Modens Pollens

>Check his eyes
>They dont glow
Deckard is not replicant
>Replicants eyes glow
>Deckhards eyes dont
>Therefore Deckhard is human
If not b then not a mystery solved

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/_7o0rvVxU0w
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Versions_of_Blade_Runner#Workprint_prototype_version_.281982.29
youtube.com/watch?v=C55bAvhEiuY
youtube.com/watch?v=zspUmElycFM
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

ive literally never understood how anyone thinks he is a replicant

Deckard isn't a replic-

they didnt actually glow, was a cine hint that characters felt something off when they looked in their eyes

Oh, it was always my thesis theory. It was one or two people who were relevant were… I can’t remember if (screenwriter) Hampton (Fancher) agreed with me or not. But I remember someone had said, ‘Well, isn’t it corny?’ I said, ‘Listen, I’ll be the best fucking judge of that. I’m the director, okay?’ So, and that, you learn — you know, by then I’m 44, so I’m no fucking chicken. I’m a very experienced director from commercials and The Duellists and Alien. So, I’m able to, you know, answer that with confidence at the time, and say, ‘You know, back off, it’s what it’s gonna be.’ Harrison (Ford), he was never — I don’t remember, actually. I think Harrison was going, ‘Uh, I don’t know about that.’ I said, ‘But you have to be, because Gaff, who leaves a trail of origami everywhere, will leave you a little piece of origami at the end of the movie to say, ‘I’ve been here, I left her alive, and I can’t resist letting you know what’s in your most private thoughts when you get drunk is a fucking unicorn!’ ‘ Right? So, I love Beavis and Butthead, so what should follow that is ‘Duh.’ So now it will be revealed (in the sequel), one way or the other.

He saw a unicorn
By extension of that he is clearly a replicant

unicorn

Deckard is a replicant
- Ridley Scott, director of Blade Runner

Neither a concise nor sound argument

because ridley scotts a hack

Except that unicorns are not real
Wolves, raccoons, owls, snakes, turtles, and spiders are
So you proved everyone including Tyrell by your logic real replicants except Deckhard

Bullshit what cut

Unicorns are not real. Everyone else have normal animals. If Deckard is a replicant, he's certainly a special one. In the end, it is best to leave it ambiguous because the whole point is how close are replicants to mankind.

The final cut (aka the definitive one)

youtu.be/_7o0rvVxU0w

he's the next gen of replicant. he keeps photos just like leon and rachel. after battys monologue edward james olmos says 'youve done a man's job'

>Modens Pollens

modus tollens

100% Hack-ino

>'youve done a man's job'
because a woman would fail lmao.

muh origami

'but are you a man?' or similar was cut after that line too, wasn't it?

And it matters greatly that it is left ambiguous: More human than human.

Watched Final Cut recently and didn't hear this one while expecting it

>It’s telling that this line was added to the “director’s cut,” but excised for the final cut, likely because even Ridley Scott felt that this line was beating a dead unicorn.

it isnt ambiguous, its heavily implied. or at least in the directors cut (which is the best version).

Deckard

>is weak
>gets beaten by male and female Replicants in every scene
>struggles to shoot his pistol
>Bryant nor any of his fellow officers, detectives or blade runners look down at him
>Tyrell is annoyed/flustered when Deckard comes in to interrogate
>no implication that he's a skin job
>no superhuman feats
>lives to be an old man


Anyone that thinks Deckard is a replicant is delusional, including Scott who is a bonified hack. Ford says Deckard isn't. The writers say Deckard isn't. It's a bullshit theory that Scott threw in for his shitty cut because he's an autistic "artist". Why would anyone want Deckard to be a replicant anyway? What point does it serve? If he is, it completely negates the fact that he's this cynical noir detective that's tracking down non-humans that actually have more humanity to them than he does. Of course he's human and not a replicant. That's the whole fucking point. It shows that Batty has more humanity than Deckard. It shows Deckard to be a hypocrite when he forces himself on Rachel and falls in love with her. The replicants are more human than Deckard.

>is weak
compared to top level-strength soldier replicants

>gets beaten by male and female Replicants in every scene
that doesn't say if he is or isn't a replicant, just that he's a shitty fighter

>struggles to shoot his pistol
when there are moral implications or he's got a broken hand

>Bryant nor any of his fellow officers, detectives or blade runners look down at him
Bryant manipulates him and Gaff openly despises him

>Tyrell is annoyed/flustered when Deckard comes in to interrogate
Tyrell wanted to see how many questions his new replicant could survive before failing the test but he wanted to make sure the tester was also in the dark so as to not influence the results.

