How Harrison Ford's Blade Runner Confession Changes 41 Years Of Debate
BY PADRAIG COTTER PUBLISHED 21 HOURS AGO
After 41 years of denying that Blade Runner's Deckard was a
replicant, Harrison Ford has finally admitted he was. This changes
the movie in key ways.
Harrison Ford has finally confessed that Blade Runner's Deckard
IS a replicant, settling a debate that probably should never
have been settled. ------
read the full story at: >https://screenrant.com/blade-runner-movie-rick-deckard-replicant-confirmed-story-changes/
What an awful site! Jumps all over the place, never settles down and
then greys out.
But, what difference does it make what Ford thinks, or even Scott.
If it's ambiguous on-screen, it's ambiguous.
ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan wrote:
What an awful site! Jumps all over the place, never settles down and
then greys out.
If your browser supports Reader View, that helps tremendously.
But, what difference does it make what Ford thinks, or even Scott.
If it's ambiguous on-screen, it's ambiguous.
That was my thought. How would Ford know?
But, what difference does it make what Ford thinks, or even Scott. If it's ambiguous on-screen, it's ambiguous.
On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 5:33:37 PM UTC-6, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
But, what difference does it make what Ford thinks, or even Scott. If it's ambiguous on-screen, it's ambiguous.I thought the movie was based on the novel "Do Androids Dream of
Electric Sheep". Of course, there were enough differences between the
movie and the novel that, I suppose, one can't draw the conclusion that would seem to be obvious to me: whether or not Deckard was a replicant himself would be determined not by how Harrison Ford saw his role, but
by what Deckard was in the novel!
On 6/4/2023 6:44 PM, Default User wrote:
ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan wrote:It would just be how he envisioned and acted the character in his own mind.
What an awful site! Jumps all over the place, never settles down and
then greys out.
If your browser supports Reader View, that helps tremendously.
But, what difference does it make what Ford thinks, or even Scott.
If it's ambiguous on-screen, it's ambiguous.
That was my thought. How would Ford know?
On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 20:36:06 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 6/4/2023 6:44 PM, Default User wrote:
ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan wrote:It would just be how he envisioned and acted the character in his own mind.
What an awful site! Jumps all over the place, never settles down and
then greys out.
If your browser supports Reader View, that helps tremendously.
But, what difference does it make what Ford thinks, or even Scott.
If it's ambiguous on-screen, it's ambiguous.
That was my thought. How would Ford know?
Unless there was a note in the treatment or script that indicated
this. /Not/ a part of the dialog, clearly.
Personally, I think he's confused.
I think the point of the novel and the film is not to
suggest that Deckard really is an android, but to
propose that synthetic personhood is valid personhood,
Or, and especially in the film, you can read the whole
thing to be about race.
On Monday, June 5, 2023 at 9:06:07 AM UTC-6, Robert Carnegie wrote:
I think the point of the novel and the film is not to
suggest that Deckard really is an android, but to
propose that synthetic personhood is valid personhood,
Or, and especially in the film, you can read the whole
thing to be about race.
But in the case where the novel was principally about the validity
of synthetic personhood, it would still have been also a condemnation
of all forms of inequality and discrimination as well, almost automatically, since they're all unfair and wrong for the same basic reason.
On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 7:28:04 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
On Monday, June 5, 2023 at 9:06:07 AM UTC-6, Robert Carnegie wrote:
I think the point of the novel and the film is not to
suggest that Deckard really is an android, but to
propose that synthetic personhood is valid personhood,
Or, and especially in the film, you can read the whole
thing to be about race.
But in the case where the novel was principally about the validity
of synthetic personhood, it would still have been also a condemnation
of all forms of inequality and discrimination as well, almost automatically, >> since they're all unfair and wrong for the same basic reason.
Houyhnhnm rights! Now!
On Monday, June 5, 2023 at 9:06:07 AM UTC-6, Robert Carnegie wrote:
I think the point of the novel and the film is not toIs there a distinction?
suggest that Deckard really is an android, but to
propose that synthetic personhood is valid personhood,
Or, and especially in the film, you can read the whole
thing to be about race.
Well, I suppose there is, in that one could write a work about discrimination against androids without believing that androids
could ever exist, simply to have a way to talk about racial
discrimination in an abstract way instead of an explicit one.
But in the case where the novel was principally about the validity
of synthetic personhood, it would still have been also a condemnation
of all forms of inequality and discrimination as well, almost automatically, since they're all unfair and wrong for the same basic reason.
My point about race is to wonder whether Dick writing
about the situation of androids in society can be read
as a commentary on disagreements amongst actual
ordinary people, then or now, that are considered to be
matters of race. Whether it's applicable. I do not think
it is meant to be applicable. Particularly, Dick's androids
in different, unrelated stories tend to "pass", to be perceived
as "real" humans although by arbitrary distinction or by
difference of origin, they're not. And once you know they're
not, you see them differently. So in that case it could be
about Jews.
Among the things Robert Carnegie wrote:
My point about race is to wonder whether Dick writing
about the situation of androids in society can be read
as a commentary on disagreements amongst actual
ordinary people, then or now, that are considered to be
matters of race. Whether it's applicable. I do not think
it is meant to be applicable. Particularly, Dick's androids
in different, unrelated stories tend to "pass", to be perceived
as "real" humans although by arbitrary distinction or by
difference of origin, they're not. And once you know they're
not, you see them differently. So in that case it could be
about Jews.
His androids, particularly the androids in _Sheep_, are definitely and >scientifically different from humans, as detected by an empathy test.
