I am CONFUSED! Blade Runner The Final Cut (1982) | Reaction and Commentary

[@one1charlie643]

At the end Roy isn't psychotic. His emotions have finally manifest, and he doesn't know how to process them. He loved Pris but didn't understand it, felt sorrow at her loss and didn't know why, anger at the one who killed her, reveled in the thrill of hunting someone, power drunk at dominating over another with superior strength, pity when he watched Deckard hanging, mercy when he saved him. A master class in movie making

[@Lethgar_Smith]

Rutger Hauer and Ridley Scott got on very well and understood each other's vision. Harrison Ford never felt comfortable with the character and struggled to understand what Scott was trying to achieve.

[@johannesvalterdivizzini1523]

@@Lethgar_Smith Hauer is just brilliant.

[@Calico_Jack_]

Roy discovered "humanity" and compassion at his final moments. No one lives forever and the other detective didn't know Rachel didn't have an extended life span. Each origami symbolized the scenes.

[@billmac7558]

THIS is where "Zoom and Enhance" came from to become the meme it is today.

[@crispy_338]

Zoom in to where we can only see 6 pixels. Now enhance and upscale it to 4k 🤌🏻

[@crispy_338]

This movie was so influential for future films. The cyberpunk, gritty, noir future is an incredible setting

[@VerowakReacts]

I love how the setting plays a huge part in the movie!

[@Lethgar_Smith]

Ridley Scott originally envisioned The character of Deckard as wearing a fedora. In fact, I think he was going to have all the men wearing hats much like we later see in the movie Brazil but Harrison Ford told them, "Sorry guys, I just wrapped on a film where I wear a fedora through the whole movie. It's not going to work" So, because of Indiana Jones we didnt get the fedora wearing version of Blade Runner.

[@VerowakReacts]

I'm glad there was no fedora for Blade Runner :D

[@johnscott4196]

The tears in the rain speech made this movie. And I read that the actor actually inserted that dialogue on his own.

[@HerrFlachpfeife]

That's only partly true. Rutger Hauer shortened some of the lines and added "will be lost in time, like tears in rain."

[@dabe1971]

Exactly. The majority of the monologue was written by David Peoples. Hauer cut down the dialogue while keeping the tone of the speech intact, as he felt the scripted version to be "overwritten". He did add the final line "All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain... Time to die."

[@mokane86]

@@HerrFlachpfeifethe final line is what makes his last lament universally deep and sad. Without it and even more lengthy it sounds more like a complaint flex.

[@Micaltuta]

No mention of the music? It is one of the greatest film scores and makes a huge contribution to the atmosphere.

[@timboxall8936]

Vangelis was indeed a unique talent

[@vendicepartners]

Watched the film with a live orchestra. It was as good as you'd imagine....

[@johncarey7786]

there's a lot in this movie that you'll miss the first viewing. The final origami piece was a unicorn just like in Deckard's dreams

[@VerowakReacts]

I can never tell what Origami is supposed to look like 🤣

[@Mr.Ekshin]

@@VerowakReacts - Not being able to tell what Origami is supposed to look like... is a pretty good indicator that you may be a replicant.

[@johnscott4196]

Life was more precious to Roy. The paradox that saved Deckard as he was dying he released the dove and saved his enemy. The line about not everyone living was just a comment on humanity

[@wackyvorlon]

Roy Batty’s final act on this earth was an act of mercy. Perhaps one of the most human things possible.

[@ronnyb5890]

they are'nt robots, they are flesh and blood but enhanced in strenght and durability exept for the 4 year lifespan Roy even says it to Sebastian, we're no machines, we're physical

[@Argoon1981]

That is right, but machines are physical, in sense that you can touch them, what you and Roy probably wanted to say, is that they are not made of metal they are organic.

[@wackyvorlon]

They’re genetically engineered humans. If you gave a human body and a replicant body to a modern day coroner for autopsy, the coroner would not be able to tell the difference.

[@woeshaling6421]

They are robots in the technical sense: constructed. Biological, but constructed. Colloquially, we understand robots as mechanical clanking machines. In that sense they aren't

[@Need2Pleaze]

The 5 replicants we see in the movie are the only replicants seen on screen. Everyone else is a human. There is another cut where there is an extended ending. Deckard has a voice over in which he mentions Rachel is unique because she has no expiration date. Similar to a human. Even though “origami dude” doesn’t know about her lack of a 4 year limit, I believe the silver unicorn is a message that he knows she is unique and is letting them both escape. The line “it’s too bad she won’t live, but then who does”? I think is simply pointing out that none of us know whether we have a 4 year limit or an 80 year limit. Replicants don’t know when they are going to die, just like us humans. There are a lot of very philosophical questions and messages throughout this movie. I think everyone needs multiple watches to feel like they get this film.

[@edgarcia4794]

The bare arm in the picture belonged to Roy. Leon liked to take candids of them to capture moments in their life times.

[@timboxall8936]

13:37 Yep, the animals are all artifical. Basically the planet is completely crapped out due to radiation, atmospheric pollution, etc. (hence it also being very dark most of the time). Nearly all animal life is extinct, but there's a roaring trade in artifical animals. This also harks back to Deckards asking if the owl in Tyrells office is real. If it were, it'd be worth billions (as it is, it's darned expensive because it's so complex) - and be a huge status symbol to own. In the source novel, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" it's everyone's dream to own a real animal, down to a fly or a toad. It's an indicator that one can have an empathetic connection.

[@splitimage137.]

"Confusion is the sign of a beginner's mind." - a very wise sage, indeed.

[@josepha5885]

In the theatrical version, Harrison Ford's Deckard narrates. In that version it was clear Deckard was human. Harrison Ford says Deckard was human. Then Scott releases a director's cut on home video (VHS) and suddenly it's an open question if Deckard is a replicant or not.

[@asterix7842]

The building that Sebastian lived in was the Bradbury, an actual LA historic landmark known for it’s ornate ironwork. Several movies have been filmed there and, supposedly, regular tours are given and I’d like to see it if I ever visit LA again.

[@johngreig7281]

Noir detective, absolutely spot on that was the style choice Ridley was going for, this is one of my favourites of all time and 2049 is a brilliant sequel, such a rare thing.

[@zmarko]

The 'cat & mouse' chase at the end of the film is my favorite one in a movie, ever. And Rutger Hauer's performance is perfect. Playful, & terrifying. And then his final monologue is epic. Man, what an amazing film.

[@TheTomt50]

"Is Deckert a human?" That's a good question. The real question is, what defines being human? What does it mean to be human? These are living sentient beings. Yes, they were created. Are we not (if you believe in a creator)? Oh, so the quote: "It's a shame she won't live, but who does?" Really just gets at the heart of it. Everyone dies. It is just one more thing that connects replicants to humans.

[@markthompson5367]

Ridley Scotts directorial debute was The Duellists(1977).low budget movie that showcases Scotts visual style perfectly

[@3DJapan]

The goatee guy who makes the origami later plays Admiral Adama in Battlestar Galactica.

[@sweiland75]

This is definitely one of those movies that require multiple viewings to understand it more. I look forward to watching your reaction to Blade Runner 2029.

[@mckrackin5324]

"Couldn't he transfer his mind to a new body?"... No. The mind is what dies. Their coding is what has the time limit.

[@mckrackin5324]

By the way, Deckard knew Rachel's past because they told him. Her creator has detailed files on every memory she has before she went online. They gave him information to use against her.

[@scgreek1114]

"Why does everything look so dark?" Because you're watching it on a tiny screen in a brightly lit room. The experience was quite different in a theater.

[@steved1135]

Nice. My single greatest movie of all time. And congratulations: you're supposed to be confused. Based on the story "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" by my favourite author of all time, Philip K Dick. His main concern in all his writing was the question of what it means to be human. Happily, this film depicts this well, all dressed in a film noir aesthetic. Perfection.

[@btrenninger1]

Deckard is a replicant. Gaff knows his daydreams of unicorns (origami unicorn at the end). Meaning Gaff has read his file just as Deckard read Rachael's file.

[@antecave]

Underrated Ridley Scott film: "The Duelists". His first I believe. The directors cut of "Kingdom of Heaven" is also good.

[@3DJapan]

This film created the "dark with neon" cyberpunk look.

[@jmontesi4]

There is a Blade Runner game (named Blade Runner, made by Westwood Studios). The game puts you into the role of a junior Blade Runner officer investigating a different case (animal murders). The game events happen along with those of the movie, including visits to a few places seen in the movie. One remarkable thing is that at the start of a playthrough the game randomizes a few characters making them replicants or humans (you don't know until a key game event if your character IS a replicant or human!), changing the story and the ending (there are 13 different endings, though some are just slight variants) A few of the actors in the movie reprised their roles In the game. PSA: There is a remastered version -avoid the remaster at all costs, people! Get the "SCUMMVM" version instead.

[@ianrastall]

I had this for PC when it first came out. I never got very far, but I did pick up my favorite "line", if you will: "All you gotta do is ask."

[@Csaba__]

I totally agree the sets and the mood of the movie is fantastic

[@VerowakReacts]

I just have to rewatch the movie without my lights on so I can see all the details 😂

[@michaelsmith1262]

In the book, he isn't a replicant. Scott implies that he is, with the dream sequence of the unicorn and the unicorn origami at the end. The original had a narration that said in the epilogue that Rachel was given an indefinite time span. Most speculate that Roy let Deckard live because he valued life at the end because he knew he was close to death, and I would guess wanted to the company as he was dying. The narration also said that it took all night for him to finally die.

[@rabudman]

I didn't know the film had so much comedy. I've never seen a reactor talk over the "tears in rain" speech. Congratulations. You're special.

[@Blaize24]

Was coming to say the same thing. Talked right over the central speech of the whole things.

[@VerowakReacts]

Thank you!

[@keithewright]

@@VerowakReacts It isn't a compliment. That speech should move you to tears, not to gibberish.

[@VladislavBabbitt]

The first theatrical version in 1982 had Harrison Ford as the narrator, so some things were more clear to the viewer than in the following cuts. Deckard is human in this version but is also inhumane. Batty at the end valued life more than anything else, even Deckard's life. This is why he saved him. Also the ending is different. Rachel is a Nexus 7. No superhuman strength but also an open lifespan. The Origami guy is also a Blade Runner.

[@DumblyDorr]

One of my perennial top 5 movies. I love it a lot! Also very rewatchable. The Final Cut completely resolves the originally ambiguous question of Deckard's nature as a human or replicant. (Deckard is a replicant - Gaff knew of the unicorn from Deckard's dream the same way Deckard knew of the spider from Rachel's dream). Many people really dislike that reading, and think the story only really has depth if Deckard is human - because then it's a tragic story about a world full of machine-like humans where our protagonist has to learn empathy and emotion from replicants, who are altogether more emotional and empathetic than the humans in in the movie. I like that reading as well - it's a great story that way. But I think the movie works just as well and has just as much depth if Deckard is a replicant. In this case you have two people employed in the literal enslavement and execution of their own people without even knowing that they are their own people... from cradle (Rachel's job assiting management) to grave (Deckard "retiring" replicants). After finding each other, they realize what is being done to them and to their people and finally break free - though without much hope... quite a powerful story as well, if you ask me.

[@ianrastall]

It also adds another layer of depth to an already complex love scene. He thinks he can tell her what to do because he doesn't see her as a person, exactly. That's already complex. Then the idea that he too is a replicant and just doesn't realize it? That is so deep.

[@LanceStoddard]

Rachel is the Unicorn. One of a kind. That's why Gaff let her live.

[@eschiedler]

The film is fantastic in theaters, but wasn't a winner at the box office (neither was the sequel) because to properly understand it you need to have read a lot of sci-fi and philosophy. So many would be confused like Verowak. It will be forever a top classic tho and worth re-watching over and over. Edit: congrats on giving it a shot.

[@dabe1971]

Zoom and enhance is essentially the generative fill we have in photoshop today.

[@herbertkeithmiller]

5:29 the scene with Rachel is the only time you see the sun in this movie.

[@luizdearaujo3892]

I recommend Philip K Dick’s novel: “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” that served as the basis for Blade Runner movie.

[@caramba10]

He picked up an Origami Unicorn made by Gaff and the only reference to a Unicorn is in his dream, so how could Gaff know? coincidence or............

[@reggiesalas4285]

I would definitely watch the making of this movie to understand the work an effort that went into making the final cut. It's very impressive, and you will definitely appreciate some of the things they did with 2049 after watching the making of this. Cheers V.

[@thunderstruck5484]

Saw at the theater with my wife! Didn’t understand everything the first time around, took some mental maturing to appreciate this movie , lots of great movies coming out back then , thanks!

[@VerowakReacts]

Definitely hard to pick up a lot of things on the first watch through!

[@michaelsmith1262]

Ok, people continually bring up Deckard's eyes in that one scene as evidence he was a replicant. If it was that simple, they wouldn't need to use a complicated Voight-Kamph test would they?

[@philpascali4070]

it's a big question and let out if ford is or isn't a replicant and divides the fans , but in what is subtle implied he is one and that is disturbing for fans because if he is , then who is not are they only real humans left , so that is crazy to imagine ^^

[@VerowakReacts]

It seems a lot of people think he is, and a lot think he isn't lol

[@WhiskyCanuck]

@@VerowakReacts famously, people directly involved in making the movie (ie Ridley Scott, Harrison Ford, and I think also the screenplay writer) have disagreed on whether he is or isn't.

[@Gort-Marvin0Martian]

Greatest final monologue ever. Hauer actually came up with that and they added it to the script. Rachel was a new model with no termination date. Deckard is not a replicant. Read the novella by Phillip K. Dick, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep". It's the basis for this film. Here are some additional films and TV based on his works. You may have seen their names. The Man in the High Castle (TV Series) Electric Dreams (TV Series) The Adjustment Bureau A Scanner Darkly Paycheck Minority Report Total Recall -- As we say in Texas; y'all be safe.

[@wackyvorlon]

Rachel is a replicant, which would mean that she, too, has a four year lifespan. She will die, but ultimately we are all mortal. That’s what Gaff is referring to when he says “too bad she won’t live, but then again, who does?” Life and mortality are important themes in this movie, along with what it means to be human. The distinction between humans and replicants is not so sharp as people treat it. Gaff is calling back to that reality.

[@brom00]

One of my favorite films. The one thing that the replicant lacks is true empathy, especially towaed animals, which are nearly extinct. That is why the VK test has so many questions about them. Don't try to figure oit why they are caked Blade Runners. That is just a name they picked out of thin air for the film. You may like watching the theatrical version. It has a noirish voice over by Ford that gives some needed exposition. The "Final Cut" is a bit misleading. There are no added or removed scences. The biggest tweaks are fixed effecy shots. How they did some of those is interesting, bring in Joanna Cassidy back, as well as recruiting one of Ford's sons..

[@chrissiegle1065]

In his other huge movie, Legend, there are columns that appear in darkness's lair... Ridley put one of them in this movie...a cameo... right outside of JF Sebastians home... i thought that was so cool 😎

[@miao_renfeng]

This movie is hardly ever fully appreciated on a first watch. Despite what others may tell you, watching other versions may help understanding it better, in your case theatrical version may help. Thanks for sharing your reaction.

[@VerowakReacts]

On rewatch, I will watch theatrical to see how it differs from this version

[@allisterfiend_2112]

​@@VerowakReacts I've been a Blade Runner fan since opening day when I first saw it in the theater. You want the theatrical release that has the Harrison Ford narration included. Otherwise it's pointless to watch the theatrical version. The narration of Ford (in the style of an old noir detective film), fills you in on a lot of the basic questions you have. Unfortunately, that version is hard to come by now and most newer versions of the theatrical cut have removed the narration. When I introduce my friends who have never seen Blade Runner I always show them the cut with the narration first as it fills in a lot of the basic questions. Even though I love the final cut version (the restoration is beautiful and they even brought back one of the original actresses to redo a bad scene where you could tell it was a stunt double), I'm not a fan of the added scenes that pretty much confirm deckard is replicant as opposed to the more open ended version of the original.

[@johnmason9655]

Rutger Hauer titled his autobiography All those Moments, with a nod to his speech at the end.

[@matdow4470]

Fun fact; Blade Runner is in the same universe as Alien.

[@crossbones13]

"I am CONFUSED! Blade Runner The Final Cut (1982)" Of course you're confused, *V-wak* . You just watched _Blade Runner: The Final Cut (1982)_ ...

