“He is definitely a replicant” – Sir Ridley Scott
Blade Runner 2
- Thread starter WarpFactorZ
- Start date
Meh. Ridley is a visuals man. His storytelling is a bit....wobbly. See also Prometheus.
The actor does not "know his character best." He knows what his choices as a performer meant to him. The people who give him the words to say - Peoples, Fancher and Scott - get the call on this kind of thing if they care to spell it out.
The audience can dislike what the creators intend, but if it's spelled out it's not open to interpretation.
In this case, the character's nature wasn't spelled out in the original theatrical release.
The audience can dislike what the creators intend, but if it's spelled out it's not open to interpretation.
In this case, the character's nature wasn't spelled out in the original theatrical release.
That just about covers it. Lol.
It was spelled out in the theatrical cut, particularly in the narration. Most of the support for Deckard as a replicant comes entirely from the later versions, which still manage to leave it unclear despite their alleged intent (I also think Ridley only decided it was the case many many years later too.)
Everything, and I mean literally everything, that can point to him being a replicant is as likely if not more likely to indicate he is not, or serves a different purpose in the story as shown...with one exception, Deckards eye glow outside the bathroom. That is explained simply as a production snafu (he's in range of the lights and glass being used to light Rachael's eyes.)
The unicorn in particular has a ton of symbolism regularly associated with it, and even if the dream sequence had been scripted and shot for the film (it appears it never was? They used footage from Legend for the Directors Cut) that symbolism in itself would just as likely refer to Rachael and Deckard thinking of her.
There is precisely zero evidence presented on screen that Deckard is a replicant in any version, and plenty of evidence to the contrary.
And since it's pretty integral to the character, if he was, I would have expected Harrison would have been told. (Look at Sid over on Ds9, he was pretty annoyed when Bashir was suddenly an augment)
The writers, who worked on the film before Ridley was on board, also go with 'not a replicant'. It's something people may like, for whatever reason, but the narrative does not support it.
The story also loses any meaning....a slave goes around killing escaped slaves, without ever knowing he himself was a slave? Unless it's spelled out for the audience, or the character discovers it in the narrative....that's a seriously useless story.
It's given the film some publicity since, but it's really emperors new clothes, people looking for a deeper layer of meaning (cos the film wasn't already up to its ears in philosophical musing right?) and that feeding back to create this legend. Now, people can enjoy it, but I would suggest stating it definitively misses a lot. I even accept stating it definitively the other way for the later cuts misses some of the intent with those edits....those edits are meant to make it vague. But they cannot conclusively support Deckard as a replicant without cutting more of the film than they did or even could.
If the new film was called BR549, would that mean Junior Samples is a replicant? 
Junior played him as one, so yes.If the new film was called BR549, would that mean Junior Samples is a replicant?
They will likely do nothing I suspect. With Ridley involved it could go full Replicant though. Funnily enough, Eldon Tyrell was planned to be a replicant in the original, so I am also wondering where they will take the Tyrell corporation.
I actually have a sneaky suspicion in BR2049 it's going to turn out everyone on earth is actually a replicant, that's the big secret.
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091107071542AA5KkCc
I will just leave this here as to why the unicorn makes as much if not more sense in the theatrical/international cut. Also remember...the origami made by gaff usually represent what he thinks Deckard is up to. 'It's a shame she won't live...but then again who does.'
I will just leave this here as to why the unicorn makes as much if not more sense in the theatrical/international cut. Also remember...the origami made by gaff usually represent what he thinks Deckard is up to. 'It's a shame she won't live...but then again who does.'
Ridley is a visuals man and a great storyteller. See also Blade Runner.
Wired: It was never on paper that Deckard is a replicant.
Scott: It was, actually. That's the whole point of Gaff, the guy who makes origami and leaves little matchstick figures around. He doesn't like Deckard, and we don't really know why. If you take for granted for a moment that, let's say, Deckard is a Nexus 7, he probably has an unknown life span and therefore is starting to get awfully human. Gaff, at the very end, leaves an origami, which is a piece of silver paper you might find in a cigarette packet, and it's a unicorn. Now, the unicorn in Deckard's daydream tells me that Deckard wouldn't normally talk about such a thing to anyone. If Gaff knew about that, it's Gaff's message to say, "I've read your file, mate." That relates to Deckard's first speech to Rachael when he says, "That's not your imagination, that's Tyrell's niece's daydream." And he describes a little spider on a bush outside the window. The spider is an implanted piece of imagination. And therefore Deckard, too, has imagination and even history implanted in his head.
