Is Deckard a Replicant?
- Thread starter Harvey
- Start date
This is actually, I think, the most persuasive argument for Deckard being a replicant. We see, earlier in the movie, Deckard recount Rachel's "secret" memory about the momma spider, something only she knew - this very VERY subtle hint, given by Gaff, shows (presumably) that he knows something about Deckard that only Deckard could know... though dreams aren't necessarily memories, are they?
I find this less persuasive - mostly because there is supposed to be no visual clues that an individual is a replicant (at least not a Nexus 6 replicant) - so while it might be possible that Ridley Scott was trying to give us, the movie viewer, a more true sense of reality than the real human characters in the movie seem to have, I think it is just as likely that it is something else - after all, not ALL the replicants have the glowing eyes, do they? I don't remember Zhora having them...
True - but this could just as likely be Deckard questioning his own humanity, rather than we the viewers being given evidence that he is, in fact, a replicant - I mean, I have a lot of personal photographs, too...
Also an interesting quote, but only definitively so when you add in the deleted language - If we are to take anything from this it is to say that Gaff believes him to be a replicant - or suspects - but this, when combined with the unicorn dream combined with Gaff's little tinfoil unicorn, really makes it look like Gaff KNOWS, rather than suspects.
This isn't really compelling evidence at all, I think - if Deckard WERE a replicant, he could have been given a test by someone who knew he was a replicant and hid the results from him.
Part of what makes the movie great, and the book itself great, is what makes Philip K. Dick's writing so effective - the viewer/reader is not SUPPOSED to know what is real and what is not - clues are given, but it is left to the observer to decide for themself. And the clues that ARE provided are so subtle that you could miss them, even upon repeat viewings.
You can really get lost in the visual stimulation of the movie and come to assume that Deckard has been a part of the Los Angeles that he walks through for some time... he sure seems like a regular at the noodle bar, for example. But if he IS a replicant, he must be an advanced one, which means he's Nexus 6, which means he can't be very old.
But, if you are the police, and you want to absolve yourself from responsibility of the questionable morality of what you are doing - scragging replicants who may (or may not) fit a definition of "human", what better way to wash your hands of that moral dilemma than to send one of their own kind to do the killing for you?
There are at least seven versions, and Paul Sammon suggests there might be even more versions than that, but the variations are minor once you've seen the Final Cut and the Theatrical Release. Five version have been released on home video (The Workprint, The Theatrical Release, The International Cut, The Director's Cut, The Final Cut).
General Kang said:
True. It's worth pointing out that it's not exactly a dream, even though the scene is usually called the unicorn dream. Ridley Scott calls it a reverie, but I fudged and called it a daydream, since Deckard is in fact, awake during the whole scene.
Scott mentions that the glowing eyes are not diagetic, but a styalistic device. That is to say, they're not a part of the world of the film, just a clue to the audience as to who is a Replicant. I'm not sure if they appear in any of Zhora's scenes or not. They also don't appear in every shot with Rachel and Batty.
Agreed, which is why I filed this under circumstantial evidence.
The fact that the most obvious line was deleted left me to describe this evidence as circumstantial as well, although you're right that it reinforces the origami unicorn as more definitive evidence.
If there was time for that. It seems likely to me that, if Deckard is a Replicant, he was probably only activated when Holden died. It doesn't make much sense to have Replicants on the Police Force and let them retire. Thus, we witness his entire life to the point of getting in the elevator (or beyond, in the Theatrical Release) in the film.
It also has a practical dimension, since Replicants prove themselves to be very dangerous in the film. Why put a human in harm's way when you can roll off an andy (as they're called in Dick's original) from the assembly line to do your dirty work?
There is some ambiguity as to how long Gaff is in the area of Sebastian's apartment in the end. Deckard's voice over in at least one version says, "I watched him die all night," but that is of course absent from the Final Cut. Gaff at least had time to search the apartment and find Deckard's weapon before going to the roof. It seems probable that he may have been watching all along. Indeed, one of the deleted scenes shows Gaff (and Bryant) watching Deckard.
Well, so do humans.
I've only seen one version of the film, and I don't know which one it was; it was screened at an awesome independent theater outside of Boston a few years ago. I keep meaning to pick up the various copies and really get into it, but I haven't yet. I haven't really been able to evaluate the issue fully, but from what I remember, I did kind the tiniest twinge of the feeling that he was a replicant.
Well, so do humans.
But not just a few years, which I thought was the case for replicants. Meaning, they were specifically made to die within about four years.
