Fun Stuff > ENJOY
Ghostbusters, Frozen, and the strange entitlement of fan culture
Tova:
Well, I haven't seen the first one myself. :-D
I don't personally see how the addition of that dream sequence would change one's interpretation. Maybe someone could enlighten me.
It's not the key thing anyway, from my perspective. The key thing is his journey from seeing replicants as being something other than human that can be destroyed without a second thought, to being people who are ethically at least his equal if not his superior. His contempation of whether he is a replicant (initially his apparent refusal to seriously consider it) is key to this journey. Whether he actually is or not is unimportant.
sitnspin:
The irony is, the book the film is based on had the exact opposite message.
Akima:
--- Quote from: Tova on 03 Jul 2016, 23:13 ---It's not the key thing anyway, from my perspective. The key thing is his journey from seeing replicants as being something other than human that can be destroyed without a second thought, to being people who are ethically at least his equal if not his superior.
--- End quote ---
Suppose you had a character whose job was to hunt down and kill runaway slaves in the antebellum south of the USA, and the story depicted his journey from seeing them as something other than human that could be destroyed without a second thought, to realising that they were just as human and worthy of life as he. Would it really make no difference to the story if he were white or black?
This isn't a wholly satisfactory comparison, because you don't need elaborate tests to detect a skin-colour, but I think it still illustrates the point. The realisation that people like you are just as human as you, and recognising that people who are not like you are as just human as you, are not equivalent moral judgements, in my opinion. The latter requires a greater stretch of emotional imagination, and that is why I think the moral core of the film is weakened if Deckard is not human, but Ridley Scott says I'm wrong.
--- Quote ---I don't personally see how the addition of that dream sequence would change one's interpretation. Maybe someone could enlighten me.
--- End quote ---
The canonical explanation is that the dream is ties into the little origami unicorns that Gaff makes and leaves around. The implication is that Gaff knows about the unicorn dream because it is part of memories implanted into Deckard in the same way that the memories of Tyrell's niece were implanted into Rachel.
Tova:
Yes, I understand that canonical explanation.
But how anyone could fail to see that even without explicitly being shown the dream is beyond me.
Method of Madness:
--- Quote from: Akima on 04 Jul 2016, 03:47 ---Ridley Scott says I'm wrong.
--- End quote ---
That doesn't mean you are.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version