Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

[Dust Devil]

Ford was definitely no replicant in the original film. He suffers a lot, and has none of the supernatural abilities of the ones he kills/destroys.

I understand not how your claim parallels the explanation.

I can understand that they liked the idea of him being a replicant too, but it doesn't make any sense in the actual film. The adding of the unicorn scene in later versions wasn't a good idea.

It certainly does not subtract anyhing from the movie, au contraire. Not to mention the unicorn fits very well in the logic of his relation with Gaff, and hence the theory of him being a replicant.

Hampton Fancher was btw fired after Scott began to work on the film. And later hired again to rewrite some dialogues while shooting was nearing its end.
Fancher wrote the original screenplay, but Scott changed the stuff a lot to get his own vision of the material.

From their own words Fancher was fired at a certain point after he grew tired and frustrated of having to re-write/re-fit/re-imagine endless times his original idea, following Scott's advices/thoughts. I know it does not make it right, to change and fuc* around with the idea of the writer, but I think it resulted in a better movie, in the end.

[stanton]

I understand not how your claim parallels the explanation.

Ehhh ... what explanation? That he feels pain and is not strong?

From their own words Fancher was fired at a certain point after he grew tired and frustrated of having to re-write/re-fit/re-imagine endless times his original idea, following Scott's advices/thoughts. I know it does not make it right, to change and fuc* around with the idea of the writer, but I think it resulted in a better movie, in the end.

Producer Michael Deeley writes that Fancher had to learn that even a co-producer credit cannot protect a screenplay-writer to get fired from what he thinks is his own film.

[Dust Devil]

The others also feel different types of pain: the more advanced, secretary type Rachael undoubtedly feels emotional pain in a spectum of negative human emotions, and actually seems dominated by them after she is exposed to the toxic truth. She starts as an apparently self-confident, strong-willed, well-balanced and fast-witted young woman rising through the ranks of the corporation - which turns out to be just a thin mask, as she has to confront her true nature. The two male replicants also feel emotional pain vis-à-vis love, fear of lifelong imprisonment/hardship and finally - death. Being combat/hardwork type models they seem more resilient to body damage, however in the last scene with Deckard and Batty it is obvious it functions more as a reflex, an act of rebellion and perhaps, a manifestation of wille zum leben. Something Deckard isn't forced to deal with in such short times, which is why he in the end only gets away with a Pyrrhic victory, and a female fast-typing dishwasher to re-think it all over. Him being a tragic figure, or better more specialized/narrower/dumber model, certainly does not excuse him from being a replicant.

[noodles_leone]

It didn't quite convince me...

 

The others also feel different types of pain: the more advanced, secretary type Rachael undoubtedly feels emotional pain in a spectum of negative human emotions, and actually seems dominated by them after she is exposed to the toxic truth. She starts as an apparently self-confident, strong-willed, well-balanced and fast-witted young woman rising through the ranks of the corporation - which turns out to be just a thin mask, as she has to confront her true nature. The two male replicants also feel emotional pain vis-à-vis love, fear of lifelong imprisonment/hardship and finally - death. Being combat/hardwork type models they seem more resilient to body damage, however in the last scene with Deckard and Batty it is obvious it functions more as a reflex, an act of rebellion and perhaps, a manifestation of wille zum leben. Something Deckard isn't forced to deal with in such short times, which is why he in the end only gets away with a Pyrrhic victory, and a female fast-typing dishwasher to re-think it all over. Him being a tragic figure, or better more specialized/narrower/dumber model, certainly does not excuse him from being a replicant.

See? You can be smart when you want.

[noodles_leone]

They got Hampton Francher to come back on? That's pretty interesting to see. Anyone else see the documentary about the first film, Dangerous Days ? Here's a Shorten Version of it that was broadcast for the BBC. Favorite part is the discussion about the adding of the voice over for the theatrical release.

Edit: Also, with the inclusion of Ford's character in the trailer. It is sad to see that he wasn't a replicate all this time.

Thanks, I'm watching this documentary right now, it is a very good one.

[stanton]

The others also feel different types of pain: the more advanced, secretary type Rachael undoubtedly feels emotional pain in a spectum of negative human emotions, and actually seems dominated by them after she is exposed to the toxic truth. She starts as an apparently self-confident, strong-willed, well-balanced and fast-witted young woman rising through the ranks of the corporation - which turns out to be just a thin mask, as she has to confront her true nature. The two male replicants also feel emotional pain vis-à-vis love, fear of lifelong imprisonment/hardship and finally - death. Being combat/hardwork type models they seem more resilient to body damage, however in the last scene with Deckard and Batty it is obvious it functions more as a reflex, an act of rebellion and perhaps, a manifestation of wille zum leben. Something Deckard isn't forced to deal with in such short times, which is why he in the end only gets away with a Pyrrhic victory, and a female fast-typing dishwasher to re-think it all over. Him being a tragic figure, or better more specialized/narrower/dumber model, certainly does not excuse him from being a replicant.

That the replicants begin to have emotions, that they begin to get aware of their momentariness, that they begin to reflect about their existence, that the machines become human, that is what the film is about. But they still can't feel pain and they are extremely strong, and all this is Deckart not. (Still there is that nail scene at the end in which Batty makes himself feeling pain, which seems wrong to me too. Seems to me like a conceptual mistake, not done on purpose to tell us something about Batty)

If Deckart is a replicant, than he was made for the purpose to hunt down other replicants, but it wouldn't make much sense to create a replicant hunter which is physically inferior to those he shall destroy.
Rachel on the other hand seems to be a new type of replicants, one which does think it is human.

