Films/DVD Asylum

Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

RE: 'Blade Runner'

Posted by user510 on December 21, 2010 at 18:52:47:
agreed. The movie is more accessible than the novel.

I recently read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" by P.K.Dick. In some ways it seemed to add clarity to watching the film. The novel gave explanation for the Earth/city environment and conditions that the movie does not, but rather presumes we already know.....or doesn't care if we know.

For instance, in the Movie you see the robotic (Replicant) Owl fly across the room in the dimly lit Tyrell Corp. In the novel we learn that there has been a dying out of almost all animal life on the planet, hence the yearning for "Replicant" versions of animals as pets. These become status symbols for their owners. And it is the Tyrell Corp that produces the Replicants. But the movie fails to mention this precondition. It merely shows a replicant owl flying across the room. Then Deckard asks Rachel if it is real. That's an early clue, I guess.

Roy Baty in the movie is a much more fearsome replicant than in the novel. And so on.

In the end I felt that the novel, interesting as it was in its concepts, is not exactly a page burner. I attribute this to Dick's narrative skills.

Still. There was enough content in both the movie and the novel to interest me.

-Steve