BladeRunner 2049: Do Fanboys Dream Of Eclectic Geeks? - The Bear and Badger

mistercrayon

Yes.

“ I’m the best one”

voices

Yeah, that's what I thought. I need subtitles for a few other bits they said though.

superflyninja

No stand out lines in this one...no attack ships on fire no tears in rain.
I'm starting to agree that this film was more an experience than a story to be pored over.

Yossarian

TBF, there were only 2 stand out lines in the original, and from what I’ve read it seems that Rutger Hauer came up with them.

voices

It's too bad she won't live, but then again, who does?

Paul the sparky

My take straight from the cinema, without having read anything in here for fear it will infect my reaction.

That was great, but over long. I got goosebumps so many times throughout, the music hit the mark, and it looked fucking amazing (3D IMAX BTW).

I sussed the twist right when the lass recognised his memory and cried, and I thought he had too as he was already doubting the coincidence of that memory and was looking for ways to disprove it, so when he did a shouty angry and fucked off when the memory was confirmed to be real instead of asking the next logical question "but is it my memory or someone else's?" I was baffled. No one else saw it coming, which I find bizarre as the blatant twist from the Accountant is something which escaped me but this just seemed obvious, especially as we know about Rachel having Tyrrell's nieces memories implanted.

I liked that is he or isn't he a replicant wasn't confirmed either way, or was it? Getting Rachel pregnant suggests human, living in a fucking radioactive wasteland suggests replicant. Fuck knows, but I like that.

The last hour seemed to drag, the fist fight with Elvis cheering the lads on was a bit WTF why??? when K was shown to be pretty nifty with Hus hand to hand stuff. Dunno what Wallace was after really, why was creating more replicants an issue when they seemed to be pretty plentiful. What did old one eye want? Seemed to be rallying the troops but to fight who? Wallace? It's a bit xmen.

Loved the stuff with the AI, and the way they were looked down upon by replicants who in turn were despised by humans.

What was Wallace's trick regarding stopping the replicant uprisings? Something to do with farming/resources but i didn't get it. And he's a replicant himself? And we let a replicant set the controls over other replicants to ensure humanities continued survival? Seems a fucking odd turn of events.

Sorry if all this is already old hat/stupid, happy to be corrected on stuff, looking forward to everyone's views as overall I loved it and am amazed that a sequel to BR wasn't a complete and utter mess. Time to sleep.

Paul the sparky

Woke up this morning thinking about the AI, and how she seemed to be guiding K and encouraging him on his path to believing in the horse memory. I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility that the one eyed woman had something to do with that, like he's been given a jailbroke version of the software. Stuff like her gaining genuine sentience (was she?) and her having the ability to give a fucking street hooker access to K's flat seem like stuff you'd not find in store bought AI companions.

I can see me thinking about this a lot today. Going to read through the thread when I get the chance.

Paul the sparky

Before leaving for work I had to put the poster I got away before Nathan had a chance to scribble all over it. I noticed the colour scheme and was reminded of K being bathed in blue light when looking at the giant AI hologram in the city before he goes to deal with the Deckard situation. I assume there must be a significance there which passed me by. Loved the way you didn't know whether K was going to kill Deckard or let him live, well until he shot down the escorts that is, nice hark back to the end of BR.

superflyninja

@Paul Wallace a replicant?

g.man

It's ambiguous.

g.man

There's an argument to be made that if Wallace is a replicant, then that might be the real reason he's so interested in replicant procreation.

superflyninja

What hints were there that he may be a replicant?

poprock

Yeah, I didn’t get any sense of Wallace being a replicant. None at all.

I did get a sense of him being a quite roughly-sketched ‘bad corporation’ character and that there was no need at all (in story terms) for him to be blind.

superflyninja

poprock wrote:

Yeah, I didn’t get any sense of Wallace being a replicant. None at all. I did get a sense of him being a quite roughly-sketched ‘bad corporation’ character and that there was no need at all (in story terms) for him to be blind.

...don't forget his cliched God complex.

Also I thought it was pretty cut and dried that Gosling is a replicant.
Deckard's daughter, if Rickie D and Rachel were replicants then the kid would have the same strengths etc. So is that why she was hidden behind the bubble? Was her immune deficiency just a cover?

g.man

K is absolutely a replicant.

