What exactly is a "Blade Runner"? I assumed he was the chosen one of a deadly, futuristic game of roller derby, like Alita. But I've never seen any pictures posted of him doing battle in the arena. Just him trying to quit AI prostitution, I think. What the hell is this movie about?
They're called Blade Runners literally, and I mean LITERALLY, just because it sounds cool.
The term does not appear in the source material (the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?) but is instead taken from a completely different novel (The Bladerunner) about smuggling medical supplies, including scalpels. Ridley Scott bought the rights to the second novel just to use the title, because it sounded cooler than any of the movie titles they were workshopping.
>What the hell is this movie about? Realistic artificial humans were created for offworld slave work, but some rebelled. They're now banned on Earth, and Blade Runners hunt down any that try to hide there. Over the course of the movie, the inhumanity of the hunter and the humanity of the hunted are compared.
For the sequel, Blade Runner 2049: It's discovered that an artificial human managed to have a child, something that should be impossible. While the artificial humans see the offspring as proof of their status as a living species, the company that makes them wants to study it to learn how to increase their production rate. An artificial Blade Runner, allowed to live on Earth to hunt his own kind, questions his life while trying to locate the offspring.
then he realizes that he IS the offspring, but is bullshitted into believing that he isn't to protect him, but sadly he ultimately ends up dying anyway.
>autoimmune isorder
Protip: there's a very large difference between an immune deficiency and an autoimmune disorder. Try to learn it so you don''t sound like an idiot in the future.
Also, some immune disorders don't present until later later in life.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Ok wise guy, how did she end up with loving rich parents?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>how did rich people obtain an orphan from an orphanage
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM I WONDER
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
She was the duplicate, placed with a family.
He was the real baby, place in the orphanage for anonymity.
This is the ultimate tragedy of the movie: he dies unknown and unknowing.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
She cried because she knew >he was the one >she was gonna lie to him
Remember, there was a girl *and a boy*. She's the fake.
She cried because she knew >he was the one >she was gonna lie to him
Remember, there was a girl *and a boy*. She's the fake.
Pretty much this is the only way the movie makes any sense at all.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
It blows my mind that people don't understand this.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
its a Villeneuve film, the type of people watching this shit just eat up the visuals and nonsense. you could cut out like an hour of the film and it would be fine, specifically the parts with Jared Leto.
>He's not a replicant in the final cut
unicorn is literally proof is he is a replicant, ridley confirmed it himself.
[...]
the whole point was deckard had no clue he was a replicant, it was yet another experiment of tyrell's like rachel, where they were given memories so as to have fabricated childhoods and feel far more alive than previous models
[...]
[...]
[...]
apparently deckard's glowing eyes were not intentional in that one scene (picrel), the cinematographer has said. rachel's glowing eyes were fully intentional, however.
This, Final Cut is the best to watch but it 100% confirms he was a replicant. its dumb but its still the best viewing experience
hampton fancher also thinks deckard is human
david peoples literally made an unofficial spinoff based around roy's off-world exploits into picrel, even though he claims he wrote it after watching the terminator
None, it's a shitty emotionless movie made for women
>What exactly is a "Blade Runner"?
It sounds like a weapon or medical supplies smuggler because it is. The morons making this movie took the title from a story where it made sense and applied to this story where it means nothing. Another example of it being a womanly "movie"
You're right, he's not a replicant, that would be silly. At least that's how it should be. But the eye tint and the unicorn BS and Ridley Scott himself saying so contradicts that. It is INTERESTING for the lines between human and replicant to be blurred and for Deckard to question like when he's sent to the police station full of androids in the novel. But with him being a replicant 100% canon no debate Ridley Scott says so that's just bullshit to me. Diminishes the whole human vs replicant thing if it's literally replicants vs replicants (that's what BR2049's for).
>But with him being a replicant 100% canon no debate Ridley Scott says so that's just bullshit to me.
It is bullshit, the eye glow and the unicorn can be explained in other ways. If Ridley's attempt was for those to be 100% signs of Dekard being a replicant then he failed. Ridley is a brainlet and should be ignored.
