Blade Runner 2049 Discussion (SPOILERS!!!)

[JKL2000]

YES!!!

The soundtrack is a really cool combination of electronic drones (mostly low, with considerable energy in the 15-30 Hz octave) mixed with large percussion, industrial noises, various huge metallic banging/booming, and -- mixed way back -- some Tuvan throat singing, Indonesian flute, Gregorian Chant-type singing, a twirly propeller noisemaker (whose name I forgot) and electric piano (closer to Rhodes than Vangelis's flanged piano, but playing some of the same themes). If you cut out the Sinatra and Presley it fits nicely on one CD-R (the official set will be a 2-CD box).

Kind of disappointed they included the Sinatra and Presley - I didn't consider them part of the score, they could be removed the same way something like gunshots would be removed. Even though in the context of the movie those parts were very cool.

[rapidfirerob]

I bought tickets online yesterday, not knowing how poorly it had done up until then. The film is incredible. WideOpenEars and I walked home and discussed it
over and over on the walk. The theater is small, but was fairly well attended. I had trouble catching the dialogue on occasion, not due to my hearing. I'll definitely
rent it when it comes out. My DVR is set to record the Director's Cut of the original Friday. I've only seen the original release. I'm still not 100% convinced Deckard
is a replicant or K died at the end of 2049. It seems they set things up for a sequel, with so many questions. Questions are certainly a good thing! Unless it does better
at the box office, a sequel is unlikely. I'm still hoping for a Man From U.N.C.L.E. sequel. That film broke even eventually, with little PR and going against Mission Impossible
and Straight Outta Compton. BR 2049 is the first film I've seen at the movies in a long time. I enjoy Ryan Gosling in darker roles as well. This was the anti La La Land.

[JKL2000]

I'm still not 100% convinced Deckard
is a replicant

Don't you think the fact he could do so well in hand-to-hand combat vs. K means he IS a replicant?

[hippypants]

Yeah, I think Ridley Scott wanted the enigma of Deckard to be questioned, although I did see a doc saying that him finding a unicorn origami at the end of the original film pretty much confirmed he was a replicant. Plus how else could he live in a radiated environment and how else could he and Rachel have a child.

OP stated some people thought a replicant wouldn't kill another replicant--I don't buy that logic. People kill other people pretty easily.

I think one of the things the movie did well was keep the level of paranoia or guessing up. What were the real memories? Who could you trust? Best to trust no one.

It could be true that the girl in the bubble didn't even have any disability--it was more like a jail or seclusion/control. Either way a lot of those chronic conditions do happen later life. I didn't have any allergy problems until I was getting around 30 ish.

[rapidfirerob]

Don't you think the fact he could do so well in hand-to-hand combat vs. K means he IS a replicant?

Fine point, but not convinced one way or the other.

[hippypants]

So in the new movie he explains “They were hunting us.” Apparently Gaff’s lenience in letting Deckard and Rachel escape was not shared by the rest of the police force? Once he finds out he’s a replicant I guess that means he becomes dangerous? If this is so, why would Gaff clue him into his identity?

Perhaps it was a coincidence and could be he just has respect for him having been a partner. Either way, he's retired now.

Yet there’s a substantial underground colony of escaped replicants, led by the one-eyed woman Freysa (who removed her own eye to avoid detection.) Deckard apparently was never part of this group. He's gone to great lengths to hide in a booby-trapped radioactive city -- while all the other replicants simply live in the sewers?

I don't understand this question. Do you mean why didn't Deckard live in the sewer along with the others? He was always a loner, and also didn't want detection.

Deckard's daughter, Dr. Ana Stelline (the memory creator) -- is she human or replicant? Miraculously born of two 'experimental' replicants (who indeed turn out to be "more human than human"), would she carry the lineage of the human gametes which her parents must have carried? Is that why she's genetically defective, and has no immune system? If she was born, I guess that makes her human (no serial numbers on her)? (I don't buy Lieutenant Joshi's explanation of there being a "soul" but certainly being born would make you not a replicant, wouldn't it? Interesting conjecture...)

The upgraded models were different. They said at the beginning they need them to be able to reproduce themselves to go further to the stars. That would allow generational travel.

The memories that Stelline creates, she can tell real memories from created ones. And yet, when K allows her to peer into his memory of the wooden horse and the orphanage, she doesn't react except to cry a little. If this was a REAL memory, one of her memories, wouldn't she have had a very strong reaction to meeting someone else with her memory?

Maybe unless she gave that memory to many different replicants. But can she tell real memories from false implants? That's one of the things the movie did well--what can you believe?

But if she was raised in an orphanage, what about her immune deficiency? Wouldn't that have manifested earlier than age 7?

Maybe not, this happens in real life: allergies, other conditions.

She says the room she lives in was created for her when her deficiency became apparent. By whom? Her mother was dead, her father had never met her, and she was an inmate in an orphanage.

I assumed it was Niander Wallace/Leto--he seemed to be the one pulling all the strings and cover ups.


Last: At the tail end of the film, when K is fighting the evil replicant bitch Luv while Deckard is chained in the car, she yells to K something like, "You were always the best one." The "best one" what? The better of him and his identical twin sister? I thought at that moment that maybe Luv was his sister. But no, the film went another direction.

The best of the newer Blade Runners? Hard to tell...

Still mulling over so many plotpoints, trying to make sense of it. Will see it again Tuesday.

Same here.

[rcarlberg]

Fine point, but not convinced one way or the other.

That's pretty much by design. Both films afterall are meant to get you thinking about what it means to be human, and whether something artificially created can ever be more deserving of that label than someone who was born.

Also, if I may belabor the obvious a bit, the replicants stand in for various races, religions, orientations and ethnic origins in being treated as less-than-human when they are obviously every bit as capable.

[Nijinsky Hind]

Saw it... Loved it. And even think I get it!

[Nijinsky Hind]

Saw it... Loved it. And even think I get it!

My take...

All of it, even the first movie, are memories in Replicants placed there by Dr. Ana. There are no "Real" children from replicants. Her immune deficiency may be due to the fact that she is the only Human being left and stays in the sealed room for survivals sake. The bad guy (wallace) is blind too which leads me to believe that he too is a replicant. He is the devil in this story.

Dr. Ana has created the world around her just like the birthday parties. A cause and effect takes place in that she now has a parent who has found her... (He thinks).

Dick would love this ending I think.


SHe (Dr Ana) loosely represents God ... Rachel a manufactured Mary. DEckert a sort of manufactured Joseph... K is like Jesus who must sacrificially die... Biblical connections and comparisons abound.

Especially the memories of the "miracle" that the farmer and the one eyed lady believe they have witnessed. Like the apostles.

I need to buy the dvd to see if I can make more connections.

Randan, setline... (Trinity, boat, fish.) Dr. Anna Stelline.
Neander. (999) wallace. (Ennear, ender)

Hollywood loves anagrams. Especially upside down ones.

[hippypants]

Check out Enemy by Villeneuve too. It's another enigma to a degree, plus it has Jake Gyllenhaal in it that does a rather great job in the title role.

Hind: interesting take on the Biblical themes, I hadn't noticed that. However, I'm not sure what you mean by: There are no "Real" children from replicants.

The newer models were supposedly made to reproduce offsprings so that they could help with traveling thru space.

[battema]

Okay, here goes. It’s a given in this movie that Deckard is a replicant. This was a matter of much controversy in 1982, with many people feeling that a replicant would not hunt replicants, and that he couldn’t be a Nexus 6 if he was already retired from the police force. However with the release of the director’s cut in 1992, I thought Ridley Scott explained this quite cleverly. When Voight-Kampffing Rachel at Tyrell, Deckard gives away the clue when he says “How can it not know what it is?” Deckard himself doesn’t know he’s a replicant — until the moment he stumbles across Gaff’s origami unicorn. It is at that moment that he realizes he and Rachel are the same species. All his memories of being an ex-Blade Runner must be implants.

So in the new movie he explains “They were hunting us.” Apparently Gaff’s lenience in letting Deckard and Rachel escape was not shared by the rest of the police force? Once he finds out he’s a replicant I guess that means he becomes dangerous? If this is so, why would Gaff clue him into his identity?

Yet there’s a substantial underground colony of escaped replicants, led by the one-eyed woman Freysa (who removed her own eye to avoid detection.) Deckard apparently was never part of this group. He's gone to great lengths to hide in a booby-trapped radioactive city -- while all the other replicants simply live in the sewers?

Deckard's daughter, Dr. Ana Stelline (the memory creator) -- is she human or replicant? Miraculously born of two 'experimental' replicants (who indeed turn out to be "more human than human"), would she carry the lineage of the human gametes which her parents must have carried? Is that why she's genetically defective, and has no immune system? If she was born, I guess that makes her human (no serial numbers on her)? (I don't buy Lieutenant Joshi's explanation of there being a "soul" but certainly being born would make you not a replicant, wouldn't it? Interesting conjecture...)

The memories that Stelline creates, she can tell real memories from created ones. And yet, when K allows her to peer into his memory of the wooden horse and the orphanage, she doesn't react except to cry a little. If this was a REAL memory, one of her memories, wouldn't she have had a very strong reaction to meeting someone else with her memory?

But if she was raised in an orphanage, what about her immune deficiency? Wouldn't that have manifested earlier than age 7?

She says the room she lives in was created for her when her deficiency became apparent. By whom? Her mother was dead, her father had never met her, and she was an inmate in an orphanage.

When K is looking at the DNA of the replicant baby, he discovers that two identical sets exist, one male and one female (that's bad biology, but nevermind). The records say the girl died and the boy is still alive -- leading him (and the audience) to believe that he might be that missing baby. Later Deckard says he scrambled the records. So maybe the girl didn't die, and K is really the replicant decoy created from Ana's DNA and implanted with her memories.

Last: At the tail end of the film, when K is fighting the evil replicant bitch Luv while Deckard is chained in the car, she yells to K something like, "You were always the best one." The "best one" what? The better of him and his identical twin sister? I thought at that moment that maybe Luv was his sister. But no, the film went another direction.

Still mulling over so many plotpoints, trying to make sense of it. Will see it again Tuesday.

One note (I saw it a second time last night, every bit as good on repeat viewing): to your last point about the fight with Luv, I think she isn't telling K that he was the best one, rather I think she's saying that SHE knew she was the best one. Because on some level that was important to her character (Wallace called her his "best angel" early on when he dispatches her to find the child).

I didn't think it was made as obvious that Deckard is a replicant in this film; in fact, I thought the film went to great pains to avoid committing either way (i.e. the talk between Wallace and Deckard near the end). It's strongly suggested though, that is certain.

There are definitely some things in the plot that I don't quite understand. Very little feels accidental, but I can't quite place some contexts. For example: in the office of the orphanarium, after the owner has fled and K is looking over the book (with torn pages) alone in the room, he stops and deliberately turns an ashtray to look at the butts. I can't for the life of me figure out the significance of that detail.

Another bit that felt a little clunky to me was at the very end, when K says that Deckard drowned out there. It's implied that he's faking Deckard's death somehow, but....how? He's a disgraced/distrusted Blade Runner, and just about anyone who might've vouched for him is dead. No DNA was left behind that I could see...so how exactly did that deception work?

These things aside, I still thought the film was absolutely gorgeous. Some of the scenes were so haunting, like him finding that horse in the furnace...wow. And the sequence against the sea wall was a perfect mix of the right atmosphere, action and music. Everything surged like the waves.

[battema]

Check out Enemy by Villeneuve too. It's another enigma to a degree, plus it has Jake Gyllenhaal in it that does a rather great job in the title role.

Hind: interesting take on the Biblical themes, I hadn't noticed that. However, I'm not sure what you mean by: There are no "Real" children from replicants.

The newer models were supposedly made to reproduce offsprings so that they could help with traveling thru space.

Enemy is a wonderfully surreal film. That one shot of the spider over the cityscape...wow.

And of course, Arrival is beautiful.

[Nijinsky Hind]

Check out Enemy by Villeneuve too. It's another enigma to a degree, plus it has Jake Gyllenhaal in it that does a rather great job in the title role.

Hind: interesting take on the Biblical themes, I hadn't noticed that. However, I'm not sure what you mean by: There are no "Real" children from replicants.

The newer models were supposedly made to reproduce offsprings so that they could help with traveling thru space.

I thought that Neander Wallace Corp was upset because he was unable to duplicate the "miracle" of replicant reproduction that supposedly had happened with deckard and Rachel ? I must have gotten confused somewhere along the line. Isn't it why he killed the replicant female? Because she could not reproduce?

[walt]

A scene that i found touching and powerful was when K's holographic girlfriend melded(?) with the prostitute.

Yeah, i want to see it again.This time i won't order the giant box o' popcorn.Medium size will do just fine.

[Nijinsky Hind]

The holograph chick was much hotter than the hooker... The hooker looked a little like the girl in blade runner 1 to me.

[hippypants]

Here's a question: Once Deckard is captured, they bring out Rachael. Deckard reaction is: She had green eyes (which clearly she didn't). Why?

Hind: You maybe right. So much in that film flows by you, and you have to think to keep up with it, which is one of the things I liked about it. It wasn't just another superehero flick that required no attention.

As far as the cigarettes--the only one I know that smoked was Deckard's old Asian partner. Could that have had something to do with it? Did he fear that they brought him back out of retirement? I don't know.

[Sean]

Saw it. Thought it was pretty good. I don't think that many thoughts were provoked for me though.

[battema]

THINK HARDER

[rcarlberg]

There are definitely some things in the plot that I don't quite understand. Very little feels accidental, but I can't quite place some contexts. For example: in the office of the orphanarium, after the owner has fled and K is looking over the book (with torn pages) alone in the room, he stops and deliberately turns an ashtray to look at the butts. I can't for the life of me figure out the significance of that detail.

One comment I read thought that this indicated Gaff, the only smoker in the film, had removed the pages. What was that logo on the ashtray though?

Here's a question: Once Deckard is captured, they bring out Rachael. Deckard reaction is: She had green eyes (which clearly she didn't). Why?

Deckard was saying the original Rachel had green eyes. They muffed the replica by giving it brown eyes.

[hippypants]

I understand that Deckard said she had green eyes, but she "Did" have brown eyes. You can look back at the original movie, Sean Young has brown eyes. So why did he deny it?

[wideopenears]

As RapidfireRob noted, we saw this beautiful thing. We loved it. I want to see it again.
Not sure K has expired. Many other points still being pondered in my noggin.

One dimension of this film that really has me thinking, and that no one here has really highlighted, is the dimension of AI, and the degrees in which it is demonstrated in the film. From K/Joe's projected GF who becomes portable (thanks to that nifty little Apple-designed "Emanator," LOL) until she's "crushed"--to Skyscraper-tall holographic hotties who have personal convos with K, and who may in fact be the same "program" as the GF --both of which, IMO, could signal a surveillance mechanism, by the way--to the replicants themselves.....what does it mean to be "intelligent" or even "Conscious?" To have a "Soul," so to speak? Deckard "Knows What is Real." Is he? Does he? Do we?

[hippypants]

I understand that Deckard said she had green eyes, but she "Did" have brown eyes. You can look back at the original movie, Sean Young has brown eyes. So why did he deny it?

This actually could fold into Nijinsky Hind's theory about using Biblical theology--the denial of Peter when asked about Christ.

[JKL2000]

That's pretty much by design. Both films afterall are meant to get you thinking about what it means to be human, and whether something artificially created can ever be more deserving of that label than someone who was born.

Yes, that made it a pretty rewarding experience, more than a lot of films can muster. Along with great visuals and aurals - win!

[rapidfirerob]

Was K's girlfriend telling him what he wanted to hear all along, as she was programmed to do so, or did she actually
have feelings and really love K? I believe this is another question that doesn't have an answer.

[rcarlberg]

Was K's girlfriend telling him what he wanted to hear all along, as she was programmed to do so, or did she actually have feelings and really love K? I believe this is another question that doesn't have an answer.

I agree. As a hologram -- glitchy, see-thru hologram -- she would seem to be incapable of love but she certainly could've been programmed to "simulate" love much as the replicants were programmed to simulate human beings. What is real, and what is an illusion? In a land where everything is fake, the level of "realness" becomes relative.