- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is Deckard a Replicant in Blade Runner?
Posted on 5/21/15 at 5:44 am to blueboy
Posted on 5/21/15 at 5:44 am to blueboy
quote:
I'm not reading all of that, but you're wrong. He's not.
I'm not wrong. The answer isn't definitive. It is very ambiguous in the film. FWIW, I lean towards Fancher's position, as I said in the other thread.
0
Posted on 5/21/15 at 7:48 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
There are 2 broad theories about this - the obvious one (assuming he is a replicant) - is, perhaps, he was an older model that they used the new memory implant process on to "reset" as a Blade Runner officer (who thinks he's human - much like Rachal - keep in mind, Roy, Zhora, Pris and Leon all knew they were replicants the whole time). This is why he seems overmatched against all, again - perhaps excepting Rachel.
I thought he was overmatched by them because they could kick the livin shite outa his azz..
as Random mentioned, he could be the "new" model that's designed to be harder to detect by being more human characteristically.
His special ability seemed to be verbalizing his emotions while NOT being emotional.. lol, I think maybe that's what leads people toward thinking he is a replicant.
quote:why? he looked at replicants as his children, and he wasn't really trying to hide Rachel.
The thing is - as soon as Deckard ID'd Rachel as a replicant, Tyrell should have had her locked up or terminated, ASAFP.
Like most all of PK Dicks books, I read this before hollywood caught on to the fact that he was a genius. Anyway the importance of this book lies more toward the discussion of life, specifically what is it, and the point that organic replicants are much closer to being humans than they are machines.
Posted on 5/21/15 at 8:05 am to Jagd Tiger
quote:
as Random mentioned, he could be the "new" model that's designed to be harder to detect by being more human characteristically.
I covered that as well - and Random made another good point - making a replicant who thinks he is a human is harder if he has superhuman strength or other abnormal abilities - Deckard - if a replicant - is either this older model (tough, but not as good as the Nexus 6 line) - and it works because the abilities are more human - OR - he is this new model, like Rachel, designed to be "more human than human" - and, while robust, not "superhumanly" in strength and endurance.
quote:
His special ability seemed to be verbalizing his emotions while NOT being emotional
I think the knock on the acting in the film is overdone. This is a dystopian future - void of color or spark. The acting suits the mood of the film. Hauer communicates conflicting emotional states with fairly subtle (at times) facial expressions, as well as some fairly extreme rage/despair/grief states. Roy Batty is the emotional center of the film, like it or not.
The action revolves around him - his actions, his team's actions. Deckard is just the "human" hunting him and the film tells the story - more or less - from Deckard's perspective, once Holden is taken out (obviously shifting to others when Deckard isn't present).
And Ford has some great moments as well - when Deckard is pretending to be with the "confidential committee" and affects kind of a nerdy/official persona - that was good. When he's recovering from the fight with Leon - that's excellent non-verbal acting right there.
And Young is unfairly criticized as well - she was very young (21 or 22 during filming) at this point and does a good job of delivering her lines under the circumstances. Her V-K test was very convincing.
The romance was a little shaky, but it is what it is - there is either chemistry there or there isn't. See Officer and a Gentleman, for example - Gere and Winger weren't on speaking terms - off-screen - when they filmed a good bit of their romantic scenes.
But, I digress.
The film almost demands an analysis of what it means to be human (whether or not Deckard is actually, literally a human) - and, for example, can a replicant be "more human than human" - was Roy Batty the most human character in the film? Pris was afraid - Zhora was afraid - Leon was enraged, as was Roy. In his final scenes, Roy expresses love, grief, rage, contempt, joy, bloodlust, meloncholy, and relief - not bad for a "robot"...
This post was edited on 5/21/15 at 8:08 am
Posted on 5/21/15 at 11:36 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
I think the knock on the acting in the film is overdone. This is a dystopian future - void of color or spark. The acting suits the mood of the film. Hauer communicates conflicting emotional states with fairly subtle (at times) facial expressions, as well as some fairly extreme rage/despair/grief states. Roy Batty is the emotional center of the film, like it or not.
My wife always found Hauer's acting a bit...much, but I think the point she and other critics are missing is that Roy was intended to be over-the-top. He was emotionally stunted, and, for all his intelligence, had a child's understanding and control of his own emotions. Anyone who has ever dealt with a four year old child knows the extremes and rapid changes that occur in someone who doesn't have the experience and maturity to master the feeling swirling around inside. Roy's superior intellect only emphasized the often febrile sensations emanating from his poorly-mastered amygdalae.
quote:
The film almost demands an analysis of what it means to be human (whether or not Deckard is actually, literally a human) - and, for example, can a replicant be "more human than human" - was Roy Batty the most human character in the film? Pris was afraid - Zhora was afraid - Leon was enraged, as was Roy. In his final scenes, Roy expresses love, grief, rage, contempt, joy, bloodlust, meloncholy, and relief - not bad for a "robot"...
That's part of the brilliance of the movie, isn't it? It's one of the best ways to judge a science fiction work -- does it explore themes in a way that is inherently amplified by the sci-fi aspect? I mean, we can always read "Crime and Punishment" or "Steppenwolf", or watch "Unthinkable" to get the same question, but they can't replicate the path that "Blade Runner" takes.
Posted on 5/22/15 at 8:21 am to randomways
quote:
That's part of the brilliance of the movie, isn't it?
Certainly - science fiction is not robots, time travel, lasers, space battles, etc. - it is those things that tell a story that would be difficult or impossible to tell without them.
Some filmmakers forget that.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News