Blade Runner

Was Deckard a replicant?

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=_7o0rvVxU0w
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Yes. Next question.

Depends on who you ask.

But yes.

He's a wizard

Deckard was not a replicant, and anyone who says this is a goddamn pleb idiot.

According to Philip K Dick: no
According to Harrison Ford: no
According to Ridley Scott: yes

In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep he was, if that helps you at all.

who the fuck cares now

No. Ridley scott is a hack fuck.

This isn't board for discussing the book you turd. In the film he's a replicant.

The point is it doesn't matter

user, you need to finish the book

A sequel is coming out so a lot do

Of course he is !!!
m.youtube.com/watch?v=_7o0rvVxU0w

he was a cuck

ahh the edit I saw of the movie didn't have the unicorn dream sequence

Depends which cut you watch.

Yep, Director's Cut makes it almost certain.

The point of the story is that it's irrelevant.

Is Ridley Scott a replicant?

If all those ham-fisted hints Scott was dropping during this flick are any indication, yes

No.

He was a Blade Runner, essentially a detective with the authority to kill someone on the spot if he decides they are a replicant. It's safe to assume you have to be on the force a lot longer than four years to be promoted to that sort of position. Even if he was a specially designed replicant that could live a long time, how long had models nearly indistinguishable from humans been available? If he was an old enough model to be working as a cop for a long enough to be a Blade Runner, he'd be severely flawed.

That's the point of Do Androids Dream's story, not Blade Runner's

>If he was an old enough model to be working as a cop for a long enough to be a Blade Runner, he'd be severely flawed.
Nexus Six have been around awhile in the story, Bro. As a matter of fact, the 4 year limit was imposed because that was when they'd start developing emotional maturity.

>It's safe to assume you have to be on the force a lot longer than four years to be promoted to that sort of position

Unless you are a humanoid robot named Harrison Ford specifically designed to hunt down replicants.

Does Blade Runner have a plot?

I rewatched it like 6 years ago and it struck me the same way it did when I first watched it in '98...

Just seemed like Scott jerking off to cyberpunk cinematography.

Nothing wrong with that. But by the end I didn't even care if Roy Batty died. I wasn't with or against anybody in the movie because the meaningful dialogue was exempt.

I like Scott, but Blade Runner was definitely accurately rated by critics at the time, regardless of what cut they saw. 1, 3, 7 or 50 cuts isn't going to fix the fact that the right scenes were never shot in the first place.

He is a replicate but the plot would be much better if he human as everyone else thought at first. Seriosuly him being a replicant takes away from the overall theme a lot. They go on about how human replicants are so the best way to show that is to have a human love one but nope having a twist that doesn't even make sense is better to plebs. If Deckard was a relplicant than how come he was so much weaker than the others?

this

this movie is pure bullshit, it's Dredd level of bad

pretty much cyber action for nerds to beat off

You do realize that Ridley originally wanted a fast paced action thriller with Ford chasing Replicants around the city?

Would you rather see that or the brilliant atmospheric emotional film about robots understanding their mortality?

No, and James Cagney wasn't really yellow.

>If Deckard was a relplicant than how come he was so much weaker than the others?
It depends what edit of the movie you watch.

Pic related is the best edit. He isn't a replicant and is simply a man who has gone cold inside due to chasing Replicants for so long that he has almost forgot what it is like to be human - hence the end scene when Roy is dying and he accepts his mortality: that is like a wake up call to Deckard to realize that he is human after all.

>If Deckard was a relplicant than how come he was so much weaker than the others?
Rachel wasn't strong either.

The final 5 minutes doesn't save the entire film. There was very little emotion throughout. The only time I felt anything was...

Actually I didn't. Like I said, I was already checked out by the time I got to the end. Every character is either unlikable or has no dialogue/character, and the only thing that makes that final scene so good is Hauer's performance and what he's saying.

Because he's finally showing character. He's talking about his experiences, what he's done and what will be lost.

I don't cry when I read about every murder that happens in my locale. I feel nothing for the replicants or Deckard in the movie. They're nobodies.

Blade Runner is atmospheric, yes, but fringes on being an antithesis to emotion.

I'd take a fast action thriller if it was done well, I have nothing against the genre. If you're attempting to discredit the genre because of what it is by default, and expecting me to bend, then you can stop projecting because it's not working.

It doesn't matter. None of this matters.

wtf?

Did you feel nothing for Sebastian when he was being used by Pris? He's basically the embodiment of Sup Forums.

Didn't you have any sympathy for Rachel when she realized she was a robot and would be retired?

Your critique of the movie makes it sound like either you haven't watched it in a long time or you just find it difficult to relate to people in general. I don't find your points valid in relation to the movie, however.

No, he's a cyborg.

MacReady was a replicant, and Deckard was the Thing.