[@JW666]

The theatrical version I believe have Harrison Ford narrating and a different ending. Me personally I prefer this version, the narrating isn't really necessary, especially for one scene that absolutely didn't need a narration because we already understand the reason behind it and I prefer the open ending in this version than in the theatrical cut. You wanna see Rutger Hauer (Roy) in a really scary role? Watch The Hitcher, highly recommend that one ;) =)

[@NestorCaster]

One of the very best signs you’re looking at a replicant, put in by Ridley Scott, is their eyes. All the replicants(human models and animal models) have that amber glow in their eyes when light is reflecting off their corneas, especially in a dark or dim lit room…. It’s a very good, subtle and artistic choice to show the audience who a replicant is, and who isn’t. The other sign that a character is a replicant, is in the “unicorn dream”; all human model replicants have the implanted memory of a unicorn running through a forest. Also 30:41: Gaff, the LAPD detective that partnered with Deckard, tails him, tracks him and gives Deckard his gun back, was there to monitor both Deckard and Deckard’s progress in “retiring” the replicants. You may find Gaff to be familiar because he is played by actor Edward James Olmos…. Most notably in the Sci-fi fandom as the actor who played Admiral William Adama, in the reimagined/rebooted version of the series Battlestar Galactica! ❤❤

[@StoriesThatSuck-pw1vi]

I prefer this version. There are issues with the theatrical version, where the studio forced Ford to do some voice-overs that he and Ridley Scott felt were completely unnecessary --- and they're right. Plus some other issues detract from the theatrical release. This version is the one Scott wanted everyone to see.

[@loonz1969]

Blade Runner is my favorite film of all time. I have seen it well over 300 times and know it like the back of my hand. If you have any questions, I'm the one to ask.

[@charlesmstover]

Think about this. Why did Deckard have no choice but to hunt the replicants.

[@jimhowe2624]

Nice to meet you, Confused! I'm Jim!

[@simianinc]

Dad. Is that you?

[@goblin2bis707]

the red eye of Deckard, there is a hint of this in the movie......ah ah ah !

[@BRadAF8521]

My favorite movie of all time! Thanks for the great reaction

[@VerowakReacts]

My pleasure!!! It's a movie that warrants many rewatches lol

[@jean-marclariviere7618]

"I wonder what company sponsored that movie?"....i said it and will say it again, your sense of humour is right there at the top...

[@paulalexandredumasseauvan2357]

deckard's eyes light up FOR A MOMENT when he walks behind rachel in the kitchen to say "but someone would" 😉 still, scott says he IS a replicant and ford says he IS NOT (or is it the other way around? 🤔) VERY MUCH ENJOYED your reaction 👍☺

[@dabe1971]

When you have a movie where the screenwriter, director and star actor cannot agree on a main plot point - Is Deckard a replicant or not ? - you have the makings of a legend. I'd encourage you to seek out the Theatrical release to see what we witnessed and fell in love with in 1982. The voice over is hated by some but I think it adds something and I'm glad I have it and two others on the BluRay release as they all offer something different. Also the 3 hour making of documentary 'Dangerous Days' is definitely worth seeking out, as is an earlier documentary by UK critic Mark Kermode called 'On the Edge of Blade Runner'. Both were available on YT. And if you really want to do a deep dive into the battles between the studio and Ridley Scott seek out Paul M Sammon's definitive book 'Future Noir: The Making of Blade Runner'. It's quite a story about a movie that was a 'flop' yet has become one of the most groundbreaking and influential and remains so even after 40+ years.

[@VerowakReacts]

I'm seeing just how divisive this movie is reading the comments here 🤣 I'll definitely check out the theatrical release though!

[@dabe1971]

@@VerowakReactsOh do. If only to hear a sarcastic Harrison Ford deliver what he hoped was such a bad voice over performance that it wouldn’t be used as he didn’t agree with the Studio who forced it.

[@dabe1971]

A lot of your questions will be answered by the theatrical release - which is why Scott hates it. He wanted ambiguity like his idol Kubrick liked in his movies.

[@thunderstruck5484]

This movie always makes me hungry for noodles

[@johankaewberg8162]

Rutger Hauers greatest role, and has done a bunch.

[@Yora21]

This is one of my three all time favorite movies. Another one is Ghost in the Shell, which is really similar.

[@ianrastall]

Actually, yeah. Vero would love that movie. It's real dense, but it's so beautifully animated.

[@yw1971]

Watch the 82' version, it has the necessary explainatins

[@auntvesuvi3872]

Thanks, Verowak! 🤖 Additional clarity may come during BLADE RUNNER 2049 (2017)... or just more artsy mysteries.

[@VerowakReacts]

I'm up for either! Clarity or mysteries 🤣

[@auntvesuvi3872]

@@VerowakReacts Same, honey... same. 🥂

[@zmarko]

I hope you do watch the theatrical cut on a subsequent viewing (I'd suggest watching The Final Cut again prior, though). It's a slightly different take on the film, with a bit more exposition, but I do find it an enjoyable version.

[@justwastingtimeaway]

As others have mentioned, if re-watching, try the original theatrical release as it clarifies further what is going on.

[@VerowakReacts]

That's the version I'll watch next time for sure

[@michaelhughes838]

If possible you need to watch the orginal theactrical release with the nior narration. It's all very straightforward

[@RevengeCreatureDelux]

Could you stand that Shrek back up in the background? Sounds petty, but I notice it every time the movie drops out😂😂😂😂Love your reactions!!!

[@VerowakReacts]

Big guy needs the rest, he's always working so hard!!

[@mikevandenboom5958]

I know many rave about the final cut, but version with narration by Harrison Ford is more preferable by me.

[@MarcoMM1]

Great reaction like always, this movie is a sci-fi masterpiece indeed. It works on every level. Dark, intelligent, visually breathtaking as well as having great performances. There are some fun-facts about it. Even forty years on from its release, this movie continues to inspire sci-fi movies and TV shows like Westworld and Altered Carbon. However, many peole are unaware that the movie is actually based on a novel by American sci-fi author Philip K Dick Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Dustin Hoffman almost played deckard. At various times during development, the original screenwriter, Hampton Fancher, pictured Robert Mitchum, Christopher Walken, and Tommy Lee Jones as Rick Deckard. Ridley Scott wanted to go in a completely different direction by casting Dustin Hoffman, whom he later acknowledged didn’t really fit the type. Ridley Scott did not read the novel before making the movie, Something that has made this film infamous in the history of cinema is the complicated backstory regarding all the different versions of the film that exist. There are a number of different versions of the movie that have been released throughout the film's forty-year history, but there are four main versions of the film that culminated in the final definitive version of the movie that was released in 2007 as Blade Runner The Final Cut. The first version (released in 1982) was heavily edited by the studio, with a number of different elements hated by some executive producers, most infamously the Harrison Ford voiceover and the happy ending. The second version is known as the workprint version. This early version of the movie, with incomplete visual and audio effects, was accidentally shown to audiences at a LA screening of the movie in 1990 (As revealed in On the Edge of Blade Runner, available on KZbin). Positive reception to the workprint version of the movie led to the Director's Cut, released in 1992, the first version of the movie in which Ridley Scott had final say. The final, and definitive, version of the movie was then released in 2007, entitled The Final Cut. These early test screenings had a huge effect on the production as Ridley Scott was forced to compromise his version of the movie. The biggest changes that were made following those test screenings were the addition of the Harrison Ford voiceover and the happy ending of Deckard and Rachel driving off into the sunset. Both of these would ultimately be removed from later versions of the movie. One of the most infamously maligned parts of the theatrical cut is Harrison Ford's notoriously bad voiceover. The voiceover was added after test screenings to make the movie more comprehensible. Many rumors about the voiceover have persisted over the years, the most vocal of which is that Harrison Ford hated the voiceover so much that he deliberately did it badly. The unicorn reverie sequence wasn't in the theatrical version of the movie, in the theatrical version of the movie, that reverie scene is absent, while the final origami scene remains, making it a rather strange, and pointless, inclusion. Another oddity regarding the unicorn sequence absent from the theatrical cut is that, after it was reinserted back into the film, many people thought it was an outtake from Ridley Scott's Blade Runner follow-up movie Legend. This rumor was dispelled by Paul M. Sammon, in the documentary Blade Runner: All Our Variant Futures, From Workprint To Final Cut. Footage from stanley kubrick's the shining appeared in the theatrical cut, the theatrical cut featured a tacked-on happy ending, where Deckard and Rachel drive off into the sunset. When constructing this alternative ending, the production used outtakes from Stanley Kubrick's iconic opening of The Shining. Most people today will no doubt be aware of the Deckard Replicant vs. Human debate at the center of the movie, and Ridley Scott's definitive answer on the issue. However, Scott's confirmation of the long-held belief that Deckard is indeed a Replicant was only confirmed by the director in 2000, 18 years after the film was originally released. The idea that deckard is a replicant came from a misunderstanding between the two screenwriters, David Peoples and Hampton Fancher worked on the movie script separately, and the idea that Deckard is a Replicant came from a misunderstanding that Peoples had regarding a line of dialogue written by Fancher in which Deckard, thinking about Rachel's relationship with her makers, wonders "what about him that made me." While the line was originally written as Deckard referring to God, Peoples interpreted the line as implying that Deckard was also a Replicant. This misunderstanding was discovered by Mark Kermode while making his 2000 documentary On the Edge of Blade Runner. Keep up the amazing work.

