As an already huge fan of Blade Runner 2049, I think it’s only fair to watch Blade Runner by Ridley Scott. See, I also really like super-futuristic life, so this film is something I would definitely like. I’ve already seen it before, so I actually don’t have any expectations. I’ve discussed how I really like the AI type ideal, that both films portray. The CGI, is a little off in some sections, and so is the acting, but oftentimes that’s what makes a film, a film. I’m a huge sci-fi fan, so this type of film is something I will definitely find fascinating. The film is fascinating because this is what Scott envisioned for the future. Which could actually happen, with the way the climate is looking. Both Blade Runner 2049 and Blade Runner are so comparable because 2049 paints the same belief that the original did. AI is a scary thing to envision, but it’s futuristic.
Cyberpunk ideals are huge in futuristic development. Every movie after Blade Runner represents an amazing portrait of what the future could look like. Granted, the Earth would not be able to hold up such an atrocity, as all environmental structures would start to collapse. To enunciate, Blade Runner painted a beautiful image of what people would want the world to look like, but this type of ideal is unsustainable. However, pretty the purples and blues mixed with the black ambiance really are, there is no harm in recognizing that this ideal could never happen. These types of colorful ideals are my favorite part of movies, but these ideals come with everything. For reasons, unknown, humans like colorful movies. Another good example of this, is the sequel, Blade Runner 2049, where the colors and music make for such a good film.
The following scene below is where Deckard is interviewing Rachel on her “replicants”. See, a replicant is a kind of like AI that had gone rogue, and through this had become dangerous. There was an escape on an off-Earth colony, to Earth. This means that Deckard’s interview was on the basis of whether or not Rachel was a replicant. Her character is very fascinating. Replicants were designed to be just like humans, they’re not AI, but they’re fake people. Rachel is an interesting character, but just for her interest to answer these questions. She’s interesting because she believes that she has a life beyond the Tyrell Corps. What, she doesn’t know is that all memories are artificial, made by somebody with the intention to implant them into the memory of someone who is Artificial.
What makes us human? Is it Emotion that makes us human? Or, is it simply crowd behaviors? Some could argue that love is what makes us human. “Blade Runner and Cyberpunk Visions of Humanity” by W.A. Senior, pushes that ideal by explaining that, “boundaries are blurred between master and slave, hunter and hunted, hero and villain, the animate and the inanimate, the human and the nonhuman” (Francavilla 8). To explain, this just means that the difference between the human race is starting to appear fogged by reality. Humanity doesn’t seem like humanity anymore, and it’s present in various aspects of the film, Blade Runner. Scott introduces the word “Frankensteinian”, which refers to man creating itself. Themes of this run rampant in the film as we see Decard visit the Tyrell Corps building.
“Blade Runner” by James Berardinelli actually gives insight into what made the film flop. Whether it was the acting, effects, or the grittiness of the Cyberpunk aesthetic. Other people would argue that it wasn’t Star Wars. Which – at the time – was a huge film that included Blade Runner‘s protagonist, Deckard, played by Harrison Ford. Harrison Ford was quite the heartthrob of the 70’s early ’80s. Themes of morality play very vividly in each scene that plays out. It’s very obvious to see that, the non-humans do everything that normal humans can do. But, the question still stands, “are they human?”
It’s important to paint that to decipher the difference between who is a human and who is artificial becomes almost impossible to enable. While watching the original, and the sequel, it was hard to figure out the difference between the two. I feel that Berardinelli does an incredible job of not only summarizing the movie but also posing that question, as said before. What is human? And, what is not human? He explains that the film was a flop, all the while remaining to be an iconic cinema. I remember commenting on a classmate’s post, saying that not every movie needs a happy ending. Berardinelli pushes that narrative as well.
A sad part of history, that proves increased sexism in the judicial system. Just for a moment, imagine if Equal Rights was amended… Would the country change? Now, this has been an ongoing amendment. By that, I mean that people have been trying to get the amendment ratified. However, Ruth Bader Ginsburg did deny the ratification and proposed new ideas that would soon become the 14th Amendment (Equal Protection Clause). RBG was a major beneficiary in Equal Rights for All. She stood for many amazing things in Congress, as one of the only people to keep pushing for the 14th Amendment. These things are comparable to the film with the fact alone of rights. Do we give the android rights? Or, do we not? While this is nothing like human rights, it’s still something that can be similar in ways. Sexism has been a long-going issue for women, so hatred is prevalent. Much like androids within Blade Runner
While also being a film of great stature, E.T. by Steven Spielberg stands to be an amazing children’s movie, and also being an adult movie. Spielberg modeled the film off his own suburban lifestyle. All of which is reflected in how young Elliott lives his life. His parents were divorced, so he found comfort in taking care of a stranded Alien, who becomes the Extraterrestrial. To deal with his parent’s divorce, Elliott befriends an alien, who becomes his companion. Someone to be his best friend, while he deals with his parent’s divorce.
Blade Runner is such a good film for its beauties. For the fact alone that it’s gorgeous, as well as the movie representing a problem as a whole. Replicants, and their masters… What is the difference between being human, and being a robot? Of course, we will live our lives, but some people are only living the motions, not just living with it. It’s like being involved with the world, but not being in it. I’d really like to enunciate that life can be lived, and life can be enjoyed, but it’s really the people you surround yourself with that make it worth it.