• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Blade Runner 2049 |OT| Do Androids Dream of Electric Boogaloo? [Unmarked Spoilers]

Did Robin Wright’s character make a passive attempt to have sex with K when she was over at his place having a drink?

When she asked “What would happen if I were to finish that?”, indicating the bottle, was that basically “I could get drunk and have sex with you.”

?
 

Sub_Level

wants to fuck an Asian grill.
Did Robin Wright’s character make a passive attempt to have sex with K when she was over at his place having a drink?

When she asked “What would happen if I were to finish that?”, indicating the bottle, was that basically “I could get drunk and have sex with you.”

?

Yes.
 
Yeah I thought as much. That’s a really good line.
And the one before. "Look at me. We're all just out here looking for something real."

Luv had also made a pass at him.

"Being asked personal questions makes one feel...desired." then immediately followed by "How do you like your job, officer?". K ended the conversation with "please thank Mr. Wallace for his hospitality."
 

Link

The Autumn Wind
I'm sure it's been mentioned already in this thread, but I wasn't the only one getting major Boss vibes from Lt. Joshi, right?
 

JDHarbs

Member
Luv had also made a pass at him.

"Being asked personal questions makes one feel...desired." then immediately followed by "How do you like your job, officer?".
This is one aspect of K's arc that I'm still trying to wrap my head around.

He struggles with the feeling that he isn't "real". So he is constantly searching for something that can fill that void, but all of his attempts seem to fail.

Multiple women make passes at him throughout the film yet he rejects then all immediately. Why? If anything, I feel like his character would be desperate for any possibility of connection instead of going back to his sad attempt at love with Joi.

My best guess is that he sees through all of the women who give him attention because each one doesn't really care about him, they all just want something from him.
 
...Multiple women make passes at him throughout the film yet he rejects then all immediately. Why? If anything, I feel like his character would be desperate for any possibility of connection instead of going back to his sad attempt at love with Joi...
And the one before. "Look at me. We're all just out here looking for something real."

Luv had also made a pass at him.

"Being asked personal questions makes one feel...desired." then immediately followed by "How do you like your job, officer?". K ended the conversation with "please thank Mr. Wallace for his hospitality."

The line from Joshi is particularly noteworthy:

Joshi: ...We're all just out here looking for something real...​

Also:

Joi: You don’t prefer your Madam?
K: You were listening.
Joi: Maybe…​

And later:

Joi: You liked [Mariette]. I could tell… I want to be real for you...
K: You are real for me...​

As several folks noted earlier in the thread, there’s an interesting complexity in the K/Joi relationship.

Joi could tell that K liked Mariette, for example, but Mariette herself couldn’t tell, since K conceals his attraction (removes her arm from his shoulder, removes her hands from his). Mariette remarks: “You don’t even smile… Oh, I see, you don’t like real girls...”

It seems like this ‘discipline’ on the part of K (concealing his attraction to others) comes naturally, simply because his relationship with Joi feels more real to him than the others.

In searching for the exact lines from the movie, I came across this neat piece:

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/10/14/the-poetry-of-blade-runner-2049

By PRISCILLA PAGE

...K realizes that his memory of a wooden horse didn’t belong to him after all. It means he is not Rachael’s child, that he’s not a miracle, not special after all, but it no longer matters. The moment K thinks he is more and wants to be more, he becomes more. His perception is reality. It reprograms him.

...Discussing K’s digital companion Joi (Ana de Armas), [screenwriter Michael] Green said, “since we are defined by what we love, what [K] loved needed a story as well.” To the world, K is just a “skinjob.” To Joi, he’s a poem. She calls his DNA “the alphabet of you.” She tells him, “I always knew you were special.” If replicants are considered a secondary species, these digital women are tertiary, even more reviled. The sex worker Mariette (Mackenzie Davis) tells her, “I’ve been inside you. Not so much there as you think.”

Mariette’s comment reflects the disdain this world has for A.I. like Joi, but it also reveals that, like K, Joi believes she is more… Hiring Mariette so she can be intimate with K is her idea. “I want to be real for you,” she tells him. He responds: “You are real for me.” And she risks everything for K when she asks him to delete her from his apartment console so no one can use her memories to find him.  She will only exist on the emanator, and if something happens to it, K explains, she will be gone. “Yes, like a real girl,” she responds. Joi’s death is a kind of Rorschach or a Voight-Kampff for the audience, testing whether we respond as if she’s a being with feelings, whether we empathize, grieve. Like Deckard’s dog kōan, if Joi perceives that she is “a real girl,” that she has a self, that she loves K, if her suffering and her wonder and her love feel real to her, then she is a real being with consciousness, as real as a replicant, a dog, or a human...