In some publicity interview leading up to "Blade Runner" he seemed to
be putting that up as his concern, touched off by reading a diary of a
Nazi who was complaining that the children were too loud when he was
trying to sleep -- these being the children in his concentration camp;
there can be things that look human but are not. His comment about
Sean Young's portrayal of Rachel (who thought she was human, but
Deckard and we know is not) was that she was "la belle dame sans merci"
he had written about. Haven't seen the revisiting of Blade Runner, the >revisiting of Alien kind of put me off those, but even the suggestion
that she and Deckard are sort of human by the end strikes me as a weak
"love conquers all" justification.
Among the things Robert Carnegie wrote:touched off by reading a diary of a Nazi who was complaining that the children were too loud when he was trying to sleep -- these being the children in his concentration camp; there can be things that look human but are not. His comment about Sean Young'
My point about race is to wonder whether Dick writing
about the situation of androids in society can be read
as a commentary on disagreements amongst actual
ordinary people, then or now, that are considered to be
matters of race. Whether it's applicable. I do not think
it is meant to be applicable. Particularly, Dick's androids
in different, unrelated stories tend to "pass", to be perceived
as "real" humans although by arbitrary distinction or by
difference of origin, they're not. And once you know they're
not, you see them differently. So in that case it could be
about Jews.
His androids, particularly the androids in _Sheep_, are definitely and scientifically different from humans, as detected by an empathy test. In some publicity interview leading up to "Blade Runner" he seemed to be putting that up as his concern,
On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 06:08:52 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohntouched off by reading a diary of a Nazi who was complaining that the children were too loud when he was trying to sleep -- these being the children in his concentration camp; there can be things that look human but are not. His comment about Sean Young'
<jack.bohn64@gmail.com> wrote:
Among the things Robert Carnegie wrote:
My point about race is to wonder whether Dick writing
about the situation of androids in society can be read
as a commentary on disagreements amongst actual
ordinary people, then or now, that are considered to be
matters of race. Whether it's applicable. I do not think
it is meant to be applicable. Particularly, Dick's androids
in different, unrelated stories tend to "pass", to be perceived
as "real" humans although by arbitrary distinction or by
difference of origin, they're not. And once you know they're
not, you see them differently. So in that case it could be
about Jews.
His androids, particularly the androids in _Sheep_, are definitely and scientifically different from humans, as detected by an empathy test. In some publicity interview leading up to "Blade Runner" he seemed to be putting that up as his concern,
If you watch the sequel (/not/ recommended, BTW), you will find that
love /did/ conquer all.
On 6/7/2023 8:07 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
If you watch the sequel (/not/ recommended, BTW), you will find thatI'm going to counter that "not recommended" with a "recommended". :) I
love /did/ conquer all.
think '2049' captured the feel of the original very well and Hollyweird apparently agrees as a third movie (Blade Runner 2099) is in development.
Among the things Robert Carnegie wrote:touched off by reading a diary of a Nazi who was complaining that the children were too loud when he was trying to sleep -- these being the children in his concentration camp; there can be things that look human but are not. His comment about Sean Young'
My point about race is to wonder whether Dick writingHis androids, particularly the androids in _Sheep_, are definitely and scientifically different from humans, as detected by an empathy test. In some publicity interview leading up to "Blade Runner" he seemed to be putting that up as his concern,
about the situation of androids in society can be read
as a commentary on disagreements amongst actual
ordinary people, then or now, that are considered to be
matters of race. Whether it's applicable. I do not think
it is meant to be applicable. Particularly, Dick's androids
in different, unrelated stories tend to "pass", to be perceived
as "real" humans although by arbitrary distinction or by
difference of origin, they're not. And once you know they're
not, you see them differently. So in that case it could be
about Jews.
On 6/7/2023 8:07 AM, Paul S Person wrote:touched off by reading a diary of a Nazi who was complaining that the children were too loud when he was trying to sleep -- these being the children in his concentration camp; there can be things that look human but are not. His comment about Sean Young'
On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 06:08:52 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohn
<jack.bohn64@gmail.com> wrote:
Among the things Robert Carnegie wrote:
My point about race is to wonder whether Dick writing
about the situation of androids in society can be read
as a commentary on disagreements amongst actual
ordinary people, then or now, that are considered to be
matters of race. Whether it's applicable. I do not think
it is meant to be applicable. Particularly, Dick's androids
in different, unrelated stories tend to "pass", to be perceived
as "real" humans although by arbitrary distinction or by
difference of origin, they're not. And once you know they're
not, you see them differently. So in that case it could be
about Jews.
His androids, particularly the androids in _Sheep_, are definitely and scientifically different from humans, as detected by an empathy test. In some publicity interview leading up to "Blade Runner" he seemed to be putting that up as his concern,
If you watch the sequel (/not/ recommended, BTW), you will find that
love /did/ conquer all.
I'm going to counter that "not recommended" with a "recommended". :) I >think '2049' captured the feel of the original very well and Hollyweird >apparently agrees as a third movie (Blade Runner 2099) is in development.
According to reviews of an alarming book,
_Asperger's Children_ (2018), when Nazis discovered
autism, they dealt with it like Deckard deals with
the androids.
On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 6:55:51 AM UTC-6, Robert Carnegie wrote:
According to reviews of an alarming book,That's hardly surprising. They warmed up the population for the Final Solution through "euthanizing" the mentally handicapped, so one would
_Asperger's Children_ (2018), when Nazis discovered
autism, they dealt with it like Deckard deals with
the androids.
expect them to treat other severe mental disabilities the same way.
The surprise is that this was when and where autism was discovered.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 302 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 79:55:51 |
| Calls: | 6,762 |
| Files: | 12,289 |
| Messages: | 5,378,162 |