3 ms·

I love the film but for a long time I really disliked that Ridley Scott changed the plot. To me Scott's idea that Deckard is a replicant but doesn't know it is

by Lio 2mo ago

I love the film but for a long time I really disliked that Ridley Scott changed the plot. To me Scott's idea that Deckard is a replicant but doesn't know it is just weak. Even the idea that they would make a replicant hunter that's weaker than the "basic pleasure model" it's designed to hunt doesn't work. I think Scott shoe-horned his change in after the fact and he's had to keep releasing new edits because it doesn't really fit. PKD's original plot themes are much richer and deeper: The purpose of this story as I saw it was that in his job of hunting and killing these replicants, Deckard becomes progressively dehumanized. At the same time, the replicants are being perceived as becoming more human. Finally, Deckard must question what he is doing, and really what is the essential difference between him and them? And, to take it one step further, who is he if there is no real difference? — Philip K. Dick

serf 2mo ago
I just want a version that includes the prophet Mercer stuff. felt like a huge component to drop out.
- gedy 2mo ago
  I'm not rah rah AI but this type of thing is what interests me about AI video generation. Adding a scene like this for answering a personal "what if?" is really cool.
  - ManuelKiessling 2mo ago
    I was recently musing in this general direction, too. The movie business is completely foreign to me, but I wonder if stuff like this would work: copyright owners licensing out their IP for niche studios serving niche audiences — I‘m pretty sure a lot of people would pay good money for a different take on the final GoT season. Or that third season of your favorite show that never came to be. A Thrawn-focused Star Wars trilogy. Various crossovers. Assumed this would work good enough on a technical level any time soon — could it work in terms of licensing and economics?
    - Anamon 1mo ago
      I'm not sure I see the benefit. Everyone can make up their own what-ifs in their mind. But isn't the joy and value in movies as mass media the fact that it's a shared experience, that everybody saw the same thing that they can talk about, interpret, and discuss? Talking about a movie after having seen it, or reading online discussions with different viewpoints on it, like this thread, is my favourite part post-movie-watching. There'd be none of that if everybody makes up and watches their own version.
- ndsipa_pomu 2mo ago
  I've always been annoyed at that too. Considering the role that "empathy" takes in the design of the Voight-Kampff, the story is pushing empathy as being a defining human trait and of course Mercerism is all about using the Empathy Box.
zabzonk 2mo ago
> At the same time, the replicants are being perceived as becoming more human. Surely this is what the acknowledged replicants in the film do, particularly Roy Batty when he saves Deckard? I was a great PKD fan (collected his books), and was a little disappointed when the film first came out, but it does grow on you.
fullshark 2mo ago
Absolutely, having Deckard be a "weak" replicant makes no narrative sense, and it also makes no sense thematically. It's about a human hunting machines and finding the humanity in the machines and discovering what humanity is lacking in himself. It's important that the line is blurred, but it's also important that he's not actually a replicant.
- thesz 2mo ago
  If a "person" is not weak, it is easy for "it" to start suspecting that it is a replicant.
  - IAmBroom 1mo ago
    Furthermore, the biggest problem with replicants coming to Earth en masse is that they could overwhelm police forces. Deckard both "fits in" to his bureau (as a mostly independent officer), and isn't really powerful enough to threaten existing forces.
justin66 2mo ago
> I think Scott shoe-horned his change in after the fact The effect used in at least one indoor scene, in which Harrison Food is filmed with his eyes glowing like the other replicants, is an in-camera effect and the decision to use it was made prior to filming.
- IAmBroom 1mo ago
  It's really so subtle that it is just an on-rewind detail. Which is fine - an easter egg.
  - justin66 1mo ago
    Yes. Ridley Scott and Harrison Ford didn't publicly agree on whether Deckard was a replicant for decades, but of course there's nothing wrong with part of a film being left open to interpretation. The "Deckard is not a replicant" interpretation seemed like a heavier lift to me after the unicorn dream was included in the director's cut. But again, that's not Scott cynically changing the meaning of the film after the fact, as the OP suggested. It's him being allowed to present his own cut of the film after it succeeded in making money. (at least one of the producers thought the unicorn thing was Scott wasting their money on concepts he'd later use in the film Legend and so they left it out of the theatrical release, as was their contractual right)
Hoasi 2mo ago
> Finally, Deckard must question what he is doing, and really what is the essential difference between him and them? And, to take it one step further, who is he if there is no real difference? Honestly, that is still what I get from Ridley Scott’s version.
ndsipa_pomu 2mo ago
> Even the idea that they would make a replicant hunter that's weaker than the "basic pleasure model" it's designed to hunt doesn't work. I don't disagree with your points, but one explanation is that Deckard was made for the purpose of passing as human and had to be kept ignorant that he was a replicant as that would likely affect his job performance. If he was made stronger than other people, then it would have tipped him off as to his nature. That does then raise the question of why Tyrell would present Rachael as being his most "human" creation unless he was testing/playing with Deckard to see what happens when replicants start to replicate.
- IAmBroom 1mo ago
  The straightforward reason still stands: "Does the test still work in a biased scenario, where the test-giver believes in a result before the test is run?"
- gen220 1mo ago
  Also, isn't it a major plot point that replicants are not allowed on Earth? So Deckard being a replicant operating on Earth is illegal; making his status as a replicant "obvious", by endowing him with superhuman traits (or even self-knowledge) would be ill-advised!
bobbruno 2mo ago
First, I don't see Blade Runner as a film version of DADOES - it's inspired by it, but it's its own story. Scott took all the liberties he wanted in the script and movie. I think the movie does a excellent job of leaving Deckard questioning his humanity, the replicants' humanity, and what it means to be human. It's not a super-hero movie, I don't even think of Deckard as a hero. The replicants' strength is a product attribute that they happen to use as they become more human and rebel. And hunting replicants is not about strength or reflexes, it's police work. As others pointed, if Deckard had the same super-human abilities, there'd be no doubt, no uncertainty. Even Rachel, who we are let know is a replicants, she's starting to suspect, but we are never told what Deckard's condition - we are as much in the dark as he is. This is what this movie is about, and this is where I find it is most faithful to PKD's story.

