Username: Password:

Author Topic: Underestimating The Power Of Research To Define Deckard As A Replicant  (Read 7649 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kinki-g

  • Skin-job
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Firstly to all people that blatantly rule out Deckard as a replicant... you are ridiculous!
honestly there are so many things that suggest that he is a replicant. Let me present in a nice list for you to get you head around.
a) the unicorn link between gaff's origami and the glimpse of a unicorn as deckard plays piano not only suggests deckard is a replicant because how would gaff know about what deckard is thinking but also that gaff himself is a replicant because he is able to connect with deckards thoughts also, thus being true it would be assumed that deckard should also be able to see gaff's thoughts but alas it is only an approx. 2 hour film
b) when deckard and rachel are in deckard's apartment and he questions her about a very specific  memory about the green spider with the red legs yadda yadda yadda... how could he get this information unless of course he lied about looking at rachel's files (which i don't think so, deckard seems trustworthy enough!) or MAYBE deckard is a replicant and as previously stated is able to see also rachels thoughts/memories in this case
c)the director's cut version is actually the moreso original version of the movie as the 1982 released edition containing the voice over's and the 'happy ending' were created in response to people not being able to comprehend the original film and people feeling that is was all to pessimistic. so people that like the voice overs... your a wank job... it was never meant to be like that! although the voice overs would help to emphasise the film noir aspects of the film they also do somewhat hinder the cyberpunk aspects as well.
d) who would know more about the film then the director? the person who shaped, ordered and created everything in his image to convey HIS meaning!
e) final scene as deckard is dumbfounded after roy saves him and gaff says quote "you have done a man's job" this wording suggests also that deckard is a replicant because he has finally lived up to his image of being a human to that of behaving like a human.
f) last but definately not least... who better to hunt replicants then replicants themselves? its like asking who knows you better then you know yourself!
i rest my case in saying that there is clear evidence, although at first i was apprehensive in the thought it is all but another dynamic of the film.
but i am not ruling out all together that deckard may be human as there is also evidence supporting this idea.
it just balls down to how much the evidence is interpreted to support its case.
classic example is the emotional response of deckard, one would assume that he is human, because emotional response is the only thing lacking in replicants and is the only thing that sets them apart from real humans. but on the flip side the emotional response that deckard is showing may also be an example of emotional conditioning that newer model replicants also go through.
overall this film is definately NOT black and white. it is all but many shades of grey.
kinki g

Offline ingels

  • Replicant Friendly
  • Administrator
  • Nexus 6 Replicant (Self-Sufficient Combat Model)
  • *****
  • Posts: 130
  • Los Angeles, 2019 Staff
    • Los Angeles, 2019
You're right, Deck might be a replicant and sending a replicant to get rid of the other replicants are a good idea, let them do themselves in..

I think that it has alot to do with what version of Blade Runner you see. Sure there are alot of evidence in the 1982 version but in the Dir Cut with the unicorn scene there is no doubt about it, sure you can twist and turn the evidence to which side of the "deck-a-rep" or "deck-a-human" table you want !

Still, the many shades of grey that is Blade Runner is the most beutiful shades  O0
Nicklas Ingels / Los Angeles, 2019 Webmaster & Forum Moderator
http://www.tyrell-corporation.pp.se

Offline airdave

  • Skin-job
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • www.outlawzairbrush.com
my answers to your statements:

a) how would Gaff know about the unicorn?...did he? that was never revealed. It would have had no detrimental effect to have revealed in the narration that Gaff knew something about that symbol, so why not include it? Only thing that was presented was Gaff making a unicorn, which happened to be the symbol that Deckard recognized and related to...because thats the connection that was written in to the script for interesting coincidence sake... Not because there was an actual connection. It also brings up the possibilty of Deckard seeing it as a sign of fate to justify his decision to make a change in his life.

b) I never got anything out of this scene.  There is no real indication of elapsed time up to this moment, and Deckard is a cop (on an investigation) who has access to all the files and info on this case aswell as information he may have gotten from Tyrell.  He confirmed fromTyrell that Rachel was indeed a replicant (it was at this time he found out about the "life span") so he would also have found out about the memory implants.

c)hunh? sorry, this statement has nothing to do with Deckard as a replicant.  but why call us "wankers"?  everyone who loves Blade Runner, first saw the narrated version. That is the version that started the interest and created the fans. If there was never another version released, then that would be the only one you have!  Why not just admit that you personally  like the "Directors Cut" version better than the original.  Some of us will prefer the original.  ...and by the way, the Directors Cut was not really Ridley Scotts creation either.

d) why did Ridley wait so long before admitting this theory?  funny how the idea came up and was discredited numerous times until Ridley Scott decided it was an interesting theory that he could take credit for.  Obvious to me that it was an afterthought.

e) would have sounded really stupid to say "you have done a boy's job"...I think we all know what it means to call someone a man.  It s not our way of saying  "you are not an alien", its just a compliment of bravery, strength, performance, maturity, etc.

f) I agree...when hunting deer, we always send out a buck armed with a bow and arrow.  When I go fishing, I usually send out a shark to do my collecting. Why not send out a few inmates to track down criminals??
You wanna know why we wouldn't send a replicant? because humans are so arrogant to think that they are the smartest animal and only a human can do a human's job.  So we would not allow a replicant to do a "mans" job.

and your last comment:
"...but i am not ruling out all together that deckard may be human as there is also evidence supporting this idea.
it just balls down to how much the evidence is interpreted to support its case."
In other words? you can interpret these ideas in any way you want, not necessarily the correct way?

