Was deckard a replicant?

im a replicant

>>84883863
he got his ass kicked by every replicant he met, even the sex doll one.
no he wasnt a replicant, that was just Ridley Scott getting pissed off with being asked the question a million times.

i'll be the fucking judge of that

He was a cyborg who engaged in cybersex

Yes
No
It's ambiguous and adds to the moral questions of the movie

>>84884096

Will the sequel ruin it?

>>84883863
ridley said yes he was so get fuked

in the book it's much more ambiguous and a running theme, where he ponders it at times. there also isn't anything in the book that directly contradicts the possibility of him being a replicant. it's pretty much ignored entirely in the movie past a passing remark, and he demonstrates empathy on a few occasions, making it null to speculate, regardless of ridley's bullshit retconning. J.F. sebastian is also more thoroughly explored as a character, blade runner really is one of those situations where the book is better than the movie. it's still a very good movie though.

>>84883863
Objectively yes

Even if you don't take Ridley's word for it (and if you don't you're a fucking idiot), there was no other plausible meaning behind the unicorn origami.

>>84885632
i think that in the theatric version there was no unicorn dream so the unicorn origami doesn't mean that that guy know his dreams

>>84885632
fuck ridley's sloppily formed canon, read the book.

replicants don't rescue bitches because they feel sorry for them because they can't feel empathy and this is covered in the movie. he literally can't be one in the movie, which is where it fails.

>>84886371
So replicants are basically just sociopaths in the book?

He is because Ridley added that half-baked dumb as fuck idea into the Directors Cut and confirmed it an interview so now we're stuck with it.

>>84886484
and in the movies. the tests at the beginning were empathy tests. replicants are incapable of feeling empathy. deckard feels empathy in the movie, however, making ridley's statements sloppy as fuck.

>>84885031
yeah but he's not the author of the book.

no he's not a replicant. case closed. fuck this meme.

>>84886887
to be fair in the book it's entirely possible that he's a replicant.

>>84883863
Where can I get the director's cut minus the stupid unicorn dream? Ridley is a hack.

>>84886971
it's true. but ridley doesn't have a voice to say whether it's true or not

i think the real way to truly know if he is or not is to read all of the books, even the ones not made by Dick. but i don't think he is.

Why do people act like the unicorn dream sequence was never part of the movie until Ridley "added" it? It was part of the movie. They even used the original scene in the Final Cut instead of the alternate sequence found in the '92 Director's Cut.

Just accept it, lads. Deckard was a Replicant.

>>84887027
as far as the book canon goes I'm actually on the side that he is, due to his lack of empathy in some situations that would normally call for at least passing thoughts about another person's feelings, and the unusual circumstances around his work and the people he's "hired" by (upscale replicant manufacturers). though in reality it probably is just dick doing his mindfuck schizo ambiguous stuff and there is no answer.

movie canon it's impossible for him to be one.

>>84887181
replicants don't feel empathy but deckard sure as hell did in the movie. if he is one it's a plot hole.

>>84887219
My theory has always been that Deckard is some sort of new, more advanced Replicant.

I just don't see how anyone can deny that the unicorn origamis that Gaff was making was his way of letting Deckard know that he knew what his "dreams" were, because they were implanted. It's no different than Rachel believing she's something she's not.

>deckard was weak at compared to ANY replicant
>He basically raped the replicant woman
>Unicorn scene added by retard ridley and not backed by anyone else involved
>A lot of the movies themes make no sense if Ridley is a replicant
Face it lads he wasn't a replicant

>>84887381
it really is as simple as if he's a replicant, there are plotholes everywhere. maybe someday we'll get a proper adaptation where there is true ambiguity but I doubt it.

I'm also bummed that ridley botched up sebastian's character because he's like an actual retard in the book not some rain man. just this autist who lives on his own in an abandoned apartment complex because he's incompatible with society. obsessed with some religion. embodiment of the moral fool archetype.

>>84883863
Your post is a replicant.

>>84887219
wasn't the whole point of the movie that replicants can feel empathy

File: time_to_die_by_anderpeich-d47nqns.jpg (69KB, 900x460px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 900x460px

He was a replicant so advanced you couldn't tell him apart from humans.

>>84887575
>>84887381
>>84887219
>>84887187
>>84887181
Because it wasn't in the movie. It wasn't in the script, all the writers disagree with him, the footage was taken from fucking Legend, its just some stupid thing Ridley came up with on his own and as the Alien franchise has repeatedly shown, Ridley Scott is fucking stupid.

>>84888942
what on earth gives you that idea?

>>84883863
It's not important whether or not he was a replicant, it's important that the question exists at all.

>>84886823
not the other anon but why did batty save deckard at the end?

>>84890592
Not >>84888942, but doesn't Roy Batty saving Deckard demonstrate empathy?

>>84890896
For the same reason he told Deckard what he's seen. Batty wanted to live forever so that everything he's experienced doesn't go to waste, by telling Deckard what he saw, he doesn't die. Not completely at least.

There's also another layer, in that Batty doesn't just tell that to Deckard, we as the audience are also a part of that conversation. And since those final words are one of the most well known pieces of dialogue in film history, then Batty has been immortalized.

>>84890937
yea i thought the whole point of that scene was that roy wanted to give deckard a taste of human medicine by demonstrating how it feels to be chased and hunted. and then roy saves deckard before dying.

so wtf. it's been a few years but how is this even a question

>>84883863
IGN: At what point while making the original film did you decide that Deckard would be a Replicant?

Ridley Scott: Oh, it was always my thesis theory. It was one or two people who were relevant were... I can't remember if Hampton agreed with me or not. But I remember someone had said, “Well, isn't it corny?” I said, “Listen, I'll be the best f#@king judge of that. I'm the director, okay?” So, and that, you learn -- you know, by then I'm 44, so I'm no f#@king 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, 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 f#@king 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.

>>84890896
Because the only way Batty lives on is in the memory of Deckard.

>>84890976
>There's also another layer, in that Batty doesn't just tell that to Deckard, we as the audience are also a part of that conversation. And since those final words are one of the most well known pieces of dialogue in film history, then Batty has been immortalized.
I'd be embarrassed to post this even anonymously.