>the eye glow and the unicorn can be explained in other ways
This is how I try to take it but my autism prevents me cause he literally said these are signs that we're supposed to notice and go "ohhh nooo..."
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
If the eye glow was prove enough for someone being a replicant then why they would need the Voight-Kampf test?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Ask Scott.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>he literally said
He doesn't matter. He had an idea for a sequel he never did and he was just pushing for that. He had George Lucas disease, just ignore him.
>He's not a replicant in the final cut
unicorn is literally proof is he is a replicant, ridley confirmed it himself.
You're right, he's not a replicant, that would be silly. At least that's how it should be. But the eye tint and the unicorn BS and Ridley Scott himself saying so contradicts that. It is INTERESTING for the lines between human and replicant to be blurred and for Deckard to question like when he's sent to the police station full of androids in the novel. But with him being a replicant 100% canon no debate Ridley Scott says so that's just bullshit to me. Diminishes the whole human vs replicant thing if it's literally replicants vs replicants (that's what BR2049's for).
the whole point was deckard had no clue he was a replicant, it was yet another experiment of tyrell's like rachel, where they were given memories so as to have fabricated childhoods and feel far more alive than previous models
>But with him being a replicant 100% canon no debate Ridley Scott says so that's just bullshit to me.
It is bullshit, the eye glow and the unicorn can be explained in other ways. If Ridley's attempt was for those to be 100% signs of Dekard being a replicant then he failed. Ridley is a brainlet and should be ignored.
>the eye glow and the unicorn can be explained in other ways
This is how I try to take it but my autism prevents me cause he literally said these are signs that we're supposed to notice and go "ohhh nooo..."
If the eye glow was prove enough for someone being a replicant then why they would need the Voight-Kampf test?
apparently deckard's glowing eyes were not intentional in that one scene (picrel), the cinematographer has said. rachel's glowing eyes were fully intentional, however.
it literally is. the unicorn dream came from gaff, that's how he knows about it. you can argue that since gaff does origami throughout the whole movie and other asian mysticism bullshit (despite being played by a spic) it was just a random chance that he left a unicorn. but the fact is gaff is purposely absent and observant of deckard, because gaff is human and deckard is not.
also there's this too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7o0rvVxU0w
if ridley says deckard is a replicant, deckard is a replicant and nothing you can do or say will change that.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
So now Gaff works as a dream implant man for Tyrell Corp while also moonlighting as a cop? We're just making shit up here. They implant memories anyhow, the unicorn vision wasn't a memory.
What's the significance of the unicorn origami in the theatrical version, without Deckard's vision? If the origami is only a direct reference to Deckard's vision then it's meaningless nonsense in the theatrical, and we're given no reason to think Gaff is anything more than a cop. If the unicorn origami is symbolic in the theatrical then same rules apply in the Final Cut.
Anyone can imagine a unicorn. Coincidences happen all the time. This coincidence made him second guess his humanity, but that's all it does. Ridley is a gay moron and nothing he says will change that.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>significance of the unicorn origami in the theatrical version
it isn't there. unicorn origami appears in the director's and final cuts. in the theatrical cut deckard finds rachel and it cuts to them driving out into the countryside. that's why 2049 is non-canon, it's a sequel to the theatrical cut which is not what ridley intended when he shot the film, the studio forced a happy ending because the film failed with test audiences (they were literally too stupid to understand the movie and the studio forced ford to do a narration as well).
Ridley also said the space jockey was just a giant albino man in a suit. He's an idiot that doesn't understand why anyone even likes his works. And him making shit up decades after the fact doesn't make it true.
>making shit up decades after
the final cut is what was originally filmed you insipid twat.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>it isn't there. unicorn origami appears in the director's and final cuts
unicorn origami is in the theatrical as well. >the final cut is what was originally filmed you insipid twat.
The unicorn vision was filmed during the making of Legend.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Ridley also said the space jockey was just a giant albino man in a suit. He's an idiot that doesn't understand why anyone even likes his works. And him making shit up decades after the fact doesn't make it true.
