MovieChat Forums > Blade Runner 2049 (2017) Discussion > "Deckard is a Replicant-Theory" is bulls...

"Deckard is a Replicant-Theory" is bullsh*t

posted 8 years ago by AkiraDLuffy
12 replies | jump to latest

The moral of the film was, that in the end a Replicant acts more human than a actual human. So that other human can learn from him. Roy Batty shows Deckard his point of view ("Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave") and then rescues him.

[–] BirdmanT7 8 years ago

The moral of the film was, that in the end a Replicant acts more human than a actual human

I agree, the end of BR is when Roy dies and Deckard's reaction alone is indication of it and what R.Scott tried to throw a monkey wrench into the story by the unicorn revere was utter BS. If you read the Book you know Deckard was not replicant and the entire premise of his conflict to retire these androids came from the fact that he was human and discovered these replicants are more human, exactly. If you watch the interview with Hampton Fancher he said the same thing and that's where Riddley was trying to screw with the story and there was conflict between them.

[–] dinkywinky123 8 years ago

The official plot outline mentions a big secret and that might be some replicants aging which would explain why Deckard is a replicant in BR 2.

I think Deckard is a regular human. That's my interpretation of the original movie. BR purists can dismiss this sequel as fan fiction. A 'what if...' kind of thing.

[–] larosat 8 years ago

Dekard = Human

[–] ChazzJazz 8 years ago

need to see the trailer again, Fancher cannot give up that secret so early surely?

http://my-impressionz.cu.cc

[–] BirdmanT7 8 years ago

Fancher cannot give up that secret so early surely?

You need to go and see the documentary on the making of Blade Runner called "Dangerous Days", you will then see Fencher talk about that he NEVER thought of Deckard as a android and was completely against that idea of what R.Scott wanted to convey, which again was not in the book either. If you ever read the book and watch the movie carefully you will realize the premise of story and why Deckard feels at conflict in killing these androids is because he is human himself. He envies their love of life, the scene Roy on the rooftop was probably the best scene in the entire movie that kind of convey that. You don't make your protagonist to be the antagonist at the same time, otherwise there is no arc and this is where Riddley fails to understand why is stupid to make Deckard an android, where the writer PKD could have done that but he didn't for a reason.

[–] ChazzJazz 8 years ago

and i would agree with him, but Didley squatt is producer, so i wouldnt think fancher would p!ss off his financier, or give away his script just like that

http://my-impressionz.cu.cc

[–] T-eschberger 8 years ago

OMG you people need to die out. Deckard is f--king replicant. Scott says so. Ford says so. The f--king film says so. Various f--king drafts of the script say so. Get the f--k over it.

[–] Mr-Fusion 8 years ago

Ford says so.

When was this?

---
Seven o'clock, psychos seize Santa's workshop and only Lee Majors can stop them!

[–] Ite 8 years ago

Ford never said that.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wallacesawyer 8 years ago

I never bought into that either, regardless of what Scott says.

The theory is dead now. Deckard can't be one because he's clearly aged in this sequel. And why would a replicant be built to age? If they want to keep him around to hunt other replicants sure, but how's aging gonna help that?

http://www.freewebs.com/demonictoys/

[–] Captain_Wesker 8 years ago

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1856101/board/flat/263699384?d=263964887#263964887.

---
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing .