After watching this movie I was left with onr question: was Dekard a replicant? First, as a disclosure, I missed like a good 45% of this movie cause I was called out of class (Me. Bergeron and I are sorta related apparently!), so I don't have all of the info.
I personally think that Dekard is a replicant for these reasons:
1) We don't see anything about his life before the movie.
Replicants are given memories of other people, so him remembering was he used to so would make sense, but in order to prove that he's human we would need to see real memories.
2) The unicorn
The only way people would know about his dreams is if he was a replicant.
3) He has one purpose
The replicants are made for one purpose and one purpose only (though it varies for replicant to replicant) and Dekard Dekard is only shown to do one thing--fight replicants.
4) Dekard shows little to no emotions
Dekard-as with many replicants can't show emotion and when he does it seems forced and doesn't appear to make sense.
Also I just want to mention how touching the replicants speech was at the end about how he needs to know how it feels to live in constant fear. He manages to humanize the replicants.
Oh, Deckard's complete lack of family or real background is interesting! He does have all of those photos, presumably of his family, but we don't ever really see him in the context of a society. And we only ever see the photos of replicants--they seem used as evidence of a past, proof that might be (and usually is) false.
ReplyDeleteI want to discuss this thing about lack of emotion more. How can we tell the difference between a replicant and an ideally masculine man (as set forward in film noir)? :-D
I think 3 out of the 4 argument points are valid. I think Dekards macho-like stoic characteristics might have just been a stylistic choice on the part of the director, that sort of resembled the main character in the Maltese falcon.
ReplyDelete