She’s not the same. "I know what’s real," [Deckard] tells Wallace. She was special, remarkable, irreplaceable because Deckard loved her. K experiences the same disconnect in the scene that follows: he meets a giant advertisement for another Joi. She looks like his Joi, calls him “a nice Joe” as Joi once did, but it’s not the same for him, either. In this moment, maybe K questions whether his Joi ever really loved him at all. But maybe it doesn’t matter, because the love he felt for her was real. This Joi is not the same as his Joi. It’s the moment K decides to pursue Deckard - not to follow Freysa’s orders to kill him, but to help Deckard meet his daughter...

“Do you dream about being interlinked?” the post-traumatic baseline test asks K. The question essentially asks whether K dreams of being, whether he dreams of being connected to others...
 

Glass

Member
Listening to BR's OST. Do we know if Vangelis was even approached for 2049? So many parts of the Blade Runner puzzle slotted so well together after so many years - Hampton Fancher returned after a huge gap in his writing career and it worked out, why not Vangelis?
 

Radogol

Member
Listening to BR's OST. Do we know if Vangelis was even approached for 2049? So many parts of the Blade Runner puzzle slotted so well together after so many years - Hampton Fancher returned after a huge gap in his writing career and it worked out, why not Vangelis?

This is purely conjecture of course, but my guess is that the production team expected drama and chose not to deal with it. Which is dumb, since Vangelis composed new Blade Runner material as recently as a decade ago.
 

Antiochus

Member
It's interesting few are debating the moral nature of Wallace's character in the film. Though on the surface portrayed as the villain, a closer examination of his goals and purpose may interpret his role as seeking to save humanity from being starved to death within a ruined Earth.
 
At the cost of an enslaved species, though.

That being said, I think most of humanity lives on outworld colonies already, no? Or did I get that wrong?
 

Freshmaker

I am Korean.
At any rate, it happened. She did in fact at one point or another insert one of her personal memories (clearly adjusted though, because that's not her in the memory) into a shipment or whatever. And that's all there is to it. She doesn't even need a good reason to do it, really. It just happened, and why you consider this of all things a plothole, I'll never understand. Because really, this is the biggest non-issue ever, and easily explained away by any one reason.

It becomes harder to call a plot hole given... How old is K?

Because I'd imagine that the memory was implanted back when they were trying to cover her tracks, not recently, and that it would've been implanted in K when he was created.

It's interesting few are debating the moral nature of Wallace's character in the film. Though on the surface portrayed as the villain, a closer examination of his goals and purpose may interpret his role as seeking to save humanity from being starved to death within a ruined Earth.
People can be absolute filth and still think they're doing good. Which I don't think was Wallace's line of thinking really. Wallace seemed more like he was forever stuck in Tyrel's shadow and he resented that man's greatness more than anything. He was as much Tyrel's shambling corpse as the rest of the world.
 

sectionse7en

Neo Member
Saw it for a second time last night on the biggest screen in town. Still loved it. Roger Deakins is the best in the biz.

There are so many subtle shifts that you notice on the second time through. K's reflection in the glass while visiting the Ana and viewing his memory in the orphanage was my favourite.

One of my favourite scenes is Madame Joshi visiting K at his apartment. Both Wright and Gosling are impeccable.

There's two things that would have made it better:

If David Bowie, as reported, would have been able to play Niander Wallace. Watching the film again makes you realise it was almost perfectly written for him. Leto was ok, but I dream of the goodness that would have been Bowie in that role.

If Harrison Ford's presence had been kept a secret. The whole film is set up that Deckard being in the film is a real mystery. Gaf's 'retired' comment leaves detail missing, and his status is unclear. He doesn't turn up till Act 3. Unfortunately he was plastered all over the trailers, posters, interviews, etc, in the attempt to promote a movie that threatened to, and has, bombed commercially.

However, putting Ford's presence a secret would have possibly lead to more excitement and mystery. I don't know. It would have been a better film without him on the poster.
 
Just watched the first Blade Runner Final Cut again on blu-ray lat evening, been a while since I've seen.

Stunning movie and just makes me want to see 2049 again even more!
 
It becomes harder to call a plot hole given... How old is K?

Because I'd imagine that the memory was implanted back when they were trying to cover her tracks, not recently, and that it would've been implanted in K when he was created.

Somewhere between 5 and 9 years old. According to the official timeline, the LAPD started bolstering their force with Nexus 9's in the early 40's.
 
This is purely conjecture of course, but my guess is that the production team expected drama and chose not to deal with it. Which is dumb, since Vangelis composed new Blade Runner material as recently as a decade ago.

Can you show me? I searched the net but didn't find anything.
 
It becomes harder to call a plot hole given... How old is K?

Because I'd imagine that the memory was implanted back when they were trying to cover her tracks, not recently, and that it would've been implanted in K when he was created.

Cover her tracks? It's her memory. I assume the track covering was done before she lived through that memory. Also, implanting memories that lead to your eventual discovery isn't really a thing you do as part of covering one's tracks.
 

Number45

Member
They were positioned in the film as mostly what they could recover after the blackout right, same as the memory that Luv showed K. It makes sense that they wouldn't be in perfect condition.
 
Those audio callbacks to the original movie, holy shit they were inelegant. That was bad anime flashbacks-esque.

