Jump to content

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


Kalbear

Recommended Posts

On 29/10/2017 at 0:17 PM, Eggegg said:

I think that the Joi plotline was there to add a humanising element to K and to demonstrate that the replicants experience the same levels of loneliness and a desire for connection as humans. I think without that element Gosling would have appeared almost completely emotionless and would lack an emotional anchor for his actions. I'm not sure I cared much about him outside of the scenes with Joi, which I'd say were some of the strongest elements of the movie.

That's a good summary of how the interaction highlighted K's isolation and need for human interaction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 27/10/2017 at 0:19 AM, boojam said:

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

Asimov's setting was 22,000 years in the future, as specifically spelled out in the later Foundation books.

Quote

We don't know how many 'off-world colonies' there are

Wallace said that with the Nexus-8s, humanity was able to settle nine new planets, but that doesn't include the ones colonised previously. My guess is that it was fewer (as the Nexus-6s and earlier models were much less efficient), so the total number would be between eleven (since it was "colonies" plural) and seventeen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Werthead said:

Wallace said that with the Nexus-8s, humanity was able to settle nine new planets, but that doesn't include the ones colonised previously. My guess is that it was fewer (as the Nexus-6s and earlier models were much less efficient)

On the other hand, the 8s weren't around long, and they might have had FTL and colonisation going on for a couple of decades before then, so a higher number doesn't seem implausible to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, felice said:

On the other hand, the 8s weren't around long, and they might have had FTL and colonisation going on for a couple of decades before then, so a higher number doesn't seem implausible to me.

 It was hard to tell in the first movie , since off-world could have meant colonies in the solar system. In BR2049  a planet , not in the solar system is named (unless renamed one). Took this to be evidence of interstellar flight , has to be FTL involved considering the time time scale involved. That implies interstellar flight existed before 2019 , as usual , implying an alternate universe , but that seems totally evident now. Well always was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, boojam said:

Took this to be evidence of interstellar flight , has to be FTL involved considering the time time scale involved.

Or possibly something more stargatey, rather than FTL spaceships? Is there anything in either film that gives any hint as to how people get to the colonies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, felice said:

Or possibly something more stargatey, rather than FTL spaceships? Is there anything in either film that gives any hint as to how people get to the colonies?

 Actually matter transmitters would be cool , tho that is a matter of FTL also. 

I read the novel back in the 1960's and can only remember that Dick had space travel to Mars, can't remember if Mars was colonized? As little as movie Blade Runner universe uses the plot of DADOES it does use some of the story, some of the characters and some of the milieu one could take the implication that it is space travel. Tho BR2049 seems to have brought in interstellar destination since there is no planet Calantha in this universe. Actually I kind of like that , a lot of possibilities for scenarios there.I mean from the first film and BR2049 it is hinted , around the edges, that replicants do all the dirty work . off world , as 'non-human' slaves, and many , if not all that we see of the rebel awol ones are combat models. This sure presents interesting possible stories for that universe.

Which reminds me, anyone heard of a novelization of BR2049? 

I remember that Dick was mortified by being asked to do a novelization of the movie and refused good money. Is there a prohibition by the Dick estate? Since BR2049 only uses  the smallest stuff from the novel would think there would be no objection. I guess it's Dick's daughter who now benefits from this film? 

(One notes there were sequel novels to BR written by J.K. Jeter , these were quite good and clever extensions of the story.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, polishgenius said:

I watched C-beams... glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.

According to David Peoples, the Tannhauser Gate is a "warp station" which is used for FTL travel. Soldier, which he wrote as a film in the same universe as Blade Runner, mentions it and there's even a depiction of the battle for the station in the deleted scenes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Werthead said:

According to David Peoples, the Tannhauser Gate is a "warp station" which is used for FTL travel. Soldier, which he wrote as a film in the same universe as Blade Runner, mentions it and there's even a depiction of the battle for the station in the deleted scenes.

The one with Kurt Russell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Corvinus said:

The one with Kurt Russell?

Yup. Obviously Peoples is not necessarily the final arbiter of what is canon in that universe (I'm not sure anyone is, given the workload distribution), but both films were produced by Warner Brothers, had the same writer and even had some of the same props (a BR spinner can be seen in wreckage in one sequence). WB didn't allow him to call the genetically engineered soldiers "replicants" though.

Also, Peoples wrote the original version of the Tears in the Rain speech. Hauer changed a lot of it on-set, but the Tannhauser Gate bit is from the original script. So I think if we want to ask the question of WTF the Gate is and how FTL works, that's the closest we're going to get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought this was an intriguing film.

When I saw it two weeks ago it left me with mixed feelings. The soundtrack was overbearing and the film was overlong, were my main complaints. I did not like the excursion to the child factory followed by the excursion to Casa Deckard, with the sequence in the theatre ( fight scene amidst flashing scenes of old film) a low point in the film. I'm therefore tempted to say that the films starts in an interesting way and fails to capitalize on that with a weak second act, but the actual ending itself was quite good I thought. The revelations about who K was, who Deckard's child really was, the fight between Luv and K, all good stuff.

So the film feels like it should be shorter, maybe the film could have sustained it's length if excursions had been replaced with something else. But man there was a lot of good in this film as well and weeks later I am still thinking about it. It was a convincing Sci fi dystopia, K's character worked for me, his relationship with Joi was interesting and many of the more secondary characters impress ( Sapper, Niander, Luv, Robin Wright). Gosling is generally very good to watch and that was the case here as well IMO. Best scene for me may have been the opening scene with K traveling to Sapper's house, and the way it ends.

4 stars out of 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Werthead said:

According to David Peoples, the Tannhauser Gate is a "warp station" which is used for FTL travel. Soldier, which he wrote as a film in the same universe as Blade Runner, mentions it and there's even a depiction of the battle for the station in the deleted scenes.

