Jump to content

Blade Runner 2049 - more human than human [Spoilers!]

Kalbear

By Kalbear,
in Entertainment

Recommended Posts

williamjm Council Member

williamjm

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, boojam said:

Two standard operational procedures exist in prose  science fiction, going back to the 1930s. 1 give a date 200 to 300 years in the future or no date at all just let the setting and milieu define it as 'future fiction'. The latter is common , on the page, oddly, STAR WARS essentially used it. . In fact SW is really set in an alternate universe without saying it.

I mean Blade Runner could have been set in 2119 that would have been a better cover.... but there is some odd thinking in Hollywood that it has to be set near the 'present'.... I don't know why.

I don't have a copy of the book to hand, but the Internet says that Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? was originally set in the distant future of 1992, although later editions apparently moved the date to 2021. I do find it quite amusing that someone apparently realised the date problem but then came to the conclusion that 2021 was so impossibly futuristic that it would never be an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
boojam Council Member

boojam

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Corvinus said:

Or 20,000 years, like Dune.

Or one billion years, City and the Stars A.C.Clarke

In Asimov's Foundation series I think it was indefinite but something like 10,000 years.

If it was Lucas it was clever,, "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away....", Boy in another Galaxy  , even if it was Andromeda that is 2.5 million years 'ago' light time... it could be a billion years ago... 

I guess 'alternate universe' is bizarre enough that the ordinary TV - Film bloke is thrown by it? Not to mention TV-Film executives!

I really can't remember if GRRM says , somewhere explicitly , ASoIaF is in an alternate universe , for him and his readers  that just normal narrative machinery in the prose form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
boojam Council Member

boojam

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, williamjm said:

I don't have a copy of the book to hand, but the Internet says that Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? was originally set in the distant future of 1992, although later editions apparently moved the date to 2021. I do find it quite amusing that someone apparently realised the date problem but then came to the conclusion that 2021 was so impossibly futuristic that it would never be an issue.

It's possible Dick did have a 'close'  date, that did happen in some prose SF .... tho it was not common ... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
red snow Council Member

red snow

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, boojam said:

Or one billion years, City and the Stars A.C.Clarke

In Asimov's Foundation series I think it was indefinite but something like 10,000 years.

If it was Lucas it was clever,, "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away....", Boy in another Galaxy  , even if it was Andromeda that is 2.5 million years 'ago' light time... it could be a billion years ago... 

I guess 'alternate universe' is bizarre enough that the ordinary TV - Film bloke is thrown by it? Not to mention TV-Film executives!

I really can't remember if GRRM says , somewhere explicitly , ASoIaF is in an alternate universe , for him and his readers  that just normal narrative machinery in the prose form.

I guess if the concept of infinite universes is true then all fiction could be considered alternate universes as by the definition of infinite there will be one that mirrors the world in the work of fiction. I think some physicists even say the laws of physics could be different in other universes so "crazy SFF shit" could work there eg flying dragons, magic, time-travel etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Theda Baratheon Council Member

Theda Baratheon

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, boojam said:

You know that is especially true for 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

When I saw that film in 1968 that was my take then. No way that future would happen , even approximately, and it didn't.

It means that the date 2019 and the date 2049 exist only in a universe next door..

2049 is of the few , maybe only, SF movies where one needs take dates. 

Two standard operational procedures exist in prose  science fiction, going back to the 1930s. 1 give a date 200 to 300 years in the future or no date at all just let the setting and milieu define it as 'future fiction'. The latter is common , on the page, oddly, STAR WARS essentially used it. . In fact SW is really set in an alternate universe without saying it.

I mean Blade Runner could have been set in 2119 that would have been a better cover.... but there is some odd thinking in Hollywood that it has to be set near the 'present'.... I don't know why.

Well the book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep was written in 1968 so so 2019 wasnt that present then.  It was 50+ years in the future. I can't remember the dates in the book though this is me assuming they're the same as blade Runner it's been a few years since I last read it. Gotta read again I do love it. 

11 hours ago, Darth Richard II said:

I believe this was confirmed by the BR2049 team at some point.

Ahh. Thought it might have been. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
boojam Council Member

boojam

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Theda Baratheon said:

Ooh nvm saw the post about Do Androids Dream dates above. I forgot it was 1992?? Lol wow. 

Even I , born in 1940, thought the year 2000 , when I was 15, seemed a 'science fictional' one. Indeed there are SF stories written in 40s,50s and 60s that place stories 30, 40, 50 years in the future. One factor that determined wither no date was given or the number 200 year to 300 years in the future was interstellar flight , especially faster than light travel. All the great SF authors realized the engineering physics was so difficult that best hedge their bets. I don't remember if Phil Dick had interstellar travel in DADOES. BR 2049 is the first time a planet has been mentioned and it didn't seem in the solar system, another alternate universe thing, there is no manned interstellar travel right now and won't get in 2049.

Clarke and Kubrick put 2001 only 33 years in the future thinking Apollo would lead to some permanent base on the Moon.

I guess someone has noted this. Both Scott and Villeneuve idolize Kubrick, well Scott got footage from Kubrick for BR2019. The 'eye' at the start of BR1 and BR2 is a small nod to 2001. Dumb me on 3rd viewing and seeing that big Pan Am sign I thought , this is the universe of 2001!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
boojam Council Member

boojam

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, polishgenius said:

Well yeah. That's what it is.

But its 'dating' had nothing to do with avoiding running into the 'the present caught up to the future' problem.

I think it was just a clever way of using an alternate universe.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
boojam Council Member

boojam

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, polishgenius said:

What is your fascination with alternate universes? I seriously don't think the term means exactly what you think it does.

The ones in science fiction always fascinated me but they had a kind of ethereal spin on them. Starting in the early 1950s alternate universes became a part of physics models , first in quantum mechanics and then in cosmology. Now , and there are various physics versions , that have become compelling parts of the architecture of the physics of the universe. There is a set of physicists opposed to the models, but there is growing set of highly respected physicists who think multi-universe models are needed even if they are still only candidate models.

It always struck me that science fiction movies could have avoided awkward realizations if they had of (1) set stories far enough into the future (those are de facto alternate universes), as SF writers did, or use an alternate universe , as GRRM has even if ASOIAF is not science fiction! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Corvinus85 Council Member

Corvinus85

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, boojam said:

The ones in science fiction always fascinated me but they had a kind of ethereal spin on them. Starting in the early 1950s alternate universes became a part of physics models , first in quantum mechanics and then in cosmology. Now , and there are various physics versions , that have become compelling parts of the architecture of the physics of the universe. There is a set of physicists opposed to the models, but there is growing set of highly respected physicists who think multi-universe models are needed even if they are still only candidate models.

It always struck me that science fiction movies could have avoided awkward realizations if they had of (1) set stories far enough into the future (those are de facto alternate universes), as SF writers did, or use an alternate universe , as GRRM has even if ASOIAF is not science fiction! 

 

Technically all fiction can be considered being set in an alternate universe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Relic Council Member

Relic

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

Well, Blade Runner bombed in China, there is no God, humanity is doomed.

Measuring a movie by its box office take is how we got to this point in time where the only movies made are all formulaic derivatives, designed to make money. The first blade runner slowly developed a cult following,  this one might too,  despite being the lesser of the two ( by far,  imho). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...