MovieChat Forums > Blade Runner (1982) Discussion > WHY!

WHY!

posted 8 years ago by fabiovasconcllos
12 replies | jump to latest

why that dialogue was removed from the final cut
DECKARD: The report would be "routine retirement of a Replicant"...
wich didn't make me feel any better about shooting a woman in the back.
There it was again,feeling.In myself.For her.
For Rachael.
this is one the best dialogues in the movie in my opinion,sayng that,i prefer much more the teatrical cut above the Ridley's favorite final cut.
Deckard being a replicant is just a idiotic twist.
For me he is a human who fall's in love by a replicant,the story works better that way.

[–] BB-15 8 years ago

You like the theatrical cut? Fine with me.

But the reason that the narration was taken out of the Director's Cut and Final Cut is that none of the main film makers had anything to do with it.
Ridley and the writers of the script had no control over the narration.
Harrison Ford did not like the narration and was forced to read it.
- It was written by another writer under the control of the studio.

BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈

[–] CremersAlex 8 years ago

... i prefer much more the teatrical cut above the Ridley's favorite final cut.
Deckard being a replicant is just a idiotic twist.
For me he is a human who fall's in love by a replicant,the story works better that way.

Watch the Theatrical Cut ( or any other version) again, fabio. You missed a lot.

[–] fabiovasconcllos 8 years ago

like what?

[–] edisonnosidE 8 years ago

Fabio, the movie is so rich with easter eggs, clues, direction, and misdirection everybody misses something.
Just watch it a few hundred ties more, ignore the obvious and see beyond the veil.

Or go back and read older threads in this page. There's a lot to learn there, and some great redirects, too.

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

[–] BB-15 8 years ago

fabio; whether Deckard is a replicant or not could still be the conclusion reached from the theatrical cut.
It's up to the viewer even with the Director's/Final Cut.

- The main story with narration in the TC seems to show that Deckard is a naturally born human.
But there are still very subtle hints in the TC which point to Deckard maybe being a replicant.

What hints?
- Notice that Leon loves to keep photos of his friends who are his family. It gives him a sense of stable memories.
Also notice that replicant Rachel has what she believes is a photo of herself as a child.
Who else in "Blade Runner" keeps photos of family around?

- Also notice that artificially born life, such as Rachel at Tyrell's office and the Owl in Tyrell's study, sometimes have a glow in their eyes.
This retina glow is associated with replicants in the film.
- If you own a copy of the film, take a close look at Deckard's eyes in the scenes where he is in his apartment.

Imo at least, BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈

[–] fabiovasconcllos 8 years ago

thanks for the answer,i just like Deckard as a human in my point of view,but i respect people who prefer him as a replicant.

[–] BB-15 8 years ago

It's fine fabio. Most people I know personally prefer that Deckard is a naturally born human.
Harrison Ford preferred thinking of his character that way.

Imo at least, BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈

[–] edisonnosidE 8 years ago

Most people I know personally prefer that Deckard is a naturally born human.
Harrison Ford preferred thinking of his character that way.

"How can it not know what it is?"

If Deckard is a replicant with implanted memories, he may not know what he is. There would be a conflict between memories and experience that the memories would win. Whereas a non-adjusted replicant, in touch with other replicants, will learn what it is. (Or may have been told what it is).

It's also logical that Ford would play Deckard as a human if that's what the replicant believed, so Ford was totally in character. Reference the Stanislavski system. Maybe Ford wasn't being petulant insisting Deckard was human, he was just being a good actor.

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

[–] BB-15 8 years ago

Method acting would be consistent with Ford's insistence that Deckard was a naturally born human.

BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈

[–] tom-721-511772 8 years ago

I think both options have merit.

If Deckard is a machine then it gives incredible depth to the plot. But if he's human, then it's a staunch criticism of humanity itself. Deckard is a man devoid of life who's only function is to destroy the lives of four people who just want to experience humanity for themselves.

[–] ChazzJazz 8 years ago

Freemasons like Didley Squatt love their visual BS; us human beings we empathise with the plight of people, real or on film...

And dont listen to the numbskulls up top, your first impression is always the best.... :P

The Visuals and The Words hit you a different way to the others, there are not enough info from the film to judge either way regarding Deckard.....even if they mess it up in BR2

http://my-impressionz.cu.cc

[–] SteveJobz 8 years ago

The original script was rewritten 10 or more times to fit Ridley's vision, after that another writer was hired for even more edits as the original had enough with the revisions.