Paul the sparky

superflyninja wrote:

What hints were there that he may be a replicant?

He wants replicants to be able to reproduce so they can conquer the stars or some shit. Seemed like an odd goal for a human to have. Like I say though, happy to be corrected if there's something which proves he isn't.

On the blindness, I thought it was some augmentation shit he had done to allow him to use the box of chips which gave him different perception/xray vision or whatever the fuck was going on, not that he was born blind. Like in his assessment of the new born replicant, he seemed to see that she wasn't going to be able to reproduce. Most probably jumping to conclusions, I unno.

mistercrayon

I thought Wallace wanted reproduction because it was easier and cheaper to create a “workforce” that way than whatever way he was doing it.

I’m not sure there was a lot of mumbling nonsense and stabbing.

You can’t say anything about the nature of the child because it’s a one off. (Replicants made in labs, and the kid was certainly not)

Paul the sparky

Sorry, I meant the new made replicant, not the lass in the dome.

bad_hair_day

I got the feeling the augmented eyes and his relative youth hinted at Wallace using his technology to enhance and rejuvenate himself to oversee his very long term goals of stellar exploitation.

poprock

I’m surprised there are so many varying takes, as I thought the film was pretty clear in its devices and intentions. I guess that’s the nature of subjectivity – that I’m convinced of my assumptions and you’re convinced of yours.

My take:

The daughter’s condition was fake. A ruse to keep her out of sight and out of mind. Part of Deckard’s ‘fudging of the records’.

Humanity is expanding across the stars (it’s a bit chicken/egg whether humanity is leaving Earth because it’s fucked or Earth’s fucked as a side effect of humanity leaving) and Wallace can’t vat-grow enough replicants to fulfil demand. In order for humanity to thrive, he needs a way of making more and more replicants – hence his desire to have them fertile. A self-replicating slave-labour workforce to enable humanity’s utopian expansionism. That it all feeds his god complex is simply the nature of the beast.

Anybody can buy replicants. They’re a product, bought and sold. Hence cheap ‘pleasure models’ bought by pimps and put to work on the streets, as well as hard-bitten labourer models created for harsh environments and military-spec models like poor old Sapper.

As for Joi the AI companion … She’s an advanced simulation. Part of her programme is to appear as alive and self-aware as possible – that doesn’t mean she actually is. She’s just supposed to convince her owner that she’s real and that she cares. End of story. K’s attachment to her is demonstrative of his replicant inability to really feel and really connect with a flesh and blood partner … until he starts to grow and evolve. By the end of the film he’s capable of empathy and self-sacrifice.

The story is about the fact that replicants have been raised to believe they are less than human, when in reality they’re every bit as human as ‘real’ humans. Deckard, and now K, both realise that over the arcs of their films. “More human than human” because they’re not cruelly subjugating an entire species like the actual humans are.

acemuzzy

That's all basically my take too

superflyninja

Yup I'm with you too Pop.

I do hope K lives though.
The way he held his hand out and felt the snowflakes was very reminiscent of the way Joi did it in the rain.

Paul the sparky

Good post on page 2 there g, the separate cuts have all merged into one for me now, but yeah the unicorn bit which basically confirms that Deckard is a replicant could do with being left out of it, I much prefer the ambiguity.

monkey

Wallace was intended to be ambiguous. Maybe he messed up his own eyes to avoid detection? Maybe he’s human and wants to be artificial or just immortal. The whole thing is supposed to blur the lines between artificial and real and he’s just another example of it.

Vela

poprock wrote:

