So I'm going to show this to my so. I've seen three versions of this movie, liked the directors cut, but am interested in your opinion, based anon. So which one is it?
Fell asleep twice watching this
Deckard was a replicant
>>67242066
If your so is a grill, you could be in for a difficult one OP. Are you sure you want to do this?
If so, might as well go for the directors or final cut - the theatrical really isn't worth it except as a bit of a novelty.
Director's cut is fine, but Deckard isn't a replicant.
Ridley is a fucking moron that misses the point by saying he is.
>>67242219
She is, but she cool, and will like it, maybe I'll go for the final cut, haven't seen that one myself
>>67242276
It's literally impossible to watch and not come to the conclusion that he is.
>>67242354
It's a stupid conclusion that Ridley forced in.
The point of the film is that there is an uncaring, unsympathetic robot acting man chasing down these robots with dreams, desires, and passions that are searching for meaning and purpose in their lives. It raises the question if a sufficiently advanced machine can ever experience the human condition.
Making Deckard be a robot cheapens everything with an M. Nightshamalamadingdong level twist.
>>67242457
I feel sorry for you
>>67242457
>my version of the film would be better
End yourself.
>>67242066
the original that has the main characters thoughts is the best version. it fills in the parts the dialog doesnt and the end indicates every one might be a replacant since he goes and punches the head of the tyrell corporation who clovis seems to have killed a few scenes earlier
i dont think i need to put spoiler on something in blade runner its decades old if you havent seen it you need help
>>67242457
>It raises the question if a sufficiently advanced machine can ever experience the human condition.
Yes, but they're not robots, and they're not machines. They are living breathing biological creations. The point isn't that they're sufficiently advanced machines, it's that they are every bit what humans are, and more... given by the "more human than human" line.
Deckard being a replicant fits perfectly with the exploration of the rest of the themes of the movie. What's it like for them to learn what they are? We see it from Deckard's point of view watching it happen to Rachael. Then we get to experience it directly from his point of view as he learns it about himself, and it casts the whole movie in a new light. His conversation with Tyrell in the beginning becomes tragic and ironic. Also, is he killing people or objects? Even if they are just objects, if he's one of them doesn't that still make him a murderer for killing his own kind.
Fuckin love this movie, I'm going to go watch it again.
>>67242066
Director's cut
Guess we don't have enough answers for wisdom of the crowd, actually the answers here are quite disparate. Imma go for final cut. And yes it's a really good movie, and I'm looking very much forward to seeing it again, no matter how my so will think about it..
Like the theatrical cut best, the voiceover makes it more noir-ish and somehow more literary. Also it has footage of Deckard and Rachel driving in a car in daylight, which is nice.
>>67242963
>>67242778
>>67242719
>People taking Ridley Scott seriously after Prometheus and The Martian
I pity you.
>>67244533
This guy knows.
>>67244645
Everything about Prometheus was amazing except for the writing. Lindelof ruins everything he touches, not Ridley Scott's fault.
>>67244517
>I'm looking very much forward to seeing it again, no matter how my so will think about it..
there is 0% chance she will enjoy it
you should watch total recall instead, no one sincerely likes blade runner
>>67244533
>>67244684
glad other people think this.
I actually think the versions without the voiceover wouldn't be as highly regarded if the audience hadn't seen the theatrical versions first or had it impressed upon them that the director's cuts are better. the story barely registers without the extra context of the voiceover.
>>67245025
She fell asleep, so there's that
>>67244645
>People taking Ridley Scott seriously after Gladiator
FTFY
>>67242167
Kill yourself.
>>67242066
The final cut is by far the best cut. A ton of people say that it has too many hints that Deckard is a replicant but that has never bothered me. I like that the final cut doesn't have glaring fuck ups like this.
>>67242963
i just watched blade runner for the first time a week ago or so and i'm still uncertain on how people come to the conclusion that deckard's a replicant
don't get me wrong, i'm not against the idea, i just don't see how it's explicitly supported by the film
is it because batty doesn't kill deckard? the "don't we all" line? The paper crane at the end? I legit just don't get it
>>67245932
>no one sincerely likes blade runner
Fuck off, you have to be a really pretentious piece of shit to think this. Blade Runner had a large fanbase long before liking it was cool. Plus it's one of the most influential sci-fi films of all time.
>>67246848
Deckard daydreams about a unicorn, then at the end Gaff leaves an origami unicorn. Gaff knowing about Deckard's daydream even though he didn't tell anyone about it implies that Deckard's memories were implanted the same way that Rachael's were. His nod at the end after looking at it is meant to indicate that he's realized it and come to accept it.
The "the again who does" line can be interpreted to support it too, but I think it's also pretty ambiguous.
>>67247344
that makes sense, thanks a lot
i kinda wanna take the final cut and change the line back to "fucker" and just dump the entire unicorn sequence; not because it "TELLS" that he's a replicant, it just hints at it too overtly and can be made redundant by the scene at the end as hes leaving his apartment, which without the dream sequence carries much more weight, and would be seen as better done.. more subtle and elegant overall in my opinion.
for these reasons i kinda think the directors cut is underrated. it's my favorite movie, but if it was as described i think it would be perfect. the best of all the cuts, for me anyway.
Everyone keeps saying they prefer the director's cut because it's more ambiguous but I thought the director's cut had the unicorn scene.
Honestly I think the theatrical version is just fine for the most part. Its the version that made the movie a cult classic, after all. The only real bad thing is the strained ending voice over with Ford essentially going "Nah Gaff was wrong, she's totally gonna live a long happy life" despite nothing proving that. Otherwise the voice overs, while a bit patronizing, aren't that bad and honestly for a lot of viewers probably necessary.
>>67247886
>The only real bad thing is the strained ending voice over with Ford essentially going "Nah Gaff was wrong, she's totally gonna live a long happy life" despite nothing proving that.
This. The theatrical cut would be fine if it didn't have that tacked on happy ending.
>>67247762
>i kinda wanna take the final cut and change the line back to "fucker"
Father is better than fucker. Fucker removes the tension from an incredibly tense scene by inserting in a totally unnecessary curse word just to show that "WOW HE'S PISSED HE EVEN SAID FUCKER"
>>67242066
rewatched it again after a long time and after reading the book
man was the movie lackluster, slow yet somehow with rushed love subplot and with half assed characterization
still it had some amazing moment,s the end confrontation on the roof is mesmerizing
what is a miracle to me that such a piece of shit book could make a good movie, jesus christ i never knew it was one of the worse books by Dick
just the memory of Space Jesus from the book telling Deckard is ok to murder still pisses me the fuck off
Go with the Final Cut. It's easily the best version
>>67242066
Why does everyone gush over this fucking awful flick? Alien was a better in every measurable way.
>>67249645
I rewatched both recently, I love both but I think Blade Runner is better. I like it more because Alien is pretty much a slasher-esque movie on a ship, Blade Runner explores deep themes and what not.
>>67242066
That is one ugly woman and that hair and makeup aint helpin. Great movie though.
>>67246848
What makes me think Deckard is a replicant is the eyes. The eyes of all the replicants have a very glassy, artifical look to them. It's the only part of them that doesn't look real. When I first watched the movie, I wasn't surprised that Rachel was a replicant because her eyes, from the moment we meet her, look like that, too. It's in fact heavily emphasized in her case by the light from the sunset shining into her eyes and making them glow in that replicant-y way.
Then, on one of my rewatchings of it, I noticed that the only non-replicant character whose eyes have that effect going on is Deckard's. Which strongly implies that Deckard may actually be a replicant. Then I started looking for other hints, and everything just fell into place: the unicorn, the "retirement", the fact that Deckard is brought back because he "thinks like the replicants". Deckard also seems to have no friends or family, yet he fills his home with photos of people it implies are his friends and family. All of this points to his memories being implanted to make him the perfect replicant hunter, by being another replicant.
>>67250051
>We'll have this weak and feable replicant that is constantly getting his ass beat hunt replicants.
>It'll be perfect
:|
>>67250051
you fucking wut mate ?
im pretty sure they didnt wear any special contact lenses
>>67242066
>to my so
wife´s son
thats exactly what you mean right
>>67244517
the final cut is a good choice
>>67250051
Deckard's eyes were normal.
>>67249785
>he wouldn't fuck a pleasure model replicant
>those skull crushing thighs grinding her down cervix deep on your cock
I hope your parents didn't want grandkids you fucking f*g
>>67242963
>
Deckard being a replicant fits perfectly with the exploration of the rest of the themes of the movie. What's it like for them to learn what they are? We see it from Deckard's point of view watching it happen to Rachael. Then we get to experience it directly from his point of view as he learns it about himself, and it casts the whole movie in a new light. His conversation with Tyrell in the beginning becomes tragic and ironic. Also, is he killing people or objects? Even if they are just objects, if he's one of them doesn't that still make him a murderer for killing his own kind.
Pseudo intellectual drivel. You're grasping at straws to seem like you understand this movie better than what is actually presented to the audience.
This is the true face of losers who insist that Deckard is a replicant just because Mr. Scott tells us in his senile stage of life.
daily reminder if you don't understand how deckard being a replicant is a callback to greek tragedies and is one of the most pivotal and important moments in cinema history you are literally a redditor and can't comprehend anything beyond surface level interpretations. i feel sorry for you.
