I think if they toned done the injured man's hysteria and tried a few more takes this scene could have been worthy of the final product. Still, it doesn't really add much to the film, so not really a great loss.
Deckard is indeed a replicant as was stated by someone else there is a scene where he is with Rachel where there is a glow in his eyes for a few seconds, there is also The unicorn dream that Deckard has and the unicorn origami that Gaff leaves him towards the end of the movie how does this relate? Ask yourself this since when do two people share a dream? It makes more sense to believe that this is something that has been implanted in both Deckard and Gaff.
@Abon666 Doesn't matter what Ridley Scott says, he didn't writer the material. His job as director was just to interpret it. Now on the otherhand, if Philip K Dick didn't love watching arguments by remaining quiet on the matter......
the movie: drackard its a replicant. The scene where hes talking to rachel in the kitchen of his apartment, after she saved him from leon, you can see that red-glowing eyes of the replicants in deckard (only for two seconds)
i hope you understand, im not very good with english...
UNMISSABLE? I'm sorry but this is very missable and that's why they left it out. As for whether Deckard is a replicant or not he obviously is, when the director himself says he is you'd have to be some sort of mongoloid to disagree.
@steve1mrcl This isn't the book though. In the book everything was different, remember when Priss and Roy were killing the spider and Sebastian was crying? That scene isn't here. Neither is anything about how much Deckard wanted a sheep and a roof with grass on it so it could eat. This movie is Ridley Scott's take on the book, it isn't the book at all. :/
@gorflunk Yep, thats what I thought. It implies Deckard has a past, no other scene does this. He thinks he has a past, but maybe he was only activated for this mission, he had no life prior to the events in the film. The deleted scene undermines that.
I'm a fan of the movie, but I am going to commit an act of sacrilege, and state that this (particular) scene was rightly taken out of the final cut of the movie. And the reason I say this is because it ruins the flow and structure of the entire story. Also, and repeating a sentiment a few people have already mentioned; Decker is too calm and the guy is too jittery--yes, I understand the context, but still...
This scene could have been good, but the holden character seems to be enjoying his camera time too much, I mean calm down your supposed to be a recovering semi-corpse.
This scene although i agree with the poster; should be included in some version of Blade Runner. But I can clearly see why they deleted it. It answers too many questions which are answered during the rest of the film. For example: Capt. Bryant explains what they are when he's showing Deckard the footage at the precinct. (Nexus 6, military..).
Holden also says: "...Maybe it doesn't work on these Deck"
That would render the scene with Deck and Rachel with the Voight-Kampff fail useless.
@frane1012 - it is something to think about - most people just think of actors and directors but the editors or those who make decisions like this can make or break movie. Think about how you can leave something out of a movie and make it better - few probably think in such terms these days.
Director Scott made a great film. Why would he want to include scenes that take away from the continuity of the film? This scene looks pathetic and campy. It also takes away the dramatic shooting in first scene of the film. I understand we all love the film but wishing to see "decker taking a dump" is reducing the myth and power of this magical film. After all this film is about human excess and the lack of compassion for each other.
@andreaprodan All the novel and the movie had in common were a couple of names. I read the novel twice and both times found it very difficult to "get into" - a fact our teacher warned us about. Ridley Scott and Phillip K. Dick had several meetings prior to production. They both agreed that many things had to be changed in order to make it a watchable movie. In the end, Dick himself made a few changes.
@andreaprodan Before the movie was released Dick was invited to a screening. After watching it he said, "I don't know how you guys did it. It's like you looked into my mind." Sorry, I can't really quote sources. I've read so many books on this movie I've forgotten.
@Singularbeing actually the other way around. the re-conceived version of battlestar galactica borrowed elements from Bladerunner since Bladerunner was made in 1982
Bought the Blade Runner collection box with all versions in it.This scene and many others are included,and tbh,this is not a bad scene.Horrible quality here,but it wasn't bad.
@putobello - Deckard taking a dump? FUCK!! That would be like Chuck Norris having a gastro fit in the toilet. It would utterly %110 blow me away and consume me! I say, bring it on Ridley Scott!!
@GravityBoy72 Yeah, this is too narrative in design. But the producers wanted this stuff in-and the voice over-cause they thought the audience wouldn't understand the movie..cause they didn't. And the audience and critics still did not understand the movie.
I am not thrilled with the acting in this scene. If a scene was going to be added to the film, I would like it to be the one where we find out Tyrell is a replicant.
@RighteousBrother oh my goodness... this movie is much more deeper than I thought.
I mean, that would emphasise the point that there is no difference between humans and replicants... Argh, too much to think about! *does not compute* *overload* *reset*
@vyre43 Yep, exactly - there's a lot that can be read into it. Also, think of this, if Roy Batty kills Tyrell - who was essentially his creator. Does that mean he's killed God?
People dont seem to get that the fact that Deckard might be a replicant has to remain a question.
Anyone that says "Yes; Deckard is a Replicant, I've personally unsolved the mystery of Blade Runner" obviously have no clue and should stop from watching any form of intelligent movies.
This movie is ambiguity, it is why it became a classic, and that its charm has not waned over the years: because it remains an enigma.
Questions are often more beautiful than their answers .
@hughtub The video quality is bad because it's either a bad download or the scene wasn't ever treated or developed to its full standard or whatever it is they do.
