Re: Frankenstein/ Blade Runner
We have an assessment centred on moral responsibilities of science. So in that regard:
- the scientists in both (Victor/Tyrell Corporation) can be considered "Promethean," i.e. going beyond their limits, thus advertising hubris/moral egocentricity
- value of responsibility can be seen in the implications when it is divorced from their plight. In Frankenstein, Victor pursues an exhaustive and lethal vendetta due, initially, to his detachment from responsibilities (renders creature lonely... creature seeks retribution...). Role reversal as Victor exudes monstrosity.
- similarly, Tyrell detaches responsibility from his creations. He allows the environment to be denigrated into an urban wasteland. Blindness to responsibilities reinforced by eye motif (i.e. thick glasses, detachment in remote Mayan ziggurat). Ironically, Roy takes responsibility for his actions ("I've done questionable things) and is able to redeem them in draining his last vestiges of life to save his foe. This scene is overloaded with biblical allusions to show his superseding of Tyrell/humanity. Inevitably, responsibilty is valued and seen as a characteristic of humanity, whereby not acknowledging it as seen as engendering dehumanisation.
- with regards to environment Shelley, through her Romanticied melodramatic + heightened language, personifies nature to the extent that it is deified. She warns that we need to take responsibility for nature as it is central to human survival. Bladerunner offers a continuum/stark juxtaposition of this notion in portraying nature's absolute corruption. Scott warns of the blind consequences of usurping responsibility. (the fragility of the environment can be seen in the absence or nature apart from in dreams and the ecological bastardisation that dominates his visuals).
I'm sorry this is a bit of a rant. Hope it helps, I'm distracting myself from writing an essay on the very subject
.