MovieChat Forums > Blade Runner (1982) Discussion > Which movie would you rather see? Deckar...

Which movie would you rather see? Deckard human or Replicant again...


Imagine that you are given a chance to see two movies. The plots are as follows:

Movie 1

In a future world, one good robot is sent to hunt down a bunch of bad robots. Along the way, he falls in love with a girl robot. Except that we -- the audience -- know that they are both just programmed robots. They are just acting out their programs.

The good robot kills a bunch of the bad robots.

At the end, there's a scene where the last bad robot could kill the good robot, but he doesn't. Instead, as his central processor starts to shut down, he sez to the good robot: "I'm sad because my hard drive of memories will cease to exist."

The good robot seems to care about the other robot. Except that we -- the audience -- know that he doesn't really. They are both just acting out their programs.

The good robot takes the girl robot and they go off to live by themselves. They act like they are happy, but they are both just acting out their programs.

---

Movie 2

A cynical cop is sent to hunt down a bunch of robots. Along the way, he meets and falls in love with a girl.

The cop kills several of the bad robots while nearly getting killing himself several times. Along the way, the robots seem to exhibit human feelings and the cop starts to have doubts about the morality of his mission. He learns that the girl he fell in love with is one of these robots.

At the end, there's a scene where the last bad robot could kill the cop but doesn't. Instead, as his central processor starts to shut down, he sez to the good robot: "I'm sad because my hard drive of memories will cease to exist."

The cop realizes that the bad robot exhibited human emotions, including regret and the fear of death in his final minutes. The cop realizes that everything he thought he knew about robots was wrong... that they are human in some sense. Despite his cynicism, he feels a sense of hope and he runs off with the girl robot in the belief that whatever they share between them is genuinely human.

---

The first movie is just a fancy Twilight Zone episode. A guy chases down a bunch of robots... turns out at the end that he's a robot himself. Nothing he learns in the movie has any meaning for us the audience because all his actions, all his feelings -- are simply the result of sophisticated programming and implanted memories, as far as we know. There is nothing to suggest otherwise. The end.


The second movie is a drama about a guy who is standing in for us, the audience, in that situation. We see him experience genuine doubts and hopes and evolve to understand that the robots also have an emotional inner life. And because he is the stand-in for the audience, we come to appreciate this lesson too.

Hopefully that provides some insights into the ongoing debate.

My pair of pennies...


Additional food for thought:

1. The pro-Replicant supporters point to Gaff's origami as proof that Deckard is a Replicant. As Scott explained: "I've seen your file, mate, and I know about your origami dream. Here, I've left you THIS unicorn origami as proof that I know."

However, early in the movie, Gaff clearly dislikes Deckard. And, at the end, he seems to take pity on Deckard with his comment that "It's too bad she won't live forever."

If Gaff knows that Deckard is an android/robot/Replicant/machine, WHY WOULD HE TREAT HIM LIKE A HUMAN WITH DISDAIN AND SYMPATHY? To Gaff, Deckard is a machine, no different from a car or a toaster. Why would he react to him as if he were human.

Comments?




reply

Gee, I'd rather watch a movie where the ending is ambiguous so that I will come out of the movie theater after seeing it the first time thinking, "What was that? What did we just see?" So I can obsess over it for years, go back and see it again and again, and buy every VHS and CD and book about it ever made.

I cling to wonder in my world.

Impossible is illogical.
Lack of evidence is not proof.
 +  = 

reply

"I'm sad because my hard drive of memories will cease to exist."

In my head, this line is delivered with a cheap computer speech synthesizer. LOL

Movie 2, definitely. I would have preferred that the Final Cut have kept Deckard human, or at least made it ambiguous. So, I came up with the idea that Deckard and Gaff simply both see Rachael as a kind of unicorn, coincidentally.

Thit and thpin!

reply

In a recent interview, Ridley Scott (fully aware of what the sequel is about) maintains that Deckard is a replicant, which strongly indicates they won't make him human in Blade Runner 2049. However, when Denis Villeneuve was just assigned as the director of 2049, he promised he will not take the mystery away.


Alex

reply

Though I'm in the school that believes that it's a more meaningful movie if Deckard is a human, I'm good with no definitive answer being provided in the new movie.

I think it was Harrison Ford who said something along the lines of: "The answer is less important than the question."

reply

I vote 2 also. It's more meaningful to me if Deckard is human, and I find the concept of him having interactions with superior replicants to be interesting. I don't see much point if they care all robots.

reply

As much as I like the idea of keeping it ambiguous, Movie 2 makes more sense to me, i.e. it has greater depth to it.


You want something corny? You got it!

reply