[movie] Blade Runner 2049

[Holman]

WOW. I went to BR2049 this afternoon, the first time I've seen a theatrical release by myself since something like 1992.

I thought it was excellent. There were maybe two or three scenes out of three hours that I felt weren't as good as the rest, but on the whole it's an incredible experience. The world is very fully realized, and the secrets are worth teasing out.

I decided to go alone because a coworker saw it on opening weekend and declared (after I mentioned seeing the original with my boys) that the new movie would be "totally and completely inappropriate" for anyone's kids.

Call me a monster, but I can't agree at all. There is significant fist/knife/gun violence, but it's on a par with nearly every other action movie of the past 20 years. There are boobs, but the sexual content is (apart from a one-second suggestion of prostitution overheard behind opaque walls) pretty restrained and even tasteful.

[naednek]

WHY do people think the more money a movie makes means it's a good or bad movie?
What's a great movie to one person is another person's shitty movie. It's all opinion.

When was that ever said? I'm assuming you're basing this off my post... I said not a good start. Never said anything about the movie...

[Holman]

On Deckard's status and possible retcon issues:

Spoiler:

I've always assumed that Deckard-is-a-Replicant is canon, but what BR2049 adds/retcons is the foundational plot point that Deckard and Rachael were designed and intended to be (for lack of a better word) breeders.

That's interesting as hell, but it also opens up some plot issues that need to be papered over. For instance, why was the very-important-to-Tyrell Deckard replicant working a dangerous Blade Runner job rather than living life inside the safer and more secure Tyrell organization?

The point is made at the movie's opening that the new model Replicants are made to obey. So how come they don't? Or are the Replicant Revolutionaries we see at the end all Nexus 7s or 8s?

Were Deckard and Rachel the only ones capable of reproducing? If so, that doesn't give much hope to the Replicant Revolutionaries hoping to carve out an independent future for themselves. If not, why is Deckard's child so uniquely important for Wallace to find?

(If Deckard's daughter is the only Replicant who can reproduce, who is she going to do it with? Is the implication a human-replicant hybrid future?)

I suppose the necessity of making all this a mystery is what gives rise to the extremely convenient backstory of the Blackout and Tyrell's replacement by Wallace.

[Alefroth]

On Deckard's status and possible retcon issues:

Spoiler:

I've always assumed that Deckard-is-a-Replicant is canon, but what BR2049 adds/retcons is the foundational plot point that Deckard and Rachael were designed and intended to be (for lack of a better word) breeders.

That's interesting as hell, but it also opens up some plot issues that need to be papered over. For instance, why was the very-important-to-Tyrell Deckard replicant working a dangerous Blade Runner job rather than living life inside the safer and more secure Tyrell organization?

The point is made at the movie's opening that the new model Replicants are made to obey. So how come they don't? Or are the Replicant Revolutionaries we see at the end all Nexus 7s or 8s?

Were Deckard and Rachel the only ones capable of reproducing? If so, that doesn't give much hope to the Replicant Revolutionaries hoping to carve out an independent future for themselves. If not, why is Deckard's child so uniquely important for Wallace to find?

(If Deckard's daughter is the only Replicant who can reproduce, who is she going to do it with? Is the implication a human-replicant hybrid future?)

I suppose the necessity of making all this a mystery is what gives rise to the extremely convenient backstory of the Blackout and Tyrell's replacement by Wallace.

Spoiler:

Would Deckard and Rachel's daughter be a Replicant? She's a biological offspring, not bio engineered.

[Holman]

On Deckard's status and possible retcon issues:

Spoiler:

I've always assumed that Deckard-is-a-Replicant is canon, but what BR2049 adds/retcons is the foundational plot point that Deckard and Rachael were designed and intended to be (for lack of a better word) breeders.

That's interesting as hell, but it also opens up some plot issues that need to be papered over. For instance, why was the very-important-to-Tyrell Deckard replicant working a dangerous Blade Runner job rather than living life inside the safer and more secure Tyrell organization?

The point is made at the movie's opening that the new model Replicants are made to obey. So how come they don't? Or are the Replicant Revolutionaries we see at the end all Nexus 7s or 8s?

Were Deckard and Rachel the only ones capable of reproducing? If so, that doesn't give much hope to the Replicant Revolutionaries hoping to carve out an independent future for themselves. If not, why is Deckard's child so uniquely important for Wallace to find?

