# Movies that when they ended you went "Whaaaaat?" **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 12, 2014, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612 "2014-01-12T21:46:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Face\_Intentionally\_Left\_Blank](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/face_intentionally_left_blank/32/288_2.png) [@Face\_Intentionally\_Left\_Blank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Face_Intentionally_Left_Blank)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 11:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/121 "2014-01-22T11:07:07Z")
> [@Justin\_Bailey](#): > > Harrison Ford says it was an accident: Try as I might, I’ve never seen the eye glow of Deckard, though so many say it’s there I’m compelled to believe it. Wait, it’s probably on Youtube. Yup. https://www.youtube.com/embed/4Js1Uwv5q1s?feature=oembed&wmode=opaque Holy crap, THAT is the big clue? Ford probably leaned too much into the light! I’m very inclined to believe Ford’s story. Worse accidents have made it onto film - I recall that in the theaters, The Lord of the Rings had a scene where a car was driving in the distance(subsequently removed in DVD release, of course). It’s also possible that Scott put that there to toy with us, or to further blur the line between humans and replicants, but I think I’ll chalk it up to accident. I will never accept the “Deckard is a replicant” theory. It ruins the comparison between the weary, disinterested, dead-eyed human Blade Runner, and the energetic, questioning, questing replicants. One is human, but the replicants act more human. True, the replicants are amoral, but then the Blade Runner shoots an unarmed, nearly-naked replicant in the back and shakes down a bar owner for free drinks. Making Deckard a replicant simply makes it a lesser movie. Perhaps Scott wasn’t entirely sure which way he was going to go (replicant or not) when he filmed it, and so he filmed some things to leave his options open. At first, he went human, but in subsequent versions he Lucas’ed it into Deckard as a Replicant. Given my intense disrespect for Prometheus, I think I’ll take the younger Scott’s work over his revisionism. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/122 "2014-01-22T11:27:32Z")
> [@Reepicheep](#): > > I am stunned no one has mentioned **Being John Malkovich**. Yes the movie was whacked, but the end was totally out of left field. Was it? It was set up earlier in the film. I mean, the whole film is bizarre but it was _consistently_ bizarre. ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/123 "2014-01-22T15:28:39Z")
I spent the whole of GodSpell waiting for them to quit farting around and get on with the story. I was still waiting when the credits rolled. Mind you, I was still in middle school at the time, and had no religious background to clue me in to the story. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/124 "2014-01-22T16:05:15Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > 'Kay. > > Dream sequence; unicorn? A half-dozen bits of cryptic comments aimed at Deckard? No. For good or bad, I take RS’s word that he intended Deckard to be a replicant. Whatever tweaks he put in the Director’s Cut, all that material was scripted and shot at the time and much of it appears in the original cuts. There was not a suggest, not a word, from anyone associated with the film that Deckard was a replicant when the film came out. Not even from Scott himself, who you’d think would want to make sure people got the point. I subscribed to _Cinefantastastique_ and other genre film mags at the time. There was a complete silence about this not only at the time, but for years and years afterwards. Scott never said “I was always disappointed that p[eople didn’t realize Deckard was a replicant” or “Deckard was a replicant, you know” in interviews or anything until relativelty recently. It’s impossible for me to believe that this was an original intention, unicorn or no. And, as others have pointed out, it messes with the whole “Roty Batty becoming more human as Deckard becomes more repolicant-like” symmetry. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/125 "2014-01-22T16:10:09Z")
I’m quite familiar with all the arguments, Cal, and it’s fairly long consideration that brings me down on the “Deckard is [supposed to be] a replicant” side. Forget the rest: Explain the unicorn dream/origami in any other terms. All of that was scripted and shot at the time, no retconning or senility on Scott’s part involved. What possible explanation is there except that Gaff knew his dream? ---
**Author:** ![Dale\_Sams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/779978/32.png) [@Dale\_Sams](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dale_Sams)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/126 "2014-01-22T18:09:45Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > I’m quite familiar with all the arguments, Cal, and it’s fairly long consideration that brings me down on the “Deckard is [supposed to be] a replicant” side. > > Forget the rest: Explain the unicorn dream/origami in any other terms. All of that was scripted and shot at the time, no retconning or senility on Scott’s part involved. What possible explanation is there except that Gaff knew his dream? At the time, I just tuned out the unicorn dream and took the origami to mean, “You know she’s not real.” I have no horse in this race at all, and can see both sides POV. ---
**Author:** ![Justin\_Bailey](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/justin_bailey/32/8792_2.png) [@Justin\_Bailey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justin_Bailey)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/127 "2014-01-22T18:44:19Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > Forget the rest: Explain the unicorn dream/origami in any other terms. All of that was scripted and shot at the time, no retconning or senility on Scott’s part involved. What possible explanation is there except that Gaff knew his dream? The dream is simple. Deckard has replicants on the