Frankenstein and blade runner essays

The parallels of symbolism and motifs within both Frankenstein and Blade Runner reveal much of the disruption and how this disrupts ones identity. This being slavery being as one of the main reoccurring motifs within both texts. This emotive term highlights the ideas of powerlessness in the face of a higher authority inevitably causing disruption to ones identity. Although this motif may be connected to physical enslavement, within Frankenstein due to being a gothic text the perception of emotional or psychological enslavement is also developed on many levels.

In turn disrupting his identity, both creations in both texts metaphorically become enslaved, disrupting their identity due to their creations controlling their lives and decisions. Disruption and towards one identity can be seen to draw parallels between both Frankenstein and Blade Runner. The Symbolism of the serpent is also a reoccurring motif that appears in both texts.

Identity in Frankenstein and Blade Runner Part 2

The serpent is an image that is loaded with negative connotations especially with biblical allusions and overtones. This is revealed through the up-shot of Roy in a long dark coat, with dark music within the background. Through this disruption of Roys identity, it has internally disrupt Scott is trying to project of domination of commerce, capitalism and urbanisation. What also helps to understand the parallels Frankenstein and Blade Runner share through disruption and how it disrupts ones identity is also shown through each texts settings and the similarities and differences that parallel between the two.

Romanticism was where people favoured the natural world, and this appreciation for the natural world is evident within Frankenstein. This is shown through the sweeping landscapes that are stark, barren and majestic. This once natural world has been disrupted by technology, population explosions, pollution and consumerism. Due to context of the natural world within both texts this leads to the cause of disruption and how it creates this concern and possible disruption towards ones identity. The similarities and differences that are presented when looking at both Frankenstein and Blade Runner and the parallels that are seen within both texts help to gain a deeper understanding of disruption and the effect is has on ones identity.

Holistically this moment can be traced to and defined concerning the tinfoil unicorn that Deckard encounters as he exits the apartment with Rachel.

HSC Course – J.Hucknall

The always present moments of this scene provide a framework that allows for the ever-shifting nature that always for multiple readings of the film. Gaff, who serves as an image of the established authority, makes it clear to Deckard that the hunt for replicants is not quite over following the death of Batty. The saying that Gaff does utter to Deckard made one distinct but important change from script to screen.

But then again who does. This avante-scene before the ending of the established a framework and foreshadowed the atmosphere that the film will conclude with.

Essay on Comparative Study of Frankenstein and Blade Runner

The shift in this word choice is mirrored by two preceding changes that have occurred in the discourse of Blade Runner. However, as the framework looks straightforward, the actuality of the text as it occurs is contradictory to what is thought to be expected and in what ultimately comes out of it on the screen. In addition to the reference to the preface of the film, this scene before the end and its shifting in wording are like that of Frankenstein. In the progression from draft to published edition, the novel went through various changes in its tone and its language.

The usage of this particular word connotes a shared respect, or at the very least an acknowledgment, of the other as an independently functioning individual. The word being, much like the word replicant at the beginning of the text, gives the artificial life form a sense of agency and blurs preconceived notions of authenticity. The traces of these constant changes and inability to singularly identify can true aspect of authenticity culminates with the ending s of the film as they are the moment s turn towards in their analysis of the film.

The final minutes of the film are dedicated to attempting to defer the idea of closure as each film, with the exception of the TC, and complicate the notion of authority that is mangled in the discourse of Blade Runner. In those last moments, Deckard rushes home to his apartment looking for Rachel. Once that has been settled, the two of them hurry out of the apartment through the corridor to escape the impending hunt that Rachel will be subjected to.

As they move along Deckard encounters a small tinfoil unicorn sitting on the ground. This moment serves as the hinge point of the text as it is both attaching the various versions as each has this moment in their version, but it also serves as a detachment in some ways. In the ending of this version of the text, Deckard and Rachel manage to make it out of the city and are seen riding through nature, with the two of them looking at each other and hoping to enjoy their time alive together.

  1. Frankenstein and Blade Runner Comparative Analysis!
  2. discursive essay video games.
  3. Homework for me.
  4. lawyer career research paper?
  5. 2. Replicants.

This ending, however, is contradictory to the rest of the story itself as there is in fact very little adventure escapades and more philosophical murmurings about authenticity. This dialogue continues the trend of this particular version of having a lack of clear category of Deckard as human or replicant.

Anybody have Frankenstein/Blade Runner Essays? | Bored Of Studies

The final speech is as follows:. I knew it on the roof that night. We were brothers, Roy Batty and I! Combat models of the highest order. We had fought in wars not yet dreamed of… in vast nightmares still unnamed. We were the new people… Roy and me and Rachael! We were made for this world. It was ours! In the genesis of this text, the ending was in constant motion and seemingly resolved with the final two iterations DC and FC finally removing the happy ending.

This initial script moment presents the ending of BR at its infantile core as it carries with it both the seemingly happy ending and an ending that situates Deckard as a replicant and fugitive. In gaining a perspective from this earlier text, avante-text, it opens up the possibilities of interpretation as it is clear from its early stages the ending was open to both possibilities and embraced an ambiguity that was not necessarily as subtle but still present. This avante-ending presents a hybrid ending by which we usually distinguish the two major aspects of the film: a happy ending and an ambiguous ending.

The ending of the films is surrounded by the authoritative figure that dictates the way in which a text is interpreted. In this particular ending, Deckard and Rachel manage to exit the dark city of Los Angeles and enter an opposite visual image as nature they enter are filled with the pastoral land that was assumed to be destroyed in the Blade Runner world. Where the two ending speeches diverge is in the actual wording but not the meaning.

Frankenstein and Blade Runner Essay

It is possible that Deckard has created a false lie, an intentional false memory, for himself to coup with the situation at hand; he is in love with a replicant, on the run from the law, and has a long future with her. While it is true that this ending does lead the viewer more inclined to read the text as Deckard not being a replicant that only becomes more explicitly true in the aftermath of the WP leak in Fairfax, CA and the sequential releases of the DC and eventually FC.

It appears that it is often forgotten that there was about a ten-year gap between the TC and DC, but during that time numerous scholarship emerged out of the text and it became a cult hit. This elevation of the author figure causes the text to become more closed in its ability to be interpreted and in the case of Blade Runner the comments made by Ridley Scott changed the perspective of the film.

Having these comments made public has altered the fan base to follow what the desired version is. The lack of closure is something closer to the uneasy feeling that the film s seems to be prevalent throughout the film. It is this ending that is directly connected the unicorn vision as the latter influences the former. The unicorn scene only appears in the DC and FC which correlates with the ambiguous ending.

However, within these two different cuts, the unicorn scene went through drastic shifts. While Deckard lays there in his existential angst, the progression of the text takes two routes in the filmed versions; the first is to simply have Deckard miraculously have an epiphany about the photographs WP and TC or include the unicorn vision which helps give context to the decision to start examining the photos. This vision has changed in the fifteen years between DC and FC and alters the way that the ending is read without having an explicitly change in the ending.

The first unicorn vision occurs a hazy dream that fades from Deckard playing piano into an empty forest like environment where a unicorn appears. Additionally, this is only moment in the DC and FC where some sense of nature finally appears[17]. From a more philosophical position, there is no natural being as the distinction between human and replicant is constantly being blurred, particularly in the non-happy ending versions of the film. The other way in which nature does not exist is by way of the natural; nothing in the entire discourse of BR is natural.

It is not the unicorn itself which is important. The importance that Scott places on the green landscape presents a possibility of something that seems improbable in the world of BR. From all the textual evidence presented in the film s , the only way that sort of fantastical nature could be possible is away from the city or created as an image of desire. However, the green landscape that the film presents is one that is greyscaled and perhaps decaying signaling that even in the natural space the BR atmosphere, the feeling of uncertainty, remains intact. This claim creates an even larger differing among the characters and in some ways does what the text does; the claims elevate Deckard to an even higher status[19], but the text in all its progression attempts to bring Deckard to an even level with those who are considered beneath him.

In this vision, the sequence is extended and there is initially the empty forest, and the viewer can see the unicorn start to emerge from off-screen. In the second half of the vision, the unicorn continues onwards and eventually closes in on the camera before passing past the screen. The screen then shifts back to Deckard sitting there before gathering the photos for the examination.

Homework for me

The change in the way that this vision is presented creates a less ambiguous ending. Where the ending was once similar to that of a fading dream, has now become a mechanical transmission in his mind. It is as if there were a switch or activation code that forces Deckard to confront the imagined creature. Scott takes full advantage of the opportunity presented to create an artificial nature to further his cause in building the argument that Deckard is, in fact, a replicant.

This change makes the ending of the film, with the tinfoil unicorn, a more direct moment because it would mean in that instance where Deckard pauses and then nods his head would be an acknowledgment of his status as a replicant. While these two categories of endings happy ending without the unicorn and replicant ending with the unicorn are the center of most discussion regarding this film, the third ambiguous version is the WP version that lacks both the unicorn and a happy ending.

The WP maintains through its end the sense of ambiguity and confusion that surrounds the film. In this sense, the WP then is the most accurate representation from the book and the most open of the version because it requires the most rigor to make a claim. This version of the text is the most evenly authored version as there was not one specific authority figure who overshadowed itself development and release into the world.

This response by Scott invokes the inner Victor Frankenstein as a question of the uncertainty of what do to do with the creature is put forth. However, unlike Frankenstein, Scott displays a sense of joy in his creation and resonates with the confusion that it embarks. At this moment the text has become almost sentient, genetic, and retrospectively this version serves as a centering of all the texts that come before it and after it.

Within its content and form, all other versions of the texts can be traced to the WP and its demand of its viewer which includes its creators to try and discover the meaning makes it a crucial text to be examined on its and not as a supplemental work.

In this version of the text, the author intended meanings do not appear to be clear-cut as it as the others making it open to interpretation and not having a set moral agenda. In this way, it mirrors the initial version of the version of Frankenstein where there is a set moral intention is left unclear. Anne K. They are principally those of style. She claims that those small changes do not interfere with the story of the text, and she is correct in the sense that the skeleton of the plot still intact, but the tone changes the reading of Frankenstein.

With these stylistic changes in the novel now, it takes away interpretation of the audience and elevates the author.

These shift in direction were in part due to external influence, most notably the deaths of Percy and her children, as well as the reaction to her being a female writer at this time.