Wlos: Blade Runner

The 1982 American film Blade Runner is an adaptation of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, a 1968 novel by Philip K. Dick.  The movie is based off of the book, but it is still very different, Philip K. Dick expressed his distaste for the movie script by saying “When I read it, I thought ‘I will move to the Soviet Unoin where I’m completely unknown. . .” (Pfeiffer 120).  Rick Deckard, a skilled and versatile figure, who is the main character in both plots is a blatant showcase of the differences between the film and movie.  It may seem as if Deckard may appear as the same person in both the film and the book, but this is scarcely true.  The fact is that the Rick Deckard of Blade Runner is considerably different from the Rick Deckard of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.  We see this through the three major points of his motivation for hunting android, his relationship with his wife, and the way in which his android hunt ended at the close of each story.

            A strong dissimilarity is observed in the motivation that Blade Runner Rick Deckard (Film Rick Deckard) and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep Rick Deckard (Book Rick Deckard) have in hunting replicants.  Book Rick Deckard is driven to hunt androids because he desires the monetary payout he will receive for doing so.  He hopes to use his reward money to advance his life into a circumstance that is more ideal for his society.  Film Rick Deckard, on the other hand, is forced to hunt for androids by a threat.  This changes the way the audience perceives the significance of Deckard’s actions.

            Another apparent asymmetry between to two Deckards is the fact that a major part of Book Rick Deckard’s character action revolves around his wife, Iran.  The absence of this type of character action in Film Rick Deckard makes him a different type of character.  The audience doesn’t see him as the man with wife problems back at home.  How does this change their perception of him as a total person?  It makes him a less busy individual.

            One of the biggest contrarieties we see between the two Deckards is the way in which their android hunt ends.  Book Rick Deckard retires all of the androids himself while Film Rick Deckard finds himself nearly killed by Roy, but then saved at the end (before Roy runs out of life and dies).  When the audience sees Film Rick Deckard’s life spared, it changes the way he is perceived.  Suddenly, he’d been given a gift, he’s lucky to be alive. 

            Although the two Rick Deckards are sharply different, similarity does exist between the two.  One obvious conformity is the fact that both Rick Deckards develop some type of deep and complicated feelings for the android Rachel.  Such an occurrence gives audience member who have studied the book and the film the notion that the two Rick Deckards are indeed like-minded.

            The plenteous differences but subtle similarities between the two Rick Deckards showcase an exaggeration of the word adaptation.  The two Deckards are not replicants of each other but are adaptations, they are similar but totally different.  When one considers the fact that Blade Runner is an adaptation of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, it makes absolute sense to think the characters would be adaptations of each other.  Rick Deckard proves this.

Andrew Wlos

Gaspari: Bladerunner Voice-overs!

In Ridley Scott's Bladerunner (1982), there is a definite sense of film noir, detective and mysterious themes. However, in the film we do not experience much mystery as from the beginning of the film we are basically introduced to the gist of what the film is about. On top of this though, we have a boring voice-over track narrated by Harrison Ford which does the film no justice. I think one of the main problems with the voice-over is that it doesn't really provide any extra element of exposition, because from the get go we see that Deckard is set out to terminate the nexus-6 replicants. In some ways this addition to the film could be useful as a tool to keep the audience from getting confused, but I think it is fairly clear the direction of the film and there are really no twists in the film. 
       

        The decision to add the voice-over track was made by the producers at Tandem Productions Inc. For some reason they thought that adding narration to the story would help increase the appeal of the film. Harrison Ford doesn't do a great job of narrating, and some even say that he intentionally did poorly to try and have the voice-over omitted from the film. In any case, the voice-over comes off as dreary and unnecessary. Although, there were some reasons that make sense as to why this voice-over was added. Bladerunner was different from other Harrison Ford films and it needed something more. “Clearly, the public was expecting another ‘feel good’ space movie with Harrison Ford cracking jokes in between blasting aliens with a ray gun. What they got was an antiseptic, downbeat detective story that apparently would not play in New York or Los Angeles, let alone those all important drive-ins in the Midwest” (Pfeiffer 124). This is one reason that the voice-over was added, poor screening results prompted the producers to make changes, and then this resulted in the subsequent voice-over

        In my opinion, the voice-over is not necessarily a complete failure, but at the same time it didn't leave a good impression on me. I think that the narration was boring and it dragged on. Although it could have helped some stay on pace, for anyone who has an idea of what the film is about no narration is necessary. 

Fisher: Blade Runner

The ending of the 1982 original theatrical release of Blade Runner has a sharp contrast with the tone set for the rest of the movie. It is easy to see that the studio, rather than director Ridley Scott or lead Harrison Ford, insisted upon shooting this separate ending. The final scene involves detective Rick Deckard “riding off into the sunset” with the android he has fallen in love with, Rachael. The setting takes place on the winding roads of some mountainous region that is colored in with green trees and blue skies. This obviously leads us to imply that they have escaped the dark, dirty metropolis that they endured on Earth and have moved to a different planet that is unaffected by whatever tragedy struck their home planet. Another sharp contrast between this final scene and the rest of the film involves the lighting. The final scene is shot in bright, sunny tones that illuminate the scenic views of the setting and bathe the frame in a warm glow. This lighting is meant to provide viewers with a feeling of hope for the future of the dilapidated world. Since Rick and Rachael can endure the hardships they have faced, then perhaps the rest of the broken people will find a way to make things work out too. However, this is a fantastical break from the entire purpose of the rest of the film. The first ¾ asks audiences to ponder the nature of their humanity and the morality of killing things that so closely resemble human beings. The darkness and constant rain, pouring in condensed and crowded streets cluttered with litter, heap on the feelings of despair. Therefore, the happy conclusion contradicts many of the plot’s pre-established themes.

Audiences did not respond well to this contrast, as Pfeiffer points out: “The film’s conclusion was the most lambasted ‘feel good’ ending since Hitchcock was forced to water down Suspicion to show Cary Grant as a hero. Audiences were no more impressed with the ‘new, improved’ Blade Runner than they had been with the original cut” (Pfeiffer 124). Producers assumed that all audiences wanted to see was a happy ending, but it should be pointed out that it may have been better to leave the film the way it was. Although advance screenings resulted in negative reviews, it perhaps would have been more conducive to release a more complete and well-rounded film that audiences did not enjoy since the subject matter left them uncomfortable as opposed to releasing a film of poor structure that attempts to soothe viewers’ unease by pandering to cliché means of enjoyment. I would be far more interested in seeing the original ending that results in “loose ends untied, and the audience had to speculate as to how the couple fared” (Pfeiffer 124).

Oria, The Unnecessary Voiceover

         After the film was done, a voiceover was added to the theatrical version of Blade Runner, which was released in 1982.  It is clear that the decision to add a voiceover was not endorsed by the director, Ridley Scott or the actor, Harrison Ford.  You can tell from Ford’s tone that he did not want to do it. It sounds forced and very monotone.  Despite his disapproval, Ford was contractually obligated to record the voiceover, (Pfeiffer, 124).  Ridley Scott clearly disproved of the voiceover since he later bought the rights to the film and made released a different version.  Producers were worried that the film would not make as much money had the voiceover not been included.  They were worried because during certain test screenings, some audience members were left confused.  Their solution to this problem: add a voiceover to clarify.  However, Ridley Scott protested stating that, “confusion was exactly what he hoped to create,” (Pfeiffer, 124).

         Personally, I feel as though the voiceover distracted the audience from the meaning of the film.  The forced voiceover did not contribute much to the overall meaning of the film.  I may feel this way because the first time I watched Blade Runner, it was a version without the voiceover.  After watching the 1982 version of the film with the voiceover, it felt as though someone had invaded it and added a foreign entity; an entity that did not belong in the film. 

