-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Blade Runner 2049 writers became victims of io9 clickbait enabled by LordOfLore
- Thread starter LordOfLore
- Start date
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Okay, now this is bait.
A proper headline would be "Blade Runner 2049 Writers Say 'It Doesn't Matter' Which Version of the Original You Watch"
It's not even the primary focus of the interview, and it's tossed away by Green pretty quickly.
A proper headline would be "Blade Runner 2049 Writers Say 'It Doesn't Matter' Which Version of the Original You Watch"
It's not even the primary focus of the interview, and it's tossed away by Green pretty quickly.
LordOfLore
Banned
Blame io9. I just bring the news.
Clickbait is clickbait. The answer is: they say it doesn't matter.
Edit: dammit Bobby
You're not obliged to copy their headline verbatim.
Edit: dammit Bobby
You're not obliged to copy their headline verbatim.
Thanks for being the person who #SavedUsAClick
Bobby Roberts
Banned
This isn't news.
(It's not your fault, you didn't write the headline. But that's as clear cut a case of bait as I've seen from io9 in awhile)
Guerrillas in the Mist
Member
Wait, what?
in the narration, deckard describes the captain as someone who would still use that word
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
The version is the one you bothered watching
It's actually kinda sad that someone actually thought cops using that word would be a thing of the past in 2019.
The one part of the future as that movie presents it that isn't shitty, and we didn't even manage that.
BobTheFork
Member
That Narration is only in the theatrical release, right?
Nappuccino
Member
The two pro-
replicant theories are "Deckard was a new model, without a short life-span" or "This is the human the Deckard model was based on."
At least, those are the two I've read that make some sense to me. I hope neither is true.
Those are two stupid ass theories, specially the second one LMAO.
It will be really interesting to see what will be the twist of this movie and to finally validate which version of the original is canon.
This is my only gripe/issue with the sequel, and I hope it's resolved in a satisfying way in 2049.
GodzillaDB
Member
While Denis Villeneuve and Harrison Ford have been beating around the bush when it comes to the question, Ridley Scott recently outright stated that Deckard would finally be "revealed [in the sequel], one way or the other" that he's a replicant. In the end, I think it's pretty clear that Final Cut will come out rightfully on top as the canonical film for its inclusion of the essential "unicorn dream" sequence to the "Deckard as a replicant" theory along with fixing up continuity errors in the process.
Nappuccino
Member
I still don't understand why the unicorn is a symbol of his being a replicant. It makes more sense to me that the unicorn is a symbol for Rachel and/or the miracle of humanity and life.
The Director's Cut and Final Cut are pretty similar, but the Final Cut removes some of the ambiguity and adds some violence. The FC is a bit of a tighter cut, but honestly I prefer the more languid Director's cut, and the way it lets images and ideas wash over you.
Anyway, you can't really go wrong with either for your first watch.
Some will argue the workprint is the best cut, but I'd imagine it plays better once you're a fan of the film to begin with.
kunonabi
Member
Workprint prototype version (1982)
International theatrical release (1982)
US broadcast version (1986)
The Director's Cut (1992)
The Final Cut (2007)
All of these versions
Thank you for the recommendations. Is there that big of a difference? It sounds like these are different movies.
I really hope not. I'm not a fan of the replicant interpretation , regardless on how stubborn Scott is with this, i'm with Harrison Ford in this one.
You can just buy the blue ray which includes all the versions and make your mind, it's worth it.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000UBMWG4/?tag=neogaf0e-20
The documentary on how the movie was made also kicks ass.
If i remember correctly , the Unicorn is how Gaff tells Deckard he knows about his dream, ergo, confirming he is a replicant.
An indication that Gaff was aware of Deckard's dreams, much like Deckard was familiar with the memory implants that Rachel had. That's the thinking behind it.
EDIT: Beaten.
It's only because of the built-in lifespan. Who says replicants can't age if allowed the time to do so?
I thought the life-span wasn't something built in, rather that it was a natural consequence of the abilities the Replicants had. "The candle that burns twice as bright lasts half as long" and so forth.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Deckard is a morally compromised, dead inside piece of shit who isn't even all that good at his job.
That's one of the bigger trip-ups for first timers- you keep waiting for Harrison Ford to be the hero.
It never happens
That's one of the bigger trip-ups for first timers- you keep waiting for Harrison Ford to be the hero.
