Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:56 pm by doc3d
If you've seen Adigitalman's "Blade Runner 2008 Fan Edit" you'll know beyond any doubt that Deckard is not a replicant. In fact, he states that his wife left for the outer colonies with another guy who made it big, and he says he decided to stay on earth to try and be human (one assumes after all the murders that have increasingly weighed on him). Batty handles Deckard like a child. So even if Deckard was a replicant, he'd be so far down the release number Nexus level that he'd be completely useless againat a Nexus 6. Bryant wouldn't have employed him if he'd been predestined for failure. Yes. a few of the script variants show the possibility of Deckard as a replicant, but these were just writing experiments that attempted to weave the film into a cohesive whole.
By the way, I've seen the film clip where Ridley Scott claims Deckard is a replicant. This is and is not true. It was true in one or two of the screenplay drafts, but it wasn't true in terms of the completed film. Authors stick in and pull out concepts when building a film. There was a chaotic change when Fancher's work was taken over by Peoples, and everything suddenly was in flux. If Deckard wasn't human, the entire concept of the film becomes false. The VO in the 5 disc set proves it as well. Deckard was a man, who had mostly, but not irredemably given up his humanity to do his job. "Cold fish" his wife who abandoned him terms him. Who can relentlessly kill increasingly human androids without rationalizing away their humanity? But Rachel causes the breakthrough into his construct of a psyche, and shatters it beyond repair. He takes Rachel, and his vulnerability and his pain, and steps into an unsure future, and probably death for them both. But he knows they will both have at least a moment of true freedom before it happens.
Doc