Was he an replicant?

Was he an replicant?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/_7o0rvVxU0w
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

no

what about the unicorn

not in the original story but he was in the movie.

Republican*
And yes.

No, I always thought the message was that Decard was a human who had lots of time and wasted it against the Androids who had no time at all but were making the most of it

Was it gumps kid ?

it doesn't matter because the movie isn't actually about humanity, it's a setpiece thriller with some really bad action scenes and Ford in his flattest role second only to The Force Awakens.

I like Ridley Scott, but this shit was terrible.

Sam Bell > Roy Batty

No, you missed the point of the film doofus.

They killed a fuck load of innocent people though
but muh tears in the rain and William Blake quotes

Yes. Literally confirmed by Scott

youtu.be/_7o0rvVxU0w

Probably going to get retconed in the sequel though

Will Forrest also die of AIDS?

Explain this then doofus :))

Scott missed the point of the movie too.

please enlighten me

It literally does not matter if he was a replicant or not.
Ridley Scott is an idiot for giving a definitive answer to the question.

/thread

What matters is that the movie makes you question if Deckard is a replicant or human, not that he really is either.

Not really. The point of the book? Yes. The point of the movie is whatever the script dictated, and the script was awful.

Can't really blame that on Scott, he's never been known to give a shit about scripts and certainly doesn't pick them based on their writing.

He's a concept director, and the best of his kind. Don't know why anybody would ask him about Deckard being a replicant or not. Well I guess if you're an idiot, you would.

The point of the movie is that it doesn't matter if he's a replicant or not. Just that he should, and we all should, use our limited time wisely because we all have an expiration date human or not.

This shit ain't rocket surgery, brah. The movie can be summed up in this sentence; "Stop fucking around, be vulnerable, live your life with the time you have."

Also unicorns

Fair point.

kind of how inception leaves you wondering if it was all a dream

I see what you mean , maybe he shouldn't have confirmed it

Yes and you're a fucking idiot if you have to ask. Either you missed a point that was literally forced down your throat which makes you a fucking idiot or you watched the original version which makes you a fucking idiot.

Not that guy but Scott is pushing this concept to stir examination of the question and the central idea of unknowing/uncertainty. Harrison believes deckard is a human but likewise that doesn't necessarily mean it is absolute that he is human. Personally this is why I think a sequel is bad as it ruins the central theme of the anxiety of uncertainty that makes the film so great.

I just want to talk about Blade Runner and i thought it was a good jumping off point to be honest

That's the idea

he was not an human or an replicants

he didnt even exist for real, he was just in the imagination of the viewer

Another reason could be is that he wanted to make a sequel and to do so he has to decide one way or the other so he can tackle something other than the question of humanity in the sequel. So he had to answer the question even though it hurts the original film by answering it.

Please feel free to insult but not offer a explanation because you dont actually understand the film

damn...

Seems like Scott was kidding with that smile afterwards. Also that answer providing "proof" is pretty ridiculous.

>Scott: You see, Ford sees a unicorn in a daydream. Then later in the movie, he sees the unicorn again by chance.
>Interview: ...and?
>Scott: So he's a replicant. *dumb grin*

Doesn't mean anything, even the interviewer knows that's a pointless answer and explanation.

So was he a replicant? Maybe, who knows, it will quite literally never be proven either way, and it wasn't even the point of Blade Runner.

>obviously never watched Blade Runner

Did you really miss the whole unicorn thing or are you just trolling? I any case reddit would probably be more suited for you.

>tfw no robot gf

The unicorn dream was a mistake.
Prove me wrong.
You can't because Deckard being a replicant or not is not the point of the movie and is irrelevant to anything in the movie.

>I'll just call him a redditor, that'll help me blend in!
Scott's answer makes no sense and you know it.

It without a doubt was but it's still there and Deckard is still a replicant.

Literally retarded.

But it makes perfect sense in the context of earlier scenes though

Don't shitpost, user. Nobody wins.

but shit posts last forever

Deckard's eye-shine is in every cut of the film...so there's that.

Unless the eye-shine has some meaning I don't know about, with that fucking owl and shit, I don't see how he's not a replicant.

First post best post

It's too bad she wont live.

Then Deckard decides to live.

Roll credits.

>The point of the movie is that it doesn't matter if he's a replicant or not
Objectively correct.
Subjectively I think the movie is better if deckard is a replicant.

Deckard is a replicant, most likely a newer version than a Nexus 6. A human wouldn't survive being brutalized by Pris or Leon. Deckard's memories were implanted, the unicorn being one of them. Gaff was aware of Deckard's false memories and the unicorn, which explains the unicorn origami. Ridley Scott thought it would be obvious enough, but he overestimated the intelligence of the average moviegoer. He later stated in an interview that Deckard is a replicant, which should be the final nail in the coffin, but some people, either retards or shitty trolls, can't seem to wrap their minds around that.

>but some people, either retards or shitty trolls, can't seem to wrap their minds around that
Or people who realize that the answer to the question "Is Deckard a replicant?" is irrelevant because they movie at its core isn't about Deckard being a replicant or not.
But I guess you completely missed the point about the humans and replicants being so similar that they both have an expiration date.

the irrelevancy is subjective. and your strawman argument is laughable. please try again.

btw, Rachel didn't have a four year life span. if Deckard was a similar model then he wouldn't have an expiration date either.

WHO SAID IT WASN'T IRRELEVANT YOU STUPID PIECE OF SHIT HE'S STILL A REPLICANT DEAL WITH IT YOU FUCKING REDDIT FAGGOT

citation needed: the post

The movie is far from all about if Ford's character is a replicant or not. Thats like getting hung up on wizard of Oz if it was all a dream or not.

The lifespan is artificial, it's in the opening slides

You're a retard. The film's central questions, as in Dick's words about all of his works, are:
>what is real
>what is human

The ambiguity about Deckard being a replicant is absolutely crucial to driving home the film's themes.

I think Deckard being a replicant ruins ruins the whole point of Batty saving him.

>Wired: Harrison Ford is on record saying Deckard is not a replicant.

>Scott:Yeah, but that was, like, 20 years ago. He's given up now. He said, "OK, mate. You win! Anything! Just put it to rest."

huh? literally what did he mean by this? greatest non-answer in history?

I think Deckard, through the course of the film, starts to wonder if he himself is a replicant...becomes scared of that possibility and only becomes truly terrified at the "Tears in Rain/Shoulder of Oriion" monologue.

Hence he drive the fuck away at the end of the movie to go live his life with whatever time he has left. The ambiguity is the fucking point of the ending. The unicorn is literally the dream of living a fulfilled life, Deckard, as far as we know, has no ex wife, no kids, no friends and nothing better to do that order 2+2=4 noodles and chase replicants.

>The ambiguity about Deckard being a replicant is absolutely crucial to driving home the film's themes.
Therefore it doesn't matter.

>absolutely crucial
>therefore doesn't matter
Wut?
Nice numbers though
Checkedem

The ambiguity is crucial.
Deckard being a replicant does not matter.

which cut should I watch?

dont know lol

lol

Don't you think it would be fuckin' stupid and make no sense if he was, though?

...

why did this make me laugh so much goddamn

Its been thrown out there that Gaff's memories are what was used to make Deckard. I guess it kind of makes sense.

It does make sense that Deckard is a replicant, and it's not particularly stupid either.
But I feel like it's been said a thousand times in this thread that it does not matter.

all me

>an replicant
>an