From: redrum@carson.u.washington.edu (Joe Stremick)
Subject: Re: Deckard might be a replicant. Time to die.
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 22:24:10 GMT

>
>No. You see, you're describing the way the parts fit inside your head. Plainly,
>that differs from the way they fit inside many other people's heads, including,
>by your own admission, Ridley Scott's. Of course there are still many folk who
>will go the their graves with "Deckard was NOT a replicant." still warm on 
>their lips. They're entitled to their view. They're not wrong, not misguided,
>just different. They don't have a problem. I don't have a problem. You don't
>have a problem. There's no problem here at all.
>
>-- 
>Internet: pete@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au   UUCP: {uunet,mcvax}!munnari!cssc-syd!pete
>Snail: 1/18-20 Orion Road, Lane Cove NSW 2066 Australia    Phone: +61 2 911 3130
>Theftright Peter A. Merel (T) 1992. Rights to all replies, followups, originals,
>sources and anything else I can get my hands on reserved.

	Well, I have heard both sides of this argument several times,
and I agree that there is evidence to support both sides.  My personal
feeling is that Deckard is NOT a replicant, because it makes the film
work better for me thematically.  In the book, _Retrofitting Blade Runner_,
there are statements from the filmmakers, Scott included, that they had
flirted with the idea that Deckard -might- be a Replicant, and left some
possible clues to that effect.  However, going on the Unicorn Dream
Sequence alone does not quite convince me.  Here is my reasoning:
(Spoilers ahead for the Director's Cut of Blade Runner)







	In the recently released Director's Cut, while Deckard is 
playing the piano, alone in his apartment, there is a scene of a 
Unicorn running through a forest, which then fades back in to Deckard
at the piano again.  Okay, so far so good: Deckard has had a vision
of a rare and beautiful creature.
	Jump ahead to the end: Deckard has gone back to his apartment
to get Rachael.  On their way out, Rachael knocks over a tinfoil
origami Unicorn, which Deckard picks up and seems to recognize the 
meaning of.  We hear Gaff (voiceover): "It's too bad she won't live;
but then again, who does?"  This voiceover links the origami Unicorn
with _Rachael_, not Deckard, and it is Deckard who realizes that she,
no matter how short of a time together they may have, is a rare and
beautiful person, like the Unicorn.  Gaff's humanity (yikes, that
opens up a can of worms, eh?) is showing: He had been there, and let
her live, giving the two whatever chance of happiness they could
find together, for whatever amount of time they had.
	All of this is just from my reading of the film.  Someone
else could just as easily derive a different meaning.  I think
Blade Runner is made to make us think, and come to our own conclusions
about what it means to be human.  The film is intentionally ambivalent.

|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-Joe Stremick,               |"But I was going in to Toshe Station to |
|       a.k.a. Redrum         |pick up some power converters!"         |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies