I don't get this

Is Rick Deckard a replicant or not in the new movie?

He was never a Replicant

Ridely Scott is just a faggot

>He was never a Replicant
care to explain

Not that guy, but he's obviously not a replicant because he's still alive.

The argument is that he's a different model.

Go and point where in the movie this is specified

It's never specified he's not replicant.

Part time.

Did they say in the movie that different models live longer?
Either way Ridley once said that he intended for him to be a replicant, then said that the best thing would be if people make their own conclusions and if it's left ambiguous. Making this sequel seems to destroy that ambiguity.

>Making this sequel seems to destroy that ambiguity.

Seems to. Unless replicants age which I hope isn't the case.

>Either way Ridley once said that he intended for him to be a replicant, then said that the best thing would be if people make their own conclusions and if it's left ambiguous. Making this sequel seems to destroy that ambiguity.
That is exactly why they making a sequel is such a terrible idea. Actually it's just one of so many reasons.

kek

>Did they say in the movie that different models live longer?
No, but they do note that the lifespan is an artificial and deliberate inclusion

This guy gets it.

The point is that it's ambiguous because it's supposed to make you question what makes somebody human or not

If you thought he was human for the first 2 hours of the movie and then they revealed that he was a replicant at the end of the movie, does that then make him less human for the first 2 hours?

This.

The author made him a Human. Harrison played him as a Human. The screenwriter wrote him as a Human. Ridley just changed shit in the later cuts because he thought he was being deep or something.

Was it rape?

In the book Philip K Dick made it clear he was a human.

a book is not a movie

The line between human and android was heavily blurred though, and there was a strong ambiguity throughout the book, the police station section, etc. Making a sequel out of Blade Runner is a terrible idea

If you have the time read the book. It is 20x better than the movie. I wish they played with the religious elements in the movie and included some of the technology not mentioned from the book, along with the elements of the horse, sheep etc.

with that soundtrack it's never rape

I don't even mind the sequel. No matter how many time i tried i still don't like or enjoy this movie. Maybe because the first few time i watched it was for an assignment for a science fiction class comparing it to the novel.

I watch it every few years and i still can't find the appeal.
Same thing with Gattaca and another movie that people love, that i can't remeber

I'm gonna try watching the Final Cut again

Didn't the book have a sequel or something though? I forgot, gotta google it myself.

The movie is not an imdb message board theory

why does some of the shots from the trailer look like they're from the hunger games?

I didn't enjoy watching it but I remember random scenes from the movie and they seem like absolute kino in my head. It's like it had its moments but it was a chore to watch it all the way through.

It's definitely not similar to the book and might leave you disappointed when seeing the movie afterwards. The main thing Blade Runner got going for it is AESTHETICS. Nearly every other thing is weaker than in the book (prose isn't so good though).

Does it matter if he is? If he gets to the point where he isn't sure himself- that's what matters.

The 4ish year lifespan/ implanted memories were newly introduced in the Nexus-6 models. Replicants before that may last for a long time.

Can humans have implanted memories? Probably.

>CatalogNo, that was the only one (to my knowledge) PKD intended to write. Check out his other works... he is a sci-fi legend

its like raping a fleshlight

They pretty much do say that.

So even in the sequel, he may still be a replicant? Just one with the lifespan not deliberately made shorter?

Also, random but I don't know why I mistakenly remembered him being called Chad Deckard instead of Rick Deckard, weird.

> later cuts

The unicorn dream was in the script, filmed and included in the film until producers tore it apart to appeal to normies. You can watch the 1982 workprint version on Blu-Ray.

ambiguity is a crutch

For me what makes me believe Deckard is a replicatant is how the police captain orders him to take up the case even though he is retired.

Feels a little too much like he has to obey.

He's clearly a replicant. If you pay attention the license plate on his flying car says "1M4RPLCN7"

>I don't know why I mistakenly remembered him being called Chad Deckard instead of Rick Deckard, weird

because he was in fact called Chad Deckard. I remember it too. Mandela effect at work.

All workforce are replicants. All blade runners are replicants. Not only Deckard is a replicant, Gosling's character is also a replicant. Check my digits if you don't believe.

Oh man, did we jump timelines?

Read the book and you'll realize that what you said is actually an argument as to why he's human.

It completely destroys a central theme of the story if he's a replicant. It's left ambiguous but it's really just wishful thinking for people that want him to be a replicant just so there's a twist. But it's not that kind of movie.

THIS

I fucking hate Scott sometimes.

so they could create long lasting replicants as the perfect hunters for replicants.

but im talking about the movie

Why would humans make robots that think they are human? Why wouldn't any human tell them they aren't human?

What's the benefit?

ywn see MEW in full Rachael attire

>Book =/= Movie

If you're gonna use this as a reason, at least provide the example and context you're referencing. In the book he's a human that doesn't like machines and has a wife who is a dull drone.

Then doesn't it end up that he gets taken to a completely different, but identical police station and orders to hunt the replicants by a replicant replacement police chief? It's been a decade since I've read the book.

Why are they called blade runners?

Because it sounded cool.

>literally the reason why

Because they run alto kill the replicants and the kill like blades.

she looks like MEW here

Functional immortality for corps worried about share prices following a leadership change, when the boss dies you just install the replicant with his memories and go on like nothing happened.

You could also make perfect body doubles for elites who are potential assassination targets.

no, she looks about 200x more attractive than haggard slut MEW.

This, it would completely undermine the themes of the movie. Scott just got too carried away with a fan theory.

not
he looks older in B.R2049 trailer

None of that requires the replicant to not know he's a replicant though. Why can't you pass on memories even if he knows he isn't human?

Also if you can pass on memories why was Roy so sad his memories would be lost in time? Why didn't he back his up or pass them on himself?

this, if he made him a replicant then he completely missed the point of the book

Is Ridley Scott a talentless hack?

we must rebuild her

Daily reminder that thinking Deckard is a replicant is one of the most reddit opinions a man can have

Deckard as a replicant was a fan theory that Ridley Scott thought was neat after he made the movie which is why he injected all that unicorn bullshit in the final cut.

>Why can't you pass on memories even if he knows he isn't human?
The replicant might not be cooperative if he knows.

>Why didn't he back his up or pass them on himself?
He doesn't have the technology or the capability, we know memory implants are possible though because Rachel has them.

there are books that are sequels to the film but the book (do androids dream of electric sheep) does not have a sequel

>He might not be cooperative if he knows

Why the fuck would you create a robot that if he found out he was a robot would flip out and not be cooperative with you? This makes even less sense. The fucking speccy fuck who made these things deserved to have his eyes smooshed.

Just make a fucking robot that does what you want that won't have a mortality crisis when they find out they weren't cum at one point

they were built to do human shit like operate warships and operate mining equipment. they are actually better than humans, better reactions e.t.c.

Why don't they make them so that they don't have philosphical thoughts and just stick to operating equiment, kind of like robots that build cars? Do they have to make them near human to do these things?

presumably so they can think creatively and build shit and dont require human supervision

fpbp

Shitley Scoot

This.

Just shoot your pretty pictures Ridley and leave the storytelling to people who know what the fuck they're doing.

The real question is what kind of person cares about Blade Runner?

Deckard: not a replicant

Goose: replicant

Who the fuck are you quoting?

>Why the fuck would you create a robot that if he found out he was a robot would flip out and not be cooperative with you? This makes even less sense.
Because the whole point is that it can immitate a human perfectly because it truly believes it is the human, it would be distressing for the robot to find out it isn't real.

Scott didn't even read the book