Skip to main content

blade runner - Why does Roy Batty save Deckard from falling?


At the end of Blade Runner, why does Roy Batty catch Deckard as he is about to fall?


I have always assumed that it was perhaps the realization of his own imminent demise that caused his actions. I was wondering if it has ever been discussed in Blade Runner documentaries or interviews? I have not seen it mentioned in any of the many DVD extras.



Answer



I feel there are two reasons Roy saved Deckard.


The first is that, during his final moments, Roy utters his awesome "Tears in the Rain" soliloquy, which extols the wonders of life, and despite its complexity, how utterly fleeting and transitory life is:



I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. [pause] Time to die.




Rutger Hauer, the actor playing Roy Batty, improvised that speech a bit at the last moment, cutting some of the scripted speech, and adding a bit of his own improv.


In interview with Dan Jolin, Hauer said that these final lines showed that Batty wanted to "make his mark on existence ... the robot in the final scene, by dying, shows Deckard what a real man is made of." from The Ridley Scott Encyclopedia.


Roy Batty, throughout the final confrontation, points out Deckard's failings. He breaks his fingers for Pris and Zhora, and asks Deckard "proud of yourself, little man?". He directly taunts Deckard's supposed moral highground: "Not very sporting to fire on an unarmed opponent. I thought you were supposed to be good. Aren't you the 'good' man? C'mon, Deckard. Show me what you're made of."


The first, and most obvious reason Batty spared Deckard's life is to demonstrate that he (Batty) understood the value of life, and what it meant to be "good", better than Deckard, the supposed protagonist of the story. It is one of those moments that flips the perspective of the entire narrative, and suddenly the "bad guy" is now the sympathetic victim of a system that never gave him a chance. It is, in my opinion, one of the single greatest moments in the movie, and is one of the primary reasons why I consider it a true classic.


The second reason is more subtle, and more speculative.



The original version was "lightened up" a bit by the studios. Changes made in the later Director's Cut, however, introduced hints that Deckard himself might be a replicant (the "unicorn scene", and Gaff's unicorn origami). During an interview in the 2000 BBC documentary On the Edge of 'Blade Runner', Ridley Scott confirmed that Deckard is, in fact, intended to be a replicant.



In the light of this revelation, it is conceivable that Batty knows this, and saves Deckard out of a sense of kinship (which also ties in with the moral high ground portion above).


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize Missy right away?

So after it was established that Missy is actually both the Master, and the "woman in the shop" who gave Clara the TARDIS number... ...why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize her right away? I remember the Tenth Doctor in The Sound of Drums stating that Timelords had a way of recognizing other Timelords no matter if they had regenerated. And Clara should have recognized her as well... I'm hoping for a better explanation than "Moffat screwed up", and that I actually missed something after two watchthroughs of the episode. Answer There seems to be a lot of in-canon uncertainty as to the extent to which Time Lords can recognise one another which far pre-dates Moffat's tenure. From the Time Lords page on Wikipedia : Whether or not Time Lords can recognise each other across regenerations is not made entirely clear: In The War Games, the War Chief recognises the Second Doctor despite his regeneration and it is implied that the Doctor knows him when they fir

Did the gatekeeper and the keymaster get intimate in Ghostbusters?

According to TVTropes ( usual warning, don't follow the link or you'll waste half your life in a twisty maze of content ): In Ghostbusters, it's strongly implied that Dana Barret, while possessed by Zuul the Gatekeeper, had sex with Louis Tully, who was possessed by Vinz Clortho the Keymaster (key, gate, get it?), in order to free Big Bad Gozer. In fact, a deleted scene from the movie has Venkman explicitly asking Dana if she and Louis "did it". I turned the quote into a spoiler since it contains really poor-taste joke, but the gist of it is that it's implied that as part of freeing Gozer , the two characters possessed by the Keymaster and the Gatekeeper had sex. Is there any canon confirmation or denial of this theory (canon meaning something from creators' interviews, DVD commentary, script, delete scenes etc...)? Answer The Richard Mueller novelisation and both versions of the script strongly suggest that they didn't have sex (or at the very l

the lord of the rings - Why is Gimli allowed to travel to Valinor?

Gimli was allowed to go to Valinor despite not being a ring bearer. Is this explained in detail or just with the one line "for his love for Galadriel"? Answer There's not much detail about this aside from what's said in Appendix A to Return of the King: We have heard tell that Legolas took Gimli Glóin's son with him because of their great friendship, greater than any that has been between Elf and Dwarf. If this is true, then it is strange indeed: that a Dwarf should be willing to leave Middle-earth for any love, or that the Eldar should receive him, or that the Lords of the West should permit it. But it is said that Gimli went also out of desire to see again the beauty of Galadriel; and it may be that she, being mighty among the Eldar, obtained this grace for him. More cannot be said of this matter. And Appendix B: Then Legolas built a grey ship in Ithilien, and sailed down Anduin and so over Sea; and with him, it is said, went Gimli the Dwarf . And when that sh

fan fiction - Does the Interdict of Merlin appear in original Harry Potter canon?

In Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality by Eliezer Yudkowsky a concept called the ' Interdict of Merlin ' appears: (all emphasis added) Chapter 23: His hand on the doorknob, Harry Potter already inside and waiting, wearing his cowled cloak. "The ancient first-year spells," Harry Potter said. "What did you find?" "They're no more powerful than the spells we use now." Harry Potter's fist struck a desk, hard. "Damn it. All right. My own experiment was a failure, Draco. There's something called the Interdict of Merlin -" Draco hit himself on the forehead, realizing. "- which stops anyone from getting knowledge of powerful spells out of books, even if you find and read a powerful wizard's notes they won't make sense to you, it has to go from one living mind to another. I couldn't find any powerful spells that we had the instructions for but couldn't cast. But if you can't get them out of old books,