FAQ  •  Login

Scott on who doesn't get Deckard is a replicant is a moron!

<<

Phantom

User avatar

Elite Rep Detector
Elite Rep Detector

Posts: 455

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 4:18 am

Post Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:11 pm

Scott on who doesn't get Deckard is a replicant is a moron!

Scott calls anyone who doesn't get Deckard is a replicant a 'moron.'

Yes, Rick Deckard is a replicant. Blade Runner director Ridley Scott finally ends the speculation over his android-hunting cop. ''If you don't get it, you're a moron,'' he says in a new DVD extra.
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20166134,00.html

:lol:
ImageImage

"THE NEWEST MACHINE IN THE WORLD WILL NEVER
MATCH THE HUMAN BEING."

-Ayrton Senna-
<<

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 Sun Dec 16, 2007 3:02 am

God, I love Ridley. :D
[In reference to A Good Year] "So anyway, fuck 'em. It was a good film."
-Ridley Scott
<<

Phantom

User avatar

Elite Rep Detector
Elite Rep Detector

Posts: 455

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 4:18 am

Post Sun Dec 16, 2007 4:47 am

briant at the beggining have top explain what is nexus 6. deckard is not a beginner... this is the first evidence.
ImageImage

"THE NEWEST MACHINE IN THE WORLD WILL NEVER
MATCH THE HUMAN BEING."

-Ayrton Senna-
<<

Starkiller

Rookie Rep Detect
Rookie Rep Detect

Posts: 4

Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:25 pm

Location: Europa Colony

Post Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:13 pm

Yeah, Ridley being forthright and blunt, as always. :)

Still, I doubt it'll do anything to alter the opinions of the die-hard "Deckard is Human" advocates.
<<

Planta

User avatar

Rep Detect Instructor
Rep Detect Instructor

Posts: 215

Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:49 am

Location: Italia

Post Thu Dec 20, 2007 3:46 am

i think we all know he's a Replicant, but we HOPE he's human. the hope for a better world is at the base of humanity, i guess.
<<

Deckard

User avatar

Senior Rep Detector
Senior Rep Detector

Posts: 176

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:23 pm

Location: Virginia

Post Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:09 am

Personally I think the whole point with Ridley saying Deckard's a Replicant is only from his perspective, and not necessarily that of PKD. Granted Ridley is the Director, but that doesn't necessarily make it so. That simply makes his statement true for his vision of the film and character. It's also a bit funny that it took so long to get a definitive statement for something he seems to feel so strongly about.

I do not believe the reaction to, and significance of Roy's amazing rescue of Deckard at the end would have had the same emotional impact with Deck as a Replicant. Roy needs to put away his disgust for humans and save one to truly show his evolution, valuing any life as his own was slipping away. Reading DADoES makes me think he is not a Replicant.

In the Blade Runner fanfic I am writing here:

http://bladezone.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2470

I will be exploring this theory of my own as the story unfolds further:

The Tyrell corporation realized the dangers of Replicants who, at the end of their lifespan, have come back to Earth to attempt a life here. They can't afford to have Replicants, their products viewed as dangerous to the general population. As a result, the Tyrell Corporation has the police department bought and paid for at the very highest levels. They are aware of Deckard's unicorn dream from either his very own VK test and a question about recurring dreams, or perhaps it was mentioned to Holden at some point in Deckard's Rookiee training under Holden.

Dave Holden, being the good cop he is, would have told Bryant if asked questions about Deckard. Gaff presents the chicken origamy to put doubt into Deckard, worrying that he might not have what it takes to come back as a Blade Runner, that he might have become a "Chicken head" (from the book). The Unicorn origami is presented by Gaff after he leaves Rachel alive, KNOWING that Deckard will flee with her. It is used to plant the suggestion to Deckard that he might be a replicant in order to force his hand and make him flee with Rachel.

This is something the Tyrell Corporation wanted. That way, the corporation can more closely study the behavior patterns of the Nexus 6 line with an unrestricted lifespan and test both the memory implants and Rachel's ability to improvise and adapt to the newfound knowledge that she is indeed a Replicant. It is also a great opportunity for them to gather data on how she interacts with a human on a rapidly growing emotional level.

They are also studying Deckard, struggling with his human thoughts and emotions over the suggestion that he might be one, and how he relates to Rachel. This way, they can either tweak the Nexus 6 line, or create in the Nexus 7 models a more highly evolved emotional matrix, even further blurring the line between human and Replicant.

The entire escape of the Replicants, their journey to Earth, and the involvement of Deckard and the Police was orchestrated by Tyrell to put this plan in motion. In the words of J.F. Sebastian, "He's a genius."

Study history. Dangerous events are allowed to unfold all the time as a catapult to public response and retaliatory actions. What a fantastic experiment the whole film becomes.


It's just an idea, but one I want to play with. If you haven't read the start of my story, I'd love to have you check it out and let me know what you think so far. :D
Deckard

"They don't advertise for killers in the newspaper. That was my profession: ex-cop, ex-BladeRunner, ex-killer."
<<

Largo

User avatar

Rookie Rep Detect
Rookie Rep Detect

Posts: 12

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:33 pm

Location: Midwest USA

Post Sun Dec 30, 2007 11:38 pm

Sorry, Ridley -- it's up to each individual viewer.

Ridley Scott needs to take a cue from Stanley Kubrick and how he invited everyone to interpret 2001 based on their individual viewpoint. Personally, I don't give a rat's patootey what Ridley's interpretation or intentions are concerning Blade Runner. I guess Ridley hasn't heard of the 'death of the author' in literary theory. What is paramount here is the individual's reading of the narrative. For Ridley Scott to call those that disagree with his own interpretation "morons" is just plain rude and arrogant.
Image
Rachael is smokin' !!!
<<

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 Mon Dec 31, 2007 5:38 am

And it could have been said in jest. Give Scott some credit. If he really felt that that many fans were morons, he would never had included the Theatrical Cut on the DVD set.
[In reference to A Good Year] "So anyway, fuck 'em. It was a good film."
-Ridley Scott
<<

Deckard

User avatar

Senior Rep Detector
Senior Rep Detector

Posts: 176

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:23 pm

Location: Virginia

Post Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:26 am

I have re-worked the beginnings of my fan fiction if anyone wants to check it out and comment . . . . good/bad or ugly.

Thanks! and Happy New Year. :)

http://bladezone.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=20087#20087
Deckard

"They don't advertise for killers in the newspaper. That was my profession: ex-cop, ex-BladeRunner, ex-killer."
<<

Phantom

User avatar

Elite Rep Detector
Elite Rep Detector

Posts: 455

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 4:18 am

Post Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:40 am

the goal is to make a SHORT FILM??
ImageImage

"THE NEWEST MACHINE IN THE WORLD WILL NEVER
MATCH THE HUMAN BEING."

-Ayrton Senna-
<<

Centauro

User avatar

Blade Runner
Blade Runner

Posts: 729

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 6:00 pm

Location: Bogota, DC [CO]

Post Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:21 pm

Re: Sorry, Ridley -- it's up to each individual viewer.

Largo wrote:Ridley Scott needs to take a cue from Stanley Kubrick and how he invited everyone to interpret 2001 based on their individual viewpoint.


My thoughts exactly.

I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE

Deck-a-human-ers, unite! :D :D :D

:roll:
-------------------------------------------------------------- Revel In Your Time --------------------------------------------------------------

Image
<<

Krokodyle

User avatar

Senior Rep Detector
Senior Rep Detector

Posts: 115

Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 5:32 pm

Location: North...

Post Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:19 pm

Deckard wrote:Personally I think the whole point with Ridley saying Deckard's a Replicant is only from his perspective, and not necessarily that of PKD. Granted Ridley is the Director, but that doesn't necessarily make it so. That simply makes his statement true for his vision of the film and character.


My thoughts exactly. =D>

I guess it's the fact that you CAN have so many viewpoints/interpretations on the BR film that adds so much to its appeal. From relatively "simple" black & white issues like "is Deckard a replicant or human" to deeper implications delving into the realm of the definition of "human", or at least sentience.

The last videotaped statement I saw of Ridley regarding this issue, he stated something along the lines of "oh, I certainly believe he is"...which, in his defense, shows that HE believes Deckard to be a replicant, nothing more.
<<

Masao

User avatar

Rep Detect Instructor
Rep Detect Instructor

Posts: 232

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:54 am

Post Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:54 am

Frank Darrabont gets it...but Ridley doesn't!

If Deckard is a Replicant then RS is the moron.

Here's how:

At any time, RS could have chosen to either A) alter Ford's scar, or B) used another actor.

Why is this so important? Using an actor who has a ten-year-old scar on his face is making a statement. Maybe many:"This guy has been around" "He has had years of experience." "He has survived!"

If the scar is false, nothing else can be trusted...including Deckard's eyes!

...And if nothing you see can be trusted, neither can the director!





That is, of course, unless you believe in the Holden Postulate.

:lol:

"The tigers still look fake."[/b]
<<

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 Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:22 pm

RS is a moron?

Why are you here?
[In reference to A Good Year] "So anyway, fuck 'em. It was a good film."
-Ridley Scott
<<

Kaneda

Senior Rep Detector
Senior Rep Detector

Posts: 111

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 8:34 pm

Post Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:28 pm

Re: Sorry, Ridley -- it's up to each individual viewer.

Largo wrote:Ridley Scott needs to take a cue from Stanley Kubrick and how he invited everyone to interpret 2001 based on their individual viewpoint. I guess Ridley hasn't heard of the 'death of the author' in literary theory.


Or perhaps he doesn't subscribe to that theory. After all, it is theory, not gospel.

Personally, when regarding film, I always view things from auteur theory. If Steven Spielberg says the mechas at the end of A.I. are not aliens, I'm going to agree with him. I'm not going to say and believe that they're aliens because the film doesn't explicitly say otherwise and completely disregard Spielberg's statement.

As for Darabont, I find it annoying that he imposes his view of what certain scenes mean when the director is the one that stages everything for his own purposes and meaning. I'm sure people would find it ridiculous if I totally reinterpreted scenes between Tom Hanks and Michael Clark Duncan in The Green Mile as suggesting a homosexual relationship when other scenes seem to state that that is anything but the case (like the fact that Hank's character is married).
"Just when my coil's reaching the green line..."
-Shotaro Kaneda

"Implants! Those aren't your mammories. They're somebody else's. They're Tyrell's niece's."
Next

Return to Deckard - Human or Replicant?

Who is online

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

cron