Blade Runner
 

Is this true? what do others think? How come I didn't see it? :goof:

The other replicant hunter Gaff, puts down the paper unicorn to let Deckard (Harrison) know that he is a replicant. Deckard dreams of a unicorn and this shows that he is a replicant as his dreams have been implanted as other replicants have (Rachael). Gaff knows Deckards dreams just as Deckard knows Rachaels.

There are many clues througout the movie so watch it again to find them. By the way this is my favourite movie of all time so I'm glad you watched it again!

I love this movie also, I can be a moron sometimes as I didn't even get that, I always wondered about the unicorn.

Thanks Mini. :up:

What are the other clues Mini? Is it something in the way the designer guy talks to him?? I don't remember any others, but it is a very involved film (and i've only read a bare-bones "intermediate-international-reader" version of "do androids dream of electric sheep", which confused me until i realised i can tell you. I didn't think P.Dick wrote like a baby ;))

This is true but i didnt get the clues before i watched the Directors Cut. I think this is because the original suffered from the production company feared that the movie would be too depressing or something? I think i have read something about this but im not sure if its true. Its been many years since i saw that original cut.

"It's too bad she won't live. But then again, who does?"

I love that quote. It still send the shivers down my back.

Ahh, that's unicorn-making-guy isn't it. Yeah, i remember watching the ****ed-up-cut originally, with that faux-detective voice-over by an obviously unimpressed Harrison. The director's cut is much more satisfying (tho i probably wouldn't have followed it without the first one ;))

Thanks people, so it is the Directors cut that I need to watch. :D

Watch the Directors cut, and he is a replicant.

I just bought Bladerunner on DVD, but I don't know if I have the Director's cut or not. I haven't seen the film in many, many years, but I got it for $8.95 for pre-ordering LoTR: Two Towers.

I just went to check my DVD and it is the Directors cut so I will watch it this week. :D

Ah, not exactly. It's still all open to interpretation. The Director's Cut does indeed suggest that Deckard may be a replicant. But it's still nothing concrete.

I, of course, being me, like to think he is.

I like the iedea that a human might fall in love with a replicant, now if he is then there is no point to the relationship :bawling:

Take a look at this article and you may be happy. It confirms from the director, Ridley Scott if he is indeed a replicant.

Article here

The so-called "director's cut" doesn't just "suggest" that Deckard is a Replicant, it finally explains and exclaims it. I don't need Ridley telling me in an interview, I knew it the glorious moment I first saw the director's cut on the big screen back in '92 (maybe my favorite theater experience ever, at the old Uptown in Washington, D.C.). The answer is right there, in the text of the film. End of debate.

http://www.bladezone.com/contents/fi...59_Unicorn.jpg http://www.bladezone.com/contents/fi...rd_Unicorn.jpg http://www.bladezone.com/contents/fi...rd_Unicorn.jpg

Deckard being a Replicant adds so much to that already densely layered film for me. Far from making the Deckard/Rachel relationship less, it expands on the main themes of the film, specifically the Tyrell motto "More Human Than Human". The Replicants in the movie, including Deckard, turn out to be a good deal more humane than their human counterparts throughout. The point, it seems to me, is that being human is more than just how you're wired, be it biological or mechanical. Life and love are precious, and those who value them are the ideal. Deckard and Rachel and the tragic Roy Batty learn this. Because of the incept dates, our couple is doomed to a short existence, and it's too bad they won't live. But then again, who does?


But what the Hell do I know? I've only seen the flick - all the various versions, about two-hundred times, easy, including the director's cut over ten times theatrically. Condemn it for making Deckard a Repicant if you must. Harrison Ford sure did (moron). Think whatever you want, you're free to do so, of course. But I also run into folks who don't think Verbal Kint is Keyser Soze or that Catherine Tramell was the icepick killer. You CAN ignore the answers the text gives, but it seems more than a bit silly to me.


And now, on with the opera!

I had never seen it, 'till we started studying it in English Studies this year, and I hated it. With a passion. Then I rewatched it, on my own time [though, still for English] with headphones, in a dark room. Verdict?

One of the greatest movies of all time.

I don't know why I'm even compelled to reply again but I have to because I love this film. There's rumour of a special edition dvd coming out sometime next year so fingers crossed. Holden I'm so jealous you got to see it in the cinema, I was 0 on first release and in 1992 I was about 11 so I was underage. I wish they'd re-release it again but as with other re-re-re-re-re-releases they come out sort of dated and unpersonal (star wars?) . Oh Well.

yeah, lovely take on it the tho Holden. The idea that the ability to love, as it were, is the ideal peak of any developing thing

(and by default, there's an add on, that the callous humans are using their mis-understood tools in such a manipulative, uncaring, "unloving" way. Not that technology will dehumanise us, but bring out the worst in us perhaps. My own twisted little reading into it. Doubt it's meant that way ;))