FAQ  •  Login

He's human.

<<

Nexus_6

Rookie Rep Detect
Rookie Rep Detect

Posts: 10

Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:14 pm

Post Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:24 pm

He's human.

Let just first start out by saying BR is my favorite movie of all time. If I was stuck on a desert island, BR would be my one movie. I know the film inside and out--I've seen it so many times it sadens me.

Deckard is a human. Sure it's fun to look deeply into the lines, the character, his motivation, and the tie between book and movie--but let's face it, this shouldn't be another "moon landing."

Being at work, I do not have the time to go through lines, nor think deeply about how to persuade you into thinking my way--just take it from one of BR's biggest fans and critics--Deckard is human.

The REAL question is: Is Tyrell?

Just kidding.
Michael Reed
www.pentaworks.org
<<

Centauro

User avatar

Blade Runner
Blade Runner

Posts: 729

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 6:00 pm

Location: Bogota, DC [CO]

Post Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:17 am

There seems to be a slight preference to considering Deck a human in these forums (me too), but over the years I've realized that it is useless to try to convince peope to think like you. It is up to eacjh one to enjoy the movie as they please.

BTW. Welcome!
-------------------------------------------------------------- Revel In Your Time --------------------------------------------------------------

Image
<<

Partizan

User avatar

Senior Rep Detector
Senior Rep Detector

Posts: 127

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:39 am

Location: Sweden

Post Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:57 am

Centauro wrote:There seems to be a slight preference to considering Deck a human in these forums (me too), but over the years I've realized that it is useless to try to convince peope to think like you. It is up to eacjh one to enjoy the movie as they please.

BTW. Welcome!


I see it this way...
In original movie Deckard is human (even thou Scott wanted to potray him as a replicant, but mind you he wasnt allowed..so human !)
but in the DC where Scott finally gets to do it he`s way, Deckard is a replicant, sadly, but then again i dont care coz the 1982 movie is the original and with a human Deck.
"..like tears in rain.."
<<

THX1138

User avatar

Moderator
Moderator

Posts: 1411

Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 6:00 pm

Location: Denver, Colorado

Post Thu Mar 17, 2005 3:43 pm

cant this be continued in one of the already created topics? this is all "reruns" for most of us.
"Don't be a dick!" -Wil Wheaton
<<

I.love.Clovis

User avatar

Senior Rep Detector
Senior Rep Detector

Posts: 110

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:41 am

Location: Finland

Post Sat Apr 02, 2005 12:36 pm

He's a human.

He's a human.
"All these moments will be lost in time,
like tears in rain."
<<

zoomer_one

User avatar

Rep Detector
Rep Detector

Posts: 90

Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 11:15 pm

Location: Ontario, Canada

Post Sat Apr 02, 2005 9:15 pm

In the book....he's a Replicant....in the film...he's human. I think that is the biggest difference between the two. Ridley wanted him to think he was a Rep...but from the end of the film he firmly believes he is human. The movie leaves it open for anyone to decide which they think he is.....but judging from Harrison's character in the film...he knows he is human.
<<

Kipple

User avatar

Honorary Member

Posts: 1266

Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2001 6:00 pm

Location: Satellite 2

Post Sat Apr 02, 2005 11:49 pm

zoomer_one wrote:In the book....he's a Replicant....in the film...he's human. I think that is the biggest difference between the two.


What book did you read? In DADoES he is human.
Image
<<

THX1138

User avatar

Moderator
Moderator

Posts: 1411

Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 6:00 pm

Location: Denver, Colorado

Post Sun Apr 03, 2005 11:02 am

no, in the book, there's hints that hes a rep as well.

i posted this earlier, but things like him not being conerned about the owl, he was only thinking of himself, refering to the "reason to kill" thing, where if he accepts the owl, he cant will it to anyone, and that sound like a reason for the corp. to kill him to take claim of the owl again. there's some other things my brother pointed out, but i cant recall them right now.
"Don't be a dick!" -Wil Wheaton
<<

Kipple

User avatar

Honorary Member

Posts: 1266

Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2001 6:00 pm

Location: Satellite 2

Post Sun Apr 03, 2005 11:18 am

THX1138 wrote:no, in the book, there's hints that hes a rep as well.


Debating the book? Guess the movie debate has lost its' steam. :shock:
Image
<<

THX1138

User avatar

Moderator
Moderator

Posts: 1411

Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 6:00 pm

Location: Denver, Colorado

Post Sun Apr 03, 2005 3:30 pm

Kipple wrote:
THX1138 wrote:no, in the book, there's hints that hes a rep as well.


Debating the book? Guess the movie debate has lost its' steam. :shock:


http://www.bladezone.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1247

where have you been?
"Don't be a dick!" -Wil Wheaton
<<

nexuszix

Moderator
Moderator

Posts: 148

Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:43 am

Location: off-world

Post Thu Apr 07, 2005 2:56 am

Ridley Scott says hes a Rep ,Harrison Ford says human....i always thought he was human before the debate....now i say it doesnt matter whether hes human rep or fish. :shock:
" wake up..time to die !"
<<

amuck runner

Rookie Rep Detect
Rookie Rep Detect

Posts: 3

Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:48 am

Post Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:59 am

In the movie, he is human. There are 2 types of replicants in the film, the most advanced being Rachel, "almost human". If Deckard was replicant, specifically tasked to run down the likes of Batty, he should at the very least be physically Batty's level. But both Zhora and Pris had a shot at him in hand to hand combat, actually had the chance to easily kill him with their bare hands. If replicants have 4 years life span, how long would it take for Deckard acquire the necessary experience in tracking down replicants. Strangely it is only Rachel, the most advanced replicant that Deckard can physically overpower.
<<

Rachel

User avatar

Rep Detector
Rep Detector

Posts: 53

Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 5:04 am

Location: France

Post Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:46 am

The important scene meaning that Deckard is maybe a replicant is the scene where he finds a little doll of paper in front of his flat, made by a policeman who usually made dolls of paper during the movie and who has put a surveillance on him. This doll represents a licorn (= horse from fantastic stories). The licorn belongs to dreams of Deckard that we see during a scene where he's taking a rest. So if the policeman is aware of Deckard's dreams, it means that maybe Deckard has got this implant of dream and is a replicant, and the policeman has got a file about his personality of andro?d.

In the other hand, if Deckard spoke about this dream to someone like a pal from the police who transmitted the info, then Deckard is not a replicant and just human. But it doesn't seem to be the right version as this kind of scene doesn't feature in the film. Then, I understood from the movie that Deckard is a replicant, and Rachel guessed that he could be one: that's why she asks him if he already tried the Voight-Kampf test on himself. Deckard understands that he's a replicant when he sees the Licorn doll of paper in front of his house, that's why he's got a slight ironical smile and don't hesitate to run away with Rachel. The two are victims of deception about who they really are, and they don't seem to play a program implanted in their brains, they seem really shocked :shock: .

The Dr Tyrell was so gifted that he apparently created practically human people who can experience feelings of rebellion and drama. I think the central theme of the movie is the risk of exploitation. It seems that all people working for chiefs are replicants in this movie. It is about the dangers of the hierarchy.

If Deckard is not as strong as the other replicants but can bear their big punches, it seems that it is for a question of cost: he's exploited by the administration which is usually poor or avaricious and which prefers an andro?d able to make the replicants lose their energy on him rather than a big fighter requesting more fuel :wink:
<<

deleted

User avatar

Veteran Blade Runner
Veteran Blade Runner

Posts: 1191

Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 7:11 pm

Location: The banks of chaos in my mind

Post Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:38 pm

Forgive me for going a bit off topic, but I've noticed several threads lately that have been getting bumped where the last post was made a rather signifigant time ago...is this forum really that underpopulated these days? I come from forums where it is generally accepted that if a topic is as old as one like this, one just starts a new to continue the discussion and lets the old one slide into the back pages. Its also worth noting that several of the original thread participants may no longer be active, and a fresh thread or post in a recent thread can attract the current posters.

That being said...we already have enough threads about Dek-a-man, including a few on the front page; why not post your thoughts in one of them?
[In reference to A Good Year] "So anyway, fuck 'em. It was a good film."
-Ridley Scott
<<

Masao

User avatar

Rep Detect Instructor
Rep Detect Instructor

Posts: 232

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:54 am

Post Sat Nov 03, 2007 5:26 am

Good point D.

It is up to the moderator (hint hint) to reorganize, archive, close or delete any topics. BTW my vote is for closure and archiving of topics such as this. -The answer has been pretty well established.
Next

Return to Deckard - Human or Replicant?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest

cron