It never happens
GodzillaDB
Member
Ridley Scott colorfully described the importance of the origami unicorn in the aforementioned IGN interview that I linked. When Harrison Ford expressed that Deckard shouldn't be a replicant during the making of the original film, Scott responded, ”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***ing unicorn!'" A popular notion of the replicant theory has speculated that Gaff's role in the narrative has him operating as a 'handler' to Deckard, possibly observing his detective work and psychological development as an experimental or upgraded version of the Nexus android. By preserving the daydream sequence in both the 'director's cut' and 'Final Cut, it provides pivotal context to the origami as an outright reveal to Deckard and the audience that he knows exactly what's inside his thoughts, much like how Deckard easily uncovered Rachel's memories as part of his investigation. Thus, his nod after picking the figure off the floor and recollection of Gaff's final remark about morality serves as a recognition of his own existence as a replicant. Also, J.F. Sebastian clarifies in his conversation between Pris and Roy that he does "genetic design work for the Tyrell Corporation. There's some of me in you." While the film hammers on the shared similarity being their accelerated aging, his involvement with hereditary development means that he could possibly dictate what subject matter becomes the memory basis for every replicant to make them feel more human. If each android did, indeed, have "some [part] of me in you," Sebastian likely took inspiration from various interests and/or items inside his own apartment, particularly the unicorn figurine (pictured below in the upper right-hand corner) being evidence for Deckard's case.
Nappuccino
Member
That's always seemed like a stretch to me. So much is implied throughout the film without explanation that it seems strange to take that direct through-line to interpret the unicorn. Especially when Gaff has known Deckard for so long. For all we know, Deckard told Gaff about his unicorn dream before the movie ever began.
I also don't care about what Ridley says, when the writers, actors, and Prometheus is not on his side.
One of my favorite aspects of the original film
I anticipate seeing "Drive" Gosling in 2049
its part of that 40s noir vibe - those guys were always drunk, lonely detectives who made risky/dumb decisions for a dame
I hope the 160 minute movie coming in a week will help us find out!
I have a very important ~deep lore~ question. What -are- Replicants? They are organic right? Not cybernetic. They're not robots, they're more like.... enhanced clones of sort? If we take this to the natural technological conclusion... what is the difference between a perfected Replicant without artificial drawbacks, and a human being?
That thread tile lol
I actually don't know the answer to this question.
I assume that a "perfected" (Nexus model with superhuman abilities and Rachel-esque empathy) Replicant would still have the shortened life span, because I believe Tyrell said it wasn't possible to make them be able to do what they were capable of and give them a long life. Candles and shit, man.
I actually don't know the answer to this question.
I assume that a "perfected" (Nexus model with superhuman abilities and Rachel-esque empathy) Replicant would still have the shortened life span, because I believe Tyrell said it wasn't possible to make them be able to do what they were capable of and give them a long life. Candles and shit, man.
i think that's a big part of the whole Blade Runner thing
"more human than human" - the tyrell corporation
Other that their designed skills (strength , intelligence and so forth) there are virtually no differences other than emotional responses, that's why the Voight-Kampff test was invented in order to spot rogue replicants.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Yeah, they're basically androids so advanced that the uncanny valley isn't just bridged, it's been filled in and paved over.
Cylons in the Galactica reboot were based on Dick's Replicants. Which is why they called em skinjobs in that show, and cast Gaff to be their opposite number.
Cylons in the Galactica reboot were based on Dick's Replicants. Which is why they called em skinjobs in that show, and cast Gaff to be their opposite number.
So if the question is whether Deckard is a Replicant or not, and if the answer to that is that he is some super special model that never made it to market, but was a prototype which is completely human in every way, complete with a natural lifespan, no particular superhuman strength, and memories that make him believe himself to be human..... how is he not a human? 
This might be why almost everyone involved in Blade Runner who isn't Scott thinks the "Deckard is obviously a Replicant!!!" idea is kinda stupid and pointless!
This might be why almost everyone involved in Blade Runner who isn't Scott thinks the "Deckard is obviously a Replicant!!!" idea is kinda stupid and pointless!
ShadowKingpin
Member
That thread title is genius.
The Nexus-8s that the Blackout 2022 prequel short focused on were established as having natural lifespans though, and were no less exceptional in respect to abilities.
What's hilarious is Deckard saying he was good at his job in 2049.
Dude is super incompetent. Multiple times Replicants get the jump on him and the only reason he doesn't die is either through a third party and Roy saving his worthless ass.