MovieChat Forums > Blade Runner (1982) Discussion > The best reason why Deckard is NOT a rep...

The best reason why Deckard is NOT a replicant!

posted 7 years ago by dinkywinky123
11 replies | jump to latest

If Deckard is a replicant why would they use a less powerful, WEAKER model to find much STRONGER repliant models? In every encounter with the replicants Deckard is weaker. He is not as strong. He's almost killed by Leon - Rachael saves him by blowing Leon away! - and in the final battle Roy beats him up with ease. It's only Roy's inner humanity that saves Deckard. Roy realizes his life is about to end and he shows compassion. He lifts Deckard up from the edge of the building and drops him on the roof.

It makes zero plot sense to have a weak Blade Runner replicant chase much stronger ones. It's dumb story logic. PERIOD.

Ridley Scott can spend the rest of his life claiming Deckard is a replicant but he is wrong because it doesn't work in the original movie. It's a flawed idea because it makes no sense. And if they're going with Deckard as a replicant in the sequel - it's just as nonsensical. Deckard is now a 70 year old replicant?

What would be the point of an old, tired, replicant Blade Runner? He would be too old to stop the new replicant bad guys (assuming the villains in BR 2 are new younger replicants). It makes no sense.

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CremersAlex 7 years ago

This is so old. It's funny how people desperately trying to tell themselves that he's not a replicant. He doesn't have superhuman strength ... How perceptive of them.

[–] little_wing 7 years ago

I don't now why you're always so derisive about this point, Alex. Even now, while filming BR 2049 there's been discussion amongst the cast and crew about whether or not Deckard's a replicant. It's true that some of the reasons viewers give, such as the strength issue, show that they haven't thought about it enough, but the fact that we're never given definitive proof, in the actual film, that he's a replicant, should leave it open enough for either opinion to be possible.

Reaction time is a factor in this, so please pay attention.

[–] laplante-co-672-297856 7 years ago

Agreed. In a separate post I mentioned that it raises way too many questions that are never answered or even considered in the story.

1. If he's a Replicant, what is his purpose? Is he being field tested as a replacement for human Blade Runners?

Batty and his crew are physically more capable than him, so if he's being tested as a Blade Runner, he's no better than the human BRs and certainly worse than the prey he's chasing.

2. Why is he exempt from the "rules" that don't allow Replicants on Earth? is he a covert experiment?

3. Who is part of the cover-up? Gaff, Bryan? Tyrell? The Tyrell Replicant R&D division? The fellow Bladerunners in the unit, the LAPD chain-of-commant? What are their respective motivations in this deception?

4. Why is he allowed to run around unsupervised? Sure, Gaff pops up periodically, but we mostly see Deckard running around with his gun in public. Wouldn't the sh!t hit the fan with the populace and other law enforcement agencies, if it came out that an illegal and armed Replicant was running around at large? What if his programming went wonky?

In other words, if the core premise of the story is that Deckard is a Replicant with no story or motivation around it, then it becomes one giant deus ex machina and renders most of the story that we see in the movie meaningless.

Also, Roy's final speech is reduced to a wasted rumination to another robot when it's meant to be the entire kernel of the movie summed up.

The writers of the original novel and the screenplay as well as Ford himself have all insisted that Deckard is human.

Scott is simply pulling a Lucas by retconning his movie.

[–] T-eschberger 7 years ago

Awwwww. This is like, totally the first time this point has ever been brought up!!!!

Too bad he's a replicant though.

[–] edisonnosidE 7 years ago

He lifts Deckard up from the edge of the building and drops him on the roof.

Frankly it looked more to me like he threw him onto the roof.

Impossible is illogical.
Lack of evidence is not proof.
 +  = 

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] BB-15 7 years ago

by dinkywinky123;

"If Deckard is a replicant why would they use a less powerful, WEAKER model to find much STRONGER repliant models?"

Deckard cannot be too far above what a naturally born human can do because then the public could see that he is a replicant.
Why? Because it is illegal for replicants to be on earth (as explained in the movie).

"It's only Roy's inner humanity that saves Deckard."

Yes. Blade runners can be killed. Any cop can be killed.
Roy just decided not to kill Deckard.
That doesn't mean that Deckard is not a replicant.

"It makes zero plot sense to have a weak Blade Runner replicant chase much stronger ones. It's dumb story logic. PERIOD."

Sorry but I can't agree.
Deckard is tough and can take tremendous punishment as the viewer sees in the film.
But he does not have other replicant powers; super strength, resistance to cold which would be a clear indication to the public that; 'This Guy Is A Replicant!'

Imo at least, BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈

[–] clickbait (193) 7 years ago

Deckard isnt a replicant, just made up story by some igonrant knob who wanna think that he is smarter than everyone else and now we have a sequel were its confirmed that he never was a replicant...just like the filmmakers wanted it from the start...a human chasing robots.