Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Blade Runner (Patreon)

Published:
2023-04-15 20:09:21
Imported:
2026-06
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

Full link: https://youtu.be/KFSMj_5Vx8g

I'm really self conscious about putting reactions out to things I recorded a while back, but I hope I didn't say anything wrong and you'll enjoy it :D. People seemed to be excited for this one! Would you want me to post the 2049 one too? Let me know!

Files

Previews only

Comments

Anonymous

Yes, we ALL want 2049.

Bubba Fett

Is this a repost or just one you've been sitting on a while?

fanofactionflicks

Dear Mari, thank you for this reaction, I really enjoyed it, and I absolutely would like to see you react to Blade Runner 2049.

Anonymous

I would love to see your reaction to 2049. But then again, you could make a video of you washing soap and I'd probably enjoy it.

Anonymous

Please watch 2049! You might also enjoy Ex Machina.

Anonymous
>>106454742

Not a repost. It was a request a while back from Tyler, a top tier patron.

Dave Becker

Dear Mary, I am glad that you enjoyed this movie. I agree with some of your contributors that it is somewhat slow and ponderous, but I think it has many elements of value. I have a great admiration for most of the films by Ridley Scott. All of them seem to meditations on the paradoxical nature of the human condition. One the one hand, we crave meaning in our lives and connection to others (friends, family, community). Yet, on the other hand, his films imply that such things are unreal, mere delusions on our part, and that the universe is a much colder place than we would like to believe. In Alien, the crew of the space ship is first seen slowly waking from sleep in a still, quiet oval room, almost like a womb. They think that they are almost "home", only to find themselves still in the depths of space. The ship's central computer (whom they refer to as "Mother") has awakened them, so that they can go on a kind of "suicide mission" to retrieve an alien being, in order to further the economic interests of the large corporation that employs them. They are aided by a science officer who is actually a non-human "machine", whose sympathies lie with the remorselessly vicious Alien, and who, at the behest of the completely unmaternal "Mother", betrays them to their deaths. The Alien itself accomplishes their deaths by forcing them to "give birth" to its own offspring, again shattering the illusion that the tie between parent and child is actually benevolent. In a sense, the very title of the film is a riddle; who is actually the "Alien", the "Creature or Man? It implies that the answer is that it is us, that we are "Strangers in a strange land." Blade Runner seems to contain the same themes. The humans regard themselves as superior to the Replicants, using them as slaves and limiting their lifespans. Yet the Replicants are not fundamentally different from human beings in their essential nature. They have feelings and emotions, they desire freedom, and most of all, they fear death. But the universe once again is brutal and cold. No one escapes death. Even the head of the Tyrell Corporation is killed by his "child", as his artificial owl (symbol of a dispassionate wisdom and indifference that transcends human illusions, like the owl of Minerva) looks on impassively

Dave Becker

Sorry, I hit the return button to go to a new line, but it sent the message prematurely. I am new here, and I am slow to learn new systems. It is hard to teach an old dog new tricks (and I am an old dog). Anyway, the film end with Harrison Ford's partner saying "Its a pity she won't live, but them who does?". In other words, both Humans and Replicants share the most important trait, mortality. I do apologize for the length of this comment. I hope that it does not seem overdone or over the top. If so, I am truly sorry. I just thought that I might share some of my thoughts on this film with you and your viewers. Thanks for your patience.

shaneth138

Blade Runner 2049 is also excellent. Would love to see you react to that!

shaneth138
>>106489411

Also, 2049 is by the same director as Dune and Arrival which I know you loved.

Anonymous

Whether Deckard is a replicant or not to me is a rather pointless debate. It wasn't established that he may be a replicant until the release of "Blade Runner: The Director's Cut" (1992), ten years after it came out in 1982. And the reason it's debated he's a replicant is because of the insertion of Deckard's "unicorn dream", so when Deckard finds that his detective friend Gaff leaves a piece of origami in the shape of a unicorn for Deckard to find, it's meant to indicate that Gaff is aware that Deckard has implanted memories/dreams, so Deckard MUST be a replicant. But the thing is the unicorn dream sequence wasn't even shot for the movie "Blade Runner", it was leftover footage that director Ridley Scott had from his 1985 film "Legend" (made 3 years after BR). So, I believe the idea of Deckard being a replicant was only an idea Ridley Scott had YEARS after the movie came out. So, he made his Directors Cut in 1992 by inserting that "unicorn dream" and pretended that Deckard being a replicant was his intention from the very beginning. But Deckard is clearly established as NOT being a replicant in the sequel BR 2049, since replicants only have a 4-life span (they clearly ignored the possibility in the sequel). Plus, if Deckard IS a replicant, then he's the worst one ever made. He can't shoot straight, he gets his ass kicked by everyone, he has no special abilities whatsoever to indicate he's a replicant (which makes the story inconsistent). And thematically, not sure what purpose Deckard being a replicant actually serves. It's a neat idea for a twist but what's the point? How does it serve, enhance or even change the story of the original movie? Harrison Ford played Deckard as human. Deckard was written as being cynical towards humanity and over the course of the movie he learns to be caring again with his love for Rachel. The poignancy being that he regained his humanity even if it was towards a non-human replicant like Rachel. But that character development is lost if Deckard was a replicant the whole time, indicating he was never human to begin with and thus there was no humanity for him to regain. Again, neat concept that he might be a replicant, but I don't see what story purpose it serves. The filmmakers clearly thought the same when they abandoned the idea in the sequel.

Bryan Tuck
>>106496157

Sorry to be a "well actually" guy, but according to the documentary "Dangerous Days" and other behind-the-scenes information, the unicorn dream sequence was filmed during the production of Blade Runner, though it was done very late in the schedule and some associated with the shoot assumed it was a test for the upcoming Legend. Scott did want the scene included originally, but it was nixed by the film's financiers. Harrison Ford always disagreed that Deckard was a replicant, and deliberately played him as a human... which of course is what a replicant would do. :) But seriously though, I agree that Deckard being a replicant doesn't really make sense in the larger world of the story. But that's sort of why I wish Scott had been able to get that unicorn dream in there originally. That way, it would always have been just an ambiguous suggestion, and there wouldn't have been a big deal made about it being added later. And I disagree that 2049 clearly establishes that Deckard isn't a replicant. It's left, as in the first one, as an ambiguous suggestion. But not sure if Mary's watched that one yet, so I don't want to get into spoilers. :)

Bryan Tuck

Mary - the little tune you were humming at the very beginning is from 1492: CONQUEST OF PARADISE, another Ridley Scott / Vangelis collaboration. :) (Not a good movie, but the music is very nice.)