The unicorn dream paired with the origami unicorn, and Ridley Scott's direct reply that "he's a replicant" settle the issue: Deckerd is a replicant.
I think he's human. I just didn't see the whole he's a Replicant thing.
Oh, and by the way did anyone knoe that the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? has been adapted into a comic?
Oh, and by the way did anyone knoe that the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? has been adapted into a comic?
The super strength would allow Deckard to realise he's a replicant very quickly, possibly leading him to question his orders. It's about giving him the proper mindset.
It was mentioned in some documentary or another that he was quite disappointed to be told he played a good robot.
Was it in "On the edge of Bladerunner"?
Let me begin by saying that I think it doesn't matter what views Scott, Ford or anyone else who worked on "Blade Runner" hold as regards Deckard's 'humanity' or lack thereof. It's certainly interesting to learn of their views and gain insights into the creative process. But I think "Blade Runner", as a work of art, speaks for itself. It is between the beholder and the movie to determine what is 'true'.
With that out of the way I tend to think Deckard's a Replicant. There's the dream/origami which is a very strong pro argument IMHO (and becomes even stronger combined with Gaff's "You did a man's job" comment). I also see the eyes as a pro argument. I definitely remember seeing them on Deckard and Rachael as well as Pris. I don't remember the others at the moment.
The photographs are certainly very interesting I think. What makes me put them into the 'pro' territory is that there is something very strange about them. Among other things (as far as I recall) none of them seem to be recent pictures or pictures of Deckard with someone. They're all old and and/or far removed from him on some level. As if somebody picked them to not explicitly reveal they're not connected to him.
There's another scene I always find interesting and would like to mention. When Deckard is at Tyrell Corp. and is talking to Rachael, Tyrell enters the room at some point. The part I'm talking about goes something like this:
Rachel: "May I ask you a personal question?"
Deckard:"Sure."
Rachel: "Have you ever retired a human, by mistake?"
Deckard: "No."
Rachel: "But in your position that is a risk."
Tyrell: "Is this to be an empathy test? Capilary dilation or the so called blush response? Fluctuation of the pupil, involuntary dilation of the iris."
Now, this scene always confused me because it seemed to me as though Tyrell was asking Racheal and not Deckard. I think this is because her questions are almost like those you might ask in a VK test.
So, to an extent, this scene feels to me as though Tyrell knows that Deckard is a Replicant. It's almost like he's playing with him.
I realize this is nothing to go on in terms of 'evidence'. But I do find it interesting nonetheless and wonder if anyone else ever had that reaction to the scene.
Btw. it's been a while since I read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep". But I remember coming away thinking it was by no means certain that Deckard was human being. I would say that, yes, it was certainly very likely. But as is often the case with PKD's stories, very little is truly certain.
Finally, I never understood why people thought the story was pointless if Deckard was indeed a Replicant. What I took away from "Blade Runner" was that it wasn't your 'nature' that defined you but rather your actions. And in that way, one Roy Batty becomes more 'human' than Deckard when he offered him mercy and salvation in a way Deckard never does throughout the film. Whether Deckard is a human or a Replicant seems unimportant to me in this context, especially since we can envision either being capable of what Deckard does.
With that out of the way I tend to think Deckard's a Replicant. There's the dream/origami which is a very strong pro argument IMHO (and becomes even stronger combined with Gaff's "You did a man's job" comment). I also see the eyes as a pro argument. I definitely remember seeing them on Deckard and Rachael as well as Pris. I don't remember the others at the moment.
The photographs are certainly very interesting I think. What makes me put them into the 'pro' territory is that there is something very strange about them. Among other things (as far as I recall) none of them seem to be recent pictures or pictures of Deckard with someone. They're all old and and/or far removed from him on some level. As if somebody picked them to not explicitly reveal they're not connected to him.
There's another scene I always find interesting and would like to mention. When Deckard is at Tyrell Corp. and is talking to Rachael, Tyrell enters the room at some point. The part I'm talking about goes something like this:
Rachel: "May I ask you a personal question?"
Deckard:"Sure."
Rachel: "Have you ever retired a human, by mistake?"
Deckard: "No."
Rachel: "But in your position that is a risk."
Tyrell: "Is this to be an empathy test? Capilary dilation or the so called blush response? Fluctuation of the pupil, involuntary dilation of the iris."
Now, this scene always confused me because it seemed to me as though Tyrell was asking Racheal and not Deckard. I think this is because her questions are almost like those you might ask in a VK test.
