I know Ridley Scott wants to have Deckard a Replicant. However, there is no way that makes any sense at all. Harrison Ford and both writers insist that Deckard is a human. I see him as human because it makes your analysis more profound. You have a human acting as a machine and a machine acting human and because of their interaction and choices, they both find what it really means to be human. If Deckard is a replicant then it loses the meaning of that story.

I always thought the most telling scene in the movie was the fact that Roy spares Deckard at the end of their conflict. He'd beaten him, thoroughly. But, faced with his own death, he chose to not strike a man down out of pure spite. It's better than a lot of humans would have done. He was willing to fight and kill for his life and freedom, as is every living being's right. But he wasn't willing to kill for no point. That indicates a moral substance.

I was absolutely enthralled by this movie when it first came out. It was like a breath of fresh air: A science fiction movie that didn't involve space battles. It has a deep and meaningful plot that's quite unique and thought provoking.

The underrated function of scify, by placing the characters in fantastical environments, is actually to examine that deeper understanding of human nature.

The OST remains the most soul-stirring music I've heard in 40+ years. Blade- Runner can also be a halting look at how veterans are treated as fully disposable tools by an entire society. We hoo-rah them in media, but leave MANY to die; from neglect, from PTSD & worse.

This movie has not aged, incredible

Respectfully, you've missed the meaning entirely. This story is built around a core question: "What constitutes life and identity?" Tyrell achieved a leap with his Nexus Replicants by seeding them with memories which gave them a foundation - a sense of identity, dreams, aspirations, a will to live. When Rachel is confronted with the truth of her origins, she is lost. Not just lost in the sense of her place in the world but down to her very being, her sense of self and self-worth is taken from her. Without this foundation, her very identity and her life purpose are tumbling down on her. Imagine not being able to trust your own memories and emotions. At the piano in Decard's apartment, Rachel plays a tune. Deckard awakens from the twilight of a dreamstate and says, "I heard music." She resumes her play then says, "I remember lessons. I don't know if it was me or Tyrell's nieces." He looks at her and says, "You play beautifully." With this one remark, he gives her something back of herself. In essence he is saying "I know your truth and I accept you, appreciate you, love you, just as you are." Each Replicant has an existential crisis of their own. Each has an innate imperative to survive and a will to thrive but also a looming sense of their own mortality. Does knowing your own death is imminent make you anymore alive? At first, Roy does not accept it. He sets out to meet his maker, to demand more life. When Roy and Pris engage Sebastian (himself a human who suffers from a degenerative terminal disease), Roy tells him "We've got a lot in common" which leaves Sebastian perplexed. "What do you mean?" he asks and Roy replies, "Similar problems." Pris drives it home saying, "Accelerated decrepitude." In every character we see a blur between humans and replicants. "We're not computers, Sebastian, we're physical," Roy tells him. And we're again confronted with the recurring question: What constitutes life? The imperative to live? Facing accelerated death? Dreams? Memories? Identity? If none of those then what? What does it matter then, human or replicant? Literally every character in this film walks this path in some form or another only to have all differences or distinctions blurred out. We end on Deckard and Rachel's departure together, flying into the happy ever after. The unicorn origami is symbolic. It is Gaff's way to tell Deckard he was there and will not give chase. It's also there to blur that last line of "more human than human" and make us wonder if Deckard is also a Replicant. The sequel ruined this of course but the idea there was to leave it open-ended, to leave us questioning, because that, after all, is the point of this story. To make you ask yourself, what constitutes life and living? Do androids dream of electric sheep? The apex is unquestionably Roy's "Time to Die" rooftop soliloquy when he comes to accept his death with dignity, recognizing that all life, all identity, however glorious, is ultimately fated to fade into oblivion - lost like tears in rain - but the takeaway message of the story is delivered by Gaff. In releasing Rachel and letting them go, he tells Deckard, "It's a shame she won't live. But, then again, who does?" In effect, that is to say, "no matter who you are or think you are, death awaits us all so make what little life you've got left worth living." And THAT's what Blade Runner is really about.