Scott: It was, actually. That's the whole point of Gaff, the guy who makes origami and leaves little matchstick figures around. He doesn't like Deckard, and we don't really know why. If you take for granted for a moment that, let's say, Deckard is a Nexus 7, he probably has an unknown life span and therefore is starting to get awfully human. Gaff, at the very end, leaves an origami, which is a piece of silver paper you might find in a cigarette packet, and it's a unicorn. Now, the unicorn in Deckard's daydream tells me that Deckard wouldn't normally talk about such a thing to anyone. If Gaff knew about that, it's Gaff's message to say, "I've read your file, mate." That relates to Deckard's first speech to Rachael when he says, "That's not your imagination, that's Tyrell's niece's daydream." And he describes a little spider on a bush outside the window. The spider is an implanted piece of imagination. And therefore Deckard, too, has imagination and even history implanted in his head.
A lot of those make me think the author wasn't paying attention to the film.
"Deckard expresses feelings throughout the film..." (This covers many of the individual points he lists) - As we know, the four year life span is because the Nexus 6 may develop its own emotional response after that amount of time.
"Deckard does not require or carry any photographs" - Even if that were true, so what? But Deckard has photos all over his piano.
"Deckard was married – this is not an implanted memory like that of a replicant, but is stated as a fact by Deckard." - How stupid. It's stated as a fact only because he remembers it.
That's not to say I disagree with the sentiment. I just find a lot of his list spurious.
It's garbled to be sure, but the points are salient...implanted memories offer a buffer when the replicants develop their emotions. Nexus 6 only have four years of their own memories (hence their tiny family and all of Leon's photos - that's Leon building his own memories. None of the other replicants have photos, Batty derides Leon for them. Rightly so...they lead Deckard to Zhora.) and Rachael has memory implants and develops her emotions during the film. If Deckard is an earlier model...he won't have the memories, if he's a later model than Rachael, or the same, then he's waaay further along the emotional learning curve...so how old is he supposed to be? He's out the other side and emotionally damaged. (See the whole flattened affect discussion in the novel.)
Deckards photos are either family photos (in which case he's not a gaff model, but could be a Holden) or are simply a collection of antique photos. Not one of them is actually of his memories, which all the other replicant photos are...Rachael with her mother, Leon's family documentary. Basically, Deckards are set dressing. (Tangent here...some state that because Rachael plays the same tune as Deckard, he must be a replicant. Which ignores the point in sheet music.)
The marriage memory (cold fish) could of course be an implant like Rachael's...except one is stated directly to the audience only, and one is stated to another character. Since Deckards narration explains a chunk of the world building and other characters...why make him an unreliable narrator? If x is untrue, is not also y and z? It is useless as evidence either way, except as a parallel to the book and an explanation for some of Deckards apartment. Not only have they given this guy implanted memories, but they built him a full physical Legend. None of which would make him more efficient at being a Blade Runner, in fact, it's the opposite...it's that loneliness that in part drives him into his eventual rebellion.
It's still never on paper (apart from the issue of Wired that prints the interview.) and that is not the only, or even most likely, explanation of Gaff or his origami, put in context of the rest of the film, or the other origami figures. In this exact quote he fucks up and refers to Tyrell's niece's actual experience as a daydream, as imagination. A dream is not a memory either, though you can remember a dream (though you more often don't.) None of the production material refers to Deckard being a replicant, and nor does Ridley until the theory is already out there (directors cut publicity basically.)
Even his worst films look visually great. Even his best films can get a bit shonky on the story side. (I recently read someone stating how well Ripley is painted as a character with visuals in Alien. She isn't...we know almost nothing about her character until Aliens in terms of backstory. None of those characters have anything to define them in Alien.) He also shapes things in edits, sometimes with a cheat here and there as he changes his mind about story elements or visuals (the reused shots of Roy in BR, using...whatever that guy was called in Alien..baseball cap...his death as Lamberts death to introduce a sexual nature to the scene for shock value) and occasionally likes to repeat himself (commodus and his father in gladiator...that murder scene is almost identical to Roy killing Tyrell.) Prometheus is a movie length example of him changing his mind back and forth during a whole production, and making a mess of the story as a result.
