Was deckard a replicant?

The film is more interesting if he's not and makes less sense if he is.

Ridley Scott: Yes.
Harrison Ford: No.
Philip K. Dick: No.

The answer is no.

>>84732876
Ridley Scott: What day is it? Where am I? Am I making a film today?

>>84732861
This is objectively true, Scott just wants a cheap twist

>>84732223
Does it really matter? No, but he isn't.

When did Ridley Scott go senile? Was it around Legend?

>>84732223
If he is, THEN WHY IS THERE AN OLDMAN DECKARD? I don't give a shit if Ridley scott will whine about it until he dies, if the sequel doesn't explicitly say hes a replicant, then he isn't.

i like beavis and butthead

>>84732223
Shit no. Imagine how old Ridley Scott was when he determined he was going to have himself a good self-indulgent whinge to the contrary and then ask yourself whether he really deserves your respect.

>>84732876

Directors of the movie:
Ridley Scott

Not directors of the movie:
Harrison Ford
Phillip K. Dick (the book is irrelevant because the movie is a loose adaptation anyway)


It is retarded how hard Scott is pushing this idea though. The actual best answer is "he might be a replicant" imo and thats how I see it in the movie, even with the unicorn scene added, its never said outright but just open to interpreting it that way.