[movie] Blade Runner 2049

killbot737 · Post by **killbot737** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 10:41 am

Spoiler:

I hope they don't CGI the shit out of him to make him look young like they did to the Dude in Tron 2. That was way down the uncanny valley. It made sense there, though, since it was a computer simulation.

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Fri Feb 27, 2015 11:48 am

killbot737 wrote:
Spoiler:
I thought Decker was a replicant, so how can he show up in this movie as an old man?

Spoiler:

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Thu Oct 15, 2015 6:27 pm

Hey, I have a question about Blade Runner (the original).

Can someone list for me a few scenes/details that are exact or almost exact echoes of other films? I'm in a discussion somewhere else about this, and I'm trying to put my finger on details.

Take, for example, the scene where Capt. Bryant is first showing Deckard the faces of the escaped Replicants. They're sitting in a darkened room with what amounts to a movie projector behind them. I know that this is a direct echo of another scene in a classic film, but I can't remember which. Can someone tell me?

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Mon Nov 16, 2015 3:29 pm

Ryan Gosling

Gosling was pretty tight-lipped about the whole affair. He said that the participation of Villeneuve and Deakins encouraged him to sign on along with the script, but joked “there’s a chip in me and if I say anything more I’ll explode if I say anything else.” However, he did add that it’s the next film he’s planning to shoot.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Jan 08, 2016 1:02 pm

Biyobi · Post by **Biyobi** » Fri Jan 08, 2016 1:13 pm

I'm much more looking forward to Pris' incept date next month. /giggity

Redfive · Post by **Redfive** » Fri Jan 08, 2016 3:03 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:

We better get cracking with the tech breakthroughs. We only have a couple years for him to get to the Shoulder of Orion and the Tannhauser Gate.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Fri Jan 08, 2016 3:06 pm

Redfive wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:
We better get cracking with the tech breakthroughs. We only have a couple years for him to get to the Should of Orion and the Tannhauser Gate.

What did we blow the free techs on for the Internet Breakthrough? Communicators? How in the world did we not choose sex robots?

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Jan 08, 2016 3:11 pm

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Thu Feb 18, 2016 2:57 pm

January 12th, 2018

The North American release date was announced this morning, a few months ahead of the production's planned start date. Shooting is scheduled to begin in July, with Denis Villeneuve — of the well received Sicario — directing based on a script by Hampton Fancher, with story ideas coming from original film director Ridley Scott. The sequel is supposed to pick up several decades after the original. Ryan Gosling will star, but given that Harrison Ford is also on board to reprise his role as Deckard, this sequel will necessarily shed some light on the original's ending.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Thu Feb 18, 2016 3:01 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:
this sequel will necessarily shed some light on the original's ending.

No no no no no no no no

Why would you do that? That's totally anti what makes PKD made into movies great. While we're at it, let's make Kafka more real and less about abstract and stop the author from engaging the reader in Kundera.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Wed Apr 20, 2016 9:02 pm

Release has been moved up a bit.

Remus West · Post by **Remus West** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 11:22 am

ImLawBoy wrote:
killbot737 wrote:
Spoiler:
I thought Decker was a replicant, so how can he show up in this movie as an old man?

Spoiler:
I assumed he was a replicant that they didn't give an artificially short life to.

Spoiler:

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 11:30 am

Remus West wrote:
Spoiler:
I must be misremembering the movie because I thought Deckard was human and his girlfriend at the end was the replicant.

Are we really spoilering a movie from 1982?

Spoiler:

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 11:37 am

If I'm not mistaken, there's even a third version that was released on the anniversary or something. I got the latest blu ray edition for Christmas, but I've yet to watch it.

dbt1949 · Post by **dbt1949** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:28 pm

After having seen Harrison Ford in the latest Star Wars movie I never want to see him reprise any of his roles ever again.

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Fri Apr 22, 2016 1:12 am

LordMortis wrote:
Remus West wrote:
Spoiler:
I must be misremembering the movie because I thought Deckard was human and his girlfriend at the end was the replicant.
Are we really spoilering a movie from 1982?

Spoiler:
It depends on which version you remember. In the original theatrical release, far superior version, with Ford's voice over. You had vague allusion by Olmos that Deckard was replicant, planting the seed of doubt and nothing more. In the ucky director's cut later released with no film noir over dub Deckard was revealed as replicant largely through dream sequences of unicorns that were described as implanted memories. Olmos no longer gives vauge allusions. He leaves the matchstick unicorn as a warning.

The original theatrical release with Ford's voice over was a travesty, and all of your opinions on this movie are hereforth invalidated.

Remus West wrote:
ImLawBoy wrote:
killbot737 wrote:
Spoiler:
I thought Decker was a replicant, so how can he show up in this movie as an old man?

Spoiler:
I assumed he was a replicant that they didn't give an artificially short life to.

Spoiler:
I must be misremembering the movie because I thought Deckard was human and his girlfriend at the end was the replicant.

Spoiler:

hepcat wrote:If I'm not mistaken, there's even a third version that was released on the anniversary or something. I got the latest blu ray edition for Christmas, but I've yet to watch it.

I got the deluxe box set for Christmas a few years ago. It has the theatrical release (which, as has been clearly stated, is a travesty), the far superior director's cut, and the third version, and I honestly can't even remember the difference there. It comes in a cool briefcase, though.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Fri Apr 22, 2016 1:35 am

Final Cut was the other version.

The biggest difference is the unicorn scene is 8 seconds longer.

There are numerous differences though including 6 more seconds in Pris's crotch.

http://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=4589

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Fri Apr 22, 2016 9:05 am

ImLawBoy wrote:The original theatrical release with Ford's voice over was a travesty, and all of your opinions on this movie are hereforth invalidated.

And yet somehow the movies was HUGE for decades before they denied the superior version existed.

You like the Star Wars updates as well, don't you?

Spoiler:
She was a replicant, but the movie was deliberately vague about whether Ford's character was also a replicant. It was never explicitly stated, but it was pretty clearly implied

Spoiler:

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Thu Oct 06, 2016 5:42 pm

Blade Runner 2049

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Thu Oct 06, 2016 8:01 pm

Im one of those weirdos that liked Roy and felt very sad for him at the end.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Thu Oct 06, 2016 8:50 pm

Oh, I think everyone likes Roy. First he's Satan, then he's Adam.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Thu Oct 06, 2016 9:21 pm

Roy Batty is everyone's favorite after that final speech in the film. He goes from villain to victim in the space of 2 minutes. Truly one of the greatest movie speeches of all time.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Thu Oct 06, 2016 9:31 pm

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears...in...rain. Time to die.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Thu Oct 06, 2016 9:32 pm

hepcat wrote:Roy Batty is everyone's favorite after that final speech in the film. He goes from villain to victim in the space of 2 minutes. Truly one of the greatest movie speeches of all time.

I think it happens while he's fighting Deckard while sparing him, or even when he confronts Dr. Tyrell about his mortality.

McNutt · Post by **McNutt** » Thu Oct 06, 2016 10:55 pm

It's been a long time since I watched the movie. What hints are given that Ford's character is a replicant?

tru1cy · Post by **tru1cy** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:31 pm

Teaser Trailer There is a Deckard sighting....

McNutt wrote:It's been a long time since I watched the movie. What hints are given that Ford's character is a replicant?

The pictures on the piano is one of them

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:49 pm

McNutt wrote:It's been a long time since I watched the movie. What hints are given that Ford's character is a replicant?

It all came down to Olmos making this for Ford:

It was Olmos' way of saying he was Ford's handler, whether Ford knew it or not.

...

Watching the trailer, maybe it will be to Blade Runner what Aliens was to Alien? *shrug*

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:59 pm

McNutt wrote:It's been a long time since I watched the movie. What hints are given that Ford's character is a replicant?

The biggest of all is the "unicorn dream." Deckard sits at the piano looking at photos (which by this point are associated with false memories) then falls asleep and has a completely incongruous dream featuring a unicorn.

At the end of the movie, when he realizes that the police have been to his apartment, he finds an origami unicorn. Gaff (the cop played by James Edward Olmos) was seen earlier in the film making origami animals, so presumably he left the shape for Deckard to see. How would Gaff know of Deckard's dream unless Deckard's mind and memories are artificial?

There are other signs scattered throughout the movie (or at least people have claimed so), and mostly they involve parallels between Deckard and the targets he's hunting. Like them, Deckard is supremely tough and capable while most of the normal humans we see are stunted or crippled. Deckard is cold and emotionally empty at the beginning of the movie and has fallen in love by the end, just as Roy and Pris have developed a love that shouldn't be possible. The whole movie is Deckard's empathy test.

Redfive · Post by **Redfive** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:22 pm

Not too much to see on the trailer but I'm still excited.

The atmosphere and setting were such an important part of the first one and the trailer looks promising in that department.

EDIT: and the music (which was also huge for me) fits.

Brian · Post by **Brian** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:37 pm

Teaser Trailer

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:43 pm

Okay, sorry if this has already been mentioned, but do replicants age? Because if not, this movie disproves the Decker is a replicant ending from the first film.

Redfive · Post by **Redfive** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:51 pm

I'm sure there will be some kind of hand waving explanation (maybe I should give them more credit than that) but straight from the horse's mouth Deckard is a Replicant

So we'll see.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:55 pm

In my mind replicants are simply genetically engineered humans. They are made differently depending on job and where they will be. I dont see them as robots. Without a death gene I dont see them living shorter or longer than normal humans....unless engineered to do so some how.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:59 pm

Neat bit of trivia that I wasn't aware of: the screenwriter for the first Blade Runner went on to write Soldier (one of about three movies I cannot turn off if I see it playing, no matter how many times I've seen it) , and he considers it to be a side sequel of sorts to Blade Runner. He has said they exist in a shared universe.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Mon Dec 19, 2016 11:01 pm

hepcat wrote:Okay, sorry if this has already been mentioned, but do replicants age? Because if not, this movie disproves the Decker is a replicant ending from the first film.

They're created as adults, but Pris describes their problem as "accelerated decrepitude," which sounds more like aging than just running out of time. When pursuing Deckard, Roy knows that he's rapidly losing control of his body: he murmurs "Not... yet!" as his hand seems to lock up.

J.F. Sebastian (who genetically designed the replicants for Tyrell) himself suffers from "Methuselah's Syndrome," which makes him grow old too fast. This is too obvious to be a coincidence, so perhaps Tyrell exploited or adapted Sebastian's problem to limit the Replicants' abilities. And of course Sebastian tells Pris "There's some of me in you."

(One weird note is that the mythic biblical Methuselah lived an incredibly long life, not a short one. I've always wondered why this is reversed in BR.)

The sequel's likely explanation will be that Deckard is a Nexus 7, and the 4-year lifespan has been extended. Tyrell told Roy this was impossible, but maybe that just meant it couldn't be retrofitted.

Apollo · Post by **Apollo** » Tue Dec 20, 2016 4:03 pm

ImLawBoy wrote:...
The original theatrical release with Ford's voice over was a travesty, and all of your opinions on this movie are hereforth invalidated...

I'd always heard that there was someone out there who actually liked the Director's Cut of Blade Runner. Glad to finally solve the mystery.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Tue Dec 20, 2016 4:07 pm

The director's cut without the voice overs is far superior than the dumbed down theatrical release.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Tue Dec 20, 2016 4:15 pm

hepcat wrote:The director's cut without the voice overs is far superior than the dumbed down theatrical release.

Go eat a pizza with fish.

Stylized Film noir as interpreted from an unreliable narrator through the lens of self discovery in a world that remains ambiguous is, especially for the time, simply awesome.

Look at the android hunting other androids? Which is dumbed down.

I suppose you think the greatest scene of total recall wasn't when the doctor described the whole rest of the movie without narrative ever even hinting to the audience that this was what he was doing.

The director's cut removes "the Holy Shit" aspect of the movie.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Tue Dec 20, 2016 4:34 pm

The problem with the voice-over is that it's done so badly. It sounds like it comes from some other movie, and it also adds a tacked-on happy ending that does far more to eliminate ambiguity than even sticking an antenna on Deckard's head would have done.

For me the biggest problem is that the voice-over makes Deckard a shallower and more stereotypical detective. It nails him him down as hard-boiled and cynical and provides access to interiority in ways that make him feel comfortably human, all so the audience can identify with him more easily. It does the same thing the happy ending does.