He is an excellent visuals man, excellent, and in some ways one of my favourite directors. Especially when he's got a great art team to work with. But he seems to change his mind a lot, and the visuals usually hide story issues (this is true in every version of Blade Runner particularly.)
If you want to blame someone about Prometheus, then blame Damon Lindelof. Damon Lindelof and his stupid script rewrites. None of Prometheus story problems are present in Jon Spaihts' original Alien: Engineers script. Of course Ridley Scott is a big name and he should have said no at Fox's pressure for rewrites. He's also the director and ultimately the movie's success or failure rests with him.
The problem stemmed from Ridley deciding he wanted a Trilogy and not a prequel to Alien anymore...but after they had set up to make a prequel to Alien. So suddenly we aren't on LV726whatever it was, Just in a place that ends up looking a lot like it, and all of the stuff that looks like a set up for alien...wasn't anymore. Except the sets and everything has been set for that...other pieces then fell apart somewhere before filming and again before editing....and no one but the director can be held responsible for 'if she runs a few feet sideways she will be fine' death. I thought Ridley was overall in charge or Prometheus? It's whole shtick was him returning to the franchise (which AVP2 had thoroughly killed stone dead. AVP itself wasn't too bad.)
A friend of mine, big Alien fan, summed it up: Prometheus is proof you can polish a turd. And it had so much of Ridleys usual polish, which basically comes down to a massive attention to world building and visual detail. (Which is what I like about his films) but also magnified examples of his usual flaws (he doesn't actually give a monkeys why something is happening sometimes, as long as it looks nice when it happens... why are there nice looking water reflections on Rachael's face in a room devoid of water? Why on a planet apparently overcrowded, is the Bradbury hotel basically empty? Why is there a body in the bath in this empty hotel? And those ones can be ignored because they aren't important. The ones in Prometheus buggered the story up.) which was a shame. He is an awesome director, but he needs an airtight script and a damn good reason to stick to it, or his mind will wander and you end up with a beautiful mess, which producers and editors then have to rescue. It's why I am glad he is not directing 2049, though I would love to see him hit those visuals again.
I love his work, but as a storyteller myself, I know I would love it a lot more if he can just pay attention to thinks like character and story a bit more. His mind...wanders to his next film almost every time. Can you imagine how awesome that would be? No need for extended or directors cuts, no last minute bodge jobs...an actual clear vision beginning to end with him directing. That would be worth seeing.
Was Deckard a replicant in Blade Runner?
In the Director's and Final cuts the answer is definitely yes. In the Theatrical cut most widely seen in the US there are still hints that Deckard might be a replicant which include (from wikipedia):
In the Director's cut the answer is absolutely yes that Deckard is a replicant. The scene of Graff and the origami unicorn does not allow for any other interpretation other than Deckard is a replicant.
In the Director's and Final cuts the answer is definitely yes. In the Theatrical cut most widely seen in the US there are still hints that Deckard might be a replicant which include (from wikipedia):
- the fact that there is no mention of, or questions asked about, Deckard's life during the period between his (alleged) previous stint as a police officer and the events of the film. The only exception being the mention of a failed marriage early in the film.
- the fact that in all versions of the film, Gaff's first line translates to "You are the blade, blade runner".
- the fact that Deckard's flat is full of photographs, none of them recent or in color. Replicants have a taste for photographs, because it provides a tie to a non-existent past.
- the (possible) ambiguity behind Bryant's threat: "If you're not a cop, you're little people" when Deckard makes a move for the door.
- the scene in which Rachael asks Deckard whether or not he has passed the Voight-Kampff test himself, and receives no answer.
- the scene in which Deckard's eyes glow (as replicants' eyes do) when he tells Rachael that he wouldn't go after her, "but someone would".
- the fact that Deckard lets his attraction to Rachael get the better of him despite knowing that she is a replicant.
- the fact that he endures beatings from three different androids of superhuman strength throughout the second half of the film, without any visible impairment on his reasoning skills, physical fitness or overall health.
- the fact that Roy knew Deckard's name, yet was never told about it before.
- the scene in which he uses a metal pipe to beat, and visibly hurt, a replicant who had just effortlessly opened a hole in a wall with his bare head.
- his ability to climb to the roof of the Bradbury Building in a short amount of time with two broken fingers.