Thanks for uploading even in this bad quality. My brother actually has the boxed set, but I'd have to really kiss up to him, before he would ever let me view any of it lol.
Really there is no DEFINITE proof about Deckard being a Replicant. Like has been said previously, it's up to the viewer. Also Ridley Scott's statement about Deckard is his opinion. Everything in the movie is a SUGGESTION about Deckard either way.
It is kind of bothersome that Scott says if you don't think D is a replicant the person is a MORON. Also the clues that say that D is a Replicant are only clues. There's no dialog saying YOU ARE A REPLICANT. Whatever you think is right.
@chopsnslams Wrong. There is proof. In a scene in is apartment he is shown to have the same eye reflection that all the replicants have. Also, Ridley Scott has made it clear that deckard is a replicant. The film makes more sense, is deeper, and more layered with Deckard as replicant. Apparently this is a threat to many people, though....I'm not sure why.
@rdecredico bescause its a retarded theory... If Deckard is a replicant he's a pretty poor make since he nearly died everytime he went up agaisnt a replicant. The fact that you know he's a human going up agaisnt these stronger and smarter replicants is what makes the movie more suspenseful and enjoyable..
twat.... perhaps his imperfections are what makes him a more advanced replicant. or the fact that roy batty was designed for combat? what was each of their purposes? and had they outgrown them? had they evolved? DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP?
@Andronicus57 Ridley Scott says he is Nexus 7 or 8..he is a replicant and so Is Tyrell..Roy was supposed to find this out and he was supposed to discover the real Tyrell was dead but frozen so he could one day be brought back to life..
@sinoftam you can see ridley scott talking about it here on youtube ..its from a special edition blade runner DVD. Deckard was a replicant and so was Tyrell..the whole purpose of the tyrell corp was to eventually figure out how to cure the real Tyrell and thaw him back out. That was in the original story line as per Scott
@TheHatefulDead why thanks for showing me the light, all my life I thought that nearly dying was worse th an dying, but thanks to you I now know that dying is worse. But thats not really what I was talking about guy.
Deckard was replicant. There is a scene in last director's ver. with paper unicorn made by chinese cop. He knows Decard's dreams, because there were loaded in his brain.
"BR" is about humanity, but in Scott original vision Decard was replicant.
@Lark1610 Gaff also put that piece of Origami to tell Deckard that he was in his apartment and that he forgive the life of Rachel. It,s a kinda sour ending because that would mean that both Deckard and Rachel would end up being hunted down. I dunno the nacionality of Gaff but the actor that played him is american of mexican heritage.
guys, Deckard was NOT replicant, yet whole movie has about lack of difference between humans and replicants. So Deckard was presented as souless bastard, while some replicants were more humans that humans themselves. Read book, and read about Philip K. Dick, so you can dig even deeper - what humans really are? What is consciousness? What if reality is just a dream? Or illusion?
@1337huntard YeS He wouLd Be DangErouS... I ThinK The Cops KneW The Whole Time he was A Replicant; ThatS why Hes a BlaDe RunneR... It Takes A RepLiCant 2 KiLL a ReplicanT
With all of this discussion on whether or not Deckard is a replicant, if its any help, in the book, it is stated clearly that Deckard is human. You could easily point out the differences between the two, but just pointing out in the original vision of the story, Deckard is human.
I HIGHLY recommend, anyone who hasn't already, to read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" by Philip K. Dick, the basis for the film.
@1337huntard You got TheRe Bro... My GueSS is he Doesnt LiKe HiM & GaFf wanted 2 spite Him By Lettin Him Kno The Truth... I Think Thats Y Deckard RaN away with Rachael, Cuz he Found out tHaT They were The Same
the ICU guy talks too fast -- nobody else talks like that in the film. I don't think any character speaks fast in film noir...off the subject a little, but I love how the asian market lady says "oh...snake".
@howboutpete I agree, it took the movie in a different direction and would need its own plot, making the movie longer and confusing. The released version is the best and although I have the director's cut, I still like the play by with Ford's voice explaining things in the first release.
I don't think it was a throw away line. Gaff says and does very little in the film, none of it is actually trivial. If he thinks Deckard is a replicant, doing the bidding of men, then "doing a man's job" is not a compliment, which it would normally be in English.
@FasterThanSoup it's meant to be ironic- he did a 'mans job' despite being a replicant. It fogs the line between what is considered human and what isn't.
@vyre43 thanks, caught that perspective. just found it painfully obvious & unchallenging. if everyone is a replicant i find myself not caring, just dont have enough emotional investment & cant drum-up anymore. the replicants with real human emotions are hunted & killed, deckard (the most "unhuman" replicant is the last "man" standing & reignites hope (along w/buddy skin job rachel) of being more human. got it. bsg did a much better job but, had the advantage of a longer format
I think we see the reason it was cut. The sick guy was dying in the seen. And he looked like he was hurt, too.
As far as interpretation goes, there is the movie and then the book. I think the book is really an examination of 'Does Mass Empathy Create God?' as opposed to 'Mass Consciousness'. The 'Mercer Deus Ex Machina in the stairwell' should tell you this.
Philip K. Dick was very much into examining theological questions and themes. Just look at his book 'Valis'. And much of his other work.
@FasterThanSoup - Some classics, like " 2001 " or the " Alien " movies, should NOT be TOUCHED upon pain of being simultaneously beheaded & disemboweled by a spastic samurai w / a rusty sword.