>Blade Runner is atmospheric, yes, but fringes on being an antithesis to emotion
Funny, because the key difference between a human and a replicant is the gradual absence of affect of emotion

>Movie happens in three years
>Replicants don't exist yet
>No hope of Sean Young waifu model
>Los Angeles will never be a sprawling, neon lit distopia
>You will never see things people wouldn't believe
>You will never see attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion
>You will never see C-Beams glitter at Tanhauser Gate
>All those memories will never be lost, in time, like tears in the rain because those memories will never exist

I like the idea that he is a Replicant and everyone is in on the joke of his life. The chief of police is, Olmos is, fuck, even the noodle guy is in on it.
It's like when a skin job goes loose, they take a Deckard out of cold storage and he has all these memories programmed into him, and they drop him in this one apartment that like a hundred Deckards before have lived in, and they let him hunt the skin jobs, then retire him when he least expects it.

No, he wasn't and the idea that he was is fucking stupid. Replicants are so feared that they are literally shot on sight and people think the cops would be ok with making one a blade runner, giving it a weapon and letting it decide who is and isn't human? On what planet does that make any damn sense at all?

In the theatrical cut, Rachel was a Nexus 6 without the short lifespan. Who's to say that part isn't at least somewhat canon? Deckard could be the same. There was actually a deleted scene from the theatrical ending where she says she thinks her and Deckard were "made for each other".

All those feels never felt

Its not a problem if he doesn't know he's not a Replicant. See the poster above you. he could be like Sean Young, with all these memories placed in his head

Why go through all the trouble of injecting memories into a fake replicant body and having all these people try to convince it that it's human just so it can hunt some replicants?

This idea makes no sense

They would just pick a cop and assign him the job

And why would you inject memories that he's recently quit the force or retired or whatever? You'd have him show up as a loyal cop still on the force who won't question his orders, not a sad sack who doesn't want to do his job

No that's the dumbest fucking shithead idea ever. Ridley Scott has fucking dementia.

It's still a problem for everyone else in the film that would know he was a Replicant and therefore wouldn't put him in a position that gives him free reign to murder people. Seriously, what the hell are they going to do if he suddenly snaps and starts killing humans either by mistake or on purpose? Why would they take that risk?

>There was actually a deleted scene from the theatrical ending where she says she thinks her and Deckard were "made for each other".
That is just too Hollywood romantic to have been included in

It's meant to be a deconstruction of the kind of elaborate and bizarre plotting in old noir stories. By making it science fiction, it highlights the contradictions. A lot of Phillip K Dick stories are just little jokes like that, elaborated on and played with. It gets kind of mangled in the adaptation, but the skeleton of it is still there.

He's a pre-short lifespan Nexus 6. He was most likely designed to take down replicants because not many people would be able to do that for a living. It would cause a borderline moral crisis. Deckard is a replicant, a perfect killing machine who's damn near indestructible. The reason he doesn't want to do his job is because he's gotten past those four years and has actually developed more complex emotions. They get him back because he's the best. Because that's what he was made to do.

Except Deckard got his ass beat down and only killed 2 female replicants by shooting them in the back. Perfect killing machine my asshole.

That's why it was cut. I think it was Scott trying to kind of keep with his Replicant idea, but either the execs caught on or he didn't like it himself.

Any other detective in that situation would have been dead. You notice how quickly he recovers when he gets beaten down? He just kind of dusts himself off and keeps moving.
And besides, the only thing that physically match a replicant is another replicant.

>A central theme of the movie is that the replicants are more human than an actual human
>lol jk hes a robot but u gotta figure it out yourself ;)

What a fucking goddamn retard.

He's not going to snap, though. Roy and the others snap because they weren't loaded with emotions and such.
It's the same reason Sean Young type wouldn't snap, because she has a life time full of emotions programmed into her, and she would never question if she was a Replicant.

never ceases to amaze me how this movie really draws the retards to the pleb filter(s) in such a variety of ways.

I think whether Deckard is or is not a Replicant is beside the actual point. The real point is that Replicants are all but indistinguishable from humans, and the main thing they have to go on is a psychological test that has to be interpreted by a person. The fact that we can argue whether or not Deckard is a Replicant and offer decent evidence for both sides is the true point, and it has some terrifying implications. For example, they could send a Blade Runner to kill just about anyone and say they're a Replicant and no one would be the wiser.

Since Replicants are physically indistinguishable from humans, and Blade Runners are trained to take out targets without question, literally any person could be targeted and no one would ask questions. To take it a step further, they have to administer this psychological test, whose results are determined by the interpreter, which means they could be easily falsified to suit the needs of the higher-ups, and that's they're best way of determining whether someone is a Replicant? That's scary as fuck.

It's a world where just about anyone could be a Replicant, even yourself, and where there is a task force of killers on hand at all times to kill whatever target they're told to because Replicants are so difficult to distinguish from humans to begin with.

The fact that we even ask the question is the point of the movie.

>He thinks Deckard was a replicant
he's not

>Any other detective in that situation would have been dead.

No, but thanks for coming up with a theoretical question and deciding how it would go, you fucking retard.

>You notice how quickly he recovers when he gets beaten down?

No, I didn't. I noticed that he was nearly incompetent.