(If Deckard's daughter is the only Replicant who can reproduce, who is she going to do it with? Is the implication a human-replicant hybrid future?)

I suppose the necessity of making all this a mystery is what gives rise to the extremely convenient backstory of the Blackout and Tyrell's replacement by Wallace.

Spoiler:

Would Deckard and Rachel's daughter be a Replicant? She's a biological offspring, not bio engineered.

BR and especially BR2049 strongly imply that being a Replicant is all about genes. There's no mechanical augmentation involved.

At which point the old question returns: aren't Replicants just more perfect humans? Why are Replicants Replicants?

[RuperT]

Yes, a very interesting movie IMO, and by golly Science Fiction.
I saw it Friday night, and attendance was low (non 3D), but the whole cinema was pretty dead, seemed to me. Shame, this is a real beauty on the big screen. I also had enough of the BWAAAAOOO, I wondered at some point if that was the trade off for bitchin' flying cars, their engines occasionally make a sound like a space whale stepping on a Lego.

I think Deckard's human, unicorn be damned. Holman is right on the mundane reasons; why not just have Deckard the Chimneysweep meet Rachel the Snake Scale Engraver, conveniently in the bowels of the ziggurat? Of course, I know that such logic in film is, at best, useless. At worst, no one will watch movies with you.

Spoiler:

I guess Gaff's change of heart would prevent him mentioning to K the snow job they ran on the skin job way back when? He can't have been happy about it. Plus, dreams are not the same as memories! Plus, Deckard's too goddamn miserable all the time not to be human!
However, maybe we ought to consider what Sergeant Jenny knew? She mentions the danger to the "wall" between humans and replicants, and interbreeding seems to me to fit that bill better than replicants independently reproducing.
The uniqueness of the child (or Rachel) is a sticking point, even before you consider that the child has to stay in a bubble (which might be a fake condition, I suppose).
I'm also a bit confused about the new Wallace replicants, the Nexus 9s as represented by Luv. There's a short film with Leto's Wallace where he shows the positronic certainty of the new models by ordering a casual self termination to compel relegalization of replicant tech. Given that K totally rebels against his programming and Luv can only eke out a few tears, I thought K might be a "kept" Nexus 8 that the LAPD heel with the base lining procedures. Wikipedia disagrees.
I'm thinking, like Holman, there's deliberate obfuscation to the recent past, specifically the Nexus 8s, and more so their similarities to Nexus 7s (Rachel and maybe Deckard).
Cool stuff around the robot love triangle for the armchair nihilist. I appreciate Gosling's soft touch as an extremely lifelike object, while I wouldn't have minded even less Ford. Kinda like Star Wars 7 in that way, actually.
Maybe the next film will be a lighthearted romp where Deckard is simply the only fertile male replicant, and all the old Nexus 8 cougars are after him across 9 planets! HELP!

[Holman]

[De-spoilered:]

Plus, Deckard's too goddamn miserable all the time not to be human!

Is he miserable? More than anything else, he seems devoid of deep emotion. Perhaps his conditioned memories have set him up to be the perfect hardboiled film-noir detective.

Gosling plays his Replicant detective the same way until a certain point.

[MonkeyFinger]

To Malificent:

Spoiler:

Where does the evidence that Deckard and Rachel are part of a different model line come from? I don't recall that ever being mentioned or alluded to anywhere in BR.

It's made clear in BR2049. Some might call it a retcon, but I think it works.

The only thing that's "made clear" is Rachel. Deckard is still as debatable as ever.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

One question I had that remains unresolved:

Spoiler:

Who left the flower by the tree that lead to the body being found and where did they get the flower since the whole ecosystem is supposedly dead? When I saw the bees in Vegas, I immediately assumed that was a clue that Deckard left the flower (since the bees need flowers and many flowers need bees). But they never actually showed any flowers in Vegas, so maybe not?

[Holman]

One question I had that remains unresolved:

Spoiler:

Who left the flower by the tree that lead to the body being found and where did they get the flower since the whole ecosystem is supposedly dead? When I saw the bees in Vegas, I immediately assumed that was a clue that Deckard left the flower (since the bees need flowers and many flowers need bees). But they never actually showed any flowers in Vegas, so maybe not?

