MovieChat Forums > Blade Runner (1982) Discussion > Deckard not a Replicant?

Deckard not a Replicant?

posted 6 years ago by wsg (16)
18 replies | jump to latest

If, as so many argue, Deckard was not a replicant, then why:

1. The origami unicorn (seen in Deckard's dreams) left by Gaff? Gaff had access to Deckard's implanted memory.

2. At the ending, both Rachel and Deckard are in the car dead. Their replicant time to expire had arrived. This is mentioned in the film as a safety feature built in to replicants in case they make it to earth. Even if they aren't found, they will eventually cease operating. If Deckard was not a replicant, then why is he dead?

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

I think you've seen a version of this movie no one else in the entire world has seen!

[–] wsg (16) 6 years ago

Apparently there are more than one ending. I have found three different endings on YouTube, none of which Deckard dies. The version that I have on my DVD ends with Deckard and Rachel flying their car out to a remote wilderness. Gaff lands behind the car and walks over to the car. Both Deckard and Rachel are in the car dead, and Gaff says something about Skinjobs (plural). If I can find a YouTube of that ending I will post it here.

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Yes, I would be very curious to see that.

[–] furiousstyles (4391) 6 years ago

Deckard didn't die, what are you talking about ?

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Maybe Dekkard talked in his sleep about the unicorn?

Anyway, the new BR movie showed us that Deckard was human, without a doubt.

[–] DracTarashV2 (4493) 6 years ago

1. Opinions on this are so divided (the Deckard is or isn’t a replicant debate in general). Those convinced that Deckard was a Replicant... hard to argue that he isn’t one in the Director’s Cut... refer to this final scene as definite proof of him being a Replicant. But I’ve read many other theories suggesting the unicorn was meant to be symbolic... though not in the way some think it is.

2. I was positive I had seen every cut of the film but apparently I have not.

[–] wsg (16) 6 years ago

Most versions have Deckard and Rachel flying in the car and the movie ends there. But the full movie continued after that with them landing and then later with Gaff landing behind them. At that point both are dead. The people arguing that he lived have not seen the full movie but the shorter version. The full version was supposedly shown in Europe (although I bought my DVD in Tampa at a second hand store), but the studio thought that the sad ending would be a put off to Americans. So they cut the last 5 minutes or so for the American release. I have it on DVD so I know the full version has both dead at the end.

Also, at the time I thought them both dying at the same time to be a plot hole. Why would both have had their termination clocks set to the same time? Also, didn't Deckard know when Roy Batty would die? Deckard presumably had seen Batty's file and should have known. My point, if these replicants were set to die soon anyway, why all the effort to find them? Just let them die.

[–] grhqofb5 (346) 6 years ago

I just saw this movie for the first time last night. So why would anyone think that Deckard was a replicant if he's tossed around like a small child by the other 3 that he kills? I thought that replicants were supposed to have superhuman strength?

I figured that some people might suggest that he was a replicant, just because this movie is so damn confusing so just about anything is in play.

[–] wsg (16) 6 years ago

By the ending in which he drops dead when his clock ends.

[–] grhqofb5 (346) 6 years ago

Well, his new "girlfriend" could just as easily have killed him because she was evil all along, and simply became self aware of her true nature. Or he could have killed himself due to the grief he experienced over her death.

[–] kwestmo (4385) 5 years ago

When are you going to provide this ending? No one else seems to know about it.

[–] Ace_Spade (9544) 5 years ago

Yeah, I've never even heard about it, either.

[–] chrisjdel (2714) 5 years ago

Has anyone read the original Dick? Clearly such an alternate ending would be inconsistent with Blade Runner 2049, where Deckard is very much alive, I don't know if it fits with the book though.

Deckard did say in the voiceover toward the end that Rachel was special. No termination date. He didn't know how long they'd have together is the way he put it, if I recall correctly. The implication being that she would just age and die like a normal human in the fullness of time.

[–] Ace_Spade (9544) 5 years ago

I have read the original. He is unarguably human in "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep". It's a great novella, too... Well worth reading.

Blade Runner 2049 certainly counts out Deckard dying (without some REALLY convoluted logic).

Personally, I've always felt like he's human. Ford thinks he's human, Philip K. Dick thought he was human, there's nothing definitive (although that pesky unicorn is pretty damning...), and now with Blade Runner 2049, well... Ridley Scott's just outnumbered.

[–] Drooch (5333) 4 years ago

When are you going to provide this ending? No one else seems to know about it.

...tumbleweeds...

[–] MikeCable (1843) 5 years ago

I've never heard of point 2 also and can't seem to find anything on Google.

I did find this, however. Three endings from earlier versions of the script:

https://io9.gizmodo.com/blade-runners-original-ending-yes-deckards-a-replican-5181048?IR=T

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 5 years ago

Ummmm I don't remember a scene where they are found dead, not sure what you were watching. As confirmed by the sequel Deckard is still very much alive and Rachel died giving birth.

[–] bobbydallas (8515) 2 years ago

"both Rachel and Deckard are in the car dead"

wait WHAT ?!