What are Replicants? I don't mean this in the metaphysical

>>82299449
sure

>>82299449
Pretty much just genetically engineered humans. They're so much superior due to this, as they're designed to be stronger and smarter.

They're completely human, depending on your view on the matter.

>>82299449
They are bio mechanical androids. In the movie all replicants are listed as artificial or robots. Example: the snakes scales are artificial with bar-codes on them. The eye doctor, etc...

>>82299462
>>82299506
retard alert

>>82299449
As far as I'm concerned in the Dick's original novel they were androids, but Ridley felt more appropriate for them to be a product of bioengeneering, not robotics

>>82299559
How come we've got no proof of them having mechanical components or parts? And I'd imagine they're called "artificial" to make dehumanise them.
Eye doctor: always just assumed he was just making models and prototypes.
Bar-codes: You can make the cells change to do that.

And they seem to die awfully fucking easily for androids.

>>82299449
>>82299559
>Although the press kit released to the media for the film explicitly defined a replicant as, "A genetically engineered creature composed entirely of organic substance",[8] the physical make-up of the replicants themselves is not clear. In the opening crawl of the film, replicants are said to be the result of "advanced robot evolution." The crawl also states that they were created by "genetic engineers." Characters mention that they have eyes and brains like humans, and they are seen to bleed when injured. The only way of telling a replicant from a human is to ask a series of questions and analyze emotional response, suggesting they are entirely, or almost entirely, organic.

>Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? makes mention of the biological components of the androids, but also alludes to mechanical aspects commonly found in other material relating to robots. It states that the bone marrow can be tested to prove whether it is from a human or replicant.

>In May 2012, Ridley Scott confirmed that the replicants were biological in nature, and contrasted them to the androids in the Alien series. "Roy Batty was an evolved... He wasn't an engine. If I cut him open, there wasn't metal, he was grown... and then within twenty years you get the first bill not passed in the Senate where they applied for replication of animals, sheep and goats and cattle and animals and they turned it down, but if you can do that, then you can do human beings. If you go deeper into it and say 'Yeah, but if you are going to grow a human being, does he start that big and I've got to see him through everything?' I don't want to answer the question, because of course he does... Ash in Alien had nothing to do with Roy Batty, because Roy Batty is more humanoid, whereas Ash was more metal".[9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replicant#Organic_or_mechanical.3F

Do they rot when they die?

>>82299634
If they are biological then what was up with Pris' weird death? She started vomiting up white liquid like the Synthetics in the Alien films

>>82299449
I always thought they were sintetoids,like humans but made with mechanical organs.

>>82299573
Yeah, just like the sheep in the book! But was the owl a robot too? I don't remember.

>>82299749
The Alien and Blade Runner movies are set in the same universe, apparently.

File: 1454492053307.jpg (14KB, 342x316px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 342x316px

>>82299634
>only way to tell a replicant from a muttonbag-- Voight-Kampff test
>something they have been know to beat

>they also bleed
>WHITE

>>82299573
I think it's more effective. You sympathize with a biological creature's right to live more than a robot's right to live.

>>82301493
I hated this

Also I may be remembering wrong but isn't there a scene in the cold storage where you see one of their organs and it looks like weird tubing? I hope I'm not confusing this with Aliens.

File: the_iThinker.jpg (84KB, 666x666px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 666x666px

>>82301656
>I hope I'm not confusing this with Aliens.
yeah... that's what my subsequent second-thought was... but I'm sure something 'white' oozed in BR...

File: GettyImages-610605132.jpg (56KB, 915x660px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 915x660px

>>82299449
>>i was too busy looking at my phone during the opening

generation kuk'd

>People taking Ridley Scott's word on anything Blade Runner.
He made a fantastic film, but don't listen to his thoughts on the philosophy or morality or finer plot details in it. He's a total pleb and doesn't understand the beauty and irony in something as simple as a Dick story.

>>82299749
No she doesn't

All of the movie's replicants are vat-grown bioengineered synths, but most are are designed for heavy labour: to be stronger, more duable, and thus have a a simpler construction (to support that strength) - hence the short-arse lifespans - they're tools that wear out and get replaced.

Rachael was essentially a pleasure 'bot', no need for strength and durability there so she's almost human in her design and probably the only real concern was making her look pretty.

>>82299449
who cares

i'm more interested in how Roy Baty got a first and last name

>>82299449
>>82299559

if they had mechanical or elecronic parts, they could just be checked with USG or X-Rayed to see if theyre replicant and there would be no need for a fancy Voight-Kampff test to test their personality

>>82299449
I think they are biological but their fine components are synthetic in a way. Grown separately. And like they have normal muscles, but an "A" level has specific proteins that are stronger and more resistant than the human ones. At least the average human.
Just you should see on a microscopic level the difference and you cannot really tell from a really, really strong human.
So you go with the Voight-Kampff test.

>>82299449
I was under the impression that they are synthetic. They are structurally indistinguishable from humans but their bones and organs and all that stuff has a different molecular composition than ours because it's all artificial.

>>82301609
But with a robot you have the whole question thing about whether a robot can ever be considered a living thing if it looks and acts just like one. Like in that A.I. movie.

>>82303255
He gave himself that name because he's a batty creeper like