by Lio 2mo ago

serf 2mo ago

I just want a version that includes the prophet Mercer stuff. felt like a huge component to drop out.

gedy 2mo ago
I'm not rah rah AI but this type of thing is what interests me about AI video generation. Adding a scene like this for answering a personal "what if?" is really cool.
- ManuelKiessling 2mo ago
  I was recently musing in this general direction, too. The movie business is completely foreign to me, but I wonder if stuff like this would work: copyright owners licensing out their IP for niche studios serving niche audiences — I‘m pretty sure a lot of people would pay good money for a different take on the final GoT season. Or that third season of your favorite show that never came to be. A Thrawn-focused Star Wars trilogy. Various crossovers. Assumed this would work good enough on a technical level any time soon — could it work in terms of licensing and economics?
  - Anamon 1mo ago
    I'm not sure I see the benefit. Everyone can make up their own what-ifs in their mind. But isn't the joy and value in movies as mass media the fact that it's a shared experience, that everybody saw the same thing that they can talk about, interpret, and discuss? Talking about a movie after having seen it, or reading online discussions with different viewpoints on it, like this thread, is my favourite part post-movie-watching. There'd be none of that if everybody makes up and watches their own version.
ndsipa_pomu 2mo ago
I've always been annoyed at that too. Considering the role that "empathy" takes in the design of the Voight-Kampff, the story is pushing empathy as being a defining human trait and of course Mercerism is all about using the Empathy Box.

zabzonk 2mo ago

> At the same time, the replicants are being perceived as becoming more human. Surely this is what the acknowledged replicants in the film do, particularly Roy Batty when he saves Deckard? I was a great PKD fan (collected his books), and was a little disappointed when the film first came out, but it does grow on you.

fullshark 2mo ago

Absolutely, having Deckard be a "weak" replicant makes no narrative sense, and it also makes no sense thematically. It's about a human hunting machines and finding the humanity in the machines and discovering what humanity is lacking in himself. It's important that the line is blurred, but it's also important that he's not actually a replicant.

thesz 2mo ago
If a "person" is not weak, it is easy for "it" to start suspecting that it is a replicant.
- IAmBroom 1mo ago
  Furthermore, the biggest problem with replicants coming to Earth en masse is that they could overwhelm police forces. Deckard both "fits in" to his bureau (as a mostly independent officer), and isn't really powerful enough to threaten existing forces.

justin66 2mo ago

> I think Scott shoe-horned his change in after the fact The effect used in at least one indoor scene, in which Harrison Food is filmed with his eyes glowing like the other replicants, is an in-camera effect and the decision to use it was made prior to filming.

IAmBroom 1mo ago
It's really so subtle that it is just an on-rewind detail. Which is fine - an easter egg.
- justin66 1mo ago
  Yes. Ridley Scott and Harrison Ford didn't publicly agree on whether Deckard was a replicant for decades, but of course there's nothing wrong with part of a film being left open to interpretation. The "Deckard is not a replicant" interpretation seemed like a heavier lift to me after the unicorn dream was included in the director's cut. But again, that's not Scott cynically changing the meaning of the film after the fact, as the OP suggested. It's him being allowed to present his own cut of the film after it succeeded in making money. (at least one of the producers thought the unicorn thing was Scott wasting their money on concepts he'd later use in the film Legend and so they left it out of the theatrical release, as was their contractual right)

Hoasi 2mo ago

> Finally, Deckard must question what he is doing, and really what is the essential difference between him and them? And, to take it one step further, who is he if there is no real difference? Honestly, that is still what I get from Ridley Scott’s version.

ndsipa_pomu 2mo ago

> Even the idea that they would make a replicant hunter that's weaker than the "basic pleasure model" it's designed to hunt doesn't work. I don't disagree with your points, but one explanation is that Deckard was made for the purpose of passing as human and had to be kept ignorant that he was a replicant as that would likely affect his job performance. If he was made stronger than other people, then it would have tipped him off as to his nature. That does then raise the question of why Tyrell would present Rachael as being his most "human" creation unless he was testing/playing with Deckard to see what happens when replicants start to replicate.

IAmBroom 1mo ago
The straightforward reason still stands: "Does the test still work in a biased scenario, where the test-giver believes in a result before the test is run?"
gen220 1mo ago
Also, isn't it a major plot point that replicants are not allowed on Earth? So Deckard being a replicant operating on Earth is illegal; making his status as a replicant "obvious", by endowing him with superhuman traits (or even self-knowledge) would be ill-advised!

bobbruno 2mo ago

First, I don't see Blade Runner as a film version of DADOES - it's inspired by it, but it's its own story. Scott took all the liberties he wanted in the script and movie. I think the movie does a excellent job of leaving Deckard questioning his humanity, the replicants' humanity, and what it means to be human. It's not a super-hero movie, I don't even think of Deckard as a hero. The replicants' strength is a product attribute that they happen to use as they become more human and rebel. And hunting replicants is not about strength or reflexes, it's police work. As others pointed, if Deckard had the same super-human abilities, there'd be no doubt, no uncertainty. Even Rachel, who we are let know is a replicants, she's starting to suspect, but we are never told what Deckard's condition - we are as much in the dark as he is. This is what this movie is about, and this is where I find it is most faithful to PKD's story.