++++Serious Question FOR CULTURED Sup Forums ONLY++++

So the central thesis of the original Blade Runner was that replicants ( human robots), once they become sophisticaed enough, they will eventually develop the full scale of human emotion and demand freedom from the tyranny of their creators. That said, H. Ford was definitely a robot in the original movie. However, in the trailer to the new Blade Runner movie H. Ford has aged. Fucking replicants dont age! What's up Sup Forums? Was I wrong? Why id Ridley letting the new writers and directors fuck his shit up?

Other urls found in this thread:

kickstarter.com/projects/2050134024/blood-machines-turbo-killer-2
youtube.com/watch?v=er416Ad3R1g
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

that's BULLSHIT decker wasn't a robot he just wanted to fuck the robot

But that synthesizer soundtracks. Can I at least be allowed to like that?

>Serious Question FOR CULTURED Sup Forums ONLY

>H. Ford was definitely a robot in the original movie.

Get out.

How do you know he's a robot m8?

Why would even watch this tripe.
If you iek bladerunner just watch bladerunner and ignore this.
We haven't had any good movies since the 1980's and things aren't about to improve.

They ruined the franchise in search for more dollarsh. Welcome to Hollywood, where nothing is sacred except dollarsh.
Wether he was replicant or not was one of the main themes of the movie and they threw it in the trash.

Haven't seen it in a while. but didnt his partner drop that little origami in his apartment to alert him that he was in danger? I understood that as evidence that Decker was a robot.

No. not true. Decker was a robot and had robot feels for another robot.

How do you know?

Something about that and his dream about unicorns. You're given hints that something is up but it's ultimately too vague (for me at least) to make a certain deduction. The movie was movie art at its peak but fuck that Ford needs more money I guess.

yea because that couldnt mean that the unicorn represented the female protagonist that was design to live a human lifespam

sorry mate your interpretation is not the holly word.

FUC KING BULL SHIT

I dont know. That was the entire point. You make up your mind based on too little info. H. Ford has said in interviews that decker was a replicant while ridley denied this. The ambiguitiy makes the damn movie what it is. Also rutgers most iconic ad lib of them all.

>cultured Sup Forums
>Sup Forums

back to ribbit, take that conceited newfag bullshit elsewhere

Because Ridley Scott hinted at it in every version of the movie, and has explicitly said in several times since.

Pretty sure he denied it actually. But who the fuck knows up from down anymore even.

Well, shit. Maybe I am wrong. I'll see if there is any evidence in the new one. I'll probably see it. i like Gosling as long as he doesnt have too many lines. Who knows, it might be good. But fuck, I could have sworn that Decker was a replicant; i cant boil that movie down to him just wanting a sex robot.

DeckRd was a new model, like the girl, that Tyrell hints at in the beginning when he has Deckard test her.

He has an unknown lifespan.

And yes he is a robot, which is why his partner leaves him the origami outside his door, his partner was sent to kill him but opted out.

Yeah and now he changed it because he is a strong independent woman

I just didnt want a bunch of shitposters in here like yourself. Go jerk off, kek fag

Why did he drink whiskey and eat noodles?

He was bleeding in it too.

You sir have sucked one to many dicks

He could have just replaced his skin, couldn't he?

>So the central thesis of the original Blade Runner was that replicants ( human robots), once they become sophisticaed enough, they will eventually develop the full scale of human emotion and demand freedom from the tyranny of their creators.
what a shitty thesis.

spiritual sequel to blade runner

kickstarter.com/projects/2050134024/blood-machines-turbo-killer-2

>independent thought is a shitty idea
>german

Checks out.

Decker would be dead if he was a robot. They had lifespans of like 6 years.

They were all robots. All the humans were dead already.

I could be wrong though. Maybe he hacked himself to stay alive.

One of the central points of the movie was that was impossible.

youtube.com/watch?v=er416Ad3R1g

>watching that shit fucking film
No, thank you, I'm not an illiterate.

Kill yourself nigger.

you can't conclude that just from the fucking origami

it's like the ending in inception, it's left open

it doesn't even matter now because by the looks of it detective gosling has to track down detective deckard so they can fight a new replicant threat together in this exciting blockbuster sequel to the beloved classic bladerunner™! don't forget to preorder your tickets!

>Ridley Scott
Who gives a shit what that fucktard thinks?

it was never said he was a replicant, just a mind game. Implying you never know, you could be a replicant without knowing.

