
Coastaljames said:
Ok, that's cool, thanks. All I need to know. I was puzzled by the "Is Deckard a replicant" debate if presumably it was all laid out in the book. Your replies answer that.

Dick is most definitely on my list of writers I need to get stuck into. The bits and pieces I've read about him all seem fascinating. Particularly in regards to his work and Gnosticism. Any recommendations as to where to start folks? Thanks.
Click to expand...

He is not the easiest of reads. His more spiritual books I'd look at The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch and his gnostic take is the Transmigration of Timothy Archer, which I've not read.

Scanner Darkly I found to be his most accessible novel followed by Flow My Tears The Policeman Said and the Clans of the Alphane Moon.

His shirt stories are SF gold though and his pre-SF stuff is lovely also.
 
Vardoger said:
Happens a lot with movies set in near future.
A movie that was really wrong was Strange Days, made in 1995. Storyline was new years eve 1999/2000. It was about memory virtual reality where you can experience a person's death and other illegal things.
Click to expand...
Phillip K. Dick was very good at exploring the effects of mind-altering technology, from false memories to empathy generators and 'mood organs', as well as artificial minds of various kinds and virtual states. He was three-quarters bonkers, of course; but he used this fact to his advantage, as it allowed him to explore mental states that many other writers could barely glimpse.

If, and when, we develop the sort of neurotechnology that Dick imagined, then we will probably experience the sort of rapid change in society that he portrayed in some of his fiction. A lot of people would be profoundly disoriented by this eventuality- but I think Dick would have loved it.
 
Naughty_Felid said:
He is not the easiest of reads. His more spiritual books I'd look at The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch and his gnostic take is the Transmigration of Timothy Archer, which I've not read.

Scanner Darkly I found to be his most accessible novel followed by Flow My Tears The Policeman Said and the Clans of the Alphane Moon.
Click to expand...

Thanks kindly Sah!
 
kamalktk said:
Yes, that's why he said that.
Click to expand...

Sebastian doesn't know anything about the four year life span or how to atop it.

Tyrell: "Sebastian, I know you don't know about biomechanics or how to put a time bomb into our replicants but can we have some of your cells please? We need to kill them after 4 years and the only possible way to do that is to use you're very obscure Methuselah Syndrome".

I always took it to mean like an artist or musician says "i put a lot of myself into that painting, track, etc."

I mean if you wanna go there Batty says to Chew "If only you could have seen what I've seen through your eyes" That's because all the replicants have eyes made up of cells of Chews eyes. Makes perfect sense.

Or when Batty calls Tyrell the God of Biomechanics it's because he is actually a god.

The Tyrell Corp that supplies the whole system with perfect android slaves only have 3 people working for them two of which have donated their cells.

Very credible.
 
Vardoger said:
You mean 37 years? From 1982 to 2019. Happens a lot with movies set in near future.
A movie that was really wrong was Strange Days, made in 1995. Storyline was new years eve 1999/2000. It was about memory virtual reality where you can experience a person's death and other illegal things.
Click to expand...

It was really wrong on a few levels, particularly the bit where the guy uses the experience recording and playback tech while he rapes and murders a woman, so she gets to see and feel what it's like for him to do it at the same time. :eek::eek::eek:

Same director as Near Dark, which if nothing else was better than The Lost Boys which came out at the same time. And deserves kudos for portraying the vampire characters as total assholes.
 
I saw Strange Days in the cinema and wasn't convinced it was worthy of rediscovery even then (it had already flopped), though it seems to have a few fans. They should have built the story around Angela Bassett, she was the best character and they stuck her in "girlfriend" mode. Also, Juliette Lewis is my least favourite actress, so maybe I wasn't going to get on with it anyway.

Palmer Eldritch is mindbendingly weird, but I didn't find it a tough read (Valis, anyone?). Gary Oldman was all set to star in a movie version in the 90s but it got stuck in development hell.
 
Days of Perky Pat seems oddly prescient. Partly because we spend so much time immersing ourselves in entertainment. And partly because we live in an age that seems riddled with nostalgia for an idealised past - both in popular culture and in politics. Even the Bladerunner sequel itself seems merely another fit of Hollywood nostalgia.
 
Naughty_Felid said:
Sebastian doesn't know anything about the four year life span or how to atop it.

Tyrell: "Sebastian, I know you don't know about biomechanics or how to put a time bomb into our replicants but can we have some of your cells please? We need to kill them after 4 years and the only possible way to do that is to use you're very obscure Methuselah Syndrome".
Click to expand...
When was that said in the film? I must have missed that part.
 
Tony & Ridley - The Scott Brothers ... finally we get the true story ..

 
Last edited:
The complete Blade Runner out takes with all of the Harrison Ford Commentary .. some people hate this version but I've always felt it accentuates the film noir sentiment of the film perfectly .. contemporary noir ..

 
Swifty said:
The complete Blade Runner out takes with all of the Harrison Ford Commentary .. some people hate this version but I've always felt it accentuates the film noir sentiment of the film perfectly .. contemporary noir ..

Click to expand...

I liked the commentary as well.
 
ramonmercado said:
I liked the commentary as well.
Click to expand...
"Skin jobs .. that's what he called them. In history books, he's the kind of man who'd call black men niggers" .. Deckard on entering Bryant's office .. they've missed that voice over bit here ..
 
HAPPY INCEPT DATE, LEON!

C9FinlZUMAABpeY.jpg
 
Mythopoeika said:
Yeah, I don't like Gosling for this film. I really wanted somebody with real ability, that I liked.
All the roles I've seen him in have just screamed 'dickhead'.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. Earlier in this thread, I dissed Ryan Gosling. My mistake! I had him confused with the other Ryan - Ryan Reynolds. Sorry, Ryan Gosling!
Both Ryans do look mightily similar, which is probably how I made this mistake:
ryan-reynolds-ryan-gosling-tease-today-161212_69556971c630cd803eff366623006eaa.jpg
 
theyre both watchable but to be honest i dont like either of them for a blade runner, total absence of gravitas ...
 
Deadpool retiring Andys though, that's a film I'd watch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top