I didn't like the film when I first watched it at age 12. I thought it was just boring. However, I kept thinking about the film for years. I've watched Blade Runner at least 50-60 times. After, the 5th time, I realized I liked the film but I didn't understand the full arch of the story and its characters. Now, I still watch it because it's such a beautiful film to watch. That's where its masterpiece aligns with me.

This movie is a once in a lifetime work of art. One can spend endless hours disseminating it and still long for more. It will live forever.

For me, the retconned unicorn in the Final Cut is a red herring; Gaff was in Deckard’s apartment, and left the origami unicorn *precisely* to let Deckard know he’d been there and spared Rachel, not because he knew Deckard’s thoughts. The ‘You’ve done a man’s job’ line is merely acknowledging that a human can be a bunch of contradictions and still be a one-man slaughterhouse, *not* that Deckard aspires to be a man. Scott’s insistence that Deckard is a replicant fundamentally wrecks the writers’ vision of Deckard escaping his Blade Runner ‘programming’ and rediscovering his humanity, which is exactly what the theatrical release was telling us. Anyway, saw it in 82 and loved it, regardless of how the critics dissed it. It had the fabulous feeling of being simultaneously old and new; just how new is still being discussed!

IMO the unicorn doesn't imply that Deckard is a replicant. The dream is his subconscious coming to a realisation about Rachel, she's unique, she's not a production line replicant she's a one-off, she has an open ended life span, and she accepts him utterly. Gaffs origami is his acknowledgement of that and his understanding of what Deckard has done in letting her live and absconding with her. A unicorn is a common metaphor for rarity.

Philip K. Dick is my spirit animal. "The man who remembered the future." Read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" when I was 13 years old, and my life was never quite the same. While Dick's writing was serviceable; his concepts, world building and prescient imagination were astoundingly powerful.

“I want more life, fucker.” This line should have been left intact in the Final Cut, which is otherwise superb.

My stepdad let me watch this when it premiered on network TV...I think it was on NBC. I was very young. The end blew my mind as a child....the "bad guy" saves the detective who killed those he loved and tried to kill him as well. I really thought Roy was going to let him die.

"All these memories will be lost, like tears in the rain" Brilliant

Teenage me left the theater obsessed with this movie. I actually looked up reviews in Film magazines at the college library.

Blade Runner is definitely a classic. The sequel is vastly underrated. Loved the podcast. Can't wait to watch this video.

After many, many years and many viewings and now no longer feeling the impact of trying to grapple with such a harsh and disturbing reality that BR brought to screen so vividly by Scott, it's a love story at its very core. The replicants show complete loyalty, sacrifice and devotion (love) for each other. Deckard and Rachel's love story is integral. I would say that their love of life and their fierce determination was best demonstrated in Roy Batty's final scene. I love the line by Tyrell when he states that- 'commerce, that is our goal here at Tyrell, more human than human is our motto'.

Blade Runner is such a classic. I believe Blade Runner is about a man questioning his own humanity and what makes us human and questions such as what I am? Am I real? Am I human? Is my life and my memories real or a dream? What is my purpose? and how long do I live for? Blade Runner is pure cinematic storytelling.

At 14:08, the reflection of the candles appear like a crown upon "Roy's" head. Roy means king. Like a candle, his life is snuffed out. I saw this movie first on the big screen. Amazing cinematography.

I had to sneak into the theatre to watch this as I was under 18 at the time. This movie changed my life. It's my all time favourite movie. From the set props to the set lighting and mood. Syd Mead's designs. Harrison Ford and Rutger Hauer's performances. I was besotted with Sean Young. It was a Ridley Scott masterpiece.

I really enjoy Blade Runner. Not my favorite science fiction film, but it’s defiantly one that has earned its place in film history. While it would have been great if it was enjoyed more when it was first released, I think because it has a cult following the film has a longer lasting impact. Sometimes the cult films stay longer than the ones that were huge and popular at one point in time, yet aren’t talked about as much as time goes on. Thank you for this video and keep up the great work!

