fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #5565 ]

⌈ Secret Post #5565 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06. [OP warned for graphic description of genitalia]

__________________________________________________

07.

[The Lost Tomb/Daomu Biji]

__________________________________________________

08. https://i.imgur.com/bn3Esgg.png
[OP warned for anime nudity]

__________________________________________________

09. [SPOILERS for Falcon and the Winter Soldier]

__________________________________________________

10. [WARNING for discussion of child death/suicide]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #797.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I agree.
(you're not the non who doesn't like Blade Runner any more than I do, are you by any chance? That one scene. eurgh.)

Not that nonny, but I also hate that movie.

Nah, I'm the Blade Runner anon, and I'm not AYRT, but yeah, I definitely agree with AYRT.

Also, OT for this thread (sorry original anon) but, okay, the thing that infuriated me the most about that scene in Blade Runner is that I thought they were going to have Rachael very actively and deliberately initiate sex. Like, she's just been given cause to question her entire life and her entire personhood, she's in the midst of a profound existential crisis (as well as intense fear for her life), and when Deckard flops onto his bed she's looking at him with a kind of contemplative interest, and I thought she was going to initiate sex with him as a way of, like, grounding herself and asserting her personhood regardless of whether or not she's a replicant. And I was already thinking, wow, I like that; it makes emotional sense for the character; it says some things about the relationship between bodily autonomy, psychology, and personhood; it's even kind of progressive for the time!

Aaaand then it just turns into, well, that.

The opportunity to achieve the same damn ends in an actually kind of cool way was RIGHT FUCKING THERE, and they just went, "Nah, he should rape her; it's hotter."

It was a kind of standard 'romance' beat of the time.

I think... because it wasn't considered proper for a woman to be openly interested in sex? Something like that?

But romances where the guy pushes past quite a lot of explicit 'No, stop, go away' were fairly common, back in the day. In Singing in the Rain for example, or Empire Strikes Back. (With occasional female-on-male versions, like White Christmas.)

It's not a trope I enjoy - and it certainly falls flat compared to modern standards of etiquette and consent. But it's not... unique to Blade Runner, either. (I don't know if that's going to make you feel better or worse, Nonny.)

there are a lot of reasons I don't like that movie and that was the most obvious one.
(and NO, rape was not considered okay in the 80's, it was a fucked decade but not to that extent)

I always kind of felt that the scene made sense thematically for the movie, in two ways: one, it underlines that replicants are treated like objects and that this is morally wrong. Two, it underlines that Deckard is not really a hero, or is at absolute best an incredibly morally dubious hero. And those are both really important and central themes of the movie. The replicants are morally indistinguishable from human beings and are being brutally exploited and Deckard is actively working to keep them exploited using violence.

I don't know if that was actually the intent, and even if it was, it probably isn't the kind of scene that should be used to make a thematic point anyway. So it was a poor choice in that respect. But I also really do think it makes sense with the rest of the movie.

This is fair, but I just do not believe for a single second that this was the intent, and I'm someone who cares about authorial intent. I mean, if I'm in the fandom for something then I will happily disregard authorial intent, but if it's something I'm not interested in fannishly and it needs to actually stand on its own, then I care about authorial intent quite a lot. I'm not overly interested in projecting my own sensibilities onto a movie in order to interpret it in a way that doesn't piss me the hell off. You absolutely can do that; it's valid; I'm not saying it isn't. I just have no interest in doing it.

I think your position is also fair and valid! I don't care about authorial intent in almost all cases but it's totally legitimate to care about it, it's just two different perspectives.

But I just want to be clear, this isn't some reading I've adopted just to pretend a movie I like is flawless, and I don't think I'm projecting my own sensibilities onto the movie. The themes that I mentioned are what I think the movie is about in general, and they're a big part of why I like the movie. These aren't things I'm coming up with as some kind of special pleading. And I still think the scene isn't great even in the light of those themes.

[ SECRET POST #5565 ]

Re: Vent thread

Re: Vent thread

Re: Vent thread

Re: Vent thread

Re: Vent thread

Re: Vent thread

Re: Vent thread

Re: Vent thread