Comparing Frankenstein And Ridley Scott's Blade Runner

1073 Words3 Pages

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) and Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner (1992) both draw upon their rapidly changing eras to contextually explore mankind’s ability to inherit hubristic ideas for forbidden knowledge. Frankenstein examines irrational behaviours and immoralities of Romantic Prometheanism within the realms of science, ideology and politics. Meanwhile, Blade Runner presents a similar cautionary tale of a dystopian future and its contemporary excess from the 1980’s era of economic hedonism. Hence both Scott and Shelley explore the loss of human morality due to a rise in technology and science in their texts.
Shelley’s Frankenstein warns the audience of how man’s desire for forbidden knowledge can lead to the loss of our morality and emotional …show more content…

The values of Scott’s context were based upon an obsession for profit, where globalisation and consumerism had reduced individuals down to a resource or a statistic. This is depicted through the characterisation of man vs machine. One of the motifs in the film is “more human than human”, expressed through the cross edited sequence of Holden interrogating Leon, where Leon is portrayed as having a greater capacity for human expression than Holden. Throughout the interrogation, Leon responds with a strong sense of curiosity, anxiety, and facial expressions that are varied. This is juxtaposed against Holden, a ruthless and un-empathic man, reinforced by his machine aids and synthetic voiceover. The idea of replicants being “more human than human” is also further indicated in the close up shot of Tyrell patting Roy’s head, similar to what a father does to his son. Tyrell’s words to Roy, “the light that burns twice as bright burns half as long […] you are the Prodigal Son […] quite the prize”, conveys oxymoronic terms as he refers to Roy as a son, yet changes this meaning to be a prize – something that he owns. The light metaphor also refers to Roy as a product, hence expressing Tyrell’s emotionless bond, or lack thereof, with his replicants, thus portraying him as a heartless and conceited creator. Thus, Scott clearly communicates …show more content…

This is based on the 1800’s Romantic ideology of nature as a divine trinity of creation. This is demonstrated by Shelley’s acknowledgement of man’s place within nature, “Sir Isaac Newton is said to have avowed that he felt like a child picking up shells beside the great and unexplored ocean of truth”. The simile and extended metaphor of knowledge as the seashell and man as mere children reflects the Romantic ideology of a great, pantheistic nature. Therefore, when Victor attends Ingolstadt, Shelley demonstrates the dangers of modern science through “penetrated nature’s secrets” and “acquired unlimited powers”. The hyperbolic description of natural philosophy undermines the relationship between man and nature as described by Newton. The corruption and misery caused by the irresponsible use of technology is evident through Victor’s earlier promise of “light” when it results in destruction. This is displayed through the change of “illumination” to “nothing but a dense and frightful darkness, penetrated by no light”. Hence, Shelley clearly validates through the fate of Frankenstein that disruption of natural order within human knowledge will only result in the destruction of

Open Document