"Do Androids dream of electric sheep?" is worth a read. IMO the movie would be entirely different without Rutger Hauer's dying monologue, which he suggested and wrote on set.

Bladerunner is arguably the greatest science-fiction film of all time, and whether you realize it or not, you've made an excellent 22 minute support for that claim. In this video, you've brought so much to light all those things that were put there under the surface. Ridley Scott made the story significantly better by making all his slight changes to Phillip K. Dick's original story. And the amazing thing is that his changes are not obvious or readily apparent. It requires the viewer to have read Phillip K. Dick and to have a deeper understanding of both version of the story. It requires the viewer to be mature, perceptive, intuitive. . . . You did an amazing job. Wow. My appreciation for this video and commentary is beyond anything I can say. Thank you.

Excellent analysis. I’ve love this film for decades and thought I understood all of it…..but you have identified more layers

It's really simple folks. In the book Deckard is human. In the film he is a replicant. The director who shot the bloody film says he's a replicant.

I saw this movie in the theater when I was in college. It was a real lonely time for me,so I thought that I'd go to a movie to cheer myself up. It didnt,however It's what I wrote my sociology paper on. Many of the points you touch on are what I touched on. Scott made me feel more empathy for the replicants then any of the humans. This program of yours has me all nostalgic for 40 yrs ago. My God how time does fly! Better then 4 yrs I guess. Hope you get a chance to read this, I hardly ever comment since it's akin to shouting into the void.

Beautifully conveyed... Thank you. When I first saw Blade Runner back in the day I was blown away. Such an eloquent, sad and prophetic depiction of humanity. I've wept almost my entire life reflecting on these issues. Thank you so much for this vid...

The unicorn dream was added to the film *after* the question of Deckert being a replicant was raised. It has always bothered me that Ridley Scott jumped on that train, something which Phillip K. Dick clearly did not intend.

The unicorn is a symbol of longevity. They live for 1000 years. When I saw the theatrical release (before Scott added the unicorn dream) I assumed that was why Gaff had left the unicorn there.

I have seen this movie so many times, and yet, thought endlessly drawn to the Bladerunner universe, had not been able to see many of the finer points that you exposed. Thank you, it was a deep and beautiful analysis.

That the movie critics thought that this amazing movie was shallow when it first came out tells us a lot about movie critics. But personally, I think the twist of Deckard turning out to be a replicant himself weakens the whole story. It's just another layer of complexity that draws attention away from the main story without adding anything to it. All of the main characters are replicants, except Tyrell who is kind of secondary anyway. This removes the element of seeing the sacredness within the opponent that seems so central to the movie. The key event of the movie is Batty saving Deckard's life, as fellow-replicant Rachael had earlier, thus fulfilling his quest for humanity just as he dies. This would mean much more with a human Deckard, rather than with Deckard being one of Batty's own people. Another question I have about the film is, who really is the protagonist? We see everything from Deckard's perspective, but it's Batty who is really going through the character arc, while Deckard is mostly just following along. And Deckard's growth, if there is any, is much more ambiguous. There's not much evidence that he "loves" Racheal in any real way, and he essentially rewards her saving his life by raping her. That could be the start of a growth arc, but the story ends before it has time to kick in. As it is, Deckard ends up in largely the same place as he started. It's Batty and Racheal who are the interesting characters, the ones who are confronted with the challenges and make the decision to attempt to rise above their programming. But Deckard seems to be mostly a plot device to let us observe Batty and Rachael.

Now this is a real masterpiece

Felt the melancholy of Roy Batty. All those moments we treasure while we are alive, moments we shared with our loved ones, great experiences we had we were alone, individual experiences that are unique and cannot be replicated, experiences if conserved and shared could enrich human experience and wisdom altogether will be lost like tears in rain among thousands of other individuals who will also pass away.