" The thing " - I'll have to rent a copy & re - watch it.
@knoxvilleguy2 hehe, i was just being a douche-clown about "the thing". i kinda liked carpenter's remake versus the somewhat campy but lovable original but, im wouldnt call it a classic. different times - maybe people could say the same of carpenter's today i suppose. douche-clown...i like that one. gonna have to workshop it this week, along w/spastic samurai (all credit will be given when i drop it at work)
@FasterThanSoup - I predict that being disemboweled & / or beheaded by a spastic samurai will become a new Internet meme. All I ask is to be immortalized through its usage. Asking for future royalties from its use w / be a helluva tricky proposition..... ;~) Like a Cylon Centurion doing a circumcision. ;~)
In reply to everything here, all your arguments are moot: Deckard is either a replicant (slave) or a human in an environment which enslaves him.
The point is: "Terrible thing to live in fear...that is what it means to be a slave."
In other words, the world is built for people to be slaves in this film. The difference is one of degrees and classifications. Even Bryant and all the cops are enslaved. The film just states it in allegorical terms.
That could work, but my take on it was somewhat different. Remember, when Batty says, "Quite an expereince to live in fear, isn't it?...That's what it means to be a slave," he's talking to Deckard as he's hanging on for his life, scared that he's going to die (scared of running from Batty, too). Batty was trying to prove a point, to get Deckard to see life from his vantage point...and he felt his point had been proven, which is why he saved Deckard (well, one of the reasons, anyway).
The mistake most of you make is that the story of the movie and the book are the same. The movie script is based on a script of a script and then heavily edited several times. The movie and the book are only very loosely related with the movie being more inspired rather than based on PKD's work.
The movie interpretation differs with each version, the Final Cut clearly demonstrates that Deckard is a replicant or at the very least that the police have an intimate knowledge of his memories.
According to the source material, they are androids. And thank you for sharing this clip. This explains the one replicant that is never explained away as missing if you do the math according to the movie. One is not accounted for. Thanks a bunch for this!
This seen was pretty much included in the game of Blade Runner by Westwood Studios. Well, not exactly this seen maybe but something similar to it. Cool...
So are Replicants robots,androids or clones?Sebastian claims to be a genetic engineer.Also note the conversation between Roy and Tyrell.Nanotechnology perhaps?
@FasterThanSoup... only that it doesn't. i mean, just how cheesy & pathetic would it be when gaff would leave an origami unicorn to wish deckard "wealth and prosperity" or something like that... in BR, the unicorn simply stands as a mythical being that can be dreamed... or even genetically designed? huuh? geddit?
ya, i undrstnd your interpretation. im not sure ive read/seen it anywhere else historically speaking or as it pertains to BR (did scott or one of the crew reveal that?) but, yeah i get what youre saying it just feels painfully obvious & contrived, exactly what i think they may have been trying to avoid (you know w/ the narration-n-all). i guess i just prefer a little more subtlety esp in a movie like this w/such prominent cross cultural content
roy batty always thought deckard was human because he says to him. " ive seen things you people wouldnt believe" although it would have been nice if roy did know at the end. just a little glitter in the eyes to show he knew. then again he might of. lol anyway absolutly flawless film. so glad ridley scott released this amazing 5 disc set.
absolutely. the guy comes across as some cheesy tough guy from a 50's crime thriller
PlazaMoon 1 month ago
Ridley Scott showed good judgement by dropping this...
bbadfish 2 months ago 2
This was most definitely missable.
terratrema 2 months ago
Amazing stuff! This film rocks!
MillieMudd67 3 months ago
cutting that out was a good idea.
spacecoke 4 months ago 2
I think if they toned done the injured man's hysteria and tried a few more takes this scene could have been worthy of the final product. Still, it doesn't really add much to the film, so not really a great loss.
ShineyEyedNexus6 4 months ago
watch'u readin for?
thparticus 4 months ago
Deckard is indeed a replicant as was stated by someone else there is a scene where he is with Rachel where there is a glow in his eyes for a few seconds, there is also The unicorn dream that Deckard has and the unicorn origami that Gaff leaves him towards the end of the movie how does this relate? Ask yourself this since when do two people share a dream? It makes more sense to believe that this is something that has been implanted in both Deckard and Gaff.
NocturneKing 4 months ago
@NocturneKing Ridley Scott himself have said that Deckard is a replicant.
Abon666 4 months ago
@Abon666 Doesn't matter what Ridley Scott says, he didn't writer the material. His job as director was just to interpret it. Now on the otherhand, if Philip K Dick didn't love watching arguments by remaining quiet on the matter......
ViktorVanhelm 3 months ago
@Abon666 o rly?
FuckinLittleDreamer 1 month ago
@NocturneKing Gaff just read deckard's file...Just like Deckard read Pris' file..
xpez 3 months ago
al i can c iz gigantic pixls on thu scren.i'm a BR fan.dislike.
jgtdaw 4 months ago
The quality of this video is amazing considering it was taken with a calculator.
TheLeoOfCostaRica 4 months ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheLeoOfCostaRica "The quality of this video is amazing considering it was taken with a calculator."
It's a deleted scene that ended up on the cutting room floor from a film that was made in 1982. That was 29 years ago. What do you expect?
fuzzywzhe 3 months ago
in the book: deckard is human
the movie: drackard its a replicant. The scene where hes talking to rachel in the kitchen of his apartment, after she saved him from leon, you can see that red-glowing eyes of the replicants in deckard (only for two seconds)
i hope you understand, im not very good with english...