Blade Runner is one of my most favorite movies. It's one of those works that doesn't really need expanding upon - whether or not Deckard was a replicant or not isn't really the main point of the movie anyway.

Like pointed out, it's just the latest cashgrab unecessary sequel to a beloved movie because Hollywood loves doing that shit at the moment.

>Ford was definitely a robot in the original movie.

It was supposed to be ambiguous

>Blade Runner is one of my most favorite movies
Are you illiterate? Because that's the reason to watch that shit film.
>cashgrab unecessary
That's exactly what Blade Runner was, a cashgrab to appeal to the retards who watch films in theaters.

at least denis villeneuve isn't expected to absolutely butcher this IP like they are doing to ghost in the shell

>so they can fight a new _______ threat together in this exciting blockbuster sequel to the beloved classic ________! don't forget to preorder your tickets!

Kinda like Star Wars....

>stop liking what I don't like
Okay we get it, go be autistic somewhere else

And more importantly it's not supposed to matter as a specific detail.

Don't compare Inception to Blade Runner

No, it's more "stop not having taste".
My dad likes Blade Runner because he's functionally illiterate.
Why? They're both massively overrated crap films.

>Why id Ridley letting the new writers and directors fuck his shit up?

who cares that shit was written by a meth addict

>It was supposed to be ambiguous
Scott said a gorillion times that he meant for Deckard to be a robot. Too many things in the movie point to this narrative.
The only opposing voice is Harrison Ford, who by the way, DOESN'T EVEN WATCH HIS OWN MOVIES. How he played the character personally isn't relevant, especially considering that there are replicants in the setting who don't know they're not human.

This 2049 thing is a cash grab, plain and simple. Ford is in it so more people will watch the movie, which was probably his only reason to claim Deckard wasn't a replicant (so he can get paid for a sequel).

Whuh? Sorcery or stfu

...

>implying the original ever answered whether Deckard was a replicant or not

Get fucked OP. Also its the original scriptwriter doing the sequel.

Now dont take this as my saying it'll be good, it'll probably suck like all unnecessary sequels do. But you're just fucking wrong OP.

THIS BELONGS ON Sup Forums YOU ASSHOLE

NOT POLITICS

REPORTED

>they will most definitely going to fuck something up in the sequel
what can they even build on
they already said everything they needed to in the 1st movie

he was a next model

>you can't conclude that just from the fucking origami

it's in the book, the author has revealed that was the concept etc

>Scott
Again, who cares what he says?
>This 2049 thing is a cash grab
So was the original film so you should love it.
I'm not sure of the specifics but it's well known Dick did some drugs. Had permanent liver, I think it was, problems from it.

disney or warner or whoever is behind this sequel can always retcon anything they want anyway

why is this even being discussed?

the primary aim of the new bladerunner is to test the moods of the audience regarding new sci-fi blockbusters franchises with star wars and guardians of the galaxy already crowding up the market

if bladerunner 2 succeeds villaneuve is going straight to work on a reboot of dune to set up its universe and that's a shit ton of movies

This seems likely. Dune hasnt been done justice on the big screen so that's fine by me.

>Again, who cares what he says?
As far as hierarchy goes, I'd put Scott ahead of Dick ahead of Ford ahead of Literally-Who-Screenwriter who got hired to work on this 2049 piece of shit.
That movie was Scott's movie.

The original is one of the best movies ever made, first of all. It was and still is very high concept.

>lol yeah right hey look robots hurr

The reason Deckard is most likely a replicant is that his partner left the origami unicorn, which shows that he (Gaf, the partner), new Deckard's implanted memories (the unicorn in the forrest, presented as Deckard perhaps remembering a dream). Deckard showed that he knew the girl's memories earlier in the film; it was all intentional. It is implied that Deckard is a replicant, but never explicitly/definitively stated.

So the whole notion is that once the ontological doubt is placed in Deckard's mind, the spiral never ends; are all his memories fake? Does he have a four year life span? Is he being hunted now? And the part that makes the movie great by the end is you get to realizing that ultimately, the line between the replicant's reality and the human condition is blurred.

It's a movie that requires no additions. But I'm at I'll going to see the new one. I'm just keeping my expectations very low.

well looks like your OP backfired, didn't it? stupid fuck

>So the central thesis of the original Blade Runner was that replicants ( human robots), once they become sophisticaed enough, they will eventually develop the full scale of human emotion and demand freedom from the tyranny of their creators.
wrong
>That said, H. Ford was definitely a robot in the original movie.
nope

Ridley Scott sucks. I'll never forgive him for fucking up Cornac McCarthy's The Counselor screenplay.