I’m surprised there are so many varying takes, as I thought the film was pretty clear in its devices and intentions. I guess that’s the nature of subjectivity – that I’m convinced of my assumptions and you’re convinced of yours. My take: The daughter’s condition was fake. A ruse to keep her out of sight and out of mind. Part of Deckard’s ‘fudging of the records’. Humanity is expanding across the stars (it’s a bit chicken/egg whether humanity is leaving Earth because it’s fucked or Earth’s fucked as a side effect of humanity leaving) and Wallace can’t vat-grow enough replicants to fulfil demand. In order for humanity to thrive, he needs a way of making more and more replicants – hence his desire to have them fertile. A self-replicating slave-labour workforce to enable humanity’s utopian expansionism. That it all feeds his god complex is simply the nature of the beast. Anybody can buy replicants. They’re a product, bought and sold. Hence cheap ‘pleasure models’ bought by pimps and put to work on the streets, as well as hard-bitten labourer models created for harsh environments and military-spec models like poor old Sapper. As for Joi the AI companion … She’s an advanced simulation. Part of her programme is to appear as alive and self-aware as possible – that doesn’t mean she actually is. She’s just supposed to convince her owner that she’s real and that she cares. End of story. K’s attachment to her is demonstrative of his replicant inability to really feel and really connect with a flesh and blood partner … until he starts to grow and evolve. By the end of the film he’s capable of empathy and self-sacrifice. The story is about the fact that replicants have been raised to believe they are less than human, when in reality they’re every bit as human as ‘real’ humans. Deckard, and now K, both realise that over the arcs of their films. “More human than human” because they’re not cruelly subjugating an entire species like the actual humans are.

This is actually an incredibly rational take on the situation that society faces in the film. The LAPD head was saying that procreation amongst replicants would be the downfall, but in your outline it is clear the downfall occurred in the 2020s. Humanity is shot, and without offworld reproduction and replicants as equals, the civilisation is just circling the drain.

In that sense Wallace really just represents a necessary evil. Or perhaps simply a pragmatist.

Paul the sparky

poprock wrote:

As for Joi the AI companion … She’s an advanced simulation. Part of her programme is to appear as alive and self-aware as possible – that doesn’t mean she actually is. She’s just supposed to convince her owner that she’s real and that she cares. End of story. K’s attachment to her is demonstrative of his replicant inability to really feel and really connect with a flesh and blood partner … until he starts to grow and evolve. By the end of the film he’s capable of empathy and self-sacrifice. The story is about the fact that replicants have been raised to believe they are less than human, when in reality they’re every bit as human as ‘real’ humans. Deckard, and now K, both realise that over the arcs of their films. “More human than human” because they’re not cruelly subjugating an entire species like the actual humans are.

That's interesting, because where do we draw the line between self awareness and just appearing self aware? How do you know that she isn't? It ties in with the themes of both films, what am I? And does it matter?

poprock

Vela wrote:

In that sense Wallace really just represents a necessary evil. Or perhaps simply a pragmatist.

One thing I thought interesting was that Wallace, despite being cast as the villain of the piece, was ultimately behaving altruistically. His grand goal was to make his own company irrelevant – to perfect a self-replicating workforce for humanity, meaning he would never sell another replicant.

It works as an allegory for all capitalism – he’s trying to do ‘good’ but his methods are horrendous. The grand altruistic goal soiled by the grubby details of how he intends to get there. Zuckerberg writ large.

Paul the sparky

monkey wrote:

Wallace was intended to be ambiguous. Maybe he messed up his own eyes to avoid detection? Maybe he’s human and wants to be artificial or just immortal. The whole thing is supposed to blur the lines between artificial and real and he’s just another example of it.

Yup, it runs through everything. Loving it more the more I think about it.

Paul the sparky

poprock wrote:

One thing I thought interesting was that Wallace, despite being cast as the villain of the piece, was ultimately behaving altruistically. His grand goal was to make his own company irrelevant – to perfect a self-replicating workforce for humanity, meaning he would never sell another replicant. It works as an allegory for all capitalism – he’s trying to do ‘good’ but his methods are horrendous. The grand altruistic goal soiled by the grubby details of how he intends to get there. Zuckerberg writ large.

Fucking point.

I need to get the fuck out of this thread, I'm getting nowt done at work!

superflyninja

poprock wrote:

In that sense Wallace really just represents a necessary evil. Or perhaps simply a pragmatist.

One thing I thought interesting was that Wallace, despite being cast as the villain of the piece, was ultimately behaving altruistically. His grand goal was to make his own company irrelevant – to perfect a self-replicating workforce for humanity, meaning he would never sell another replicant. It works as an allegory for all capitalism – he’s trying to do ‘good’ but his methods are horrendous. The grand altruistic goal soiled by the grubby details of how he intends to get there. Zuckerberg writ large.

Nawwwwwh. Wallace would set up replicant farms. Keep that green coming in. And/Or sell replicant seed packages to whoever needs em, ie sell 100 replicants capable of reproducing, then send them down to a planet and let them work away, birthing new members of the workforce as they go.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories