Support NeoGAF

[jett]

Some time ago Denis Villeneuve (the director) said they would not confirm whether Deckard is a Replicant or not in the movie, and would leave it up to the audience.

Well, Ridley Scott, true to his self, gives no fucks.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/06...ards-true-nature-and-the-future-of-the-series

IGN: At what point while making the original film did you decide that Deckard would be a Replicant?

RS: Oh, it was always my thesis theory. It was one or two people who were relevant were... I can't remember if Hampton agreed with me or not. But I remember someone had said, ”Well, isn't it corny?" I said, ”Listen, I'll be the best f#@king judge of that. I'm the director, okay?" So, and that, you learn -- you know, by then I'm 44, so I'm no f#@king chicken. I'm a very experienced director from commercials and The Duellists and Alien. So, I'm able to, you know, answer that with confidence at the time, and say, ”You know, back off, it's what it's gonna be." Harrison, he was never -- I don't remember, actually. I think Harrison was going, ”Uh, I don't know about that." I said, ”But you have to be, because Gaff, who leaves a trail of origami everywhere, will leave you a little piece of origami at the end of the movie to say, ‘I've been here, I left her alive, and I can't resist letting you know what's in your most private thoughts when you get drunk is a f#@king unicorn!'" Right? So, I love Beavis and Butthead, so what should follow that is ”Duh." So now it will be revealed [in the sequel], one way or the other.

In another interesting bit of news, Hampton Fancher's (the original screenplay) involvement in the movie has been made clear. For a while people didn't know if he actively worked on the sequel or if he was credited because they were reusing discarded ideas from his original draft. According to this interview Fancher and Scott both developed a "novella" that forms the basis of the new movie.

IGN: Is that why, as a producer on the sequel, you brought Fancher back?

RS: Immediately, I talked to him on the phone and he went, ”Oh, s#!t, not again." He still walks the walk, talks the talk. And from our first meeting, which was about a week and a bit, we formed a very nice, almost a 100-page novella, which tells the whole story of where we will be today. It's good. Very nice.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

"So, I love Beavis and Butthead..."

Yeah, this dude is powered by bullshit and wine fumes now.

I highly doubt he and Hampton Fancher wrote a fucking novella.

 

[NealMcCauley]

 

[daxy]

I respect Ridley Scott for his work, but the dude could definitely take some cues from David Lynch and learn to embrace the beauty of mystery.

 

[Real Hero]

I love Ridley Scott, he is ace

 

[Fuchsdh]

Then how the hell is Deckard still alive in this film?

 

[John Kowalski]

Why would a Replicant age?

 

[Eggiem]

Why would a Replicant age?

It's a next gen model.

 

[HStallion]

You know I have a lot of issues with how Ridley Scott has handled Alien and some of his other recent films but he is still entertaining as Hell to listen to. I think he has totally just moved onto,"I don't give a fuck" old age.

 

[dejay]

I actually agree with Scott. Yes, it would have been cool if Deckard's identity were more ambiguous, but I also find it cool that Gaff represents humanity in the movie, not Deckard, and ultimately Gaff is the human who sees Deckard as something more than a machine.

 

[Radogol]

Why would a Replicant age?

Because he's a super advanced Nexus 7 whose special power is that he's useless as fuck.

 

[HStallion]

It's a next gen model.

Actually its a mid generation release, The Deckard Pro

 

[plasmasd]

You definitely don't want an older replicant as your pilot.

 

[Robot Pants]

You know I have a lot of issues with how Ridley Scott has handled Alien and some of his other recent films but he is still entertaining as Hell to listen to. I think he has totally just moved onto,"I don't give a fuck" old age.

Yea well he's also ruining everything he's ever worked on

 

[Toparaman]

The original (Final Cut) film unambiguously confirms it in its last scene, at least if you believe in Occam's razor. Not really controversial.

 

[Burt]

Yea well he's also ruining everything he's ever worked on

Can't fuck up Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut

Ain't no one giving him the money to go back to that.

 

[jett]

I love Ridley Scott, he is ace

I love how blunt and direct he is, that's for sure.

IGN: Have you watched films over the years and been like, “They’re ripping off Blade Runner or Alien”?

RS: Yeah.

IGN: Is that the kind of thing that rubs you the wrong way, or are you honored by that in a way?

RS: No, you … a little bit of each. A little bit of irritation initially, and then kind of honored, and then what the f#@k.

lol

Why would a Replicant age?

Replicants are biological, they aren't made out of metal.

 

[Pyrrhus]

How was there any ambiguity left after the Director's Cut? Of course Deckard was a replicant. He was a replicant in the novel the story was based on, Gaff knew what his factory-installed dream was, and his eyes glinted like Rachel and the owl's in one scene.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

"am cry" ?

 

[Toparaman]

"am cry" ?

Are you down with the kids Bobby

 

[Razorback]

I don't think there's any room left for doubt. Deckard is a replicant, It's dumb, but that's what it is.

 

[John Kowalski]

Replicants are biological, they aren't made out of metal.

If they are genetically engineered, and if their bodies can be made according to the needs at hand, that one would age just like a human seems like it would be a decision that was made. I mean, i wasn't left with the impression that they could somehow live forever, but that they would probably be able to age a lot slower, if made that way.

Well, i mean, maybe Deckard is the one Replicant that shows they can be made to be indistinguishable from humans.

 

[Psychoward]

This isn't some new thing, it's pretty explicit in the Director's Cut or extended edition or whatever the hell it's called.

One of the reasons why I wouldn't be looking forward to the new one if it was anyone other than Villeneuve directing.

This isn't like Alien where he keeps making shitty movies/retcons after the classic, this was the first movie.

 

[Ezalc]

How was there any ambiguity left after the Director's Cut? Of course Deckard was a replicant. He was a replicant in the novel the story was based on, Gaff knew what his factory-installed dream was, and his eyes glinted like Rachel and the owl's in one scene.

What? He isn't a replicant in the book, and fuck what Scott says, he's not a goddamn replicant in the movies either.

 

[jett]

There's this bit from the interview I don't get:

Because I'm very much a part of the new script, we even took the opening of the film and that's how I was gonna open the original film. And I was sitting with Hampton and said, ”Remember that thing we did with blah-blah-blah-blah-blah?" He said, ”Yeah." That's how we began our conversation.”
[The original is] a really good film, and it's stood the test of time.

IGN: Oh, interesting. I think I might know what that is, too. I think we see a glimpse of that in the trailer, don't we?

RS: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

What scene in the trailer might they be referring to? I took a glimpse at Fancher's BR script and it opens exactly the same as the finished movie. There's an alternate title sequence in BR with visuals of waterdrops, but I see nothing like that in the BR2049 trailer.

Also, curiously, Fancher's script has voice over narration. I did not know that.

If they are genetically engineered, and if their bodies can be made according to the needs at hand, that one would age just like a human seems like it would be a decision that was made. I mean, i wasn't left with the impression that they could somehow live forever, but that they would probably be able to age a lot slower, if made that way.

Well, i mean, maybe Deckard is the one Replicant that shows they can be made to be indistinguishable from humans.

I'm just saying it's a plausible explanation. Honestly I've watched BR multiple times and it wasn't until recently that I realized Replicants weren't robots. In hindsight it's really obvious, though.

 

[Psychoward]

What? He isn't a replicant in the book, and fuck what Scott says, he's not a goddamn replicant in the movies either.

"The director of the movie is wrong about his movie because I don't want it to be that way"

lol

 

[SugarDave]

Ridley off his nut in the Prometheus commentary

Guy is such an asshole, I kinda love it.

 

[III-V]

Not like this


not like this

 

[PantherLotus]

I will always lol at this back and forth. Of course he's a replicant. If you don't agree, totally fine, but I enjoy the many obvious hints and subtle cues that show he is a replicant all the more knowing so. Gives the film a lot of rewatchability.

 

[III-V]

I agree that there are plenty of hints that he is a replicant, but he also seems to be more human (empathy) than the other humans, who are severely lacking empathy as a whole.

Also, he is much weaker than the other replicants, although he manages to best them using his wits.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

What scene in the trailer might they be referring to?

There's a draft of Fancher's script, a pretty early one, that begins with Deckard retiring a replicant on a farm in the wasteland.

The shot of Gosling walking away from a burning building with a tree in the foreground is that sequence.

 

[Tony Redgrave]

IGN: Have you watched films over the years and been like, ”They're ripping off Blade Runner or Alien"?

RS: Yeah.

IGN: Is that the kind of thing that rubs you the wrong way, or are you honored by that in a way?

RS: No, you ... a little bit of each. A little bit of irritation initially, and then kind of honored, and then what the f#@k.

I love this man, lol he kills me every time.

Long live to you sir, my favorite director of all time.

 

[Drencrom]

It wasn't enough that he had to fuck up Alien's lore/backstory, but now he's ruining Blade Runner too.

 

[George Oscar Bluth II]

There's a draft of Fancher's script, a pretty early one, that begins with Deckard retiring a replicant on a farm in the wasteland.

The shot of Gosling walking away from a burning building with a tree in the foreground is that sequence.

Probably Dave Bautista.

 

[Toa TAK]

I can just choose to ignore him.

It's easier this way.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

It wasn't enough that he had to fuck up Alien's lore/backstory, but now he's ruining Blade Runner too.

He ain't doing anything but talking a bunch of shit to IGN.

He didn't write a goddamn novella with Hampton Fancher. There is no way. He's just machine-gun mouthfarting any thought flitting through his head with an ABV higher than 13%

 

[Ezalc]

"The director of the movie is wrong about his movie because I don't want it to be that way"

lol

The man who wrote the book, the guy who wrote the script and the person who portrayed the character don't consider him to be a replicant. I don't care what kind of drug induced hysteria Scott is on, Deckard is human.

 

[polyh3dron]

"am cry" ?

you must be new here.

 

[jett]

There's a draft of Fancher's script, a pretty early one, that begins with Deckard retiring a replicant on a farm in the wasteland.

The shot of Gosling walking away from a burning building with a tree in the foreground is that sequence.

Ah thanks. I tried finding the earliest of Fancher's drafts but couldn't.

 

[HStallion]

It wasn't enough that he had to fuck up Alien's lore/backstory, but now he's ruining Blade Runner too.

I mean he was doing this for a long time before he got back on the Alien train. Ridley has been rather blatant about the Deckard is a Replicant thing for a long time now.

 

[Enduin]

I really hate this. Deckard questioning the possibility he is, but not actually him being a Replicant, is a far more meaningful and important reality. His act of questioning his own existence conveys and reinforces the humanity and individuality of the Replicants themselves that he has interacted with them and been taken in by them so much that he has become unsure of his own existence. It shows they have transcended beyond sophisticated androids into unique sentient beings.

For him to just be another Replicant undermines that. It just makes him another high end android fooled into thinking they were a real person by fancy programing, but not actually being one. It doesn't say anything about him or the other Replicants and what they went through.

I'm glad Villeneuve is leaving it up in the air.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

you must be new here.

oh is this some insipid decade-old-regurgitated in-joke catchphrase bullshit like bomba?

You weirdos and your fuckin' dorky slang.

 

[George Oscar Bluth II]

He ain't doing anything but talking a bunch of shit to IGN.

He didn't write a goddamn novella with Hampton Fancher. There is no way. He's just machine-gun mouthfarting any thought flitting through his head with an ABV higher than 13%

But what if you're wrong?

You were wrong about Lucasfilm.

What if it's the beginning of a trend?

 

[MattKeil]

Then how the hell is Deckard still alive in this film?

I don't think the Deckard we see in this film is the replicant.

 

[Toparaman]

The man who wrote the book, the guy who wrote the script and the person who portrayed the character don't consider him to be a replicant. I don't care what kind of drug induced hysteria Scott is on, Deckard is human.

So...the Unicorn origami is just a coincidence?

At the very least, the film wants you to think Deckard is a replicant. What evidence is there in the film that Deckard is human?

 

[Toa TAK]

But what if you're wrong?

You were wrong about Lucasfilm.

What if it's the beginning of a trend?

I can't let him be wrong anymore.

At least until after Scott gets another Alien movie to finish up the trilogy.

That's what you keep saying, right Bobby?

RIGHT?

 

[Bobby Roberts]

What if it's the beginning of a trend?

 

[Bobby Roberts]

So...the Unicorn origami is just a coincidence?

Before the Director's cut added the Unicorn sequence into the film, the unicorn was, I believe, largely interpreted as commentary on Rachel's nature as a replicant, just like the chicken represented Deckard's will, and the boner guy represented... a guy with a giant cock, or something.

The unicorn origami was up for interpretation, as was Deckard's status. You could reasonably argue one way or the other.

DIrector's Cut started to erase that. Final Cut put it to bed entirely. So now it's not up for interpretation. Basically because, as according to Drunk Butthead-Fan79 in the OP, he was the director and fuck you, Deckard is a robot.

 

[cackhyena]

What an ass.

 

[MMarston]

"am cry" ?

you're old, Robert