Deckard a Replicant? I Think Not.

I think Ridley's attempt to impose his idea of Deckard being a replicant on the film is a bad idea. In my opinion, Deckard being a replicant not only detracts from the overall value of the story, but it just isn't possible according to the internal logic of the story.

From what I've heard over the years, people who claim that Deckard IS a replicant use the following arguments:

1. Deckard dreams about a unicorn and Gaff leaves one at his apartment at the end of the film.

2. Deckard has a bunch of photos at his apartment and replicants collect photos.

3. Deckard's eyes briefly glow orange in one scene just like all the other replicated lifeforms in the movie. 

The Unicorn

In the original theatrical release of the film, there is no unicorn dream. So, does that mean he's only a replicant in the director's cut? Even with the unicorn dream in the film, it doesn't really mean anything since Rachel is the only replicant with memory implants. It is explained that replicants don't have memories of their own (it is assumed they mean of anything prior to their creation: childhood, adolescence, etc.) and Rachel is introduced as a prototype with memory implants. If Rachel is essentially the first and only replicant with implanted memories ("the" prototype), then Deckard cannot be a replicant with the implanted memory of a unicorn running through a forest. I'm sure someone could construct some sort of conspiracy theory about how Deckard was manufactured before Rachel ad absurdum, but that's not supported by the events in the film. In fact, Deckard is presented as a retired Blade Runner brought on to handle one more tough job and that's just what he is. And as for Gaff leaving an origami unicorn at Deckard's apartment, it is just Gaff being Gaff. Gaff makes an origami man out of a matchstick, so does that mean Deckard is a human? Come on.

The Photos

Deckard hypothesizes that the lack of memories is what drives Leon to collect photos. Rachel (who has memories) has a photo. Deckard has old photos. So, they think since Leon and Rachel have photos and are replicants Deckard MUST be a replicant since he has photos! So, the rationale is anyone in the film with photos is a replicant? Come on. Roy Batty, Pris, and Zira are replicants and they aren't shown with any photos.

The Glowing Eyes

Yeah, a few brief moments in one scene and it's supposed to be a subtle hint. Not likely. There are plenty of other scenes where Deckard's eyes don't glow. Too much is made of this and, outside of the film, Harrison Ford explained that it only occurred because he accidentally stepped into the light.

Additional

Replicants are described as possessing (and demonstrate during the course of the film) superhuman strength, endurance, etc. At no time does Deckard demonstrate the same abilities. In fact, he is portrayed as being all too human.

Replicants are also revealed to be emotionally unstable psychopaths. It can be inferred that this occurs because they don't have memories since Rachel (the only one with memories) is more stable. Albeit, she's still emotionally immature. Deckard is not portrayed as possessing this same mental defect.

Bryant reveals that Deckard has a past when he talks about Deckard's prior service as a Blade Runner. So, is he lying? That's right, he's part of the conspiracy, too! I've wasted too much time on this already. LMAO.

 

TheEtherBunny TheEtherBunny
26-30, M
1 Response Feb 24, 2009

I THINK THE CLUE WAS IN THE ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP