It's unambiguous that Blade Runner is a terrible film.
Haven't seen it for a few years, but I thought it glossed over issue, in contrast with the book?
( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Thu 6 Jun 2013, 16:38, 3 replies)

Scott confirmed, 25 years after the movie's release, that Deckard was a replicant all along
www.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/movies/30kapl.html?_r=2&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Thu 6 Jun 2013, 16:56, closed)

Only in his shitty, narrativeless, Director's Cunt.
In the REAL film, he's human.
( stuj (^(^;;^)^) GO TEAM SPIDERS!(^(^;;^)^), Thu 6 Jun 2013, 19:34, closed)

If I remember correctly, the 'deckard is a replicant' thing is an internet fan wank that got shoehorned in after the fact.
(cs1ca, Thu 6 Jun 2013, 21:18, closed)

It's been so long since I've read it that I can't remember, I liked the book better but I still think the film was great, especially as a technical achievement for when it was made.
(Shamelesspendant Better dead then smeg., Thu 6 Jun 2013, 17:06, closed)

I think the film is excellent too, and I usually think pretty much everything ever is utter toss.
I put it to YOU, Monster Munch poster from the Internet, that there is a very real possibility that the problem, if indeed there is one, lies not in fact with the film 'Blade Runner' starring Harrison Ford, but with you yourself.

Please consider this message as indication that I, Monty Boyce, also of the Internet, am both ANGRY and UPSET at the internet at this juncture.

Thank you for your time.
( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Thu 6 Jun 2013, 17:31, closed)