From: lukas.mariman@NOSPAMgmail.com   
      
   "Ned Ludd"  schreef in bericht   
   news:LOKdncfppOFrS-jXnZ2dnUVZ_r-dnZ2d@speakeasy.net...   
   > Gnomus wrote:   
   >   
   >>>> What about Rachael -- what's she?  Deluxe pleasure?  Secretarial? Would   
   >>>> you risk falling in love with something you knew had a limited   
   >>>> shelf life?   
   >   
   > Thinking about this a little more, I think that is an important part of   
   > the story.   
   >   
   > I don't think it's a question of "risk" but that the intellect is not   
   > completely in control of our emotional beings.   
   >   
   > So, while Tyrell views her as "an experiment, nothing more" Deckard sees   
   > her as an attractive woman, with a heart and a soul, and can't shake that   
   > image, even if he knows intellectually that she was manufactured.   
   >   
   > There is evidence that Deckard has seen her file, and he knows that she   
   > does not have a set lifespan -- I think that's in the voice over at the   
   > end of the Theatrical release.   
      
   ... And this brings up the issue of what is "canon" in BR...   
      
   As far as I am concerned, the last scene from the "original", and anything   
   associated with it, is a travesty of the rest of the movie. It doesn't even   
   *belong* in BR, IMHO.   
      
      
      
   __________ Informatie van ESET NOD32 Antivirus, versie van database   
   viruskenmerken 4299 (20090802) __________   
      
   Het bericht is gecontroleerd door  ESET NOD32 Antivirus.   
      
   http://www.eset.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)