>I'd put Scott ahead of Dick
Because you're a retard.
>That movie was Scott's movie
Yeah, and it was shit.
>The original is one of the best movies ever made
No, it isn't, it's garbage for drooling retards

Simpleton

Philip K. Dick said Deckard was human, that's definitive in my mind.

>managed to make sci-fi noir
>garbage for drooling retards
I guess you're just a childish contrarian.

>Hollywood
>culture
Fucking Burger. Pick one!

It's been a long ass time since I watched this pile of shit but they took out the pseudo-religious aspects didn't they?

synthesizers are great

Its a good film dingus.

Hollywood has clearly gone to shit over the past 20 years or so; but that doesn't mean that great films don't exist.

NO U

Artist don't always know the meaning of their work, regardless of your mind.

You're not giving future humanity enough credit

>Its a good film dingus
No, it isn't.

It did suck nut Cm is allowed one don't you think?

Thanks

Wtf are u talking about? Literally really?

>Fucking replicants dont age!
then please do tell why the inception date was important?
>tfw replicants have 4 year lifespan and their attempt to find a method of lengthening it from their maker is what the movie is all about

do androids dream of electric sheep?

Physically age...I guess a replicant might take on disguises..to appear like they were...no evidence in the movie, though

>Physically age
the final scene with Rutger doesn't end because of physical damage the battle has done... it ends because the character is dying of old age

I know that. My original question was why would they allow Deckard to "appear" to be physically older in a sequel? Im not saying the replicants dont age

Blade Runners, the synthetic men who hunt the replicants are designed for long term use. They're government agents and hence the public didn't know they could live that long.

Deckard is in hiding because he lasted longer than expected.

Boom Ret-conned. Give me 10mil now plz

They did well with adapting dick' s story, but there is nothing after that. Some faggot has ducked up this film, I know it.

Yes but he doesnt appear old. Replicants, from the evidence shown, dont get wrinkles, dont get weak and slow and dont get grey hair. They stay the same age appearance wise but their internal functions degrade.

So pumped for this

>H. Ford was definitely a robot in the original movie.
No he wasn't.

This is what I originally thought

>why is this even being discussed?

because retards are making a cash grab putting a grandpa actor into a leading man role, Ford's days are done as a leading man, why can't they just come up with new ideas and not make shitty cash grabs for nostalgia

let me guess this one will have explosions instead of the weird monologue?

>The original is one of the best movies ever made, first of all. It was and still is very high concept.

it didn't even put asses in seats, it's got cool concept shit and art direction in it but hardly the best film ever made, not even close

But its based on based Heinleins "Do androids dream of electric sheep"

Yup. Read the novel and it's clear that Decker is not a replicant. Not sure where people got that idea from...

>based Heinleins

Heinlein's main work was Stranger in a Strange Land, about Martian Jesus,

many of his works are great, this is Phillip K Dick the fucking degenerate crack addict who would blow an ounce of coke and crack out 5 shitty novellas of similar quality to this one,

he's hardly the creative mind that Heinlein is, he's more of a watered down Isaac Asimov mixed with coke fiend bad writing tendencies like Steven King, another degenerate who just kept typing words because he was stoned out of his mind writing books for weeks at a time without sleeping

>it's clear that Decker is not a replicant.

there is an interview with Phillip K Dick talking about how he was a replicant, maybe the director of the film didn't think so, who gives a shit it's pulp crap

I've tried to watch blade runner like three times in my life and fell asleep everytime. Is it just cyber/steam/whatever punk autists obsessing over the setting? Really don't get what's so captivating about the film, "robots are people too" is such a tired storyline

In the theatrical edition, he's probably not a replicant.

In the director's cut, he is probably a replicant.

Philip K. Dick was a schizophrenic. I wouldn't believe anything he had to say about his own work in retrospect.

They were not robots. Replicated genetic material ages and dies...4 year lifespan, pal

>its pulp crap
kill yourself friend

Ridley Scott said in an interview that Decker was suppose to be a robot in the film adaptation. This is the significance of the paper mache unicorn.

>Ridley Scott in charge of understanding subtext.

>That said, H. Ford was definitely a robot in the original movie

Which fucking version?