MEW comes close to being a Sean Young waifu

Deckard isn't a replicant in the book

I really wish people wouldn't jump into a discussion if they don't know what they're talking about

You can't say that for certain and again, why would the cops, who kill Replicants on sight, suddenly be ok with allowing one to become a blade runner just because it thinks it's human? It has no rights, anyone could and would kill it the second they had a chance because it's their fucking job.

In the movie, yes.
In the book, no.

There, debate over.

no he wasn't, and Childs and Macready weren't infected

Childs was, fuck off.

Carpenter said one of them was so it had to be Childs. The audience is with Macready the entire time during the finale. Childs somehow wanders out into the storm, finds his way back, has no breath, and drinks gas.

if he was a replicant why did his hand get so easily rekt? and why did he bitch and moan about the pain?

>who kill Replicants on sight, suddenly be ok with allowing one to become a blade runner just because it thinks it's human?

Because he shouldn't be and isn't in the original story. Him being a replicant is shoe horned in as a twist last second and it utterly ruins the entire concept of the story and many of it's central themes.

I would bet good money that Scott had made most of the scenes already and then thought up the idea on set and really didn't tell anyone.

this

We know he didn't tell Ford who is adamant that he specifically asked Scott if Deckard was a Replicant at the time and was told no.

It's not the cops jobs to kill replicants. That's why Blade Runners exist, because its there specialty job to confirm someone is a Replicant and then retire them. The normal cops aren't hanging out thinking who may or may not be a Replicant. Earth is a giant shithole, they have their hands full already.

So the scorecard is:

Philip K Dick: no
Harrison Ford: no
Ridley Scott: no
Ridley Scott: yes

Fine, why would other Blade Runners, like Olmos, not shoot Deckard on sight if they knew he was a Replicant?

Because he doesn't think he's a Replicant, and they don't want him to think he is one. A Replicant hunting Replicants? Do you know how quickly he would snap?

>My only reverie is thoughts of you my darling.

I loved that line from Phantasmagoria.

Or how about just the fact that a regular human would be exactly as effective as Deckard without any possibility of snapping

>and they don't want him to think he is one. A Replicant hunting Replicants? Do you know how quickly he would snap?
THEN. WHY. USE. A. REPLICANT.

The motivation of dusting off a replicant and going through all this shit when you already have blade runners makes zero sense

he would have known when rekt his hand though and would have said something before he went bye bye

THIS

Because he was created specifically to hunt down Replicants. He's so ingrained with memories that theres no real chance of him jumping ship.
The blurb in the beginning of the movie seems to be misleading. If it was true, why didn't Harrison retire Sean Young in Tyrell's office?

>THEN. WHY. USE. A. REPLICANT.

Probably because Scott wanted a twist and didn't care about it's impact on the story.

Because when a human cop gets killed, you have to pay a pension to his wife. When a Replicant is killed, you break another one out of storage. They are a dime a dozen. There's literally thousands of Roy and his crew out there.

> If it was true, why didn't Harrison retire Sean Young in Tyrell's office?
Because she was Tyrell property and on Tyrell's property. I assume corporations have extraterritorial rights, because cyberpunk, and therefore Deckard was in no position to kill her there. Why he didn't kill her later when she showed up at his place is a more interesting question.

FINKEL AND EIENHORN

>Because when a human cop gets killed
They aren't cops, they're blade runners

If they DIE, you don't have to pay them SHIT because they get paid per replicant killed. Most of them aren't married. Deckard is in the book but I'm pretty sure if he does his wife gets nothing

You keep coming up with rationalization a for this dumb twist, but it still makes zero sense. You can nitpick all you like but there is no motivation for this in the movie and goes against the main theme

You will never own an Imouto Model 14, programmed to give unconditional love to you and be a slave to your dick.

The real twist is that every person on the planet by that point was a replicant but only some of them knew it.

I think you're confusing me with another poster, I'm not trying to rationalize the dumb twist. I've been arguing that Deckard being a Replicant makes no damn sense at all.

Don't bring the book into this. Fancher, Peoples, and Scott all admit to never reading the book or setting out to make an accurate adaptation of the book, but merely play upon the themes of the book.

>My face when playing the Blade Runner PC game and fucking up the calibration of the VK so that everyone would come out as a Replicant.

Was pretty cool to add that into the game. Granted, you don't kill anyone really important to the story this way, but its fun retiring random people you meet.

Yeah. Isn't that like the main point of the entire movie?

Tokyo at night is the closest you can get

It was explicitly stated that he was a replicant.

>tfw 3d waifu-bots never

Depends what cut you watch.

I personally do not care.

No he's human.

Rutger and Harrison said there was no point making him a replicant as it lessens the impact of the ending.

I love ridley scott, i think hes one of the greatest directors but goddamn deckard aint no replicant

You didn't answer the rest of the post. Only part of it was about the book. But nice try

You're in the desert, walking along in the sand, when all of a sudden you see a tortoise.

He is clearly not.
Zero evidence.

So many of you geeks hate being human, so you just want an artificial Deckard.