You can't interpret evidence to support a case...that is manipulation of the facts!
Either evidence points to an answer or it is not evidence. It can't point to two answers!


sorry to be so combative with your post, but I personally have never agreed with this theory that Deckard is a replicant
and your "wanker" comment irritated me enough to respond! LOL
its all good!!
« Last Edit: April 17, 2007, 03:03:37 pm by airdave »
Don't Panic!

Offline airdave

  • Skin-job
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • www.outlawzairbrush.com
In light of "new" evidence....
I would like to update and amend my opinion regarding this silly(LOL) "Deckard as a replicant" theory.

Having viewed the Harrison Ford interview (on this sites main page)
I acknowledge the fact that Ridley Scott had some sort of "idea" regarding Deckard as a replicant,
during the making of the film.
Ford claims to have argued (with Scott) over the idea of keeping Deckard as a human.

Although this indicates that some ideas, some discussion and some arguments may have taken place,
it still does not confirm the basic idea of Deckard as a replicant (within the story).
I have read Dick's original novel and there is no indication or basis for this concept.
The movie screenplay does not indicate this idea nor does this idea play out in the movie.
It appears to be only a concept, that could be incorporated into the film, based on exisiting information within the storyline.
I think it is a complete coincidence that certain vague or "grey" areas of the storyline
helped lead Scott to this alternate direction for the film.

I still stand by my opinion that Deckard is not a replicant,
but I acknowledge my mistake in believing Ridley Scott did not have this idea until after the film's completion.
Don't Panic!

Offline ingels

  • Replicant Friendly
  • Administrator
  • Nexus 6 Replicant (Self-Sufficient Combat Model)
  • *****
  • Posts: 130
  • Los Angeles, 2019 Staff
    • Los Angeles, 2019
In light of "new" evidence....
I would like to update and amend my opinion regarding this silly(LOL) "Deckard as a replicant" theory.

Ford claims to have argued (with Scott) over the idea of keeping Deckard as a human.

Well, that is the one thing I think we all can be pretty sure about.. Arguments when the movie was in the making

To me, the two versions of Blade Runner (Dir Cut & Theatrical) splits up in two different ways.. In one we get very vague hints if we have our eyes open
and in the other with the dream it's like getting a bucket of cold water over the head. The movie Blade Runner is alot dfferent from "Does Androids Dream" and
I have no problems with that. I dont think that Ridley's word are final in any way either but it does give Blade Runner a totally new twist when you think about it..

The glowing eyes and everything, I kinda feel that alot of the evidence are very well hidden and some of it may very well be cool "designed" stuff, it really works and
it takes a few "times" with Blade Runner before you find the evidence.. That's a neat thing thou !!

To me, it really doesnt matter but as I said.. It's a totally new twist, like you spliced the movie up in two very different versions and it would maybe be the best solution to the problem with the replicants. Design a replicant, dumber (or smarter) then the replicants before him, not knowing or ever getting to know what he is and sending him out to take care of the other Replicants

There's the perfect fail safe design for you !!
Nicklas Ingels / Los Angeles, 2019 Webmaster & Forum Moderator
http://www.tyrell-corporation.pp.se

Offline rocketpack

  • Skin-job
  • *
  • Posts: 2
As to the subject of Deckard being a replicant: 1) If Deckard was a replicant created especially to retire other replicants he would have been as strong and fast as they were...instead he appears very limited and quite human. 2) When Gaff leaves the origami unicorn; it was after his decision to let Rachel live...he made it for her.  She was a mythical creature and wasn't real...he thought she had a short life span as well and that she would be dead soon...so basically he was saying to Deckard: "You're in love with a dream buddy."

Offline airdave

  • Skin-job
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • www.outlawzairbrush.com
Re: Underestimating The Power Of Research To Define Deckard As A Replicant
« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2007, 05:20:57 am »
excellent points!!
yes, Deckard was good at his job, but definately not as flexible and strong as the replicants.
and
of course...the unicorn is a mythical creature, an illusion, Deckard has found his fantasy escape.
(makes alot more sense to me)

I still believe the replicant idea was nothing more than an afterthought.
Maybe it was an idea bounced around between people during and after the making of the film,
but still an afterthought to the original story and screenplay.

To know for sure...we need to ask the writer himself.
P.K.Dick could best answer the question.
If Dick didn't have this idea first (no matter how obscure in the story)
then it just doesn't make sense for anyone else to suppose the idea.

(and by the way, I personally got no indication of this "theory" from Dick's original story)
Don't Panic!

Offline andy7

  • Skin-job
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: Underestimating The Power Of Research To Define Deckard As A Replicant
« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2007, 07:17:31 am »
In Dick's original story there were two police forces, one was a fake one made up of replicants and they tested him and found him to be human (or did they just find him the same as them?). In the end of the preproduction scripts Deckard muses that he and the replicants were no different, both 'programmed' by their makers and men. He felt that he and Batty were brothers in the fact that they were both 'combat models'. It was this quote that set Ridley off, and according to most sources he decided on his own to make Deckard a replicant. In the end it only matters that there is little difference between man and replicant, and that the enigma of Blade Runner still lives on.

Andy

Offline airdave

  • Skin-job
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • www.outlawzairbrush.com
Re: Underestimating The Power Of Research To Define Deckard As A Replicant
« Reply #8 on: August 10, 2007, 12:17:42 am »
well said..good info
Don't Panic!