Izanagi1990 4 months ago 2
Pretty inconsistent. Does not fit at all with the rest of film's mood.
dewfall56 5 months ago
UNMISSABLE? I'm sorry but this is very missable and that's why they left it out. As for whether Deckard is a replicant or not he obviously is, when the director himself says he is you'd have to be some sort of mongoloid to disagree.
leej70 5 months ago
if u read the book it was based on you will know deckard was no replicant
steve1mrcl 5 months ago
@steve1mrcl This isn't the book though. In the book everything was different, remember when Priss and Roy were killing the spider and Sebastian was crying? That scene isn't here. Neither is anything about how much Deckard wanted a sheep and a roof with grass on it so it could eat. This movie is Ridley Scott's take on the book, it isn't the book at all. :/
Tigerlilly0777 4 months ago
Ridley Scott would never have left this in the movie only because it makes it pretty clear that Deckard is not a replicant.
gorflunk 5 months ago
@gorflunk Yep, thats what I thought. It implies Deckard has a past, no other scene does this. He thinks he has a past, but maybe he was only activated for this mission, he had no life prior to the events in the film. The deleted scene undermines that.
Mattkidchannel 5 months ago
Good call, cut the fat please!
AkuNoHana 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Owww I love this movie very much ;)
jumpy666666 5 months ago
I'm a fan of the movie, but I am going to commit an act of sacrilege, and state that this (particular) scene was rightly taken out of the final cut of the movie. And the reason I say this is because it ruins the flow and structure of the entire story. Also, and repeating a sentiment a few people have already mentioned; Decker is too calm and the guy is too jittery--yes, I understand the context, but still...
0mniP0t3nt 5 months ago
did u record this with ur ass
Flames56 5 months ago
It's a little off. the tones of the actors don't match very well. Holden's too excited, Deckard's too calm.
ItchythaWookiee 6 months ago
I dont get it. Whats happening to this scene?
qwame100 6 months ago
This scene could have been good, but the holden character seems to be enjoying his camera time too much, I mean calm down your supposed to be a recovering semi-corpse.
heatflash888 6 months ago
@heatflash888 - I knew there was something wrong with the scene.
catothewiser 6 months ago
thought for the day (F*****d up obviously)
What would Philip K Dick say about the concept "False Positive?"
pleasant dreamzz.......
graemeirvine1 6 months ago
This scene although i agree with the poster; should be included in some version of Blade Runner. But I can clearly see why they deleted it. It answers too many questions which are answered during the rest of the film. For example: Capt. Bryant explains what they are when he's showing Deckard the footage at the precinct. (Nexus 6, military..).
Holden also says: "...Maybe it doesn't work on these Deck"
That would render the scene with Deck and Rachel with the Voight-Kampff fail useless.
ShouriSeifuku 7 months ago 2
This scene was a FAIL! Thank God they deleted it!
frane1012 7 months ago
@frane1012 - it is something to think about - most people just think of actors and directors but the editors or those who make decisions like this can make or break movie. Think about how you can leave something out of a movie and make it better - few probably think in such terms these days.
catothewiser 6 months ago
Comment removed
frane1012 7 months ago
Good job, Leon.
mifty744 7 months ago
@HoopsEntertainment
Worse, he's a bad actor replicant.
aeopmusic 8 months ago
Not a great scene, the movie's much better without it.
Wintermutate 8 months ago
With that quality is missable, at least here.
saintengel92 9 months ago
Nose hoses are never popular on TV or film, second only in repugnance to surgical masks.
zippyman818 10 months ago
Haha terrible acting from the bed dude!
johnnymassacre 10 months ago
Glad it was cut !
hcanuck7 11 months ago
Further evidence of how important post film editing can be. This scene and the actor who plays Holden are TERRIBLE! I almost gagged.
Tubetopfan1 11 months ago
@Tubetopfan1 completely agree!
beyondz55 11 months ago
Director Scott made a great film. Why would he want to include scenes that take away from the continuity of the film? This scene looks pathetic and campy. It also takes away the dramatic shooting in first scene of the film. I understand we all love the film but wishing to see "decker taking a dump" is reducing the myth and power of this magical film. After all this film is about human excess and the lack of compassion for each other.
pachacutti 1 year ago
@Singularbeing
The term "skin job" was used in Blade Runner, first. So, actually Battlestar Galactica (the new series) has shades of Blade Runner ...
eklektro68 1 year ago 4
was Dick consulted by Warner Bros and scott? The novel is so HUGELY superior, more intelligent and thought-provoking...
andreaprodan 1 year ago
@andreaprodan All the novel and the movie had in common were a couple of names. I read the novel twice and both times found it very difficult to "get into" - a fact our teacher warned us about. Ridley Scott and Phillip K. Dick had several meetings prior to production. They both agreed that many things had to be changed in order to make it a watchable movie. In the end, Dick himself made a few changes.
spacecowboy5000 1 year ago
@spacecowboy5000
Thanks for explaining. I've just rented the film, to see it again (years later), and I really felt the two had little in common.
andreaprodan 1 year ago
@andreaprodan Before the movie was released Dick was invited to a screening. After watching it he said, "I don't know how you guys did it. It's like you looked into my mind." Sorry, I can't really quote sources. I've read so many books on this movie I've forgotten.
spacecowboy5000 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
IS HE HOLDEN?
renatoavatarian 1 year ago
is him HOLDEN?
renatoavatarian 1 year ago
@Singularbeing actually the other way around. the re-conceived version of battlestar galactica borrowed elements from Bladerunner since Bladerunner was made in 1982
SocratesTheGadfly 1 year ago
This is in the work print of the movie.
