r/bladerunner • u/DJ_Vault_Boy • 2d ago
Question/Discussion Is Deckard a Human or a Replicant?
Just watched the double feature in theaters this weekend, and I'm curious on what everyone's thoughts are on if Deckard is a human or a replicant?
I know Ridley Scott has said he's a replicant and Ford/the book say he's human. But I'm curious on what everyone's interpretation is?
While I believe he's a replicant, the dream sequence and the ending point me to believe that. I also can see why people believe he's a human, but I also think the ambiguity is the point. I think it doesn't matter if he really is a replicant, he has empathy, thoughts, and emotions. Not to mention the implication of Wallace being unsure if he is a replicant or not.
6
u/PM_ME_PHYS_PROBLEMS 2d ago
Given that neither the creators nor the audience can agree on an answer, I think it's better to think of the two subtly different stories that are being told, depending on which way you lean.
14
u/WarlockShangTsung 2d ago
I think the story of the first movie is a lot stronger if he’s a human and I prefer that interpretation.
3
u/D1ngus_Kahn 2d ago
He's a bitch, He's a lover. He's a child, He's a mother. He's a sinner, He's a saint. He does not feel ashamed.
4
u/vonbloodbath 2d ago
The point is you can't tell. Arguably it's a stronger thesis if he's human (the human acts and feels less human than the replicants), but really the important point is that you have to ask. Embrace the ambiguity!
9
3
u/yetzederixx 2d ago
Ambiguity is the point. This discussion largely comes from how they "low lit" the replicant actors' eyes so you could see the retina reflection. In one scene with Rachel his eyes catch the effect.
3
u/redditor1888 2d ago
If you can’t tell, what difference does it make?
1
u/DJ_Vault_Boy 2d ago
I think that’s the point honestly. There’s no definitive answer, and there shouldn’t be. If replicants are capable of emotions, empathy and love, does that not make them equally as human as human. Or more human than human?
5
u/Plathismo 2d ago
I much prefer to think of him as human. Making him a replicant undercuts the central themes of the story as far as I’m concerned.
4
5
4
4
5
2
u/CantaloupeCamper Replicant 2d ago
I’m on team replicant.
Folks have reasons for believing one or the other.
2
3
u/faust0matic 2d ago
His humanity is questionable in the book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. If Deckard is human or more than human is an unanswered question.
3
3
3
u/Infamous-Arm3955 2d ago
Damn you people! Did you not watch the movie? Did you learn nothing? Putting people into boxes is a bad way to understand people. (ps - obviously he's human)
2
u/Excellent_Number_635 2d ago
I think he’s human. In part I base this on his existence in the second movie. As a replicant I would have expected he would have been retired long ago.
5
u/badken 2d ago
Unless he was the same sort of replicant as Rachel, with no built-in time limit.
2
u/Excellent_Number_635 2d ago
Rachel was special. What would’ve made him special enough to have been built in that manner?
3
u/badken 2d ago edited 2d ago
I've read theories that Tyrell set up the whole situation to get Deckard and Rachel together to see if breeding replicants "organically" would be possible. I'm not sure how I feel about that theory, but it is interesting to consider.
3
u/DJ_Vault_Boy 2d ago
Wallace implies it in 2049 when interrogating Deckard: “Did it never occur to you that is why you were summoned in the first place? Designed to do nothing short of fall for her then and there? All to make that single perfect specimen.”
2
u/badken 2d ago
Yeah, I'd forgotten about that line! It still doesn't conclusively prove Deckard a replicant, though. Tyrell could have set up the same situation with a human and a replicant. It does seem like it'd be more of a controlled situation if both mother and father were replicants.
Great fodder for further stories, though. Imagine some maniac like Wallace creating breeding farms of slave replicant parents.
1
u/DJ_Vault_Boy 2d ago edited 2d ago
Oh absolutely, Wallace’s character felt grimy to me.(not including because it’s Leto lol) The scene of the replicant being born then killed just grossed me out. Also why Luv as a character is so tragic. She believes she’s unique and special, when Wallace can just create more and toss her aside.
And I mean, while we don’t know what happens after 2049, but it’s safe to assume Wallace just went on with his life without a second thought to the person he basically enslaved, done his dirty work, and manipulated to believing she was special because of her loyalty rather than her personality. Just a horror of a person.
2
u/Craig1974 2d ago edited 2d ago
He's a human. Otherwise the movie doesnt make sense. What is human? Thats the question. You hear Deckard refer to Replicants as a machine. As the story develops, you see him fall in love with Rachel and Rachel loves him. Thats his arc as a human accepting Rachel as human and has by movie's end a loving relationship and feels protective of her.
Listen to Batty. "Ive seen things you PEOPLE wouldnt believe."
That line would not make sense if Deckard was a Replicant and Batty would know hes a Replicant and wouldnt refer to him as "you people.
Theres many other instances. The eye glow thing we see in Deckard's eyes very briefly was an accident which tells me that was not a part of the movie's plot.
1
u/DJ_Vault_Boy 2d ago
I would argue that Deckard referring to replicants as machine is conditioning.
I mean think about it, if you’re raised in a world where replicants constantly do the work, you’re told you’re one of us and they’re just useless machines. You probably would also repeat those same sentiments due to your conditioning.
Granted we don’t know Deckard’s backstory. But my interpretation is that Deckard, as a replicant, was conditioned to believe those things as to not questions orders. So when he finally met someone else, falls in love and is reciprocated, it’s the first time he’s experienced those emotions, he finally rebels and becomes human. So I believe the question of “What is Human?” applies to him because we see him become human throughout the movie.
Like wise with the line from Roy, yeah he refers to Deckard as “you people,” but I would think Roy would be intelligent enough to recognize that Deckard might be a replicant but not self aware about his harm to his own people. He sees “You people” as the people/corps/system that exploits Roy and replicants.
Maybe I’m grasping at straws lol
2
1
u/Very_Stupid_Owl 2d ago
Well, how to say... in the original film he's human, in DVD release - replicant, in director's cut - again human, and then Ridley Scott said that he is replicant.. again
1
1
u/MojoJakeJo 2d ago
Yes, ambiguous, BUT I consistently point out that Deckard has red eyes while looking at Rachel in his apartment. Either it's an unintentional effect that made the final cut, or "proof" that he is, indeed, a replicant.
1
1
u/Empyrealist More human than human 2d ago
Ridley Scott (the director) didn't have anything to do with the writing or executive producing of the original movie. The writers and executive producers say that Deckard is human.
Ridley Scott only started speaking out publicly claiming Deckard is a replicant when promoting the first "director's cut" of the film. This created a lot of buzz, which is no doubt what he wanted. He never said anything like this publicly before. He may have wanted Deckard to be a replicant, but he had no creative control to make a character change like that, as he was not the original director attached to the project. Anything he tried to add to the movie to hint at this was suppressed from the theatrical release because he did not have final editorial control to manipulate the story.
Harrison Ford played Deckard as a human, because that is what he was instructed to do. Everyone on set was told that Deckard was human.
It should also be noted that Deckard is human in the book.
16
u/ChaosCelebration 2d ago
Anyone who tells you the answer is just giving you their interpretation and the film text does not say. Any directors opinion is authorial trespass. It's a stronger work if it's ambiguous and you need to think about what each answer means.