From: darth.vader@empire.gov   
      
   "Ned Ludd"  schreef in bericht   
   news:6IadnfswvKTnv3janZ2dnUVZ_tajnZ2d@speakeasy.net...   
   > me@privacy.net wrote:   
   >   
   >> The reason I posted in this particular thread was that I finally got   
   >> around to watching Disc 4 of the set, and all the interviews.  Up until   
   >> that point, I had no particular opinion of Deckard's humanity or not.   
   >> Ridley Scott's proclamation that he WAS a replicant finalized the   
   >> argument for me.   
   >   
   > .... and I'm supremely disappointed by his declaration.   
   >   
   > If Deckard is human, then you've got the replicants showing more humanity   
   > than Deckard -- who is basically tired.  Tired of his life, tired of his   
   > work, tired of society.  He sees the replicants (especially Rachael) as   
   > living and vibrant, and he's tired of society telling him that they're   
   > machines, and malfunctioning machines at that.   
   >   
   > If Deckard is maybe-human, maybe-not, there is a whole range of "what is   
   > humanity" questions that are maybe a little too obvious.   
   >   
   > If he's a replicant, that's actually the least interesting of the three.   
   > You get the same "what is humanity" questions in all three possibilities.   
   >   
   > But mostly, making a definitive statement on Deckard's origin eliminates   
   > two of the three possibilities.   
   >   
   > It makes the discussion smaller.   
   >   
   > ... on the positive side, it does let us question Ridley Scott's sanity. I   
   > have no idea why he'd want to make this masterpiece smaller.   
      
   What do you mean? He ALWAYS intended for this deck-a-rep subtext. Whether   
   you want to pick up on that or not does not make BR any more or less   
   brilliant, IMHO.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)