BladeZone's Off World Forums

seamless as in you would never know it was a different track.

imagine a DVD was split up into chapters like this

1 2 3 4 5 6

and that a special edition clip was inserted between 3 and 4

1 2 3 extra-track 4 5 6

no, to confuse you further.. the extra track/special edition clip was a fade or dissolve to the new added scene, therefore this would have to alter scene 3 (because it dissolves into this new track). so what you actually get is a the following

<-----------------------new track called 3a ------------------------->

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 dissolve extra extra extra dissolve 4 4 4 4 4 4

so, if you select special edition, you get this track list

1 2 3a 5 6 7 (wereby 3a is 3+extra+4)

hope that helped.

David Dryer created fifteen faux commercials to be used as background videos or advertising billboards. Some they used...most not used. It would be great to add them to the "extras" disc.

You mean discs.... :wink:

I hope. As long as its at least four discs.

I was going to create a separate thread for this. But, it is more appropriate here, even though it is too lat. BUT...that said...

I've been writing. What I'm currently writing has to do with the "rape" scene between Deckard and Rachael. Whenever I show this movie to a new viewer, I feel very uncomfortable with that scene, and feel I have to explain the scene's intent.

My "wish" would be for this scene to be edited so that it can not be perceived as a rape. After all it was not written so. In my opinion, it was a combination of Ford's poor interpretive acting, Scott's directing, and the editing. It is my understanding that the scene was actually longer than is presented. And, some of the dialogue removed/altered.

I'd recommend removing that scene...but Vangelis did such a great job with sequencing a most beautiful piece of work to it.

I don't mean to cause a stir amongst us over such a controversial subject...but it came up in my writing, and had been in the back of my head for quite some time. I just hope that, in the "Final Cut", it had been modified some.

Wishful thinking.

The scene works if you see it as two replicants who have never experienced the emotion of love first-hand before. Deckard's natural tendency is to basically be a cop...dominate the situation, never be vulnerable, never allow the other guy to have the upper hand. Raechel's natural tendency is to withdraw, either behind a cold exterior or physically flee an unknown or threatening situation. Both are feeling something they never have felt before genuinely. They have "tapes" in their head from other people's memories of what love is. But they have never really FELT it. So they deal with it awkwardly, to say the least.

I think that this is what you actually see in that scene. It doesn't make it any less disturbing...it's awfully close to rape. However, it's necessary to the story, and it's not gratuitous.

It can only be considered rape in the most politically correct interpretation. Especially since he didn't force sex on her, he forced her to deal with her emotions which she was afraid of. You also have to remember she was a wanted escaped replicant now that would surely be killed if she left his apartment. She felt like she had lost her whole identity and felt worthless enough to choose death. In that scene he 'forced' her to see her feelings and herself as real again.

Also most women who have watched that scene with me have said it was very "hot". It is actually kind of primal and truly sexually experianced people understand this. The awkwardness also works to keep the scene from being cliche'd. It seems to be a technique that Ridley used a lot in his early work.

I am okay with the scene being 'uncomfortable'. It works well in the context of the movie and adds to the tension. The fact that this movie still challenges us after all these years is a good thing in my book. Changing that scene would in fact be the equivelant of the "Greedo shooting first" syndrome. That would be a crime.

All due respect to Kipple (which is a great deal), I?m definitely with msgeek and ridleynoir on this topic & respectfully disagree with the ?rape? interpretation of this scene ? it?s not rape if the person being approached says ?no? repeatedly and insistently, which Rachel definitely does not do ? she acquiesces to his advances, and eventually even tells Deckard ?put your hands on me? entirely of her own volition. Obviously, Deckard?s rough/macho romantic approach or technique is very un-P.C., not to mention totally un-Cary-Grant-esque, and sure, some might find it in bad taste. Still, given the stated 'evidence,' I?ve no idea how this scene would possibly be construed as ?rape? in a court of law. What the scene is about is (replicant or not) Deckard?s breaking down Rachel?s mental and emotional barriers, and helping her to get in touch with her ?human? (or ?more human than human?) feelings and sensations.

But Kipple brings up a good point, and I personally think the scene is dramatically one of the strongest scenes in the entire movie because it *is* uncomfortable for a lot of reasons (even if Rutger Hauer tried to trivialize it in the ?On the Edge of BR? doc as Ford?s ?f*cking a dishwasher?; going by that interpretation, Hauer?s Roy was also just another lumpen dishwasher who was dating yet another dishwasher in the movie as well).

I think the scene totally succeeds at getting at the main question at the heart of the movie: what does it mean to be human? If an artificially-genetically-created individual resembling a human being that is not truly ?born of woman? exists as an adult, what emotions and sensual experiences are they capable of? Is it replicants' right to have access to experiencing emotions and sensual experiences that human beings do? Furthermore, what other rights do replicants have, or should they have ? any? None? The movie doesn?t offer all the answers to these questions (nor should it), but in asking these questions, it makes for genuinely thought-provoking adult entertainment.

(I also definitely think one of the more disturbing and compelling elements of the movie is its labeling of Pris as ?a standard pleasure unit for off-world colonies? ? i.e., many female replicants are being created solely for sexual servicing of off-world human workers, and without any rights of their own. Who knows what Pris, Zhora, and other female replicants have had to endure in the off-world colonies, where they are basically part of an industry of sexual slavery?)

Like all of Philip K. Dick?s stories, BR isn?t G or PG-themed Disney material; it deals with darker, ambiguous and contradictory issues, and is probably most appreciated by people who like their sci-fi more adult, complex, challenging and ?uncomfortable? in nature. So (again, with all due respect to kipple) to suggest re-editing this particular scene in order to make it a less uncomfortable experience for the audience honestly leaves me feeling far more uncomfortable than anything in the movie itself.

Ahem, a small but very important correction to my last post above:

It?s not rape if the person being approached *doesn't* say ?no? repeatedly and insistently, which Rachel definitely does not do.

(My sincere apologies for giving anyone the wrong ideas.)

I had an issue with this scene, because it was quite edgy in an un-romantic way from my perspective.

msgeek's well spotted observations place a new light on it for me though.
(Following msgeek's tone) If Deckard is a Replicant, how sophisticated a being is he to be able to process intense emotions as passion and anger? The romance between the two comes off as clumsy, at least how I perceive it.

As do many real life Romances.

Note: here there be SPOILERS wrt the Enhancement Archive/Deleted Scenes version of Blade Runner...




You have been warned...




Come not further lest ye be spoil'd...




Here we go:

The second conversation between Deckard and Holden actually has Holden making a similar comparison. He thinks that Deckard had his way with Zhora before retiring her. And then there is a cut, and you see the image of Holden and Deckard talking in his hospital room, and it's on a monitor being watched by Inspector Bryant. Holden talks about Deckard "frakking a washing machine" and Bryant muses about it himself as he watches the proceedings from the surveillance camera.

You almost wish it made it to the Final Cut because it really does point out the species-ist way people think of Replicants in the world of 2019. They aren't human, they are meat robots. Therefore they are beneath the status of human and can be exploited without thinking of their being thinking, breathing beings (sapients, sophonts) and their rights. Regardless of where you are on the Deck-A-Rep continuum, part of Deckard's evolution as a character comes when he ceases to look at the Replicants as meat robots, and sees them as fellow living beings. Arguably this process had started even before we meet him, because this unease is what makes him quit in the first place.

(note: changed because of lame forum code de-cusser)

hehe this really made me laugh. The conversation would have been a little too rough for the film.

Really? To me, the whole film has this certain roughness to it.