RamBam3000 1 year ago
Was this the guy referred to later by Ford's character as 'Holden'?
pilatunes 1 year ago
this scene was in the screenplay. He's the guy that leon shot in the first scene of the movie.
xNukeUx 1 year ago
Bought the Blade Runner collection box with all versions in it.This scene and many others are included,and tbh,this is not a bad scene.Horrible quality here,but it wasn't bad.
Hammern28 1 year ago
I love this movie so much that if they included a scene of Decker taking a dump i would have still love it!
putobello 1 year ago 67
@putobello - Deckard taking a dump? FUCK!! That would be like Chuck Norris having a gastro fit in the toilet. It would utterly %110 blow me away and consume me! I say, bring it on Ridley Scott!!
jlcmiles 9 months ago
@putobello now that you mention it, have you seen Do Androids Take Dumps?
neckercube1 9 months ago
@putobello Do androids take robotic dumps?
fookfocketyfookfook 5 months ago in playlist (4) Brade Runner Clip
@putobello Yet you don't know his name is Deckard.
WalterLiddy 5 months ago
@putobello You love this movie so much but you don't know the name of the main character. It's Deckard, not Decker.
Bilfo 1 month ago
Considering the complete clusterfuck they had making that movie im amazed we got anything.
Wesleech 1 year ago
Yeah.. glad that was cut.
GravityBoy72 1 year ago 61
@GravityBoy72 Yeah, this is too narrative in design. But the producers wanted this stuff in-and the voice over-cause they thought the audience wouldn't understand the movie..cause they didn't. And the audience and critics still did not understand the movie.
edmonddantes64 8 months ago
Holden says...It's a DICK thing....you wouldn't understand.....I dunnnoooo...*coughcough*
qixotical 1 year ago
I am not thrilled with the acting in this scene. If a scene was going to be added to the film, I would like it to be the one where we find out Tyrell is a replicant.
JaySoap 1 year ago
@JaySoap
Erm... Tyrell isn't a replicant. Deckard is.
vyre43 1 year ago
@vyre43 No - but they were originally going to have a scene where Tyrell *was* a replicant, and the real Tyrell had been dead for years.
RighteousBrother 1 year ago
@RighteousBrother oh my goodness... this movie is much more deeper than I thought.
I mean, that would emphasise the point that there is no difference between humans and replicants... Argh, too much to think about! *does not compute* *overload* *reset*
vyre43 1 year ago
@vyre43 Yep, exactly - there's a lot that can be read into it. Also, think of this, if Roy Batty kills Tyrell - who was essentially his creator. Does that mean he's killed God?
RighteousBrother 1 year ago
@RighteousBrother mwuahahaha, now on that I'm an expert- Advanced English
-____-' so many thematic concerns...ack.
vyre43 1 year ago
Will people just stop raping a once beautiful film? (which by the way has almost nothing to do with the original novel?)
bloodySunday77 1 year ago
Glad this didn't make it in.
rbatty90210 1 year ago
People dont seem to get that the fact that Deckard might be a replicant has to remain a question.
Anyone that says "Yes; Deckard is a Replicant, I've personally unsolved the mystery of Blade Runner" obviously have no clue and should stop from watching any form of intelligent movies.
This movie is ambiguity, it is why it became a classic, and that its charm has not waned over the years: because it remains an enigma.
Questions are often more beautiful than their answers .
Gargantua606 1 year ago 3
@Gargantua606 Ridley Scott says he is..Tyrell is also..
Gloomshadow1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Gargantua606
"... that Deckard might be a replicant has to remain a question."
Well said, Gargantua.
The meaning of this story isn't found in the answer to that question...
The meaning of this story is found in the question itself.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
This scene is too bright compared to the other ones and that guy wrapped up in plastic is probably trying to fart and talk simontaneously.
realjap3 1 year ago
I can miss this one just fine
TheBilly 1 year ago
Thank goodness Captain Exposition was cut from the film, haha
chasingpaganini 1 year ago 2
@chasingpaganini hahaha. Captain Exposition hahahahahaha. yours was the comment I was looking for hahahahahaha.
lensjockeyvideo 1 year ago
all i understood is skin-job
emperror333 1 year ago 2
I liked it I don't care what I r=ead that you commented on and read
chuckyduck87 1 year ago
Resolutions like this should be forbidden from uploading to YouTube
JoseWanKenobi 1 year ago
@JoseWanKenobi And with this sound quality.
matifachal 1 year ago
Glad they didn't keep this scene in the movie, the video quality is just too poor.
hughtub 1 year ago
@hughtub The video quality is bad because it's either a bad download or the scene wasn't ever treated or developed to its full standard or whatever it is they do.
Kr8mer 1 year ago
One of my top 5 favorite movies. My favorite scifi of all time
Deader87 1 year ago
Gracias a Dios la borraron.
VIDEOSUBNORMAL 1 year ago
That guy's bad acting always ruined the opening scene for me. This is even worse.
lactoseme 1 year ago
Thanks for uploading even in this bad quality. My brother actually has the boxed set, but I'd have to really kiss up to him, before he would ever let me view any of it lol.
WoodRatGirl 1 year ago
Really there is no DEFINITE proof about Deckard being a Replicant. Like has been said previously, it's up to the viewer. Also Ridley Scott's statement about Deckard is his opinion. Everything in the movie is a SUGGESTION about Deckard either way.
It is kind of bothersome that Scott says if you don't think D is a replicant the person is a MORON. Also the clues that say that D is a Replicant are only clues. There's no dialog saying YOU ARE A REPLICANT. Whatever you think is right.
chopsnslams 1 year ago
@chopsnslams Wrong. There is proof. In a scene in is apartment he is shown to have the same eye reflection that all the replicants have. Also, Ridley Scott has made it clear that deckard is a replicant. The film makes more sense, is deeper, and more layered with Deckard as replicant. Apparently this is a threat to many people, though....I'm not sure why.
rdecredico 1 year ago
@rdecredico bescause its a retarded theory... If Deckard is a replicant he's a pretty poor make since he nearly died everytime he went up agaisnt a replicant. The fact that you know he's a human going up agaisnt these stronger and smarter replicants is what makes the movie more suspenseful and enjoyable..
Andronicus57 1 year ago
@Andronicus57
twat.... perhaps his imperfections are what makes him a more advanced replicant. or the fact that roy batty was designed for combat? what was each of their purposes? and had they outgrown them? had they evolved? DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP?
weekevypeepants 1 year ago
@Andronicus57 Ridley Scott says he is Nexus 7 or 8..he is a replicant and so Is Tyrell..Roy was supposed to find this out and he was supposed to discover the real Tyrell was dead but frozen so he could one day be brought back to life..
Gloomshadow1 1 year ago
@Gloomshadow1 where do you get this information from?
sinoftam 1 year ago
@sinoftam you can see ridley scott talking about it here on youtube ..its from a special edition blade runner DVD. Deckard was a replicant and so was Tyrell..the whole purpose of the tyrell corp was to eventually figure out how to cure the real Tyrell and thaw him back out. That was in the original story line as per Scott
Gloomshadow1 1 year ago
@Andronicus57
"he nearly died everytime he went up agaisnt a replicant"
You need a little perspective there:
*Nearly* dying is nowhere near as bad as *actually* dying...
and every replicant who faced off with Deckard *actually* died.
TheHatefulDead 1 year ago
@TheHatefulDead why thanks for showing me the light, all my life I thought that nearly dying was worse th an dying, but thanks to you I now know that dying is worse. But thats not really what I was talking about guy.
Andronicus57 1 year ago
fine this scene was cuted
keffren1 1 year ago
Android*
kolcoglow 1 year ago
It's Dave Holden. Androif hunter which was injured during hunting nexuses 6 (see book)
kolcoglow 1 year ago
awsome
rembrent65 1 year ago
Poop.
1ring2rule3pigs 1 year ago
Hear about hugh arguments for Deckard=replicant in the following video, especially @6:17. Look at this:
Zaranyzerak's Blade Runner Review - Part 4 of 5
pompejio 1 year ago
Deckard was replicant. There is a scene in last director's ver. with paper unicorn made by chinese cop. He knows Decard's dreams, because there were loaded in his brain.
"BR" is about humanity, but in Scott original vision Decard was replicant.
Lark1610 1 year ago
@Lark1610 Gaff also put that piece of Origami to tell Deckard that he was in his apartment and that he forgive the life of Rachel. It,s a kinda sour ending because that would mean that both Deckard and Rachel would end up being hunted down. I dunno the nacionality of Gaff but the actor that played him is american of mexican heritage.
RykoMD 1 year ago
guys, Deckard was NOT replicant, yet whole movie has about lack of difference between humans and replicants. So Deckard was presented as souless bastard, while some replicants were more humans that humans themselves. Read book, and read about Philip K. Dick, so you can dig even deeper - what humans really are? What is consciousness? What if reality is just a dream? Or illusion?
tomakin 1 year ago
Please look at Zaranyzerak's Blade Runner Review - Part 4 of 5
pompejio 1 year ago
@1337huntard YeS He wouLd Be DangErouS... I ThinK The Cops KneW The Whole Time he was A Replicant; ThatS why Hes a BlaDe RunneR... It Takes A RepLiCant 2 KiLL a ReplicanT
TrenTonStackZ 1 year ago
yeah this scene is not necessary - the guy was a prick enough.
bebelehaut 1 year ago
this scene was not necessary.
skitch88 1 year ago
With all of this discussion on whether or not Deckard is a replicant, if its any help, in the book, it is stated clearly that Deckard is human. You could easily point out the differences between the two, but just pointing out in the original vision of the story, Deckard is human.
I HIGHLY recommend, anyone who hasn't already, to read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" by Philip K. Dick, the basis for the film.
RenegadeReplicant 1 year ago
Deckard is a Replicant. Thats why Gaff left an oregami of the Unicorn that Deckard was draming about. They talked about that on the bluray
TrenTonStackZ 1 year ago
ok but why would gaff want to show that he knew deckard was a replicant? would he be dangerous to them if he found out?
1337huntard 1 year ago
Comment removed
TrenTonStackZ 1 year ago
Comment removed
TrenTonStackZ 1 year ago
@TrenTonStackZ
ok then why would gaff let deckard know he was a replicant by leaving that unicorn?
1337huntard 1 year ago
@1337huntard You got TheRe Bro... My GueSS is he Doesnt LiKe HiM & GaFf wanted 2 spite Him By Lettin Him Kno The Truth... I Think Thats Y Deckard RaN away with Rachael, Cuz he Found out tHaT They were The Same
TrenTonStackZ 1 year ago
Well he was killed they took this scene out of the movie so thats what you would think and know...hes dead.
GrilloJ123 1 year ago
It's cause in the book, he wasn't actually killed.
desolatesoul87 1 year ago
I'm glad this scene was deleted. Was quite bad and would've taken away from the movie
crazykiwiguy2007 1 year ago 2
the ICU guy talks too fast -- nobody else talks like that in the film. I don't think any character speaks fast in film noir...off the subject a little, but I love how the asian market lady says "oh...snake".
mharrin5507 1 year ago
I always thought he was killed until I saw this deleted scene.
starwarsrebel2006 2 years ago
deleting was definitely the right call
howboutpete 2 years ago 49
@howboutpete I agree, it took the movie in a different direction and would need its own plot, making the movie longer and confusing. The released version is the best and although I have the director's cut, I still like the play by with Ford's voice explaining things in the first release.
dragongoff 1 year ago
@howboutpete What.
CaptainVideo890 1 year ago
doing a "man's job"? are you kidding?
seriously ambiguous. is probably a simple
fragment of another long forgotten & unused
(in the americas) english (among others i
imagine) proverb and means just what
it states
FasterThanSoup 2 years ago
I don't think it was a throw away line. Gaff says and does very little in the film, none of it is actually trivial. If he thinks Deckard is a replicant, doing the bidding of men, then "doing a man's job" is not a compliment, which it would normally be in English.
jimbobeire 2 years ago
@FasterThanSoup it's meant to be ironic- he did a 'mans job' despite being a replicant. It fogs the line between what is considered human and what isn't.
vyre43 1 year ago
@vyre43 thanks, caught that perspective. just found it painfully obvious & unchallenging. if everyone is a replicant i find myself not caring, just dont have enough emotional investment & cant drum-up anymore. the replicants with real human emotions are hunted & killed, deckard (the most "unhuman" replicant is the last "man" standing & reignites hope (along w/buddy skin job rachel) of being more human. got it. bsg did a much better job but, had the advantage of a longer format
FasterThanSoup 1 year ago
a man's home is his castle
a man's man
never send a woman to do a man's job
the movie w/o this and "that car
scene" are more elegant. it seems like a
very hamfisted effort and is quite insulting
scott was right about the narration and the
car but, not this
FasterThanSoup 2 years ago
whether deckard is a replicant or not is merely up to the viewer's to decide, there is evidence to suggest he is and isn't.
Personally I thought he was, gaff was the pupet master.
hardgayramen4ever 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm looking for participants to take part in a university study of Blade Runner. Please just visit my profile for more info. Thanks!
filmresearch2010 2 years ago
I think we see the reason it was cut. The sick guy was dying in the seen. And he looked like he was hurt, too.
As far as interpretation goes, there is the movie and then the book. I think the book is really an examination of 'Does Mass Empathy Create God?' as opposed to 'Mass Consciousness'. The 'Mercer Deus Ex Machina in the stairwell' should tell you this.
Philip K. Dick was very much into examining theological questions and themes. Just look at his book 'Valis'. And much of his other work.
theshowmecanuck 2 years ago
@theshowmecanuck
book was before movie
DaJaeff 2 years ago
I dunno, kind of missable. Thanks for upload though.
donnyRandom 2 years ago 9
You now realize Blade Runner and Alien are set in the same universe.
scr4pp7 2 years ago
Syd Mead worked on both Blade Runner and Aliens.
jimbobeire 2 years ago
This scene didn't really contribute to the film, kind of redundant.
As to whether Deckard was a Replicant or not, that's an extra added " Easter Egg " to be debated about as long as this film is in existence.
And GOD HELP ANYONE who tries to make a " new, revised " version of this classic, like has been attempted with other science fiction classics !!
knoxvilleguy2 2 years ago 4
@knoxvilleguy2 remakes...challenging...what about "the thing"?
loved that flick. maybe a prequel? but, ya youre right - good luck w/the classics
FasterThanSoup 1 year ago
@FasterThanSoup - Some classics, like " 2001 " or the " Alien " movies, should NOT be TOUCHED upon pain of being simultaneously beheaded & disemboweled by a spastic samurai w / a rusty sword.
" The thing " - I'll have to rent a copy & re - watch it.
knoxvilleguy2 1 year ago
@knoxvilleguy2 hehe, i was just being a douche-clown about "the thing". i kinda liked carpenter's remake versus the somewhat campy but lovable original but, im wouldnt call it a classic. different times - maybe people could say the same of carpenter's today i suppose. douche-clown...i like that one. gonna have to workshop it this week, along w/spastic samurai (all credit will be given when i drop it at work)
FasterThanSoup 1 year ago
@FasterThanSoup - I predict that being disemboweled & / or beheaded by a spastic samurai will become a new Internet meme. All I ask is to be immortalized through its usage. Asking for future royalties from its use w / be a helluva tricky proposition..... ;~) Like a Cylon Centurion doing a circumcision. ;~)
knoxvilleguy2 1 year ago
In reply to everything here, all your arguments are moot: Deckard is either a replicant (slave) or a human in an environment which enslaves him.