- the fact that Gaff, who had shown no sympathy for Deckard throughout the film, tells him "You've done a man's job, sir!" after Roy expires, lets Rachael live and does not intervene when she and Deckard leave his apartment.
In the Director's cut the answer is absolutely yes that Deckard is a replicant. The scene of Graff and the origami unicorn does not allow for any other interpretation other than Deckard is a replicant.
Blade Runner's Original Ending: Yes, Deckard's A Replicant
December 22, 1980 draft:
It's the day after Deckard kills Batty, and he's in his apartment with Rachael. Bryant shows up at Deckard's apartment, and they talk on Deckard's vidphone. But Deckard won't let Bryant in. Deckard insists he's alone, but Bryant can tell Deckard is lying. Bryant warns Deckard that Gaff is ambitious. There are long pauses while Deckard tries to figure out what Bryant means, and then he gets it. Deckard finds Gaff staking out his apartment, and almost shoots Gaff. But Deckard says (in a voice-over!) that he's tired of pulling triggers. So instead Rachael and he sneak out and go out to the countryside. Rachael makes Deckard pull over because she's never seen snow before. They talk about Roy Batty, and how he made Deckard realize every moment is precious. Rachael says it's the happiest day of her life, then she begs Deckard to shoot her. He does. Then he drives off, realizing it's too late for him to get away. "They wouldn't give me papers for the Colonies even if I wanted them." He wonders who designs "the ones like me." As Deckard stares at the sky, he concludes his voiceover:
The great Tyrrell hadn't designed me, but whoever had, hadn't done so much better. 'You're programmed too,' she told me, and she was right. In my own modest way, I was a combat model. Roy Batty was my late brother.
February 23, 1981 version:
Deckard and Rachael are in Deckard's apartment. He asks her if she loves him, and if she trusts him, and she says yes. He packs some stuff and they head for the elevator, but he sees a tiny unicorn made of tinfoil: "Gaff's gauntlet." Then Deckard drives through the woods at 160 miles per hour. Deckard and Rachael smile at each other, but a blip flashes on the vidscreen of Deckard's car. Deckard puts the tinfoil unicorn on the dash. Deckard's car zooms through the woods, and he gives us a last voice over:
I knew it on the roof that night. We were brothers, Roy Batty and I! Combat models of the highest order. We had fought in wars not yet dreamed of... in vast nightmares still unnamed. We were the new people... Roy and me and Rachael! We were made for this world. It was ours!
December 22, 1980 draft:
It's the day after Deckard kills Batty, and he's in his apartment with Rachael. Bryant shows up at Deckard's apartment, and they talk on Deckard's vidphone. But Deckard won't let Bryant in. Deckard insists he's alone, but Bryant can tell Deckard is lying. Bryant warns Deckard that Gaff is ambitious. There are long pauses while Deckard tries to figure out what Bryant means, and then he gets it. Deckard finds Gaff staking out his apartment, and almost shoots Gaff. But Deckard says (in a voice-over!) that he's tired of pulling triggers. So instead Rachael and he sneak out and go out to the countryside. Rachael makes Deckard pull over because she's never seen snow before. They talk about Roy Batty, and how he made Deckard realize every moment is precious. Rachael says it's the happiest day of her life, then she begs Deckard to shoot her. He does. Then he drives off, realizing it's too late for him to get away. "They wouldn't give me papers for the Colonies even if I wanted them." He wonders who designs "the ones like me." As Deckard stares at the sky, he concludes his voiceover:
The great Tyrrell hadn't designed me, but whoever had, hadn't done so much better. 'You're programmed too,' she told me, and she was right. In my own modest way, I was a combat model. Roy Batty was my late brother.
February 23, 1981 version:
Deckard and Rachael are in Deckard's apartment. He asks her if she loves him, and if she trusts him, and she says yes. He packs some stuff and they head for the elevator, but he sees a tiny unicorn made of tinfoil: "Gaff's gauntlet." Then Deckard drives through the woods at 160 miles per hour. Deckard and Rachael smile at each other, but a blip flashes on the vidscreen of Deckard's car. Deckard puts the tinfoil unicorn on the dash. Deckard's car zooms through the woods, and he gives us a last voice over:
I knew it on the roof that night. We were brothers, Roy Batty and I! Combat models of the highest order. We had fought in wars not yet dreamed of... in vast nightmares still unnamed. We were the new people... Roy and me and Rachael! We were made for this world. It was ours!