I liked them a lot actually. The visual Rachel flashback was the best though. Very poignant. More so because there's just something about seeing a (beautifully cleaned up) shot like that appear in a movie 35 years later.
 

Creamium

shut uuuuuuuuuuuuuuup
I love this bit of triva from the imdb page:

Hampton Fancher was approached to write a script for this film. He agreed to write the sequel but in a novella format mixed with a screenplay. He wrote the 110 page novella script and then told them to leave him alone after that.

Going full 'get off my lawn'. I wonder if he actually watched his movie.
 

Adry9

Member
Going for a second viewing tonight. I think I'm as excited as for the first one, and this is my first time doing a second viewing in the cinema for any movie.
 

Adry9

Member
This was the first movie I really noticed the Atmos. Lots of stuff going on in the overhead speakers.

Yeah, it was my first time in a theater with Atmos and hands down best sound system I've heard in a cinema.

Is it even better than whatever sound system they have in IMAX? I saw it twice in that.

If you want to go for a third viewing, at the same cost, I'd say go and check the Atmos version. But if you've already experienced it in a good sound system (if it was an IMAX room it probably had one) I wouldn't go a third time just for Atmos.
 

Woz

Member
Can you show me? I searched the net but didn't find anything.

It's in the 25th anniversary OST

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000Z0OX9O/?tag=neogaf0e-20

A 3-CD set was released in 2007 to coincide with the 5-DVD release to mark the 25th anniversary of the film. It includes the 1994 official CD along with two bonus CDs, both compiled from original material by Vangelis. The second disc includes some previously officially unreleased material, but is still not complete, omitting the Main Title track, for example. The third disc contains new material inspired by Blade Runner.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_(soundtrack)#2007_release
 

valkyre

Member
This was the first movie I really noticed the Atmos. Lots of stuff going on in the overhead speakers.

Mine too! It was really the first time in an Atmos theater that I felt that the extra cost actually paid off...

Most of the other films I experienced in atmos I was like "eh". But with this one it made a real impression.
 
Saw it again last night. It's a great fucking movie, but with another elite director they would have done a much better job with several moments where the pace is just there, stopping at glacial pace (not better movie, I'm talking about its pacing). That and the pace then multiplying by several notches the last 30 minutes. Saying that, I do hope Ville makes another sequel to this since there's loads to be explored, but it's also a movie I'm satisfied if they never make another one.
 
I wanna say that in the first movie, you see advertisements for going off-world like everywhere I think. And given that they call them "colonies", that feels like more than just a single percentage of the population living up there. Besides, they inhabit 9 planets, right?
 

Number45

Member
I wanna say that in the first movie, you see advertisements for going off-world like everywhere I think. And given that they call them "colonies", that feels like more than just a single percentage of the population living up there. Besides, they inhabit 9 planets, right?
I can't put my finger on where, but I'm sure there was a comment in 2049 about needing the cash to live off-world.
 
I really disliked this movie. Based on the box office thread, it seems people think that those who don't like the film are "stupid" and "this is why we can't have good things" but my problem with the film wasn't necessarily the slow pace itself. If done right, I love movies with a slow narrative. Tarkovsky films for example I find to be experiences more than movies. To state a recent example, Aronofsky's Mother was amazing and a movie I plan on rewatching. But this was more style than substance, in my opinion. If a movie is slow moving and the cinematography is "part of the script" then honestly for me to enjoy it, it needs to mean something.

It didn’t resonate with me at all. For the protagonist to be a robot who is trying to feel something, the script should be more solid at the very least. Passing the importance of K’s past over to Deckard and his daughter in the third act was just, meh. The audience finally started laughing/reacting to the movie barely when Harrison Ford and his dog showed up, and I couldn’t help but to feel that they added the whole father/daughter thing so the audience could hold onto something emotional. It just didn’t work for me.
 
I really disliked this movie. Based on the box office thread, it seems people think that those who don't like the film are "stupid" and "this is why we can't have good things" but my problem with the film wasn't necessarily the slow pace itself. If done right, I love movies with a slow narrative. Tarkovsky films for example I find to be experiences more than movies. To state a recent example, Aronofsky's Mother was amazing and a movie I plan on rewatching. But this was more style than substance, in my opinion. If a movie is slow moving and the cinematography is "part of the script" then honestly for me to enjoy it, it needs to mean something.

It didn’t resonate with me at all. For the protagonist to be a robot who is trying to feel something, the script should be more solid at the very least. Passing the importance of K’s past over to Deckard and his daughter in the third act was just, meh. The audience finally started laughing/reacting to the movie barely when Harrison Ford and his dog showed up, and I couldn’t help but to feel that they added the whole father/daughter thing so the audience could hold onto something emotional. It just didn’t work for me.

What felt meh about the third act to you? I thought it added a very worthwhile twist to K's arc. In that he didn't need to be special to be considered human.

And you got nothing whatsoever out of, for example, Joi's arc?
 
Top Bottom