Spoiler:

Didn't Deckard say that he left Rachael before the child was born, and that he never went back? Or am I mis-remembering that?

I assumed that the flower was left by Drax Sapper Morton, the farmer Replicant. We're told that he grows garlic just for himself, so he could probably grow flowers too.

(Is it possible that K actually smells flowers in Morton's place, and Morton only tells him it is garlic? K has never smelled it before, so he might not know, and possibly a Replicant wouldn't make the same distinction between good and bad odors. Later, when he sees the flower, he picks it up and smells it, and only then does he call for the drone to do a scan. He has probably never seen flowers on a grave before, so the mere custom itself wouldn't give him a clue to look.)

Still, it is possible that Deckard brought the flower from his bee colony. (Those bees have to mean something.) Either way, it was still yellow, so the flower was only very recently cut.

The next question is, what was the relationship between Morton and Rachael? Or even between Morton and Deckard? For Deckard to have impregnated Rachael but then left before she gave birth puts all of these characters pretty close to each other. For him to have left only after she died (and for him to know the location of Rachael's grave) means that he and Morton are known to each other.

Why was Morton the caretaker of Rachael's grave?

[Montag]

One question I had that remains unresolved:

Spoiler:

The next question is, what was the relationship between Morton and Rachael? Or even between Morton and Deckard? For Deckard to have impregnated Rachael but then left before she gave birth puts all of these characters pretty close to each other. For him to have left only after she died (and for him to know the location of Rachael's grave) means that he and Morton are known to each other.

Why was Morton the caretaker of Rachael's grave?

Spoiler:

Morton performed the C-section, him being the combat medic and all. I believe he was so moved by the delivery and death of Rachel he felt love and responsibility for Rachel. While it was necessary to save the child, I am inferring he did kill Rachel in the process. This was the miracle he witnessed and partook in.

[Combustible Lemur]

Saw it this afternoon, loved it.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Combustible Lemur]

Regarding Deckard:

Spoiler:

How could he be a Replicant if Replicants had a limited lifespan when Deckard would have been made?
Blade Runner 2049 is 30 years after the original film. Wouldn't a Replicant Deckard be long since dead?

Spoiler:

Rachel and Deckard were both from the model line that were designed to live normal human lifespans. That adherence to making this line so close to humans is pretty much what spawns the entire plot of the movie, really.

'
Wait a minute, how does that fit with:

Spoiler:

Too bad she won't live, but who does?

With Tyrell's secrecy it's unlikely he told the cops (it Olmos's line yes?) that his evolutionary leap illegal replicants had long lifeapans.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Combustible Lemur]

Spoiler:

Replicants are supposed to have superior strength, yet Deckard couldn't free himself from the bonds at the end of the movie. It took a known replicant to do that.

Spoiler:

He also pretty handily got his ass kicked by Roy in the first movie, but Ridley still said he was a replicant. What about the paper unicorn?

*shrug*

Spoiler:

there are difgerent classes of replicants, soldiers, hookers, bladerunners, laborers. Roy was a soldier and the new models are upgraded from the old Deckard classes, hence why Joe was able (maybe) to kill an older model that was a soldier class. I say maybe because they suggest batista's character sacrificed himself to recruit Joe.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Archinerd]

Just got back from seeing it this evening. In short, I loved it.

[Grundbegriff]

Saw it tonight in IMAX 2D. I was prepared for disaster and pleased to find it a worthy successor that makes interesting use of the archetype while contributing new themes and ideas to those already in play.

Spoiler:

The childbirth issue harkens back to Battlestar Galactica's weird treatment of same. Here it's handled better.

Lieutenant Buttercup did a good job. Leto was as creeptastic as expected. Love his zen pond. Gosling was excellent. Great to see familiar faces:

Spoiler:

Lovely that Gaff made an appearance. As for Rachael, the digital necro in this was so much better than in Rogue One, and it was pretty good there.
Here it was spooky.

Product placements are heavily thematized, not only to underwrite the film but also to comment on the practice and to link back to the original. Amusing shout-out to Wall-E. And to the Korova Milk Bar.

Best spoiler overlooked by yours truly but learned at imdb:

Spoiler:

The species of Deckard's whittled critters in Vegas form an acrostic of "Rachael"

Bottom line: If you like the slow, steady pace and extraordinarily rich visuals and art-filminess of the Final Cut, you'll like this. Villeneuve nailed it.

