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).