Forum

1. Fenhorn, thank you for using the military designations for different types of handguns.

2. Of course a Colonial Marine M-41A pulse rifle isn't just a dressed up Tommygun. This is diegetically shown in the film in a couple of scenes. Scott and Villeneuve weren't as concerned with explaining technical details so we are left to guess.

The weapon looks the way it looks because the prop-makers wanted to have a weapon that had a futuristic look and at the same time a retro-look and that also could shoot blanks. That is the reason it had some steyr parts and some .44 revolver parts and some extra things on top of that that just look cool.

Thank you for the succinct summary of my earlier posts!

However...

They didn't try to hide anything. If they really wanted to hide it, they would have used a pistol and not a revolver and then put some extra things on it to make it look futuristic.

...doesn't really add up.

Look at the pics of the replica I posted in the OP. Or the film you yourself posted to, if you prefer. Do you actually see any recognisable revolver parts anywhere? A cylinder? A hammer? Anything?

No?

Wouldn't one actually have to say that — for "not trying" to — they did, in fact, succeed in hiding it away quite thoroughly?

In fact, you see less — as in, a hell of a lot less — of the Bulldog in the Blaster than you can see, e.g., of the M1A1 in the Pulse Rifle, the MG42 in the Smartgun, or the L2A3 in the Stormtrooper blaster, which is about 95% bare. The only uncovered Bulldog parts are (a) one trigger [essential for operating the prop], (b) the cylinder release [also essential for prop operation], and (c) the few square cm of barrel not covered by Steyr parts.

In fact, it's the exact opposite: choosing a revolver instead of a pistol is itself a vital part of being able to hide the pyrotechnical mechanism! With a pistol, you'd need to contend with the grip magazine, the movement of the slide, and not to mention: ejecting shell casings — a dead giveaway to mark it as a contemporary weapon (unless you can obscure them in murky lighting, as they do in ALIENS).
With a revolver, you can integrate it deep into the prop, put greeblies over all the identifiable parts (as they did), even completely re-shape the grips (as they also did), and still have it able to fire the blanks — now looking a proper, futuristic weapon of some properly arcane futuristic functionality.

The thing is: the "some extra things on top just to look cool" stuff are all just greeblies on the prop, sure — but they're real parts of the in-world weapon!
They, and their functionality on the "real" weapon, would need to be rationalised. For the weapon in the game, they aren't just "extra things on top" — they have a real functionality. Of some kind.

So yeah, kudos for Ligan's research for finding out that the gun is "really" a revolver. Well done; good job. Applause. Much rejoicing. All that.
But just because they found out that the prop is built that way — why does that necessitate that's what the in-world weapon should be, too?

If anything, it's far more in keeping with the Film Noir stylistic choices.

Isn't the quintessential Film Noir handgun a Colt Government?

2. Of course a Colonial Marine M-41A pulse rifle isn't just a dressed up Tommygun. This is diegetically shown in the film in a couple of scenes. Scott and Villeneuve weren't as concerned with explaining technical details so we are left to guess.

Precisely the point I've been struggling to communicate, here: an on-set prop weapon's construction and functionality differs from the in-world weapon's functionality.

A point that seems to have become lost in this game, though.

If anything, it's far more in keeping with the Film Noir stylistic choices.

Isn't the quintessential Film Noir handgun a Colt Government?

I tend to picture something like the Colt Detective first.
I guess there's representation for both revolvers and automatics out there.

Precisely the point I've been struggling to communicate, here: an on-set prop weapon's construction and functionality differs from the in-world weapon's functionality.

A point that seems to have become lost in this game, though.

I think it's too early to tell.
The blast pistol seems to have quite a following with people willing to pay substantial amounts for a replica.

https://youtu.be/Qj8bVAwvkwg

If you're willing to part with around $1,000 for a replica prop, are you imagining it just as the prop, or does it cross the line into a relic of the setting?

I do agree that in-world functionality doesn't have to be based on the practicalities of prop construction.
At the same time there doesn't seem to be anything that says it has to be different.

They wanted a revolver because it fitted the character, that was the look they where after. A classic detective look. They added some other things it to make it look like a future weapon, things that didn't have any apparent purpose other than to make it look big, powerful, a bit unique and like something from the future. They didn't have to explain how this work, what everything was, why there are two triggers and so on. It is a sci-fi looking revolver. If FL would change that, a whole lot of people would wonder why (and also the weapon would no longer be the Blade Runner Blaster).

I would be tempted to keep the internal 5 round cylinder, even though it's partially obscured so it makes speed loading impossible.
Most props seem to have the aiming sight fixed directly onto this so it's not as if the whole cylinder can be exchanged.
There would of course be a variety of rounds that could be loaded, maybe the aiming sight LED colour depends on the current round chambered.
Green = Standard
Orange = Hollow Point
Red = Explosive
Blue = Armour Piercing

The cylinder-release is a thumb selector that lets you cycle the chamber without firing

The Steyr-Mannlicher receiver part is a single shot, loading and ejection through the same port, cycled with the bolt lever, and activated by the second trigger.
It's calibre is smaller, so reflects different ammo.
The lack of appreciable barrel maybe suggests accuracy is an issue.
Maybe self contained gas discharged rounds focused on utility (flare, tracer) or non-lethal (taser, tranquilliser) might fit the bill.

The boxlike device with red LEDs under the main barrel could potentially be part of the targeting system, linked to the side bar 'aim sight' device.
I picture a very low power laser that projects the aiming information directly into the eye when lined up.
Or, it could also impart some level of stabilisation, aim assistance.

This is the interesting bit. Back then, they just build a prop-gun that looked cool and big. Even though some of the things have been retconned since then, FL (and that fanatic setting writer) may have to do some work themselves.

Regarding speedloading. In the Adam Savage clip above, it looks like the magazine can be speedloaded.

2. Of course a Colonial Marine M-41A pulse rifle isn't just a dressed up Tommygun. This is diegetically shown in the film in a couple of scenes. Scott and Villeneuve weren't as concerned with explaining technical details so we are left to guess.

Precisely the point I've been struggling to communicate, here: an on-set prop weapon's construction and functionality differs from the in-world weapon's functionality.

A point that seems to have become lost in this game, though.

Michael Biehn and William Hope's lines diegetically define the capabilities of the M-41A. Blade Runner lacks such dialog. We know what an M-41A is supposed to be, we can only infer things about Deckard's gun. All we know about the thing in-world (based solely on the film) is that it makes a bass report and large, Hollywood exit wounds.