brain, so when he sleeps, he questions whether he himself is a replicant because he feels dead inside. Dreams don’t have to make sense and if dreaming about a unicorn is the only qualification then EVERYBODY is a replicant. As for the origami, Gaff is just fucking with Deckard. A calling card to say, “You take her with you, someone (maybe even me) will be coming for you.” ---
**Author:** ![GargoyleWB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gargoylewb/32/199_2.png) [@GargoyleWB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GargoyleWB)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/128 "2014-01-22T19:15:28Z")
> [@Dale\_Sams](#): > > I’ll take the word of a lot of people that it’s good, and i’ll see it someday, but man…those trailers did nothing to pique my interest. I’m very interested in astronauts in space danger (see Apollo 13). Sandra Bullock and George Clooney in space isn’t quite as interesting. > > Hopefully the meaning of that came across. My feeling (saw it in 3D IMAX) is that it was a stunning technology demo with a bare-bones simple plot. However, Bullock and Clooney did a superb job of convincing acting in a green-screened cgi world that elevated the movie greatly. So many others (Star Wars sequels, Sky Captain, Last Airbender) fall completely on their face due to unconvincing acting in their virtual sets. So I’d agree with Oscars for Director, Actress, Cinematography, but not for Screenplay. ---
**Author:** ![nearwildheaven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90db22/32.png) [@nearwildheaven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nearwildheaven)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/129 "2014-01-22T19:29:00Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > _Safety Not Guaranteed_. The ending wasn’t totally unpredicted, but I was shocked they actually went there. For me, that could be classified as “one of the worst movies I actually finished”. A 38-year-old man who’s obsessed about his co-workers’ virginity status? Really? :smack: ---
**Author:** ![GargoyleWB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gargoylewb/32/199_2.png) [@GargoyleWB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GargoyleWB)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/130 "2014-01-22T19:29:59Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > There was not a suggest, not a word… I second Cal’s memory, as I also scrabbled for every bit of pre/post production in every magazine that it appeared. I’m firmly in the “not a replicant” camp. Gaff’s unicorn was simply a “you’re chasing a fantasy” message to Deckard, just as his stick-boner guy was a “you’re thinking with your dick” message. The unicorn as a supposed false memory makes no sense anyway, if Deckard was having flashbacks of unicorn memories (if intended as an experienced memory) then he would have questioned his own humanity long ago. “Doc, I saw a real unicorn once, I know it sounds crazy but…”. If it is supposedly an implanted dream or memory of a dream, that is equally ridiculous as it would imply a whole set of other artificial dreams (naked in the classroom, falling off a cliff, forgot locker combination, missed the final lecture exam, chased by a clown, etc) had to also be deliberately implanted. Ridley simply had the opportunity to reuse cutting-room footage from Legend and screw with his past project in a “Greedo shot first” revisionism. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/131 "2014-01-22T20:30:09Z")
So the unicorn dream and the unicorn origami are completely unrelated? Okay. Let’s say the dream could have been about anything at all. Anything. Why a unicorn running through a forest, a rather difficult thing to shoot compared to some murky sex-ish stuff in a dark corner of the soundstage, or some semi-meaningful collage of re-used footage? Why insert that strange, brief dream sequence at all? Why a unicorn origami? If the chicken and the dick-man were so meaningful, what does the unicorn mean in that closing context? Not “what does some random origami telling Deckard Gaff was there but didn’t do anything” but what does the odd match of a unicorn mean? I won’t argue that Scott didn’t tinker with the film for the later cuts - but these are elements in the original. Why? ---
**Author:** ![Justin\_Bailey](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/justin_bailey/32/8792_2.png) [@Justin\_Bailey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justin_Bailey)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/132 "2014-01-22T20:45:12Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > Why a unicorn origami? If the chicken and the dick-man were so meaningful, what does the unicorn mean in that closing context? Not “what does some random origami telling Deckard Gaff was there but didn’t do anything” but what does the odd match of a unicorn mean? Deckard knows that Rachel’s memories have been implanted. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that Blade Runners would know about the implanted memories that Tyrell uses? Again, I think the origami is a message. “I know what you did and I’m coming.” ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/133 "2014-01-22T21:02:34Z")
> [@Justin\_Bailey](#): > > Deckard knows that Rachel’s memories have been implanted. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that Blade Runners would know about the implanted memories that Tyrell uses? Not as far as I can reason. There’s no indication that Deckard or any other Blade Runner is meant to be a Terminator - a single-purpose Retirement machine. If Deckard is a replicant, he has to be able to move and live in human society even though replicants are illegal on earth. Thus he would be given a mix of memories; those that let him function as human but additional information that make him an effective hunter. I take the discussion between Deckard and the chief to be the first time they’ve ever actually met - Deckard’s “memory” is that he used to be a Blade Runner but quit. He was taken out of storage, or built, or reprogrammed, specifically to solve the problem of the six escaped Nexus 6’s. I don’t see “Deckard as a replicant” as some tacked-on fanjizz, even if it originated with Scott. It’s in the novel (although resolved differently) and the story can be interpreted that way without distorting anything. > [@](#): > > Again, I think the origami is a message. “I know what you did and I’m coming.” No argument. But it could have been ANY origami. Why a unicorn - there and in the dream? And why the dream at all? ---