[hitbyambulance]

just saw it tonight. there were some excellent shots and some very good sound design. music was genuinely wondrous at times. i appreciated that the story took its time (relative to a movie's standard running length) and wasn't overly rushed. i also appreciated that not all the foreshadowing hit you over the head, and that Ryan Gosling actually displayed some subtle acting skills. it still came across as competent fanfic - the original *really* didn't need a sequel. anyhow, i think i liked Villaneuve's directorial style and i'm going to seek out _Arrival_ (which i have not seen yet).

i feel like this was setting up for another sequel, since it ended before 'stuff went down'.

[Kraken]

Read a story that said it died at the box office because:

1. Long runtime was a big commitment, especially for young people who aren't familiar with the original;
2. Necessity of seeing the original first adds to the time commitment;
3. The existence of multiple versions of the original confused potential viewers;
4. It's not an action movie, which young viewers expect; and
5. It doesn't fit into a theater's usual scheduling. If they typically slot a film for six two-hour blocks per day, they could only squeeze in four for this film. So 50% fewer screenings.

It's expected to do better overseas, where viewers have longer attention spans and more interest in non-action films.

I will wait for DVD myself due to the long runtime, and because I need to see the original again first, and the DVD is a "very long wait" on netflix.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

Certainly it will add to the experience, but I don't think it's absolutely necessary to see the original film before seeing 2049. My girlfriend had never seen the original but still really enjoyed this one. We just watched a three minute summary of the original on YouTube before heading to the theater.

[hentzau]

Read a story that said it died at the box office because:

1. Long runtime was a big commitment, especially for young people who aren't familiar with the original;
2. Necessity of seeing the original first adds to the time commitment;
3. The existence of multiple versions of the original confused potential viewers;
4. It's not an action movie, which young viewers expect; and
5. It doesn't fit into a theater's usual scheduling. If they typically slot a film for six two-hour blocks per day, they could only squeeze in four for this film. So 50% fewer screenings.

It's expected to do better overseas, where viewers have longer attention spans and more interest in non-action films.

I will wait for DVD myself due to the long runtime, and because I need to see the original again first, and the DVD is a "very long wait" on netflix.

I would just say that this is a movie that needs to be seen on the big screen. I know that term gets thrown out there a lot, but the cinematography on this movie is amazing. As well as the sound design.

[pr0ner]

If Deakins doesn't win the Oscar for cinematography for BR2049, something is terribly wrong.

[Redfive]

If Deakins doesn't win the Oscar for cinematography for BR2049, something is terribly wrong.

Agree, it was really quite spectacular.

[Holman]

Read a story that said it died at the box office because:

1. Long runtime was a big commitment, especially for young people who aren't familiar with the original;
2. Necessity of seeing the original first adds to the time commitment;
3. The existence of multiple versions of the original confused potential viewers;
4. It's not an action movie, which young viewers expect; and
5. It doesn't fit into a theater's usual scheduling. If they typically slot a film for six two-hour blocks per day, they could only squeeze in four for this film. So 50% fewer screenings.

It's expected to do better overseas, where viewers have longer attention spans and more interest in non-action films.

I will wait for DVD myself due to the long runtime, and because I need to see the original again first, and the DVD is a "very long wait" on netflix.

Makes me wish the new Blade Runner had come out with the same production values but as a brief HBO miniseries.

[Anonymous Bosch]

This was likely already mentioned earlier in the thread, but don't forget there are several official Youtube shorts that provide some additional context between the events of the original and the sequel:

• BLADE RUNNER 2049 - "2048: Nowhere to Run" Short
• BLADE RUNNER 2049 - "2036: Nexus Dawn" Short
• BLADE RUNNER 2049 - "Black Out 2022" Anime Short

Saw the IMAX version yesterday, and enjoyed it immensely. I thought it was unequivocally one of the best science fiction films i've seen in years (and well worth watching at the cinema, for the full cinematic and audio experience).

Of course, I'm now left with the real burning question:

Spoiler:

So... is the dog real?

[hitbyambulance]

Of course, I'm now left with the real burning question:

Spoiler:

So... is the dog real?

this reminds me...