So, to an extent, this scene feels to me as though Tyrell knows that Deckard is a Replicant. It's almost like he's playing with him.
I realize this is nothing to go on in terms of 'evidence'. But I do find it interesting nonetheless and wonder if anyone else ever had that reaction to the scene.
Btw. it's been a while since I read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep". But I remember coming away thinking it was by no means certain that Deckard was human being. I would say that, yes, it was certainly very likely. But as is often the case with PKD's stories, very little is truly certain.
Finally, I never understood why people thought the story was pointless if Deckard was indeed a Replicant. What I took away from "Blade Runner" was that it wasn't your 'nature' that defined you but rather your actions. And in that way, one Roy Batty becomes more 'human' than Deckard when he offered him mercy and salvation in a way Deckard never does throughout the film. Whether Deckard is a human or a Replicant seems unimportant to me in this context, especially since we can envision either being capable of what Deckard does.
Agreed and disagreed. I think author intent is important to consider when analyzing any creative work. In this case, the author or auteur is Scott, especially considering his nature as a very involved director.
But, sometimes a creative work takes on a life of its own. IMO, I can't think of any that would fall into this special category at the moment, but I'm sure I could come up with some eventually.
While I've never noticed that in that scene, the scenes between Deckard and Bryant have always struck me as strange. Bryant seems to have this stiff attitude, a sort of nervous look in his eyes.
It's been a few months since I read it, but Rick gives himself the VK Test with another man reading him the results and he seemed satisfied with the readings to me.
I suppose that degree of removal, plus he would be a little bias if he actually was an andy, causes some doubt... Seems like a very minor doubt to me, personally.
yeah, aren't replicants supposed to be much stronger than humans? AFAIK, Deckard got his ass kicked on more than one occasion. If he's a replicant, he should be just as strong.
Edit: Deckard isn't a replicant. I hope Deckerd isn't either.
Is it crazy to think that at the end of the film, not knowing for sure whether he is a Replicant or not is kind of the point?
When you give Deckerd a dream about a unicorn, and then you demonstrate that Olmos' character knows what Deckerd dreams about, you're establishing that the dreams are something "installed" in Deckerd by others.
That scene, which was part of Scott's original intention for the film, was not ambiguous. That is why when asked years later Scott would answer unambiguously that Deckerd was a replicant.
The point was only obscured by the editing of the original theatrical cut which was mandated by the studio to present a tidy, "happy" ending.
That scene, which was part of Scott's original intention for the film, was not ambiguous. That is why when asked years later Scott would answer unambiguously that Deckerd was a replicant.
The point was only obscured by the editing of the original theatrical cut which was mandated by the studio to present a tidy, "happy" ending.
But as has already been pointed out, it wasn't a dream, as such. Deckard was awake when that scene took place. So there's got to be other reasons both he and Gaff knew about it.
Seems we're the only ones to think so.
This is one of those things that is missing from movies today. Movies today like to answer any an all questions about the characters or incidents in the movie. I miss the days were movies left you with questions so people could sit around the room, or message boards as is the case today, and discuss things like this. It always made the movie more interesting.
Oh, I am in the he is not a replicant camp. No real logic or reason, I just never got the feeling he was.
Oh, I am in the he is not a replicant camp. No real logic or reason, I just never got the feeling he was.
I too have always enjoyed the ambiguity of Deckard's status and the discussions it creates. Personally, I've always preferred to believe that he's human. I just find it thematically more interesting: by the end (due to his relationship with Rachel, Batty showing him mercy, etc.), Deckard probably realizes that these bio-mechanical Replicants are more human than he is -- at least in a "spiritual" sense (so to speak).
Well, if he is a Replicant, then that probably depends on what generation he is. While I'm loath to bring up the studio-imposed "happy ending" of the theatrical cut, Deckard's closing narration, IIRC, mentions that Tyrell informed him that Rachel was specially designed without the four-year lifespan. Whether you accept that as a canonical part of the film is up to you, but either way, the idea of some Replicants being created without the limited lifespan sounds reasonable, and it's possible it could apply to Deckard as well.
Well, if he is a Replicant, then that probably depends on what generation he is. While I'm loath to bring up the studio-imposed "happy ending" of the theatrical cut, Deckard's closing narration, IIRC, mentions that Tyrell informed him that Rachel was specially designed without the four-year lifespan. Whether you accept that as a canonical part of the film is up to you, but either way, the idea of some Replicants being created without the limited lifespan sounds reasonable, and it's possible it could apply to Deckard as well.
Similar threads