According to Deeley the idea of Deckart being a replicant too, began to fascinate Scott while they were already shooting, what maybe explains why this idea remains muddled. The unicorn scene was btw also not part of the work print, which was shown here and there in the late 80s, but first appeared in the so called DC of the early 90s,, which was not prepared by Scott despite it being labelled as DC.

[noodles_leone]

That the replicants begin to have emotions, that they begin to get aware of their momentariness, that they begin to reflect about their existence, that the machines become human, that is what the film is about. But they still can't feel pain and they are extremely strong, and all this is Deckart not. (Still there is that nail scene at the end in which Batty makes himself feeling pain, which seems wrong to me too. Seems to me like a conceptual mistake, not done on purpose to tell us something about Batty)

If Deckart is a replicant, than he was made for the purpose to hunt down other replicants, but it wouldn't make much sense to create a replicant hunter which is physically inferior to those he shall destroy.
Rachel on the other hand seems to be a new type of replicants, one which does think it is human.

According to Deeley the idea of Deckart being a replicant too, began to fascinate Scott while they were already shooting, what maybe explains why this idea remains muddled. The unicorn scene was btw also not part of the work print, which was shown here and there in the late 80s, but first appeared in the so called DC of the early 90s,, which was not prepared by Scott despite it being labelled as DC.

Still, with the unicorn scene in, Deckart is a replicant.

[Kurug3n]

Thanks, I'm watching this documentary right now, it is a very good one.

You should give the entire documentary a watch sometime. Its around 3 1/2 hours long and goes into it even more so than the linked one.

[PowerRR]

I've seen blade runner once, years ago. Really really liked it. Can't remember which cut it was (probably directors, since it was 10 years ago and i dont think theatrical or final were readily available then). And I've never returned to it, because there's TOO MANY FUCKING CUTS!!!!

noodles - what's the one and only one to watch? and don't say watch all of them...I ain't got no time for that!

[stanton]

Still, with the unicorn scene in, Deckart is a replicant.

And with Deckart feeling pain he's none. It's muddled.

Blade Runner is an overrated film anyway. It is a good one, but not a real great one. For me still in the 8/10 part of this world.

[stanton]

I've seen blade runner once, years ago. Really really liked it. Can't remember which cut it was (probably directors, since it was 10 years ago and i dont think theatrical or final were readily available then). And I've never returned to it, because there's TOO MANY FUCKING CUTS!!!!

noodles - what's the one and only one to watch? and don't say watch all of them...I ain't got no time for that!

You mean which Blade Runner version of the 5 existing ones? Then the so called Final Cut, which is the real DC. But in the end all 5 versions are not that different.

[noodles_leone]

I've seen blade runner once, years ago. Really really liked it. Can't remember which cut it was (probably directors, since it was 10 years ago and i dont think theatrical or final were readily available then). And I've never returned to it, because there's TOO MANY FUCKING CUTS!!!!

noodles - what's the one and only one to watch? and don't say watch all of them...I ain't got no time for that!

The version with the unicorn.

[Kurug3n]

Just watch The Final Cut.  The wikipedia about the different versions is interesting to look at though.

[Dust Devil]

The FC is the DC as it should have been - it is the version to watch.

I personally stand with what I always said: I care less about technicalities (and versions, for that matter) as I care if the movie is overall good on all levels. BUT, after all the butchered/spoiled versions of BR that I watched, and after all the times I thoroughly enjoyed the movie even as such, I must honestly say the FC/DC is by far the superior of them all. By far. The unicorn has nothing to do with it.

I think it's fair to say that for a director such as RS, who was, at least at the time, much more concerned with the story and visuals than actually directing the actors, trusting his vision is the way to go. There are countless angles, lightings, +/- 1 - 2 sec cuts that I noticed even on the first watch, that improved the movie experience on all levels - drastically.

[Dust Devil]

And about the unicorn: the unicorn appears ''in person'' for the first time in Deckard's dream-like sequence (not originally included in the cut(s)), but it also appears indirectly - as an origami folded figurine made by Gaff. Not only that, his origami figurines appear throughout the movie and not without significance: 1) when Deckard is either beaten up and nearly strangled by Zhora, or saved from Leon by Rachael (I can not remember at this point) - Gaff folds a chicken origami, 2) when Deckards starts falling for Rachael - Gaff folds an origami of a man with an erection, and finally 3) in the end scene before Deckard runs away with Rachael - Gaff already was in front of his apartment (knowing Rachael's inside) and he folds him a unicorn that Deckard finds in front of his appartment later when he arrives. This ties very well with the ''Deckard is a replicant'' theory, as it implies that Gaff knows very well what Deckard is thinking, or what he's gonna think. Just like Deckard knows most if not all Rachael's memory implants (''spider with the orange body and green legs'' etc.).

Gaff also treats Deckard as somewhat inferior to him and highly predictable, in the end he mocks him with the line ''You've done a man's job sir.'' (it sounds more like ''You've done a man's job son.'', but I won't stretch this too much). And so on and so on, there's much more to the ''replicant hunting replicants'' theory than a few seconds of one unidentified white unicorn.

I was more inclined to discuss what the unicorn means, as the first two origami are easy to decipher. But perhaps some other time.