Although I believe that he was a replicant, I remain skeptical that he was a full or powerful one. Main point? He didn’t have the strength of the other replicants.
Having both versions of Blade Runner at my disposal, I think you are all reading WAY too much into this.
No, Deckard is NOT a Replicant. Nope, nope, nope.
How about the character’s established history as a Blade Runner? This was made up, he was then captured, the memories of being a Blade Runner implanted into him, and then he was released to take care of his comrades? I don’t think so
Zarathustra said:
'I was puzzled over one thing: when Leon encounters Deckard for the first time and assaults him, Deckard calls out his name as if he knows him. When he exclaims, “Leon!”, it really sounds like he means to say, “Leon! It’s you!” ’
No he looks scared, as he knows that he’s about to get his ass kicked. Of course he recognized Leon, he saw the friggin’ tape of the OTHER Blade Runner getting wasted. Duh.
Baglady said:
“…except that the sixth, we now know, is Deckard.”
Just because the movie’s director, YEARS after the fact, decided to say that? Not good enough for me. The movie NEVER directly states that he’s a replicant, and the book sure doesn’t. I’d like to interview Harrison Ford, and ask him if Ridley ever said to him “Oh, by the way, you’re a replicant, too.” Bet he never did. If he ever decides to make a sequel, and bring that out then, then fine, he’s a replicant. Until then, it’s all just fanboy gibberish. Doesn’t mean a thing.
Lizard said:
“Am I the only person on Earth who liked that voice over? I thought it made the movie much easier to follow.”
Make that two of us, pal. The movie’s a classic in EITHER version.
Duh yourself, clone boy. I knew that Deckard had seen the tape and all that, and I didn’t know that there was a question over whether Deckard may or may not be a mutant. Nonetheless, I thought it was strange that this hard-boiled blade runner would use a tone of “hey Leon, buddy, don’t kick my ass” rather than “leave me alone, you inhuman skin job”. Scared doesn’t have anything to do with whether he seems to instinctively recognize Leon, and appeal to him on (what sounded to me like) an almost buddy-buddy level.
Zarathustra
Please substitute “replicant” for “mutant” above. My mistake.
What kind of kipple are you spouting? The movie was loosely based on the book- there’s about a gazillion things in the movie that weren’t in the book and vice-versa so your “not in the book” argument doesn’t wash. You’re right that the movie didn’t come out and explicitly state that Deckard was a replicant. But to buy the premise that he wasn’t a replicant you’d have to ignore the director’s comments and the diector’s cut of the film doesn’t really make sense then.
Gotta side with the replicant side here. I thought this was pretty much settled, actually. It’s arguable in the original version, but pretty clear, I thought, in the directors cut.
That being said, I think lawoot was right about “Leon!” Deckard was very low key and a bit sleazy throughout the whole movie, and seems like the kind of guy who might habitually try to BS his way out of anything. 
It’s been pretty well documented that the “missing” replicant is an editing error, not a plot thread. It was supposed to be a matronly child-care model.
His physical strength doesn’t really say one way or another. He was tossing Rachael around earlier, and she definatly was a skinjob. If he was some kind of stealth replicant like her, his strength was proably either reduced, or on some kind of limiter. He was awful tough when he had to be, after all.
Assuming he’s human just has too many red herrings.
I always took the “I didn’t look at it” line to imply that Rachel’s time was very close to up.
The real question, of course, is weither or not BGC’s Priss is a lesbian.
I saw some mention of Scott’s “confession” somewhere that mentioned that Harrison Ford said he was “surprised” by the news. Anyone else want to bet that Ford was being sarcastic? Considering how he felt about it, I mean.
Odd note: The “That was irrational. Not to mention, unsportsmanlike.” line was originally supposed to be Roy talking to himself. He lost control for a second and beat Deckard up a bit before letting him run. I guess they left the line in because it was so damn cool.
–
“Not fish. Snake scale.”
Now that I think about it both book and film tell us the Replicants are a new advanced model that is harder to detect- so who better to track them down than one of their own. There’s a crappy scene cut out where the Blade Runner Leon takes out at the start tells Dekkard this from his life support machine.
I wondered if Rachel ‘knew something’ when she asked Deckard “have you tried that machine on yourself?”, or something to that effect. Maybe each pot was calling the other kettle black, so to speak, and rightfully so. I assumed that Rachel, being a more advanced model that Deckard, could detect another replicant without the benefit of the Voigt-Kampff machine.
What’s up with the random bleeding by the replicants and Deckard, if he is a replicant? They didn’t seem to consistantly bleed when injured. I’m referring mainly to the scene where Leon takes one to the head. He didn’t appear to bleed – maybe the circuitry made it harder to put blood vessels up there.
But she didn’t know she was a replicant. She only figured it out after Meeting Deckard and being tested.
That’s the irony of the pot calling the kettle black.
I read the book ages ago and have seen the theatrical release a dozen times and I really can’t see that one has anything to do with the other with the possible exception of a single grain of an idea.
I had no problem with the voice over element in the original release, either. But I have a big problem with the extremely trite ‘Deckard is one too’ twist that seemed a whole lot like a late entry to me.
So, just like all the Highlander sequels and Aliens 3, in my world the directors cut does not exist. It’s comforting to be able to edit your world. 
Having watched the Director’s Cut as a direct result of this thread, it struck me as odd that Roy knew Deckard’s name when they first met. How did Roy know Deckard was the one who had been chasing them? Leon, not Roy saw Deckard kill the replicant in the club, and then was killed himself by Rachel. When did Roy ever see Deckard before they met at JF Sebastian’s place, much less learn his name?
Did I miss space out and miss a scene, or could this also be considered an argument that Deckard was a replicant and Roy knew this? Could saving the life of a fellow replicant also be one of the reasons Roy let Deckard live at the end of the movie instead of the voice-over reason given in the original? After all, Roy sure didn’t seem to care about human life at all, he killed Tyrell and Sebastian even after Sebastian was nice to them and tried to help.
BTW, the origami unicorn at the end of the movie seemed to be made of tin foil instead of paper, another clue possibly?
Maybe I’m the only person who doesn’t care if he was a replicant or not. It’s one of only two movies that I ever went to SLEEP on. Can’t believe how dull it was.
The following is from the URL I cited:
> How Did Batty Know Deckard’s Name?
>
> This is either a technical error in the film, or an
> indication that Batty knew Deckard, and Deckard doesn’t
> know Batty. One idea is that Deckard (and possibly
> Rachael) were replicants, and part of the rebellion. They
> were caught entering the Tyrell building and, as an
> experiment, they were retrained as an ex-Blade Runner and
> a replicant who thinks she’s a human. The experiment is
> to see if a replicant could turn on other replicants that
> he/she used to know.
>
> This explanation is a bit weak and far fetched, as it
> on the Tyrell Corporation retraining Deckard but not
> changing his name. (Imagine if Roy had called him “Mr
> Smith”!). This makes the Deckard/Zhora confrontation more
> interesting: she would have recognized him, and would be
> wondering if he was having a joke or not. When she
> realized that he was for real, she clobbered him. This
> could also give Bryant an excuse for getting the number
> of escaped replicants wrong.
>
> Different versions of the script have Deckard as a well
> known Blade Runner, so in that case it would be
> reasonable for Batty to know about him. A likely
> explanation is that Leon was within earshot when Deckard
> showed his ID to a cop and gave his name; in an earlier
> script, Batty then had Leon go after Deckard for killing
> Zhora.
>
> In Hampton Fancher’s script dated 7 January 1980, Bryant
> tells Deckard that the replicants may have tapped into
> the ESPER computer and that it will take about a day to
> secure the system. Later, at Sebastian’s apartment, Batty
> tells Pris and Mary that Leon and Zhora are dead and that
> the police have discovered he has been tapping into their
> computer. He informs them that he can’t monitor what the
> police are doing anymore. This is what causes Pris to
> say, “Then we’re stupid and we’ll die,” and why the
> replicants are expecting Deckard to come for them.
I have an easier simpler answer: You’re trying too hard to make the plot be consistent. The writers and the director either never worked out in detail when the major characters first met each other, or if they did, there were so many conflicting drafts of the script that they forgot to reconcile them.
I wrote:
> I have an easier simpler answer
What I meant to say was “I have an even simpler answer.”
The ending to Blade Runner is open to interpretation. With that said here’s what I make of it all. I don’t believe Deckard is a replicant, I feel the point that’s being made is that Deckard’s life is similar to that of a replicants. Each replicant he dispatches slowly brings his own life closer to dissipation (it’s said he’s the best at what he does right?) so his fate is tied to the replicants he hunts. Moreover I believe Rachael has a longer life span than that of a normal replicant (Tyrel said she was an experiment, and experiments have exceptions. In regards to what Olmos’s character Gaff said “It’s a shame she wont live, then again who does?” I feel he’s giving Deckard a threat/heads up, Deckard told Rachael someone would come for her in his absence and Gaff was just reminding him of that fact. Which would explain why Deckard went in to his apartment “guns a blazing” at the first sign of trouble, he was expecting another blade runner to be there however, found only Rachael. As for the origami object, it was just a good gesture from Gaff, a way of saying “hey, I could have finished her off, take her and leave”.
Welcome to the mayhem, Mr. Mojo!
I don’t mean to be stomping on you, but it did seem worth pointing out that you’re reviving a 13-year old thread about a movie that was 18 years-old at the time of the original post. This means we are, in mid-October 2013, discussing the subtle nuances of a movie that is 31 years old and set in our near future of 2019 – and based on a book published in 1968. I wonder if there are any other cinema themes being so thoroughly analyzed among amateur enthusiasts so long after their publication.
Anyway, since the Zombie is walking again, I am inclined to disagree with you about Deckard.
Back in the 1990’s when I had watched my VHS copy of the director’s cut for the NNth time, I went on-line and discovered a website dedicated to discussion and debate of one question: Is Deckard a Replicant? I don’t know if that site still exists, nor do I recall the name of the site, but I do remember there was a lot of spirited discussion about all sorts of minute details. I encourage you to see if there are similar fora still out there.
There’s some key dialogue in the movie that encourages my belief that Decker is actually a replicant and doesn’t realize it – even when he’s providing his own confirmative arguments:
Rachael shoots Leon, thereby stopping the latter from killing Decker. The next scene is Decker and Rachael at Decker’s cluttered apartment, where he cleans up, then offers Rachael a drink to calm her down. She is still looking visibly traumatized by her actions.
“Shakes?” he asks and she nods weakly, “Me too. Real bad. Happens every time.”
They shift around, Rachael ends up at the piano, Decker on the couch. She sight-reads the sheet-music and Decker falls asleep–we see him dreaming of unicorns (not electric sheep) for a few minutes. He wakes up and compliments her ability.
“I didn’t know if I could play.” Rachael comments, “I remember taking lessons…”
Then they argue, with Decker shooting down each of Rachael’s ‘childhood memories’ as implants* from someone else (e.g. Dr. Tyrell’s niece). A few scenes later, Decker learns that Rachael has run away from home. She shows up at his place and her statement “I AM the business” tells everyone she’s realized she really is a replicant (and she’s upset about it).
Shift these very close scenes with very little intervening distractions around just a bit, and I’d expect Decker to get that funny look on his face (done best by Hugh Laurie as Greg House when he’s made a critical realization in his diagnostic efforts) – I know you’re a replicant; your memories are programmed, you get the shakes after killing; I do too, real bad; “Holy #@#%#% they’re programmed responses - which means I’m a replicant as well!”
Besides, what’s a better weapon against a replicant (which can perform superhuman feats like pulling boiled eggs out of a pot or leap across a chasm 30 storeys above the street) than another replicant (which can perform superhuman feats like survive getting its neck twisted 100+ degrees or leap across a chasm 30 storeys above the street)?
The final fight scene ends with Batty (Rutger Hauer) realizing he’s basically already dead and working to save Decker, then tearfully explaining why just before expiring.**
I think it’s the mainstream version (I’ve seen both) that has Decker’s narrative voice-over speculating that, in his final moments, Roy had learned to appreciate life for its own sake and that’s why it spared him. It’s kind of unspoken that such a quality (achievement) crosses the line from machine to human.
Later, we see Gaff shouting something cryptic and most people think that’s just a warning that puts Decker on-guard. I agree with others that it’s a warning to take the girl and flee while they can. However, along with the unicorn, it says “I know what you (two) really are. I know what you’re programmed to dream about.” and, unlike police chief+ Bryant, who simply accepts and fulfills his job of making sure “skin jobs” get ‘retired’, Gaff can appreciate life for its own sake enough to let the replicants (Decker and Rachael) flee and live out whatever time they have left.
–G!
We’ve passed the point
Of no return
How can we make ammends?
All alone I’ve watched
the candle burn
Burnin at both ends
…–Rik Emmet (Triumph)
…Tears in the Rain
…Sport of Kings
*Remember, this is from the same guy who authored “We can remember it for you, wholesale!” which was made into Total Recall which was about transferring memories from one person to another.
** Gil Moore says he woke up and saw that scene playing on the TV screen and thought, “We’re making technologies that are beyond our ability to handle their results and consequences!” and that inspired him to write Triumph’s Tears in the Rain.
- I dunno if he’s a chief; he clearly ranks above Gaff and Decker (and Holden, for that matter).
Closing this topic since it’s 13 years old. Feel free to start another one in CS if anyone wishes to continue discussion.