There is a reference for that? I am aware of the vague illusions to BR in Solider by Peoples , had not heard something like that , he made that in an interview?

Soldier was a poor science fiction film, knowing that Peoples wrote it is puzzling... because his screenplays for Unforgiven and 12 Monkeys are quite remarkable. In fact his work on BR2019 is so good I was hoping , if Fancher had a 'script-helper' it would have been Peoples.

That interview with Fancher and Green implies that they did not use Fancher's story completely , unlike BR2019 he did not seem upset this time around. I would like to see the Fancher screen play.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, boojam said:

There is a reference for that? I am aware of the vague illusions to BR in Solider by Peoples , had not heard something like that , he made that in an interview?

Soldier was a poor science fiction film, knowing that Peoples wrote it is puzzling... because his screenplays for Unforgiven and 12 Monkeys are quite remarkable. In fact his work on BR2019 is so good I was hoping , if Fancher had a 'script-helper' it would have been Peoples.

That interview with Fancher and Green implies that they did not use Fancher's story completely , unlike BR2019 he did not seem upset this time around. I would like to see the Fancher screen play.

 

It's one of the deleted scenes from the film. It's referenced on the Blade Runner Wiki and I believe is on the DVD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

It's one of the deleted scenes from the film. It's referenced on the Blade Runner Wiki and I believe is on the DVD.

I notice that director Paul Anderson rewrote a lot of People's Soldier , that is not a good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/29/2017 at 8:42 AM, williamjm said:

We don't know how many 'off-world colonies' there are, so it's possible some of them might be great places to live while others are war zones. Given the difficulty of setting up an off-world colony I'd imagine life might not be that great for the general population (even with replicants to do some of the dirty work), although it might be more pleasant for the richer members of society.

It might also depend on how established the worlds are.  The older, more established ones might (now) be very nice, and the rich go there.  Whereas in 2019 and for new worlds in 2049, life might be a lot harder. That would be where the poorer people, and the ones being advertised to would be predominantly going.  

On 10/27/2017 at 5:55 AM, red snow said:

I maybe just assumed she was adopted by reading between the lines. K visits the orphanage to ask "Fagin" if he has notes on the kid. "Fagin" thought K was there to buy/adopt a kid - so I just thought that's what went down.

Makes me wonder whether she really had a compromised immune system - unless she caught something at the orphange? And it seems as much of a miracle she survived into adulthood as being born given the seeminly random events that happened to her.

I'm pretty sure those were adoption records they were looking up, since K needed to know where the child had gone next.  It is likely that the replicants organised Ann to be adopted by sympathisers to give her a cover and the whole process probably gave her an identity, while hiding that the girl had survived.  Layers and layers of protection.  I suspect the compromised immune system is another step - I imagine replicants can be identified at the DNA level and Ann's DNA would be pretty weird.  Putting her away in the bubble gives her both a level of protection, and if they foresaw her job a way of influencing future replicants.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ants said:

I'm pretty sure those were adoption records they were looking up, since K needed to know where the child had gone next.

The records claimed she died at the orphanage, so they're unlikely to be adoption records. I don't think there's any official record that Stelline was adopted, is there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless everyone at the orphanage was in on it (very unlikely) there would be adoption papers. That was why they were torn out. The digital records of her death were manufactured (or altered from boy to girl) but since the orphanage kept physical copies they had to be torn out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/2/2017 at 9:11 PM, ants said:

 

I'm pretty sure those were adoption records they were looking up, since K needed to know where the child had gone next.  It is likely that the replicants organised Ann to be adopted by sympathisers to give her a cover and the whole process probably gave her an identity, while hiding that the girl had survived.  Layers and layers of protection.  I suspect the compromised immune system is another step - I imagine replicants can be identified at the DNA level and Ann's DNA would be pretty weird.  Putting her away in the bubble gives her both a level of protection, and if they foresaw her job a way of influencing future replicants.  

It is clever that the Replicant Underground (RU) could tamper with DNA records and when did that happen? It would seem that even in the world before 2022 , Ana was born in 2021 , Sapper already had a'protein farm? before the black out? and troubled times? Ok. Sapper's address looked way off-map. Ana was born at-home with Sapper and Freysa there with Rachael.*  Didn't looked like there were any authority about to take DNA there. Then licky split , next year 2022, the Black-Out , engineered  (according to the short) by the RU. Ana would have been approximately 1 year old then. We don't know how long she lived with Sapper and Freysa, especially if she had health problems. Even if she didn't that orphanage looked like it did not have an infant or toddler wing!  DNA taken at orphanage placement? Ok. Troubled time must not have been troubled enough to keep bureaucratic operations in chaos, I guess? 

Then 20?? to 2049 the RU and Ana get lost. The RU has set Ana up and keeps her secret and get her with the Wallace Corp. (so to speak).I like the suggestion what Ana is the source of replicant-non-compliance by way of memory implants Like Ana has a bigger secret than being the daughter of a replicant! 

What does Ana know about the RU?

* I have listened to Deckard's dialog 3 times and find that his 'long gone' statement does not exclude him from being there at Ana's brith.  The PLAN was for Ana to be in the position she is in 28 years after her birth?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The plan wouldn't necessarily include Ana being where she was 28 years after her birth, or at least not her employment, as she obviously has to be quite good at what she does to have that role.  

As K was going through the DNA records of all children born the same year as Ana, it would seem that everyone is now DNA checked who is on the grid.  At least as a child.  

Sapper obviously had the farm in 2021, as that is where Rachel is buried.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ants said:

Sapper obviously had the farm in 2021, as that is where Rachel is buried.  

Though it might not have been a farm at the time, or at least not the same type of farm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...