Deckard was a replicant in Blade Runner?

File: imdb theory.png (2MB, 1904x780px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1904x780px

No he wasn't. He was a blade runner for many years and people knew him. The rules are 4 years for replicants.

And don't give me the eyes bullshit. Scott liked the effect there's no genius story telling behind it.

>>81815872
In the uncut version its heavily implied. I think in the new one hell at least be paranoid he is.

>>81816028
>at least be paranoid he is.
You could say he's a paranoid android.

>in blade runner everyone is a replicant
>those Deckard is hunting are just malfunctioning models
>hence no one having a true free will in the movie/cinema except for the hunted group

>>81815872
If he was replicant why did he got his ass handed to him by everyone?
Why is he known as a badass blade runner again?

>>81815872
yeah in the script it was going to be a full reveal but in the cut they decided they had no place to reveal it, at the beginning would obviously ruin the film and its concepts and at the end there was no time and it would have been extremely clumsy.

>>81816028
well he's clearly survived well past 4 years and Rachel hasn't, but it is not like he couldn't find out very easily and he has near total freedom at the end of the film since he is allowed to retire. It is more likely it wouldn't matter to him.

>>81816002
He can be copy of himself, him self every 4 years.

>>81816170
He was weak to be like human. How badass blader runner become pice of trash.

>>81816527
English please

>>81816575
I mean he was weak, to looks like human.

>>81816002
Yeah, he could easily have been a replicant with implanted memories, like Rachel. Some people think he was just that with Gaff's implanted memories, woould explain why Gaff makes all the origami that line up with Deckard's thoughts.

File: veerle_baetens-22-10-2009-17.jpg (27KB, 750x423px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 750x423px

>>81815872
Riddley Scott said he is a replicant, watch Mark Kermode's On The Edge of Blade Runner documentary.
At the very end of the doc when Mark asks Scott what was the mesning of the unicorn origami he literally says
>he is a replicant

>>81816527
Deckard was probably a Level B or C

File: roy_batty.jpg (60KB, 1200x794px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 1200x794px

>>81817447
forgot pic

When something like that isn't spelled out for you, it means that perhaps leaving it nebulous is more meaningful than being explicit.

Don't be so autistic in needing to find the right answer. Consider the meaning in leaving that question unanswered, and how that might further underscore the themes that the film explores.

>>81816002
>He was a blade runner for many years and people knew him.

Who knows him in the film other than the police chief?

>>81816853
>Its too bad she won't live. But then again who >does

>>81816225
In the script he wasn't going to be one, once Ford, and Hauer, found out that the autist Ridley wanted to change the script into Deckard being a replicant they were pissed. The argument ended with Ridley telling Ford he wasn't going to be a replicant, but then still put it in the film.

There's like 7 different versions of this film, which one is the best?

>>81818337
Final Cut

>>81815872
i dont know. i thought i read something where ridley scott said he was "definitely" a replicant. now people are saying he is not. i think he is but one without the 4 year lifespan. interested to find out

>>81818348
I want that car

Why send a human to hunt down replicants when you can send another replicant.

Shits dangerous.

File: spinner.jpg (239KB, 1000x631px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 1000x631px

>>81818442
>2019 soon
>still no Spinners

>>81818442
i customize motocycle to Bladerruner style.

The book is better. [\spoiler]

The point is that it's ambiguous. The whole film is asking the question "what makes a human", and you're left to figure that out for yourself by the ambiguous nature of Ford's character. This is the reason there's so many damn cuts too. It's art transcending the fiction: Scott wanted you to keep questioning. So he releases a slightly different product every few years that changes the parameters of the film, and results in you reaching a different conclusion on the "is he a replicant" question. By doing this, scott is asking the audience to reflect on what made them decide he was a replicant and not a human in one version, and what made them decide the opposite in another version. This enlightens us on our own, personal, definitions of humanity.

He's obviously a replicant, by any of the cuts other than theatrical.

>>81816853
Oh man that's my BR canon now.

>>81818515
I'm sure Alphabet or Facebook will cook up something by then.

>>81819177
And that's why he pilots him around. He has the walking stick because he hurt himself in the line of duty.

>>81815872
Ford and the script writer both insist he wasn't a replicant, that Ridley Scott decided he was after the fact. It makes no fucking sense at all for a society that is so terrified of replicants that they've banned them off-world and will kill them onsight to allow one to become a Blade Runner where it gets to decide who is and isn't human.

"Oh but he's a new model, like Rachel. He doesn't even realize he's a replicant so that makes it ok."

Get the fuck out of here with that bullshit. Do you really think the other Blade Runners are going to be ok with that shit? Or does no one realize he just suddenly showed up and believes himself to have been there all along? Because that's even more fucking stupid.