[@michaelhughes838]

The newer replicants might not have the same reactions that older replicants

[@timboxall8936]

11:40 Housing shortages are common - particularly in areas where there's inadequate radiation/pollution shielding. There's constant adverts for moving to the off-world colonies for a better life - Earth is gradually being abandoned, but you're only eligible for off-world migration if you're intact in the, well, reproductive stakes. Sebastians progeria side-effects would likely mean he wouldn't be eligible.

[@yungathart7801]

Does Verowak Dream of Electric Sheep?

[@scgreek1114]

The theatrical release includes film-noir style narration by Harrison Ford which makes the plot less confusing. For example he explains at the end that Rachel has no built-in life span. Purists really dislike the exposition. I prefer it because I'm not brilliant, apparently. 😊

[@VerowakReacts]

I'm learning that people feel very strongly one way or another regarding this movie 😨

[@scgreek1114]

@VerowakReacts I actually enjoy them both, but I feel I enjoyed this version because of the context provided by the original release.

[@michaelsmith1262]

@@VerowakReacts I, like many people, saw the original version first, and didn't really mind the narration. I can see value in both. There are actually several versions, with differences other than the narration and unicorn dream sequence. Fun Fact, in the original ending Deckard and Rachel are driving away and Scott used footage from The Shining, as that was not in the original script. So he just dug up some random scene of a car driving, because he was pissed they made him do it.

[@Yngvarfo]

9:21 Wait a minute. Could this be a clue to where Elon Musk got that bizarre design for the Cybertruck? 29:40 I always *assumed* that the pain from the nail was to keep himself awake a little longer.

[@wackyvorlon]

I’ve felt that the design for the cybertruck was lifted from the armoured personnel carrier in Aliens, which IMO was itself based on the design of scooptrams used in mining.

[@Yngvarfo]

@wackyvorlon That was in fact an aircraft towing vehicle.

[@gallendugall8913]

As with many of Philp K Dick's works the point is to question "what is reality" when there are no firm answers. I think answering the questions definitively, which some versions of this film (as well as the sequel) certainly do, miss the point of the exercise.

[@VladislavBabbitt]

10:30 - Bingo! This is the idea for the sequel.

[@rx7dude2006]

Yes you definitely need to rewatch it, missed quite a bit.

[@VerowakReacts]

It doesn't actually matter since everyone has a different opinion on what it going on in the movie 🤣

[@johnmonk66]

In the original story, he was a replicant, the story it is based on was called "do robots dream of electric sheep', and we saw him dream about a horse as a clue to the people who read the story the next movie will give you answers, and more questions

[@steved1135]

Actually in the story he's not a replicant.

[@timboxall8936]

7:27 "Everything is so dark!" Are you sure it's not the DC Universe?

[@timboxall8936]

It's definitely worth reading the original novel. It's very different to the movie - while many concepts/names/situations remain the same, It goes into much more detail about the empathy aspect and how it can be achieved artificially and naturally and how central a part it is to human nature. The movie has a real tonal shift from the novel - and it's just as good. There's a couple of inferior sequel novels by K W Jeter also.

[@goblin2bis707]

the UNICORN at the end !!!!! is Deckard a replicant? the BIG questions of a lot of people since 1981. If you know the great writer of the novel ''do androids dream of electric sheep'' Philip K. DIck (the origin of the movie Blade Runner''. he certainly is .... that's the universe of Phillip K. Dick questionning the reality of things and identities of people

[@michaelsmith1262]

No, he was not a replicant in Dick's story.

[@BlackMatt2k]

V watching Blade Runner is a good Saturday afternoon.

[@timboxall8936]

Ain't that the truth!

[@scottgibeault1717]

This game was amazing on Sega CD.

[@longfootbuddy]

people will undoubtably say that deckard is a replicant, because they see his eyes suddenly look like that, but thats only there to make you question the difference between humans and replicants, and it makes 0 sense to think deckard is actually a replicant

[@wackyvorlon]

I think a core theme of the movie is whether replicants are human or not. In that ambiguity rests Deckard himself.

[@longfootbuddy]

@@wackyvorlon well, they certainly want you to question what exactly life is, what human is, and what these replicants are.. but again, these are just questions, and not answers, like many will take a these kinds of suggestions in a movie

[@JumboSeventyNine]

@@wackyvorlon This is the point. Personally I think Deckard is a replicant because there is the eye lighting and also Gaff knows his dreams and there are other clues. However the argument of is Deckard a Replicant misses the point a bit. Once the Replicants are 'More human than human' or they are indistinguishable the question isn't are they a human or a replicant its are the two the same thing and what does it even mean to be human anyway?

[@michaelhughes838]

THINK light will reflect from human eyes and Gaff (origami man) is human and no one lives forever so his statement to Deckard about. Who does ? Doesn't mean Deckard s a replicants

[@lordwilksy]

I’m awaiting for Alien 👽 🥚

[@Bleckman666]

@5:28 "I wondered what companies sponsored this movie?" That's a very interesting question when you consider "The Blade Runner Curse": kzbin.info/www/bejne/iqqtZnWLgLeYppI

[@rnkelly36]

This is the beginning of the Cyberpunk genre. Sort of Sci Fi Nior. There are no easy answers. Even in interviews Ford and Scott disagreed about was the main character human or not. In just about every Cyberpunk story since you are going to get ambiguous answers to questions. The purpose of the genre is to make you question your own humanity and how you define human. From this I would suggest going anime. Much of anime Cyberpunk took its lead from Blade Runner. My person favorite is Alita or even better Ghost in the Shell. Not the movies but the anime.

[@johnscott4196]

I don't think Deckard is a replicant. There is such a thing as coincidence, like a unicorn. Obviously meant to be thought provoking but would they allow a replicant to retire? 4 year life span? How long could he work, retire and go back to work. I think it's a red herring claiming he's a replicant. And he had seen the guy doing origami before

[@TennSeven]

There is nothing that stands out about replicants to let people know they are replicants, and that is the whole point. It's a thought experiment: if there were manmade people who were indistinguishable from regular humans except for their emotional responses, and if even their emotional responses would be the same after five or so years (or could even be induced with false memories where the replicant itself would not know it was not human), are they not human? Should they not be afforded the same rights an considerations as a naturally born person? At what point does something artificial deserve the same rights and protections that the rest of us have?

[@ymtwoodworks]

Why was the origami a 'uincorn'?

[@VerowakReacts]

I never noticed it was a unicorn 😅

[@HamishMcNaughton]

“Oh Leon, he’s a professional”. Well done 😂

[@VerowakReacts]

I'm glad someone caught it and enjoyed it!! 🤣

[@calebwilliams7659]

@Verowak, before you watch the sequel, Blade Runner: 2049, I highly recommend watching the three short films, each about 10 minutes long, that ties the two movies together, and were created in conjunction with the sequel. All three are here on YT and they are: 1) Blade Runner 2022: Black Out (an anime film), 2) Blade Runner 2036: Nexus Dawn featuring Jared Leto (both creepy and awesome), and 3) Blade Runner 2048: Nowhere to Run featuring Dave Bautista.

[@philshorten3221]

The Unicorn, coincidence or did they know Deckards memories 🤔

[@SHANECatLovinActivistHistorian]

CHECK OUT ---- Wanted: Dead or Alive 1986 film