This movie was a real DIRECT PUNCH ON MY STOMACH when i first saw it.... i was 15 years old... with lots of questions about life and death... I remember that scene with Deckard and Roy, in the end, made me cry, with maybe the most painfull cry i ever did... that moment opened my eyes about how death is inevitable and life is short...

'quite an Experience, to live in fear, isn't it?' It most certainly IS, Roy. Without a doubt.

This was great! I’ve watched this film so many times but not as much as Alien. Yes please, would love your take on 2049.

“Replicants are either a benefit or a hazard. If they’re a benefit it’s not my problem.” That line can fit with so many things in life.

Amazing analysis of an equally amazing movie. Bravo!

I remember sitting in the theater absolutely stunned. The visual power of this film on a big screen was unbelievable and unforgettable. The ending was a bit fairy tale but a much needed relief. Thanks for this great vid. Went back to watch it several times because it was just that great btw. Miss those days…

Deckard is not a replicant. I still remember how I got into this film, It was showing on one of the cable premium movie channels, and I'd tune in, watch for a while, then do something else while it played in the background. And the music haunted me. Finally, I sat down and watched the whole movie. And was stunned. I've been a fan ever since.

For sure one of my favorite Sci Fi flicks, 2049 was also quite great. A vid on that one will be interesting. .

Seen it at the theaters when released in 82. Went back 3 more times!. Top 10 for me. A life and death movie. Deckard is saved by both Rachel, and Roy. Alot of folks missed that part, which is a BIG piece of the puzzle, for Deckard and his changed way of thinking.

Tears in rain might be the most touching impactful piece of cinema I have ever seen. I have a feeling this movie will have a much larger impact as AI and automation becomes more mainstream

Glad I saw it in the theater. Loved the visuals. I wanted to be the snake lady.

You did a did good job with this and I’d be happy to watch a breakdown if it’s sequel. Certain films capture an aesthetic that resonates through time and provides infinite influence and inspiration to future artists. Blade Runner, The Mad Max films, and the first two Alien movies are all shining examples of this. When this compelling atmosphere is combined with a great story the result is a film that is always relevant.

I saw this in the movie theaters when it first came out and it immediately became one of my all time favorites. I love the story line and the gritty atmosphere it has. Truly still amazing to this day.

4 years old is an interesting age for the replicants as it is roughly seen as the age when humans start to show the capacity for independent thought and decision making abilities. The tears in rain monologue, among the greatest monologues in movie history, is where Batty shows regret how his memories and experiences will not be shared or passed on, but it is also the moment when he expresses the realization where that is what it means to be human.

I would recommend to read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep by Philip K. Dick. It could give some insight.

I believe Deckard is human. In the novel he is human, both of the screenwriters thought he was human, and Harrison Ford played him as human. There is a symmetry in the movie. Deckard is a human who is losing his humanity; he's an alcoholic. After killing Zhora he gets drunk to deaden his conscience, which replicants don't have. Rachel is a replicant who through her experiences and implanted memories is becoming more and more human. They meet and literally and figuratively save each other's lives. Break that symmetry and the heart is ripped out of the movie and all meaning is destroyed.

Two of my favorite movie shows my city as I see it. Blade Runner, and Constantine. Those fire breathing building are Oil refineries that vent natural gas, that is found with oil. They vent it to, prevent pressure from getting too high. I'm not sure why they started to burn the gas, but it's a good thing. We prefer releasing more CO2 than methane. I think the refinery uses most of the gas to run the refinery, and they vent the excess.

In 2049 Deckert lives in an irradiated area and had been there for years. Not possible for any human, or replicant who has no super abilities. While Deckert felt plenty of pain, he was also very durable. Just what you would give to a long lived variety.

This movie was for me the most innovative movie at the time, and for several more decades to come. So ahead of its time on different levels. And much respect to the original author of the book also.

This came out when I was in college, my firends gave me lots of crap for thinking it was a true masterpiece. I had the last laugh!

I love BR, the original watched in the theatre. That was it, that was the one. I did not fully understand the plot but I never watch movies as puzzle solving. To me it was fantastic, every frame of it and that was all that matters to me. Its the ride.

I agree - the end of the movie, the final scene between Roy and Deckerd, Roy saving him, his sorrow at losing his life - none of that would have worked if Deckerd wasn’t human. And Gaff knowing about the unicorn, well, maybe he was just psychic.

I love the movie, saw it when I was very young for the first time and watched it many times since, I prefer the Harrison Ford narration version this video was very well done YES please do 2049

Wonderful analysis. Great presentation. I hadn't run all these aspect particulars down. Thank you.

I read “Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep” and it was amazing. Every question you have of blade runner can be answered from that book.

ThanX for your perspective on this excellent and classic film. I've watched Blade Runner countless times AND ALWAYS see & learn something new. Love it.

Yours is the best analysis I've seen or read. I first saw this film when it was newly released in theaters. That version was narrarated by Deckard/Harrison Ford which added to its film noir quality. I've contemplated this film for years, yet your examination provided some interesting ideas, ideals, and insights. Thanks for this refreshing and relevant dive into the underlying concepts and theme of this timely classic. Kudos!

Blade Runner is one of my very favorite…dare I use the term?….science-fiction movies ever.Maybe Ridley Scott’s belief that the movie is not actually science-fiction but,in fact,contemporary is what allowed him to make such a convincing,detailed vision,Blade Runner’s “secret sauce” if you will(sf filmmakers take note:If you actually believe in the future you’re creating, it will seem like more than just a movie).I would definitely be intrigued by,and listen to,another such presentation devoted to Blade Runner 2949(and possibly about other things in the Blade Runner universe-books,short films,that Netflix miniseries-as well.)

It never ages, this refelction on humanity is absolutetly timeless

Was blown away by this movie when it came out. And Rutger Hauer is absolutely spectacular in his role.

It's about whatever YOU (the viewer) think it's about. It belongs to YOUR thought process and YOUR imagination. Same with books, we get to fill in all the gaps and spaces, if it isn't in the book we get to fill it in. That's the magic and THAT is why movies, books and fiction can mean so much to us. It's personal. ❤

This is an excellent commentary on Blade Runner. Great Job!

That’s an excellent summary of the depth of the film mate. With the exception of one point at least from a personal experience standpoint. Once you end up in a damaged state, the mind does indeed start to accept whatever is to come and you lose the ability to fight.

I worked on MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE as a Co-Ex Producer/Writer. There is NO DOUBT that Deckard is a replicant. PKD’s daughter agrees. The PKD production company execs agree. The sequel leaves no doubt.

One of the greatest movies ever made. Which is exactly why it was not well received when it came out, way ahead of its time. And yes, Deckard is obviously a replicant.

At 07:15 in video, "According to Ridley Scott, the eye, shown briefly during the film's opening scene, is meant to evoke the idea of Big Brother watching." I would not disagree with Scott here, but Art can have more than one meaning. I had always interpreted the eye differently. To me, the eye represents the viewpoint of one of the replicants, or perhaps the viewpoint of any poor person, living in the vast, complex, impersonal world of Blade Runner. It is a world so far removed from that in which people were meant to live, a world that a person can hardly comprehend when he looks upon it all. The natural world that we evolved in has been so completely replaced by technology that animals, indeed even people, have become technology. The environment is no longer one of forests and animals, but rather one of buildings and vehicles. One might just as easily think of the eye as belonging to a squirrel who is trying to live in a dirty inner city, eating garbage rather than acorns, nesting on buildings and dodging cars. And this vast Dystopia would be all the more difficult for a replicant to grasp, having had only a few years for his mind to develop.

Very very well done. I appreciate the analysis, although I always felt at the unicorn dream was not something that gaff somehow found out. I think that decor dreamed about it, and gaff happened to draw on the coincidence, making the unicorn origami that he left an indication that he knew Rachel was a replicant, and that he was looking at her like the unicorn that got away. She was the one of a kind thing that got away and he was letting her go with Deckard.