         The voiceover acts as the main character, Rick Deckard, inner thoughts.  It also serves as a statement of the obvious.  Producers were worried that audiences would not understand the film unless they were told directly what was happening.  This can be seen at the end of the film after Roy saves Deckard’s life: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJzIT6fQ3OU

         Roy has just given an eloquent speech about his life and everything that he would be leaving behind.  From this example, the voice over points out to the viewer everything that has just happened.  It restates that Roy has just died and that he saved Deckard’s life.  This is a moment that would have worked better without the voiceover. 

         Another moment that would have been better without the voiceover was at the very end.  As Deckard and Rachel are driving off to start their new life elsewhere, Ford’s voice can be heard once again stating the obvious. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fCeH-WnJYM

         Again, another moment is ruined by a tacked on voiceover.  In actuality, the film could have ended the moment that Rachel and Deckard entered the elevator.  However, this ending still would have worked better without the voiceover.

         The examples above prove that the voiceover was more of a distraction from the film as opposed to a benefit.  I feel as though the message of the film is clear, considering I watched it for the first time without the voiceover and understood it perfectly.  It was not effective in conveying the thematic message of the film.  At the same time however, I suppose it does help to support certain ideas by repeating the action of the film. 

Miller: Who is Rick Deckard?

Michael D. Miller

Blade Runner Blog

Who is Rick Deckard?

Discuss three ways in which the Rick Deckard of Blade Runner, 1982, is different from the character in Philip K. Dick's novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Then discuss at least one way in which they are alike.

Rick Deckard in the book, “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” is married, chooses to be a bounty hunter, and is fully ensconced in Mercerism.  Whereas, in the film Rick Deckard is not married, is forced into becoming a Blade Runner, and virtually has no affiliation to any religious ideology.

In the book, “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” Rick Deckard is married to Iran, a woman who seems to be succumbing to the drudgery of life after World War Terminus. The idea of Rick being married lends to his human side. A man who is married has the ability to love and care for another human just as much as himself, which many would consider a human quality.  In the book, she comes across as unhappy with her current life situation, depressed, and is happy to share her depression with her husband. Iran make a number of comments that seem to undercut Rick’s profession, claiming that he is a murderer working for the police department instead of retiring malfunctioning androids. Rick is tolerant and growing weary of Iran’s mood but still seeks to mend their relationship.

Rick Deckard chooses to be a bounty hunter for monetary gain. He is searching for his identity. One way he is doing this is by searching for a real, live animal to connect with. He feels that he is losing his ability to empathize with humanity; therefore he is continuously searching for an animal to keep him connected with his emotions. The book also postulates that the ownership of a real, live animal is one afforded to those of privilege, a sign of status. However, Deckard chooses to be a bounty hunter in order to earn enough money to buy the real animal. By doing so, Rick believes that this will also rekindle his relationship with Iran.

Rick Deckard is connected to the religion of Mercerism the dominant religion of the day. The fictional religion headed by the cult figure, Wilbur Mercer. Humans can connect to Mercer through the use of the empathy box, which in a way inserts the user into the scene with Wilbur Mercer where the user experiences what Mercer experiences. By doing so, the human senses the thoughts and feelings of other users therefore connecting the collective through Mercer.

            In the film Blade Runner (1982), Rick Deckard is a single man living alone in an apartment. This fact tends to give the impression that Deckard is driven by his work and has little time for anyone else in his life. However, he connects with Rachael, a known replicant. “The moral dilemma is made worse when he falls in love with one of his targets—Rachael—and android so indistinguishable from an actual person that she possesses an artificial memory and real emotions” (Pfeiffer 121).  By the end of the film, he and Rachael run off together presumably to live happily ever after.

            Rick Deckard is forced to return to his former profession as a Blade Runner. He is picked up at a local restaurant and brought back to meet with Bryant who tells him, “Either you’re a cop or you’re little people?” He replies, “No choice.” Deckard is the best at what he does and the challenge of locating, testing, and destroying the renegade replicants is no easy task. Deckard may also be feeling a sense of revenge for the Holden being severely injured by the replicant Leon.

            The film also seems to conveniently omit everything that is Mercerism or any religious ideology. The religious aspect of the book is not even mentioned in the film. There is, however, a development of the theme of empathy in the film. This is accomplished through other means. Rachael saves Rick’s life when she shoots and kills Leon on the street. Leon and Rick are fighting and it appears that Rick is about to die, when suddenly Leon’s head explodes and the camera pans over to show Rachael holding a laser gun. Additionally, on the rooftop, when Rick and Roy are engaged in the final showdown, rick leaps to a neighboring roof and does not quite make it. He is slowly losing his grip when Roy leaps to the same rooftop and watches Rick struggle to regain his grip. At the last moment, Rick slips and Roy reaches out and saves Rick from falling to his death. Both of these instances certainly display a form of empathy on the part of the replicants, which replicants were believed to be devoid of throughout the film, thus making them sub-human.   

O'Connell: Blade Runner (1982) Blog

The Hollywood interpretation of Rick Deckard we see in Blade Runner (1982) presents us with a gruff noir hero who appears vastly different from the original novel’s contemplative and alienated and main character, struggling to resolve mixed feelings about his way of life. In Blade Runner, Deckard is something of a loner. He is unmarried, lives alone, and does not appear to have permanent employment, whereas Rick in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is fully attached, living with his wife and receiving a salary from the police department. However, Iran is apathetic if not cold to him, and his position as a bounty hunter is extremely low ranking in the police department. Both characters are somewhat alienated, but the contrast of the latter’s inhospitable way of life is a better illustration of his growing despondency than the former’s simple lack of attachment.

The book’s Rick is nearly extremely interested in animals, and his lust for both the therapeutic compassion of animal husbandry as well as the social status brought about by the ownership of an organic animal is nearly obsessive, as he even carries his Sidney’s guide on his person at all times. His consumerist desire drives many of his actions, most notably his monetary compensation for the retirement of the Nexus 6 androids. The film version of Deckard makes no mention of animals, electric or organic, nor is any type of compensation for his mission mentioned explicitly. While it’s certainly probable that he does receive payment, the simple fact that it’s not mentioned nearly eliminates the idea as motivation for his actions.

While his love affair with Rachael is complex and fluctuating in the novel, with multiple intricacies and questions left open, Deckard’s relationship with her in the film is as clean-cut as a fairytale romance. While the novel’s Rick does confess love for Rachael at first, he’s also driven to anger and murderous desire to retire her when he learns that she was employed to sleep with many bounty hunters in effort to keep them from killing more androids. The same blurred line between killing a sentient being and retiring a piece of machinery is calling into question for Rick whether his affair is true unfaithfulness to his wife with another human, or inconsequential masturbation with a machine. The film has none of these questions to their relationship.

While it’s easy to pick out the ways in which the film has fallen short of the book’s complexity, Blade Runner retained the main character’s most obvious struggle. Pfeiffer’s synopsis of the original script states: “The plot would focus on Deckard’s increasing aversion to killing these superpowerful robots or replicants. [...] Deckard’s problem is in identifying the replicants and resisting the urge to treat them with the same compassion one might extend to a human being.” (Pfeiffer 120) Though much was omitted, the film adaptation portrays Deckard’s inner turmoil and questioning appropriately, which was certainly just as much of a focus in the novel as well.

Carter: Blade Runner Blog

The Blade Runner (1982) film was produced with a voice over track because the producers of the movie didn't believe that the audience would be able to follow along with the movie. The voice over sets up the scenes and fills in any wrong interpretations the audience may developed from what the directors wanted to convey. The voice over also explains the thought of Deckard's while he questions the androids and the way he interprets the various statements made towards him. The voice over doesn’t really have a positive affect on the film in my opinion, the voice over just becomes annoying and confusing throughout sections of the movie. The thematic message of the film is clearly stated though, at the end of the movie, the thoughts of Deckard. Deckard questions the true meaning of life, comparing his beliefs to the ones of the replicants and Roy Batty's conversation at the end of the movie. The narrating of the movie is effective in telling the audience what the author was aiming to do, without it I do believe the audience would be loss. The reason being is that the movie wasn't done very well, this is the reason for the Director's cut being released short afterwards. The thematic message of the film slightly differed from the book but still followed the theme of the book very loosely.