What exactly is a "Blade Runner"? I assumed he was the chosen one of a deadly, futuristic game of roller derby, like Alita. But I've never seen any pictures posted of him doing battle in the arena. Just him trying to quit AI prostitution, I think. What the hell is this movie about?
What are you smoking anon? Get out of my dying thread.
I've never seen it? I thought I'd finally ask what the go was. QRD?
QRD: watch the movie, any cut
They're called Blade Runners literally, and I mean LITERALLY, just because it sounds cool.
The term does not appear in the source material (the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?) but is instead taken from a completely different novel (The Bladerunner) about smuggling medical supplies, including scalpels. Ridley Scott bought the rights to the second novel just to use the title, because it sounded cooler than any of the movie titles they were workshopping.
are you fricking kidding me? this entire time there's been à book called The Bladerunner?
he means that figuratively
>What the hell is this movie about?
Realistic artificial humans were created for offworld slave work, but some rebelled. They're now banned on Earth, and Blade Runners hunt down any that try to hide there. Over the course of the movie, the inhumanity of the hunter and the humanity of the hunted are compared.
For the sequel, Blade Runner 2049:
It's discovered that an artificial human managed to have a child, something that should be impossible. While the artificial humans see the offspring as proof of their status as a living species, the company that makes them wants to study it to learn how to increase their production rate. An artificial Blade Runner, allowed to live on Earth to hunt his own kind, questions his life while trying to locate the offspring.
then he realizes that he IS the offspring, but is bullshitted into believing that he isn't to protect him, but sadly he ultimately ends up dying anyway.
lol not quite anon...
I took my 30 seconds to realize that the girl with an autoimmune isorder would not have survived in the horrific orphanage.
That was his memory.
>autoimmune isorder
Protip: there's a very large difference between an immune deficiency and an autoimmune disorder. Try to learn it so you don''t sound like an idiot in the future.
Also, some immune disorders don't present until later later in life.
Ok wise guy, how did she end up with loving rich parents?
>how did rich people obtain an orphan from an orphanage
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM I WONDER
She was the duplicate, placed with a family.
He was the real baby, place in the orphanage for anonymity.
This is the ultimate tragedy of the movie: he dies unknown and unknowing.
She cried because she knew
>he was the one
>she was gonna lie to him
Remember, there was a girl *and a boy*. She's the fake.
Pretty much this is the only way the movie makes any sense at all.
It blows my mind that people don't understand this.
its a Villeneuve film, the type of people watching this shit just eat up the visuals and nonsense. you could cut out like an hour of the film and it would be fine, specifically the parts with Jared Leto.
This, Final Cut is the best to watch but it 100% confirms he was a replicant. its dumb but its still the best viewing experience
did you fall asleep during the move
He's the one.
The Leto guy knew.
2049 isn't canon and you're gay for using spoiler tags on two movies that everyone on this board has seen
You're the gay one
i know i am but what are you?
I was responding to someone who HADN'T seen the movie.
That was the whole point.
You idiot.
it's entirely possible to watch a movie and ask "what the frick was it about?"
besides that you're still a homosexual lmao kys
>same writer
>isn't canon
lol
hampton fancher also thinks deckard is human
david peoples literally made an unofficial spinoff based around roy's off-world exploits into picrel, even though he claims he wrote it after watching the terminator
None, it's a shitty emotionless movie made for women
>What exactly is a "Blade Runner"?
It sounds like a weapon or medical supplies smuggler because it is. The morons making this movie took the title from a story where it made sense and applied to this story where it means nothing. Another example of it being a womanly "movie"
>None, it's a shitty emotionless movie made for women
Lmao he didn't get it
Final Cut
The implication that Deckard's a replicant ruins it for me.
He's not a replicant in the final cut, but the blurring of lines between man and replicant is a big part of the story in any version.
You're right, he's not a replicant, that would be silly. At least that's how it should be. But the eye tint and the unicorn BS and Ridley Scott himself saying so contradicts that. It is INTERESTING for the lines between human and replicant to be blurred and for Deckard to question like when he's sent to the police station full of androids in the novel. But with him being a replicant 100% canon no debate Ridley Scott says so that's just bullshit to me. Diminishes the whole human vs replicant thing if it's literally replicants vs replicants (that's what BR2049's for).