The point is: "Terrible thing to live in fear...that is what it means to be a slave."
In other words, the world is built for people to be slaves in this film. The difference is one of degrees and classifications. Even Bryant and all the cops are enslaved. The film just states it in allegorical terms.
jfulbright 2 years ago 4
That could work, but my take on it was somewhat different. Remember, when Batty says, "Quite an expereince to live in fear, isn't it?...That's what it means to be a slave," he's talking to Deckard as he's hanging on for his life, scared that he's going to die (scared of running from Batty, too). Batty was trying to prove a point, to get Deckard to see life from his vantage point...and he felt his point had been proven, which is why he saved Deckard (well, one of the reasons, anyway).
TheShockMaster 2 years ago
The mistake most of you make is that the story of the movie and the book are the same. The movie script is based on a script of a script and then heavily edited several times. The movie and the book are only very loosely related with the movie being more inspired rather than based on PKD's work.
The movie interpretation differs with each version, the Final Cut clearly demonstrates that Deckard is a replicant or at the very least that the police have an intimate knowledge of his memories.
chukmaty 2 years ago 2
How did you get this?
converseme0 2 years ago
redundant scene, glad they cut it
shimonkarmel 2 years ago 2
I'm glad it wasn't used in the film. Completely different tonality than the rest. Almost kind of bad..lol.
Great curiosity, thanks for uploading!
fundy76 2 years ago 28
@fundy76 like tears in rain?
zephyrico238 1 year ago
Guys, the people posting about the "Is Deckard a replicant?" question evidently got it more than you did.
If you believe it's obvious one way or the other, then you've failed to appreciate the ambiguity that was deliberately built into the story.
Although, to be fair, from what I remember the movie was much less ambiguous than the book.
bdig7 2 years ago 2
Ridley Scott revealed that Deckard is indeed a Replicant
odenskrigare 2 years ago
That's irrelevant. Ridley Scott can't "reveal" anything, he's not Philip K. Dick. (though he is a great director!)
bdig7 2 years ago 3
but philip k dick says he is not. who do we believe?
mundof1 2 years ago
@mundof1 Believe what you want. After all, if you follow the creators, are you nothing but a slave too? ;)
And you, and you, are but a thought.
mrmattw95 2 years ago
According to the source material, they are androids. And thank you for sharing this clip. This explains the one replicant that is never explained away as missing if you do the math according to the movie. One is not accounted for. Thanks a bunch for this!
mval44 2 years ago
This seen was pretty much included in the game of Blade Runner by Westwood Studios. Well, not exactly this seen maybe but something similar to it. Cool...
Fakatkafa 2 years ago
wow! never new this clip existed. Thanks for uploading.
rumrunner777 2 years ago 2
i think the guys name is holdon or something like that.
xXiglowinthedarkXx 2 years ago
it is
dazza5266 2 years ago
So are Replicants robots,androids or clones?Sebastian claims to be a genetic engineer.Also note the conversation between Roy and Tyrell.Nanotechnology perhaps?
gammafoxtrot 2 years ago
they're androids i believe.
xXiglowinthedarkXx 2 years ago 2
The Replicants are genetically engineered humans. J F Sebastian was one of the designers
therealmarcus 2 years ago
I can't believe the "Is Deckard a replicant?" debate is still going on. Did you guys not see the unicorn?
Lesia44 2 years ago
the unicorn could easily mean something
else without scott inserting deckard's dream
sequence in.
unicorns are a symbol of wealth and
prosperity.
all the other "hints" up until gaff origami
unicorn could have went either way....if
you were looking for it
FasterThanSoup 2 years ago
@FasterThanSoup... only that it doesn't. i mean, just how cheesy & pathetic would it be when gaff would leave an origami unicorn to wish deckard "wealth and prosperity" or something like that... in BR, the unicorn simply stands as a mythical being that can be dreamed... or even genetically designed? huuh? geddit?
dumpsky 2 years ago
cheese factor? i respectfully disagree
& im not the only one one here that felt it could
have served a dual purpose. is it really so
hard to accept that gaff was also giving the
nod to both deckard & rachel, as if to say "you
wont be hunted, even though everyone else
knows what you both are - merry xmas!"?
wasnt that one of deckard's fears & motivation
for returning to her apt?
FasterThanSoup 2 years ago
hey, on that note. in the theatrical release was
the origami in there w/o the reverie? what, if
anything would that mean (assuming this is
what happened, getting old - cant remember)
FasterThanSoup 2 years ago
FasterThanSoup 2 years ago
...sorry if my posts are out of order. im clearly
a chatterbug and im not sure whether to paste
top/down or bottom/up....
FasterThanSoup 2 years ago
glad it was cut
danielmurray04 2 years ago
roy batty always thought deckard was human because he says to him. " ive seen things you people wouldnt believe" although it would have been nice if roy did know at the end. just a little glitter in the eyes to show he knew. then again he might of. lol anyway absolutly flawless film. so glad ridley scott released this amazing 5 disc set.
1988martin 2 years ago 2
If Deckard is a replicant, then this means they are now using replicants to hunt their own down now.
PsychopathInFoil 2 years ago
Why not? Has been done before. Get the expendable underclass to do the dirty work.
jimbobeire