>no implication that he's a skin job
How does Gaff know about the unicorn dream? Heck of a coincidence otherwise.

>no superhuman feats
Not all replicants are superhumanly strong. Their physical and mental attributes are set according to the client's needs.

>lives to be an old man
We only find that out in the sequel. For all we know at the end of the first, he drives off with Rachael, they have a great couple of weeks, and die.

I don't know if it's because I saw some whacky version or because I'm misremembering, but for whatever reason I remember that police chief guy mention there's another replicant out there and it doesn't mention Rachel by name it just sort of cuts to Deckard thinking about it.

Rewatching the Final cut, this happens much earlier in the movie and he actually confirms it's Rachel but yes.

IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER!

The moment you assume that Deckard is a replicant, the moment the book and the film lose their true meaning, intention and appeal. You make him a replicant and it undermines the entire story. Seriously, the film has no point if he's a replicant. That plot twist would be better served in another movie where conspiracy plays a role in the narrative or, in 2049 where they make K a replicant right off the bat and he's still struggling with taking down his own kind. With Deckard being a replicant, it undoes all the 'replicants are equal to humans' and 'a human now sees a replicant's life as being valuable'. If he is one, what would be the point of the film then? A fellow replicant hunts a group of other replicants who came to meet their maker then fell in love with another replicant, the end? That's idiotic.

Deckard is a cold, cynical bastard, but human nonetheless. That's why he ponders the notion of what it means to be human as he tracks down these replicants.

Ford has said repeatedly that he played his character as human.

Even without the unicorn scene, it's pretty clearly hinted in the dialogue multiple times. His cop partner keeps throwing odd dialogue at him, like "we need a REAL MAN for this job" and "you did a MAN'S job". It's not just nitpicking, those lines feel odd in the context of the movie too.

that was a shit line, forcing it down the viewer's throat. the point is to leave it ambigious because it's not about whether he's a replicant, but whether it matters.

Hampton Fancher, the screenwriter, deliberately put ambiguity into the question because he likes the idea of viewers debating what it means to be human. He said that he falls on the "Deckard is human" side.

What Fancher doesn't realize is that viewers won't debate what it means to be human, but will instead REEEE out over trivial details and ignore the crux story altogether.

He's definitely human. The replicant theory is stupid since replicants are illegal on earth. If Deckard was a replicant, why the hell would be working for a police unit as a Blade Runner.

>muh Gaff is following him
>it's a Tyrell experiment

It's bullshit. It's a lame theory thought up by pretentious brainlets to make the film feel deeper to them than it actually is, when in fact, the themes and philosophy of the film are given more depth if Deckard is in fact human.

Other than retarded fans, Ridley Scott is the only one that goes by this replicant theory. Why? He completely misunderstood the metaphysical themes from the original screenplay where Deckard is thinking about what it means to be human.

Yup.


People love twists too. Deckard being a replicant is just "cooooooool, maaaan"

Deckard has the unicorn dream.

Deckard's Blade Runner buddy leaves the unicorn origami for him at the end.

Either Deckard's buddy knows that he's a replicant and is aware of certain implanted memories they all have. OR he can somehow read Deckard's dreams and is just fucking with him.???

>Other than retarded fans, Ridley Scott is the only one that goes by this replicant theory.
>No true Scotsman

It's the future.
You can have artificial eyes that glow and artificial eyes that doesn't glow.
Glowing eyes doesn't mean anything

They can clearly extract implant, and manipulate people's memories. That thing is even more terrifying than the replicants themselves.

>If Deckard was a replicant, why the hell would be working for a police unit as a Blade Runner.
In the original novel a large part of the human population are replicants without knowing it, because of the implanted memories. I'm not saying the source work is canon for the film, but that the same idea could be used in the context of the film. Even if Deckard was a replicant, that doesn't mean the PD would know he is.

The question is not to say definitively if he's human or not.

The question to ask is "has he earned his humanity?"

He starts out as a burnout shell with little to no empathy for his fellow creature. Over the course of killing the Nexus-6s and interacting with Rachael, he empathizes with the Nexus-6s and Rachael and it gets harder to simply shoot them.

When Batty saves Deckard and lets him live with his final act, Deckard decides that conscious emotional creatures deserve empathy like anyone else. He runs away with Rachael, knowing full-well that she'll die in a short while, since a small amount of happiness is worth more than all the time in the world.

Pretty much this. Anyone who asserts that Deckard is a replicant simply doesn't have a good grasp of the meaning of both films.

>How does Gaff know about the unicorn dream? Heck of a coincidence otherwise.

Maybe he told him? Deckard and Gaff were partners after all. The way Deckard nods when he holds the unicorn origami means that he understands that it's Gaff way of telling to follow his dream and run away with Rachael.

>Denying the narrative of 2049 which is a worthy sequel in every way

I knew I shouldn't have even bothered replying to you brainlet.

There's no way that answer will satisfy the autists here. It's not a spoon-fed yes or no.

And if empathy is a requirement to be human, Sup Forums's entire userbase is just asking to be retired.

Exactly.

>Deckard has the unicorn dream


Only in the directors cut where that fucking uniocorn in the forest is hapazardly thrown in after years of the film being complete.

In the original, the unicorn is the last of a series of origami figures that Gaff uses to taunt Deckard, and that was the extent of it. The origami was Gaff's calling card, typical of old film noir detective stories. In Bryant's office when Deckard insists he's retired, Gaff folds a chicken. It represents Deckard being afraid to come out of retirement. Later he makes a man with an erection. Why? Because Deckard is attracted to Rachel. And finally, the unicorn. Deckard plans to can run away with her, but she won't live. Before the Scott's hamdisted directors cut, that the unicorn was simply a message to Deckard to say "I know you have Rachel, and Gaff is either going to let her go, or is that the unicorn is Gaff's gauntlet and he will hunt them both down and kill them.

A unicorn has long been the symbol of virginity and purity, which ties in with Rachel's status. Legend states that only a virgin could capture a unicorn. Unicorns are extinct, and Gaff may think the same of Rachel, as she definitely has a limited lifespan.

Rachael is (and always will be) a replicant among humans, and will be different, like a unicorn among horses, because of her termination date. (In the tacked-on ending, Deckard says that she doesn't have a termination date)

Rachel leaving with Deckadd and knocking over the unicorn symbolizes her escape from the Tyrell corporation, which only looked upon her as a replicant. Deckard fell in love with her and is going to attempt to take her away.

In the novel the androids are also fucking mechanical. Real easy to tell if you're an android or not.

ITS ABOUT THE ILLUSORY NATURE OF CONSCIOUSNESS REEEEE

If the watcher was meant to know the answer, the movie would have told you the answer. Thus, you're not supposed to know one way or the other.

Brainlets and children will argue forever about if he is or isn't but it ultimately doesn't matter.

Didn't the sequel pretty much confirm he was a replicant?

> 2 replicants having a son is the main plot
> Jared Leto saying it was all pre-planned to make them breed
> Deckard has to hide in a fucking abandoned casino to not be hunted down, and when Gosling arrives he thinks he's going to get retired

Maybe I'm just being a brainlet, but the whole film makes no sense if deckard IS human.

>Denying the narrative of 2049 which is a worthy sequel in every way

Well if we're bringing up the sequel, then Deckard is almost definitely a replicant since Niander Wallace says Deckard was programmed to love Rachael.

>inb4 REEEEE
don't bother kid, you're getting all worked-up over nothing.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Versions_of_Blade_Runner#Workprint_prototype_version_.281982.29

The unicorn dream was in the "original" version, and the screenplay, and Ridley wanted to put it in the film. The studio forced him to cut it because of test screenings. You can argue that for whatever reason the theatrical version was the "pure" version if you want, but the unicorn dream wasn't some retarded idea he got 20 years after filming the movie. It was intended to be there all along.

He only brings up the possibility:"Maybe, maybe not." It actually doesn't matter much to him.

> 2 replicants having a son is the main plot
It was never mentioned if it was 2 replicants or a replicant and a human, only that the mother giving birth was a replicant.
> Jared Leto saying it was all pre-planned to make them breed
Jared Leto didn't know shit, he was just a businessman who had purchased the rights to Tyrell's legacy and tried to fuck with Deckard's head to get him to reveal information.
> Deckard has to hide in a fucking abandoned casino to not be hunted down, and when Gosling arrives he thinks he's going to get retired
He had a bunch of enemies to be afraid of regardless if he was a replicant.

Villeneuve went out of his way to keep it ambiguous and irrelevant to the plot.

WALLACE WAS FUCKING INTERROGATING DECKARD YOU DUMB FUCK. HE WAS TRYING TO GET UNDER HIS SKIN AND WOULD HAVE SAID ANYTHING TO GET HIS HANDS ON THE CHILD.

So replicants only dream of unicorns ? Like on a regular basis it's just non stop unicorns ?
Gaff knows he's a replicant ? Why would he know ?
He knows he dreams of unicorns non stop?
Do humans ever dream of unicorns ?

I told you not to get worked-up.

>Deckard is almost definitely a replicant since Niander Wallace says Deckard was programmed to love Rachael

I always lol when I see people going back and forth about this shit. It's silly.

When I was a teenager I'd really get into this debate, but ultimately, it doesn't matter. It's just a stupid movie.

As someone above me said, it was in the original cut, before the studio got in there. So, while your analysis certainly 'works', it's just not true. The unicorn left by Gaff is there because he knows about Deckard's dream (i.e. replicant). No other way to read that.

I don't particularly care, the movie works both ways (can't say the same for the sequel, which, if he's human is a bit stupid), but it just so happens that in the context of both the original (not theatrical) and Final cuts he is one.

It would be as if they cut out scenes from a Dracula movie that showed the count sucking blood and climbing the tower or whatever. It wouldn't make him 'not' a vampire just because it wasn't explicitly stated.

Wallace was obsessed with Deckard once he obtained Tyrell Corp's records and found out what Rachael was, and that Deckard had run off with her. He's not exactly stable, he's got a literal god complex, while also having an inferiority complex due to Tyrell's achievements in Replicant technology vastly overshadowing his own. It's his working theory that Deckard was designed to meet Rachael and impregnate her. It's just as likely that Rachael was simply designed to have reproductive capabilities and that anyone could have knocked her up. Even Wallace says 'or maybe not' after theorizing about Deckard being designed.
The only evidence for Deckard being a replicant is two things:
A) Ridley Scott using footage from an unrelated movie in his later cuts of Blade Runner to insert the unicorn dream because he thought he knew better than literally everyone else involved in the production,
B) Deckard's eyes shining when Ford accidentally stepped into the light being used to make Young's eyes shine.

All the characters that question Deckard's humanity are used to contrast his actions with the Replicants' and show that in many ways they are more human than Deckard is.

Most characters in the film have either animal memories, names, or motifs attached to them. Animals being super-valuable with most Earth's ecosystem dead, make such characters special:

Roy: Wolves.
Leon: Turtles.
Zhora: Snakes.
Pris: Raccoons.
Tyrell: Owls.
Sebastian: Mice.
Rachael: Spiders.
Deckard: Unicorn.

If Deckar is a replicant, he's a special kind because nobody else seems to have a fantasy creature as his animal.

Or gaff just makes origami to let dekkard know he was there . Not that he knows his random day dream he had once

>When I was a teenager I'd really get into this debate,
and it's sure easy to spot them in this thread.

Makes the rest of the movie pretty basic too.

Deckard owns an electric sheep in the novel. It's a status thing.

in the book there is a chapter where he takes the void kompt test and passes. so there is that. could also mean he is so human its a fine blade edge he is running on between created and born lol

Watching the film I just took the dream to mean dekkard wanted to get out of the city and be free like the unicorn running through the forest
Then got the origami unicorn at the end meaning now he gets to be run away and not have Gaff chase him down

Not necessarily.


If something gets cut and ends up on the cutting room floor, that doesn't mean it happened in the actual film.

Think of something like Terminator 2 with the deleted chip removal scene.

youtube.com/watch?v=C55bAvhEiuY


Once something like that is cut, it no longer becomes canon. In the theatrical version, the T-800 learns from interacting with humans, not from his chip being switched and rebooted.


Speaking of Dracula, same thing applies to something like Return of the King. In the directors cut, Saruman is in there and ends up getting killed. But in the theatrical version? He lives and spends the rest of his days hiding in his tower.

youtube.com/watch?v=zspUmElycFM
So in the case of Blade Runner, there are so many different versions where everyone's theory is correct. Deckard can be a human or replicant in any version that the viewer is watching.

Just because it was Scott's intent, doesn't make it so. Same thing applies to Ford, the writers or the studio that thinks he isn't. It's not written in stone.

Do Muslim replicants fuck electric sheep ?

All of gaff's origami has meaning: the chicken when he's accusing Deckard of cowardice, the man with with the erection when he's chiding Deckard for falling in love with a replicant, the unicorn when he's warning Deckard his relationship with Rachael is just a fantasy.

When this relates to the unicorn dream it brings up the question of how does Gaff know that Deckard had a waking dream about a unicorn?

>Deckard could have told him
not shown on screen or mentioned

Deckard is fully aware of details of Rachael's memories, meaning that it is possible to view a replicant's mental catalog

The ambiguity comes from Deckard not having a memory of a unicorn, but a DREAM.

>Then got the origami unicorn at the end meaning now he gets to be run away and not have Gaff chase him down

That's what I got from it too. Especially with Deckard's cheesy, happy smile.

Thematically speaking, Deckard being a replicant in this film makes no sense. Replicants have a four year lifespan. Deckard was a well-established Bladerunner, apparently having retired other replicants before the mission depicted in this film, otherwise the dialog from Bryant would not have alluded to needing to bring him back... so Deckard was built and brought online - on Earth where Replicants are illegal - to retire rogue Replicants - establishes a great reputation with Bryant, who refers to them as "Skin Jobs", and after some time of being on his own, he's brought back because another Blade Runner who was sent to retire them was OK as long as he was left on a ventilator? There's just not enough time for Deckard to squeeze his life and tenure into a brief 4 year span. Now, yeah, Rachel has no 4-year lifespan and unlike the short-lived Replicants, Tyrell seemed to make more of an effort with giving her a past and more refined human qualities... to the point where she didn't even know she was a replicant whereas the Nexus 6 replicants always knew what they were. ...but why would Tyrell make another, equally or even more refined replicant to be a Blade Runner?

why make one if Tyrell did? Why not have made more than one instead of allowing a human to be nearly killed in that line of duty? Skills are apparently the hallmark of being a Replicant. Each one of the Nexus 6 Replicants were purpose-built to exhibit certain talents, not unlike humans but conceivably to a greater extent... to be better in their talents than most if not all human would be. Rachel seemed to be the proof-of-concept for Tyrell. She was the quintessential cornerstone of his personal collection that apparently included an artificial Owl, only she didn't know she was a part of that collection. Where does Deckard fit in with all this? Would Tyrell build Deckard specifically to destroy his own products? Why would he do that, after all the four year lifespan was apparently the measure of control to make sure things didn't get out of hand... and if he did capitulate and build Deckard after realizing the 4 year lifespan wasn't working - again - he must have been a newer product thus how could he have done all that he had leading up to the Nexus 6 escape to Earth? It just does not fit, and if you use Occam's Razor, it's the more simple explanation that is most likely where the truth lies. Deckard, was human.

Rachael did have a 4 year life span. She just died during childbirth. Perhaps because of this limit? We know by watching the original that replicants get progressively weaker as they get near the end of their life span. Roy Batty had to stab his right hand with a nail in order prevent it from going numb. Also, as mentioned in the sequel, only the nexus 8 were able to live naturally.

You're getting bogged-down in details and missing the growth of Deckard's character.

In the beginning, he's a burnout.
He takes the job because he's threatened by Bryant.
Over the course of the movie, he learns that the replicants have hopes and dreams and fears. He feels bad about killing them.
He forces himself on Rachael and feels bad, even though she's a replicant and, in that regard, she's no different than a Fleshlight.

By the end, though, he has empathy for Roy Batty and the replicants, he can't bring himself to kill anymore because he realizes replicant life matters as well.

tl,dr:
Deckard's growth as a character is important, what happens before or after the events of the movie really isn't.

Kek agrees it seems.

Deckard is not a replicant.

Rachel IS the unicorn, the human-replicant (also this gets confirmed in the secuel, as she is the only replicant ever to give birth to a child), a one of a kind replicant.

The only bright thing about Deckard's life was the unicorn dream, then he finds it in Rachel.

impressive samefagging

Blade Runner is a better film is Deckard is a replicant.

2049 is a better film if Deckard is a human.

Rather than your obscure symbology, isn't it more likely that they used a unicorn because it's an animal that isn't real, implying Deckard himself may not be real?

Also: did Fancher script the unicorn scene and the ending? People claim Ridley haphazardly threw in the unicorn shot but it seems way too integral to the movie for that to be the case.

The way I read into it, the possibility that the natural born "replicant" might have a replicant mother and a human father is much more important and interesting.

The fact that Deckart appears thirty years later in the second movie shows that Villeneuve and the writers had to suddenly add in the extended life of Nexus 8. There was no mention at all of replicants having an extended life beyond the Nexus 6 life span in the theatrical and Director's cut. Nexus 8's sudden ability to live longer was a McGuffin to allow for this idea that Deckart was a replicant.

For Deckart to have been a replicant would also have meant that there are many more replicant conspirators needed to be in on it, like his Deckart's boss and other secondary characters in the movie. Those he interacted with to further his investigation implied he had long term relationships. The implication from that is that anyone could be a Replicant and you won't know it.

I think the implications of the child were far more important. Biologists will tell you that members of different species cannot interbred and the existence of the child clearly shows that Replicants are of the same species. From that, it means that replicants are equals unless you want society to return to slavery. For me, slavery and our disposable society are what I saw being the central questions to the movie.

And then throw in the relationship between Joe and his hologram "wife". If a human can love a replicant (Deckart and Rachel), then can a replicant love an AI (Joe and his DVD player)?

what does the fact that he is a replicant add to the story? it plays no role in the movie itself, so why would he tease such a thing afterwards?

ridley is such a fucking hack, always has been

How can you like a movie and not like the director?

>K hits every single person he shoots at
>Deckard misses

>what does the fact that he is a replicant add to the story
How about the fact that we've been symphatizing with him for the entire movie thinking he's a human, underlining the entire point of the "replicants aren't less human than we are" theme.

NO THAT DOESNT FUCKING MATTER A REPLICANT KILLING REPLICANTS IS BORING A HUMAN KILLING REPLICANTS AND FALLING IN LOVE WITH ONE IS INTERESTING YOU STUPID FUCKING BASTARD

Calm down Patrick.

...

the movie never gave hints or implied this in any way, and mentioning it afterwards is completely irrelevant

who says i liked Blade Runner? fucking boring trash movie.

>the movie never gave hints or implied this in any way
Except that it does, multiple times, as already mentioned in this thread.

Saw the theatrical cut with the voiceovers on syfy the other days, and his eyes sere red in it. I think it may have been a lighting error.

The idea of Deckard being a replicant wasn't conceived in the time between the release of the original and the final cut. It was always there, just less obvious.

NO FUCK YOU FUCKING COCKSUCKING NIGGER KEK FAGGOTS IF DECKHARD IS A FUCKING REPLICANT THE WHOLE FUCKING MOVIE IS POINTLESS RIDLEY SCOTT DOESNT KNOW FUCKALL DECKARD IS A FUCKING HUMAN END OF FUCKING STORY YOU FUCKING DUMBFUCKS

Are you thinking of when he kills Zorah and the police chief tells him there are four more to go instead of just three? If that's the case, they specifically mention that it's Rachel since she ran away from Tyrell Corp earlier.

Yeah that scene, I could've sworn in the cut I watched, that scene was at the end of the film, and Rachel isn't mentioned.

Just a sort of open ended line about there being another replicant out there.

Once again I'm sure I'm misremembering.

>modens pollens

Guys, this is not open to debate anymore. The director´s cut states beyond all doubt that he is a replicant.

> The creator states that he wanted to make a replicant more human. Thus he ages, he is not super stroing and his eyes don´t glow
> We see Dekard being activated on chinatown
> Then there is the unicorn dream
> The fact that the other detective knows about the unicorn dream
> Roy recognizing what Dekard is and not killing him

Come fucking on guys. Get your asses out of your heads.

If he knew dekkard was a replicant does that mean everyone on the force knew? Did everyone just go along with it?
Would his partner get a list of his memories?
Would he have a list of his dreams of unicorns?

I really don't think he's a replicant, but do you know why Gaff follows him around? I could probably work it out given another viewing, but I'd just like to see another explanation

The new movie confirms he's not.

The old Skinjobs had limited lifespans, it was part of their progamming. Thus he woulda been dead a long time ago.