>But with him being a replicant 100% canon no debate Ridley Scott says so that's just bullshit to me.
It is bullshit, the eye glow and the unicorn can be explained in other ways. If Ridley's attempt was for those to be 100% signs of Dekard being a replicant then he failed. Ridley is a brainlet and should be ignored.
>the eye glow and the unicorn can be explained in other ways
This is how I try to take it but my autism prevents me cause he literally said these are signs that we're supposed to notice and go "ohhh nooo..."
If the eye glow was prove enough for someone being a replicant then why they would need the Voight-Kampf test?
Ask Scott.
>he literally said
He doesn't matter. He had an idea for a sequel he never did and he was just pushing for that. He had George Lucas disease, just ignore him.
Doing my best to
>He's not a replicant in the final cut
unicorn is literally proof is he is a replicant, ridley confirmed it himself.
the whole point was deckard had no clue he was a replicant, it was yet another experiment of tyrell's like rachel, where they were given memories so as to have fabricated childhoods and feel far more alive than previous models
apparently deckard's glowing eyes were not intentional in that one scene (picrel), the cinematographer has said. rachel's glowing eyes were fully intentional, however.
>unicorn is literally proof is he is a replicant
No it isn't, Ridley.
>unicorn
>horse
K is Deckard's son.
it literally is. the unicorn dream came from gaff, that's how he knows about it. you can argue that since gaff does origami throughout the whole movie and other asian mysticism bullshit (despite being played by a spic) it was just a random chance that he left a unicorn. but the fact is gaff is purposely absent and observant of deckard, because gaff is human and deckard is not.
also there's this too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7o0rvVxU0w
if ridley says deckard is a replicant, deckard is a replicant and nothing you can do or say will change that.
So now Gaff works as a dream implant man for Tyrell Corp while also moonlighting as a cop? We're just making shit up here. They implant memories anyhow, the unicorn vision wasn't a memory.
What's the significance of the unicorn origami in the theatrical version, without Deckard's vision? If the origami is only a direct reference to Deckard's vision then it's meaningless nonsense in the theatrical, and we're given no reason to think Gaff is anything more than a cop. If the unicorn origami is symbolic in the theatrical then same rules apply in the Final Cut.
Anyone can imagine a unicorn. Coincidences happen all the time. This coincidence made him second guess his humanity, but that's all it does. Ridley is a gay moron and nothing he says will change that.
>significance of the unicorn origami in the theatrical version
it isn't there. unicorn origami appears in the director's and final cuts. in the theatrical cut deckard finds rachel and it cuts to them driving out into the countryside. that's why 2049 is non-canon, it's a sequel to the theatrical cut which is not what ridley intended when he shot the film, the studio forced a happy ending because the film failed with test audiences (they were literally too stupid to understand the movie and the studio forced ford to do a narration as well).
>making shit up decades after
the final cut is what was originally filmed you insipid twat.
>it isn't there. unicorn origami appears in the director's and final cuts
unicorn origami is in the theatrical as well.
>the final cut is what was originally filmed you insipid twat.
The unicorn vision was filmed during the making of Legend.
Ridley also said the space jockey was just a giant albino man in a suit. He's an idiot that doesn't understand why anyone even likes his works. And him making shit up decades after the fact doesn't make it true.
workprint prototype
Why'd you say that anon? I've never seen it
so watch it
the secret uncut as they call it, shhh keep it down
I like the director's cut. The sword fighting scenes felt more epic.
Which cut is longest but doesn't have the narration or imply that Deckard's a replicant?
The Final Cut
The one without the voice over and without the stupid unicorn scene
Frick you, I liked the voice overs.
HE'S THE KIND OF COP FROM THE HISTORY BOOKS WHO WOULD CALL BLACK PEOPLE Black folk
Same, feels more like a noir.
JOI is actually human, but you tards aren't ready for that.
Final Cut
2 Mogs 1 in every possible way, it's contrarian now to think BR2 is bad because reddit likes it. Funny to watch all you sheep fall in line.
Theatrical. Only sycophants and pseudo-intellectuals fawn over the final cut.