**Author:** ![AHunter3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahunter3/32/368_2.png) [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/134 "2014-01-22T22:37:04Z")
_Contact_, if I’m allowed to count the entire last act or scene as “the ending”. NOTE: I grew up on science fiction, so extraterrestrial intelligence (aka space aliens) was a mainstream concept. But it wasn’t intermixed with theology or semi-theological notions wherein the belief in ETs was somehow akin to faith in things you could never prove. I came in expecting a cerebral thriller and, furthermore, the 1st half ++ of the movie, with Jodie Foster as marginalized outsider-scientist, set me up to expect a strong female hero who establishes interplanetary contact and proves her case and changes the scientific landscape and so on. What? The? Fuck? [Here’s](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=3765035&postcount=27) a summary of my reaction from 11-12 years ago. Definitely two and a half hours of my life that I want back. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/135 "2014-01-22T22:40:20Z")
> [@Justin\_Bailey](#): > > Again, I think the origami is a message. “I know what you did and I’m coming.” Actually, argument - you got that backwards. The message is, “I could have killed her (and maybe you), but here’s your head start, because…” something something about being a real stand-up robot. Android. Replicant. Guy. Whatever. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/136 "2014-01-22T23:41:30Z")
“I could have killed you, but why bother because she’s got a four year lifespan like all skinjobs. Now go ahead and run off with her and watch her die of old age.” ---
**Author:** ![Grestarian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grestarian/32/3227_2.png) [@Grestarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grestarian)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/137 "2014-01-22T23:49:25Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > Citizen Kane. Rosebud is a fucking sled? Really? The whole movie we are looking for a damn sled? I thought it would be something shocking, like in real life where “rosebud” was Hearst’s pet name for Marion Davies’ cooter. You must be joking! As much as the whole movie was a thinly-veiled allegory for Wm. Randolph Hearst’s biography, the sled was a bluntly disguised metaphor for Caine’s childhood: “Mom took away my favorite toy and forced me to grow up. I built a mansion and a fortune and an empire because of that, and all I ever wanted was the freedom to be a kid and play on my sled!” [Waah, Waah, Waah, like we feel sorry for you and your empire.] * * * I think \*Thunderbolt and Lightfoot \*had a pretty shitty ending. They get the money, the kid gets his fancy car – right from the factory – and then he dies in the passenger seat? ---
**Author:** ![Push\_You\_Down](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/push_you_down/32/9095_2.png) [@Push\_You\_Down](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Push_You_Down)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2014, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/138 "2014-01-22T23:52:29Z")
> [@Reepicheep](#): > > I am stunned no one has mentioned **Being John Malkovich**. Yes the movie was whacked, but the end was totally out of left field. Which part of the end was out of left field? ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2014, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/139 "2014-01-23T00:13:18Z")
> [@Grestarian](#): > > As much as the whole movie was a thinly-veiled allegory for Wm. Randolph Hearst’s biography, the sled was a bluntly disguised metaphor for Caine’s childhood… Yes, it was, but it could have been Lightning or Thunderbolt or Big Red or whatever. It was “Rosebud” because that’s what WRH called Marion’s clit. Welles had big brass balls but little sense. > [@](#): > > I think \*Thunderbolt and Lightfoot \*had a pretty shitty ending. > They get the money, the kid gets his fancy car – right from the factory – and then he dies in the passenger seat? Yet another in that string of early-mid-70s movies with pointlessly downer endings. God, does it never end? ---
**Author:** ![nearwildheaven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90db22/32.png) [@nearwildheaven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nearwildheaven)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2014, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612/140 "2014-01-23T00:38:21Z")
> [@AHunter3](#): > > _Contact_, if I’m allowed to count the entire last act or scene as “the ending”. > > NOTE: I grew up on science fiction, so extraterrestrial intelligence (aka space aliens) was a mainstream concept. But it wasn’t intermixed with theology or semi-theological notions wherein the belief in ETs was somehow akin to faith in things you could never prove. I came in expecting a cerebral thriller and, furthermore, the 1st half ++ of the movie, with Jodie Foster as marginalized outsider-scientist, set me up to expect a strong female hero who establishes interplanetary contact and proves her case and changes the scientific landscape and so on. > > What? The? Fuck? > > [Here’s](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=3765035&postcount=27) a summary of my reaction from 11-12 years ago. > > Definitely two and a half hours of my life that I want back. I read the book before seeing the movie. THAT book’s ending was a major mindblower too, and all I could think was, “Mr. Sagan, don’t write any more fiction.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-when-they-ended-you-went-whaaaaat/678612.md?page=8)