Blade Runner

The heart of Blade Runner (1982) for me is the scene where Roy Batty, one of the Nexus 6 replicants, is about to die. He has spent the entire film trying to find a way to prevent his death, which has been programmed to occur four years after the date of his creation, his "incept date." Batty tells Rick Deckard what is going to be lost when he dies—all his memories, everything he has experienced, all the sights he has seen, "like tears in the rain." The words may seem corny, but the scene as a whole is moving, especially given that Deckard has fallen in love with Rachael, another replicant, and even more so since the film plants various clues suggesting that Deckard himself may be a replicant.

Blade Runner celebrates human life. It does so by its focus on a group of human-like replicants who are as self-aware and intelligent as the humans who created them. Only by a careful test can a replicant be distinguished from a human. Replicants fall in love with each other and, in one case, with another human. They feel emotion (though they are not supposed to). They are also programmed to die. They want desperately to live. Ultimately they emerge from the film as more human than any of the other characters. The character of Roy Batty, who quotes Milton, is truly tragic and heroic.

In a genre that often resorts to explosions and rocket ships and juvenility, Blade Runner is remarkable exception. It's an intelligent film that considers a number of serious issues—globalization, hyper-capitalism, pollution, multiethnic America, ethnicity, technology, bioengineering, and what it means to be human. It considers these themes in a way that is woven smoothly into the story—one never feels preached to, though in Roy Batty's final scene it is difficult not to get the painful point. The fine performances by Harrison Ford, Sean Young, and Rutger Hauer strengthen the overall presentation.

Blade Runner is one of my favorite films. It's highly imaginative. The characterizations are fully developed, the acting is excellent, and it's in a rare and small group of films that are truly visionary. It's especially interesting to see how the film conflates the 1930s era film noir elements with a 2019 science fiction setting.

Obviously, made in 1982, Blade Runner does not benefit from the special effects technology of 2007. But for the most part the effects are adequate. This film is slow and moody and murky. The Vangelis score is dated, yet effective. Even in 1982, I would have argued that the film was set at a time in the future (2019) too close to the present day. This is even more obvious now in 2007, only 12 years away from the time when the film is supposed to take place. Too much would have to happen between now and then for the film's setting to offer a plausible prediction of what the future may be. A date several centuries more advanced would be better.

Blade Runner has been released on DVD in at least two versions, the original commercial version of the film with the Harrison Ford voiceover narration, and the "Director's Cut" version with the voiceover removed and some scenes and edits restored. In the fall of 2007, "Ridley Scott's Blade Runner: The Final Cut" will be released to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the movie. It will include restored scenes and will presumably be the last version of the film to be released. This version may make more explicit the suggestions in the earlier versions that Rick Deckard may be a replicant (director Ridley Scott confirmed several years ago that Deckard is indeed a replicant), and may make more explicit what happens at the end of the film when Deckard and Rachael leave together.

Being more explicit could be a mistake. One of the most impressive aspects of the film as we have it now is its allusiveness, its ambiguity—it hints at and suggests a lot of possibilities without making them explicit. It convinces us that it is showing a world that extends far beyond the boundaries of the film itself. Two examples: earth is being evacuated, and only the unhealthy and the less privileged are left behind. Why earth is being evacuated is never explained, though the pollution that pervades the world may be part of the reason. American society is clearly in dystopic decline. We can infer or speculate about the evacuation but cannot know much about what lies behind it. In addition, Blade Runner makes a number of references to replicant animals. If you pay careful attention to some of the scenes and to comments some of the characters make, you realize that animals are highly valued and that real animals are in short supply. Again, the film barely hints at these facts. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, by Philip K. Dick, the source novel for this film, explains more about the rarity of animals and the reasons why the earth is being evacuated. I'm not sure the explanation in Blade Runner is needed.

Frankly, I don't like the notion that Deckard may be a replicant. The film's message about what it means to be alive and conscious would be far more poignant if delivered by a replicant to a human. If Deckard is a replicant, then the impact of the final scene is reduced. In that scene, the replicant who has been the target of the blade runner's assignment to "retire" him is given a message about the meaning of consciousness and existence. That's a message one would expect humans to teach to replicants. If one replicant is teaching another replicant, then the poignancy and irony fall away.

In the forthcoming final version, I hope director Scott is careful to remain true to his original tone and intent. He has made a number of statements about the film that may or may not be genuine. Fans have speculated at great length as to whether Deckard is a replicant. There are certainly clues in the film suggesting that he is. But there are ample reasons to believe he is not. Did Ridley Scott mean to suggest this in his original film, leaving the possibility unresolved? Do we take at face value his comment that Deckard is really a replicant, or was he bowing to fan pressure. Is he going to re-conceive the film, or simply try to present a fully realized version of his original intent. I hope the latter. Ambiguity and uncertainty can be far more powerful than concrete facts and realities.