Spoiler:

i had a hard time believing that wood would be so valuable. especially where a small wooden horse sculpture was worth enough for a real horse. it seems to be there would still be a lot left, and that the statement of value the dealer gave was purely for shock value, as it throws the value of rarities - such as real animals - out of its proper scale.

[Holman]

Of course, I'm now left with the real burning question:

Spoiler:

So... is the dog real?

this reminds me...

Spoiler:

i had a hard time believing that wood would be so valuable. especially where a small wooden horse sculpture was worth enough for a real horse. it seems to be there would still be a lot left, and that the statement of value the dealer gave was purely for shock value, as it throws the value of rarities - such as real animals - out of its proper scale.

Spoiler:

Yeah, that was strange, especially when so many of the decrepit buildings (such as those seen in the original movie) are surely full of wooden walls and wooden furniture.

One thing that strikes me about both movies is how they've never explicitly mentioned why animals are so rare, although reasons can be guessed. (The novel's explanation is, IIRC, tied to the religion plot that never made it into the movie.)

[Archinerd]

This was likely already mentioned earlier in the thread, but don't forget there are several official Youtube shorts that provide some additional context between the events of the original and the sequel:

• BLADE RUNNER 2049 - "2048: Nowhere to Run" Short
• BLADE RUNNER 2049 - "2036: Nexus Dawn" Short
• BLADE RUNNER 2049 - "Black Out 2022" Anime Short

I watched the first 2 but then I realized that I prefer the ambiguity of what & how we got to the world of 2049. Wish I hadn't seen them but they are easy enough to forget/ignore/pretend and convince myself I never saw them.

[Torfish]

Watched the original Blade Runner last night and then went to the new one this afternoon. Absolutely loved it. A great movie experience. The sounds and visuals were stunning. Ford was great.

[Redfive]

Ford was great.

Spoiler:

Her eyes were green...

[Moliere]

I'm on day 3 of slogging my way through the almost 3 hour runtime. Can the characters talk/walk/move any slower?

[Archinerd]

Slow pacing is part of the lore.

[Jaymann]

Watched the original Blade Runner last night and then went to the new one this afternoon. Absolutely loved it. A great movie experience. The sounds and visuals were stunning. Ford was great.

Were her eyes really green?

[Holman]

Watched the original Blade Runner last night and then went to the new one this afternoon. Absolutely loved it. A great movie experience. The sounds and visuals were stunning. Ford was great.

Were her eyes really green?

Sean Young's eyes are definitely brown, but in the (original) BR scene where Deckard administers the Voight-Kampff test to Rachael, the eye in the machine's screen is green.

BR enthusiasts have debated whether this is intentional or a continuity error.

[Kurth]

Missed this in the theater, but just caught it on demand. Loved it!

Spoiler:

I know this runs counter to Scott and “cannon,” but I still believe Deckard is human and the child is a human/replicant hybrid. There’s enough ambiguity to allow for that, and I just like it better!

[Daehawk]

I also missed it. I missed the first one too though. I just have not watched this one because Im afraid it will ruin stuff from the first one I love. Or my ideas at least. I want the first one to stay as it is.

[Anonymous Bosch]

I also missed it. I missed the first one too though. I just have not watched this one because Im afraid it will ruin stuff from the first one I love. Or my ideas at least. I want the first one to stay as it is.

You definitely missed out; the visuals and sound were outstanding at the cinema. More importantly, I think it easily ranks among the top science fiction movies released in the 21st century. It certainly doesn't ruin anything about the original at all.

[Holman]

And on top of that, BR2049 is basically a love-letter to the original.

[Archinerd]

+1 to what Holman & Anonymous Bosch said.

It really is a great movie despite it's plot holes and Jared Leto. Actually, I think he's fine in this but some people really seem to hate him.

[hitbyambulance]

after some more months of contemplation, i'll rephrase what i originally said - it's tragic that this was a sequel to a film that absolutely did NOT need a sequel and so, as a result, i'll never really be into this one - i do like many other, non-sequel-related things about it. sort of a weird opinion i don't think i've held before. i'll probably watch it again.

[Torfish]

Saw this a second time and still have the same opinion from the first. I loved it and think it is in my top three favorite scfi movies of all time. Watching it in the theater was mind blowing with the enormous sound and visuals. Absolutely love it. Also, enjoyed watching Harrison Ford in this one. Much better performance than his recent Star Wars acting.

Great movie.