Always reminds me of the Dasein-Zuhandenheit-Vorhandenheit relations and the ideas of authentic being. Delightful piece of modern cinema.

Always enjoy your reviews and this was a great one. I believe the answer to the question is Deckard a replicant is answered in Blade Runner 2049. The first movie gives us the hints and I'll focus on the main ones for me: Gaff, his walking stick, and origami hobby. I believe this is setting up that Gaff was forced to retire as a blade runner to working behind a desk due to injuries sustained during active duty. The department wanted the ability to keep his knowledge/experiences "online" in the streets, so they commissioned a replicant blade runner with Gaff's memories - Deckard. I believe what we see in the second movie confirms that Deckard is a replicant with his hand carved wooden horse and other figures showing his own unique interpretation of Gaff's memories/experiences coming out. Basically, showing that even with the same life experiences as someone else, we are all still unique and different, living life in our own way and in this case expressing their creativity differently: Gaff's origami vs Deckard's wooden cravings.

You completely nailed it. Bravo. Please do 2049.

We weren't ready to perceive what Blade Runner was trying to tell us. It took a long time for enough people to 'get it' for Blade Runner to get the respect it deserves. I saw it on a Betahifi rental in about 1985 and I knew I was missing most of the story, but kept going back to it now and then because the worldbuilding totally captured my imagination. Some time in the mid 90's I just fell in love with the whole film, and paid full retail on release day for the last Final Cut DVD box set on the shelf. Well worth it.

Another QUALITY & EXCEPTIONAL video! I'm so impressed by this channel (this is only my 2nd video) and look forward to checking out future content. My one suggestion would be a video on Westworld - the series version. I could only imagine the thought provoking depths you would uncover (which has yet to be achieved properly). Thanks for the excellence that goes into your content!!

Nice take. You got to the heart of it.

Outstanding analysis 👍🏽

This reminds me of the popular paradigm that humans rose to current status because of ruthless competition, A newer paradigm is we developed empathy, compassion, and cooperation.

*Dove flies away in pivotal scene* Director John Woo: this could be something 🤔

I loved this analysis and you perfectly captured and explained all the subtle themes of the film. Will you do one of Blade Runner 2049?

Thank You for this video analysis, Sometimes Im not that good at deciphering the messages of certain films, Blade Runner is one of them but this video helped me learn more about it.

You got this better than any commentary I have ever seen. Note that the book is about Deckard's healing his humanity. The toad sequence always makes me cry. Check your Sidney's.

I do agree that it really shouldn't matter if Deckard is a Replicant but on a personal view I choose to not subscribe to Ridley Scott's contrary interpretation. The film plays far more powerfully that you have a "machine" who has discovered his humanity ultimately helping a detached human rediscover and solidifying his own humanity and, in the process, leaves behind a legacy of sorts. I also feel that it's ultimately for the best to keep the Replicant question in the realm of ambiguity, especially in regard to "Modern Writers" who lack the creative talent; tries to answer these mysteries with idiotically disappointing results. Some mysteries are best left unanswered.

Didn't the replicants escape and kill people? And then kill to prevent themselves being captured? Seems like "retiring" them is reasonable.

Deckard’s character seems like he’s been taken over (possessed) from the start, as if he’s being played in a video game. At the noodle shop he asks for 4 but the chef tells him 2 is his usual, then Gazz speaks to him in a foreign language and Deckard tells him he’s got the wrong guy. In the meeting with Bryant he behaves almost like an imposter learning as he goes…

Ridley Scott has entertained me all of my adult life. He is a true gift to us all.

Rutger Hauer is the real star of this movie

To me the biggest tell that Deckard is a skin job is Gaff saying "You've done a man's job".

I first saw Blade Runner in high school around 1993 or so. Was bored, didn't quite get it. Saw it again a few years later while in college. Been my favorite movie ever since, fending off the rest of my top 3, Alien and Aliens, for nearly 30 years now. The first Ghost in the Shell movie by Mamoru Oshii is also a favorite largely due to the similarities I see in it with Blade Runner.

One of my favorite movies of all time. One subtheme that I have often thought about is that the rain drenched megapolis is the result of a world powered by hydrogen, as the exhaust - water - is constantly released into the air.

My own head canon is that Deckard is not a replicant. Ratchel's pointed jab about the Voight/Kamph test is that the whole idea that replicants have no empathy is BS. Its just a way for humans to "other" the replicants and an excuse to treat these otherwise superior beings as disposable. The humans show no empathy whatsoever, going as far as fouling up the Earth and killing everything that isn't them. It's a joke that they condemn the replicants for not showing empathy when it is something they lack themselves. I find it more meaningful that Deckard as a human learns a lesson about humanity from those he originally considered inhuman.

Vangelis music was so great

I know people hate when Harrison ford did narration on the original release but that was what I grew up with. On vhs of course. The movie is one of my favourites I can literally watch it several times a year !

Nicely done....this answered lots of questions I,as a young viewer, didn't or couldn't discern. This critique was remedial insight to a very enjoyable movie. All that dark foreshadowings...that claustrophobic overpopulation..Batty's steely blue eyes. This is one of my primo films of Scott. Thanks for the overview.....Kudos.!!

Great video and Deckard is human.

The notion that Deckard is a replicant is ridiculous, and Ridley Scott seems to understand neither Dick's work nor his own. It's telling he didn't start pushing this idea until well after the movie came out. The 'replicant Deckard' theory contradicts the source material and every single minute of the movie except, supposedly, the moment with the glowing eyes and the origami unicorn. The unicorn (in the dream) could just as easily represent Deckard's desire for something good and pure, instead of the job that is dragging him down into the muck. Rachael is that unicorn, both because of what she represents to Deckard, but also because she turns out to be a rarity among replicants: No expiration date. Notably, what we hear Gaff say, as Deckard picks up the unicorn, is a line about Rachael, NOT about Deckard or his dreams/memories. 'Replicant Deckard' takes the entire overarching narrative about what it means to be human, the idea that Deckard is a human acting like an emotionless robot, while the replicants are the ones acting like humans, and how it's a pair of artificial beings who ultimately return Deckard's humanity to him, and sacrifices that narrative for a dumb twist ending. If that's what Scott had in mind from the beginning, he has extraordinarily bad taste and very little understanding of how to construct a coherent story. Watch the special features for Legend sometime. If even half of what is said in them about Scott is true, he just blurts out the first harebrained ideas that pops into his head, and it's up to his collaborators and screenwriters to reel him back in. In light of that, his (relatively) recent insistence that Deckard is a replicant makes a lot more sense.

When it was first released, I watched, oh maybe 40 times. The film incorporated all kinds of future technologies, some with us now, others yet to come. So well rounded by ridley scott, and so far sighted by Philip dick. The difference between science fiction and science fact is time, and twenty years on, this film continues to be my own personal yardstick as to what science fiction should be.

I don't care that Ridley Scott issued a fatwa declaring that the original theatrical release is not his vision and should be ignored (release the voice-over cut!). With very rare exceptions all movies made are altered by so-called Hollywood "studio interference", and even Scott uses "test audiences" before a movie release, because Scott's "vision" ain't really the "be all and end all". The movie I saw in 1982 is the REAL Blade Runner in the same way that the Star Wars I saw in '77 is the REAL Star Wars (Han shot 1st!). The same goes for Roald Dahl's original books (SCREW YOU Puffin!). It can never be over emphasized that REPLICANTS are MACHINES, they are NOT human. Tyrell's owl is also a machine and no one makes videos philosophizing that the owl is real! While I dislike all these videos declaring that replicants are humans, I have begun to understand that accepting the replicants as biological androids requires the "final Cut" fans to abandon heroic self insertion into the story. Roy Batty is not Neo from the Matrix. He's not going to save you, you'd be lucky if he doesn't kill you.

This floated up. Loved the film, your take on it and the only thing I was going to add had already been said. Great comments, many things I hadn’t thought of, great group