Date: 2006-12-01 04:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pathia.livejournal.com
If I recall correctly, Ridley Scott has said that Deckard was indeed one himself on like, the DVD or something.

Date: 2006-12-01 04:56 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] araquan.livejournal.com
Well, when Edward James Olmos is leaving origami unicorns in front of Deckard's apartment... One does have to wonder how he knows that that's what Deckard has dreams about, yanno?

Date: 2006-12-01 05:30 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] araquan.livejournal.com
Guess not... But maybe they're electric unicorns...

Date: 2006-12-01 05:41 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mythos-amante.livejournal.com
COOL! Do sparks fly out of their.....er......NOSTRILS?!

Date: 2006-12-01 06:02 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] araquan.livejournal.com
No, but they have electroluminescent horns... ^_^

Date: 2006-12-01 05:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mythos-amante.livejournal.com
We are geeks! XD

Date: 2006-12-01 07:09 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] athelind.livejournal.com
For me, the deciding factor is the use of the Bradbury Building as the setting for the finale -- since that was also the building used in the classic Outer Limits episode, "Demon with a Glass Hand".

Date: 2006-12-01 07:45 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] araquan.livejournal.com
Hmm. Good point.

Date: 2006-12-01 07:51 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] paka.livejournal.com
I know that technically Deckard is supposed to be a replicant. But for me, I really like the idea that he's human - just a very dehumanized human. The replicants are actually the guys in touch with what being human is by comparison. I think that's a cooler story by far.

Date: 2006-12-01 05:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] athelind.livejournal.com
I like that aspect, too, which is why I think the ambiguity is the core of the mo...

Crap. I didn't include an option for "it's ambiguous, you can't give a definitive answer".

Date: 2006-12-01 12:26 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hafoc.livejournal.com
His eyes glow, his memories are known to others, but he's not as strong as a replicant. He lacks all their special abilities. Evidence on one side and the other, back and forth. In short, the folks doing the movie did such a good job of leaving you in doubt whether he's human or replicant that the only solution that fits all the evidence is that he's neither. So much for being too clever, I guess.

Date: 2006-12-01 05:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] athelind.livejournal.com
Note that Rachel is definitely a replicant, but she's not as strong as Deckard. When we see the "character sheets" for the four that he's hunting, they're all listed with "Class A" physical abilities -- suggesting that there are other physical levels, just as there's an obvious range of intellectual prowess between Leon and Roy.

Deckard IS strong enough to pull himself up from a ledge one-handed -- with a hand that's had two fingers dislocated. That's pretty good for a professional free-climber, much less a washed-up cop with a history of alcoholism.

Date: 2006-12-01 06:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cpxbrex.livejournal.com
I don't think it is actually supportable that Deckard is a replicant. I mean, Rachel never does anything physical at all, but whenever a replicant does do something physical they're far physically superior to Deckard (who has had not just training but is an extremely experienced fighter). Deckard constantly gets his ass kicked by recreational replicants and cargo loading models, not just the bad-ass ninja military job.

Sure, there's a lot of hints that Deckard is a replicant, but there is also a far greater body of contrary evidence that he isn't, I think.

Date: 2006-12-01 11:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hafoc.livejournal.com
It also doesn't make any sense from a plot viewpoint.

Deckard is a replicant. Replicants are illegal on Earth, to be shot on sight. Deckard quits the force and goes on alcoholic benders, exhibiting all the symptoms of escalating emotional instability. The obvious solution? Kill him and make another Deckard.

You want to save his experience? You want to save his abilities? If he's a replicant, those were implanted in him anyway. You need only feed the same file into Version 2.0. Or Version 112.0, whatever.

No, if he's a replicant, the only logical choice is that they kill him some time before the movie starts.

But another "problem" is that the movie doesn't go into the further consequences of the advances in replicant tech. Specifically, we are told that Rachel, we are told, is an experimental model who was given real human memories in order to make her more predictable. This raises myriad complications.

The theme of the movie is "What is human?" Giving Rachel human memories only blurs the line further, so it points up the theme. But it also brings up the obvious problem that if you can give a replicant SOME of a human's memories, you can also give a replicant ALL of them.

Since our memories make us what we are, a replicant with all of a human's memories would effectively BE that human. We are talking "immortality" here; so long as your Life Insurance bill to the Tyrell Corporation gets paid each month, they'll keep your brain tape updated and load it into a new body upon hearing of your unfortunate demise.

This is nowhere given in the movie, but it's implicit in the technology. You think someone like Tyrell wouldn't have thought of it? If not he, certainly the Kenneth Lays and Robert Byrds of the world would have. How much would a rich S.O.B be willing to pay for something like that? Is there any question they'd jump at the chance?

I've always had a sneaking suspicion that this is what Deckard really is. Say you have a top cop who, shortly after recovery from a bout of alcoholism, was the most deadly and effective Blade Runner ever. But all good things must end. He takes one risk too many and gets killed, or rebels completely and runs away.

So you reload his mind into a human ability-level replicant body. You stop loading his experiences at a point where he was coming off a bender and had stopped at a street vendor's place to buy some cheap noodles. You prop him up there, start the program, and send your hatchet man to bring him in...

Date: 2006-12-01 07:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kynn.livejournal.com
But does his spine glow? That's what I want to know.

Date: 2006-12-01 07:39 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kynn.livejournal.com
The replicants were created by man.

They evolved.

They rebelled.

There are many copies.

And they have a plan.

Date: 2006-12-01 08:58 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] twentythoughts.livejournal.com
Maybe he's the special Alcoholic Detective model. They made one for each dark, rain-soaked city.

Anyway, as has already been mentioned, the point is that the movie doesn't tell you outright. You're left wondering, thinking, and thus remembering the movie a lot better than if there was some definite revelation scene where the fast food guy goes "He say you repricant!", and Deckard tears away his restraints, takes a couple of heavy steps forwards, and screams "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

(That said, someone needs to take all the silly "No!" moments from the six Star Wars movies and put them into one Youtube video.)

Date: 2006-12-02 09:12 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wy.livejournal.com
I'm for human. Screw ridley scott, that's the way i read the phillip k dick novel.

November 2019

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
101112 13141516
17 181920212223
24252627282930

Tags

Page generated Feb. 11th, 2026 09:24 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios