Support NeoGAF

[Cheebo]

How in the world did we get so lucky that BOTH Twin Peaks: The Return and Blade Runner 2049 lived up to their respective originals?

What a year.

 

[Sean C]

I don’t think Deckard is a replicant. Wouldn’t he too have to be a special replicant that can procreate in order for that to be the case? That would be dumb.

Rachel was a replicant and she could procreate, so Deckard being able to have kids doesn't prove anything either way.

Since Villeneuve has said the movie is deliberately ambiguous, I don't think there's any determinative plot point. You can basically choose whichever reading you prefer.

 

[KraftyKrankins]

Rachel was a replicant and she could procreate, so Deckard being able to have kids doesn't prove anything either way.

Since Villeneuve has said the movie is deliberately ambiguous, I don't think there's any determinative plot point. You can basically choose whichever reading you prefer.

Exactly. He could've been a replicant as well. It's not mutually exclusive.

 

[airjoca]

She makes memories for replicants. He just happened to get one that was based on a real event in her life. Or that’s how I took it.

But why would she be imagining snow exactly when K is dying in the snow?

Either she is his true twin and was sharing his pain/experience, or she was creating the movie memories for us replicants in the audience.

 

[gatti-man]

What a movie wow. So great I’m flooored.

 

[Astral]

Rachel was a replicant and she could procreate, so Deckard being able to have kids doesn't prove anything either way.

Since Villeneuve has said the movie is deliberately ambiguous, I don't think there's any determinative plot point. You can basically choose whichever reading you prefer.

So male replicants all have working sperm and shit?

 

[Turbo Killer]

did they ever explain in this universe why they needed slave ai fleshy dudes for offworld labor vs just robots?

Maybe Leto wanted to fuck a replicant and have kids.

 

[KodaRuss]

I dont think I was ever this suprised by all the twists in a movie. Villeneuve is just amazing. I want to see it all over again right now.

 

[Sean C]

I think there was plenty of doubt regarding Joi, 'everything you want to see/hear' was the slogan right? Definitely open to interpretation though.

It's certainly open to interpretation, but I think mine is more in keeping with the movie's themes and K/"Joe"'s arc.

Blade Runner is all about exploring the nature of humanity, particularly in relation to men's creations, and making the point that those creations do have humanity despite their not being thought to or meant to. We don't really have the specifics of how these AIs develop, but we also don't know why K, despite being a replicant of the class that is meant to be obedient, ends up not being obedient -- beyond that he developed/chose to.

Moreover, Joi's scenes have weight to them. Take the moment where she walks out into the rain (another "tears in rain" echo, maybe). Villeneuve films this moment primarily from Joi's POV, like the scene is as much about her as K. We don't see it as K being entranced by this fakery, we just watch her looking at her own hands as the rain causes her to solidify.

And, as I said, K's arc is moving past the artificial "chosen one" narrative and choosing to fight for a cause, even at the risk to his own life, which allows him to invest it with meaning. Joi insisted on following K at the risk of her own demise, even saying that by abandoning her pseudo-immortality she could become a "real girl".

So male replicants all have working sperm and shit?

I don't see that that's any more implausible than female replicants having working ovaries.

Beyond that, the replicants seem to be primarily or exclusively organic creations.

 

[jett]

Interesting question. This is what I don't get. Rachel had twins or no? The copy in this case was just scrambled records? How did K manage to get her memories?

One-eye makes it clear there was only one baby. She also mentions how everyone else also thought they were the chosen one, and that's how they "believed.". I took that to mean they also had that memory implanted in them, maybe on purpose by Rachel Jr. to assemble her revolutionary army or really who fucking knows.

Also goddamn these characters needed more memorable names.

 

[krazen]

did they ever explain in this universe why they needed slave ai fleshy dudes for offworld labor vs just robots?

He said somethig about how it would exponentially increase the amount of replicants as slaves. Which makes sense in a chattel slavery type way, imagine if every two tv’s in your house guaranteed a third popping up, lol. Plus at least from what we saw with the replicants I would assume its a harder process then childbirth

 

[kris.]

How in the world did we get so lucky that BOTH Twin Peaks: The Return and Blade Runner 2049 lived up to their respective originals?

What a year.

Dude right?
Just got out. Kinda stunned at just how much I ended up loving this.

 

[Jeffrey]

wait, Joe suppose to have died at the end? Thought he was more... just at peace. Guy seems to have handled every other flesh wound just fine.

 

[KraftyKrankins]

The biggest thing I disliked in the movie (more so than the OST) was how easily telegraphable most of the plot points were in the movie. The Memory Maker being the kid, K being or not being a replicant, Rachel's stuff. Managed to guess almost everything way before it happened.

I dont think I was ever this suprised by all the twists in a movie. Villeneuve is just amazing. I want to see it all over again right now.

Heh, funny how differently the movie worked on both of us.

 

[krazen]

wait, Joe suppose to have died at the end? Thought he was more... just at peace. Guy seems to have handled every other flesh wound just fine.

Nah, she gutted him from the side with a pretty long knife. Even when he got hurt in the ‘New Vegas’ explosiom with Ford and got stabbed inthe stomach the other replicants had to come in, save him, patch him up

 

[Chained Prometheus]

Just got back to the house after a 90 minute long drive from the IMAX theater with my dad. Definitely going to be seeing this in theaters again.

And yeah, I personally prefer 2049 over the original film by a significant margin. I wouldn't be surprised if the original still ends up being more influential and iconic as a whole to people in general, but I found myself preferring the overall execution of 2049. The central mystery, even though I'd already been spoiled on it a few days ago, was far more engaging to me than Deckard's hunt to find Roy, Pris, Zhora and Leon was in the original film.

My dad, who really doesn't care much for the original film, felt the same way. He's not much of a sci-fi fan in general, so I was worried he wouldn't be into this film, but he was completely sold on 2049.

 

[Adaren]

My favorite thing is how this is a movie about what it means to be human, set in a world that has all but left humanity behind. I love how every futuristic landscape just feels empty.

 

[Einchy]

I think with Joi it's definitely left ambiguous how much was just her programing and how much was her really loving K. However, I think it's clear by the end that K believes that none of it was true and she was just doing what she was programmed to do.

wait, Joe suppose to have died at the end? Thought he was more... just at peace. Guy seems to have handled every other flesh wound just fine.

They patched him up the first time but he didn't seek out any help later on since he wanted to keep Deckard save and make them think he died in the crash. But yeah, he definitely died.

 

[caesar]

It's certainly open to interpretation, but I think mine is more in keeping with the movie's themes and K/"Joe"'s arc.

Blade Runner is all about exploring the nature of humanity, particularly in relation to men's creations, and making the point that those creations do have humanity despite their not being thought to or meant to. We don't really have the specifics of how these AIs develop, but we also don't know why Gosling, despite being a replicant of the class that is meant to be obedient, ends up not being obedient -- beyond that he developed/chose to.

Moreover, Joi's scenes have weight to them. Take the moment where she walks out into the rain (another "tears in rain" echo, maybe). Villeneuve films this moment primarily from Joi's POV, like the scene is as much about her as K. We don't see it as K being entranced by this fakery, we just watch her looking at her own hands as the rain causes her to solidify.

And, as I said, K's arc is moving past the artificial "chosen one" narrative and choosing to fight for a cause, even at the risk to his own life, which allows him to invest it with meaning. Joi insisted on following K at the risk of her own demise, even saying that by abandoning her pseudo-immortality she could become a "real girl".

Great analysis, definitely coming round to it more. One of the things I felt was great about the film was how K was never said to be malfunctioning or faulty, he simply became what he did because something inside him compelled him to do so.

The 'real girl' part resonated with me as well, as did her plain jealousy towards the other woman when K wasn't even in the room after the love scene.

 

[NealMcCauley]

Nah, she gutted him from the side with a pretty long knife. Even when he got hurt in the ‘New Vegas’ explosiom with Ford and got stabbed inthe stomach the other replicants had to come in, save him, patch him up

To add to that the camera made a point of showing she twisted the blade. That makes a knife wound exponentially worse.

 

[Einchy]

Speaking of Luv, how the hell is Sylvia Hoeks and why is she still an unknown? She was fantastic in the movie. I hope to see her poop up in more movies.

 

[Sean C]

And yeah, I personally prefer 2049 over the original film by a significant margin. I wouldn't be surprised if the original still ends up being more influential and iconic as a whole to people in general, but I found myself preferring the overall execution of 2049. The central mystery, even though I'd already been spoiled on it a few days ago, was far more engaging to me than Deckard's hunt to find Roy, Pris, Zhora and Leon was in the original film.

My dad, who really doesn't care much for the original film, felt the same way. He's not much of a sci-fi fan in general, so I was worried he wouldn't be into this film, but he was completely sold on 2049.

I think 2049 is better than its predecessor on a story level (at a minimum, it doesn't contain a scene as badly misjudged as the Deckard/Rachel sex scene).

Visually, it can't escape the shadow of the original, which was one of the most aesthetically influential films of all-time, but that's an impossible standard.

 

[broncobuster]

Joi trying to convince K that he was birthed/the child was telling him what he wants to hear. It’s ambiguous. Even telling him to delete her from the home unit could be feeding into K’s desires. Joi is shown to take the initiative, if she believes it’s in K’s interest, based on some psychological profile she has of him.

 

[KodaRuss]

The biggest thing I disliked in the movie (more so than the OST) was how easily telegraphable most of the plot points were in the movie. The Memory Maker being the kid, K being or not being a replicant, Rachel's stuff. Managed to guess almost everything way before it happened.



Heh, funny how differently the movie worked on both of us.

Given enough time anyone can think of a multiple possibilities of how any movie would end. I believe this movie kept me so engrossed in what was actually happening on screen that I had little time to focus on what was possibly going to happen.

 

[KodaRuss]

Speaking of Luv, how the hell is Sylvia Hoeks and why is she still an unknown? She was fantastic in the movie. I hope to see her poop up in more movies.

I really dont want to see her do that but yeah she was really great. Loved her character.

 

[zelas]

Ah you're right, she knew he had killed Dave Bautista. How, I can't say I guess!

I also don't understand what was the deal with K's supervisor, in general. I'm not sure her character made much sense.

She had to have known a blade runner got Bautista. Maybe her resistance was checking out a bunch of them and they stumbled upon him and his pictures of a dead tree.

I'm kind of with you on K's supervisor though. I get the whole keep things secret aspect, but after K was so blatantly going rogue idk what her goals were. I mean she liked him, but that much? They didn't really justify that.

 

[Sean C]

Joi trying to convince K that he was birthed/the child was telling him what he wants to hear. It’s ambiguous. Even telling him to delete her from the home unit could be feeding into K’s desires. Joi is shown to take the initiative, if she believes it’s in K’s interest, based on some psychological profile she has of him.

As I said, it's open to you to read it that way, but I don't see that that fits with the film's thematics at all, or how the film handles her. We're even shown her interacting with people when K isn't around, where she displays emotional attachment.

 

[BronsonLee]

K's supervisor was fond of him so she gave him a bit of a leash because he hadn't really had tons of trouble before, and he also said that he killed the kid

She protected him in that scene with Luv (ugh when she crushed the glass, ughguhguhguhguhg) because screw Luv

 

[Chained Prometheus]

I think 2049 is better than its predecessor on a story level (at a minimum, it doesn't contain a scene as badly misjudged as the Deckard/Rachel sex scene).

Visually, it can't escape the shadow of the original, which was one of the most aesthetically influential films of all-time, but that's an impossible standard.

Nah fam, Villeneuve and Deakins knocked it out of the fucking ballpark with this one. It owes just as much to films like Stalker, The Sacrifice, The Shining and Se7en as it does the original Blade Runner. There's a much wider range of visuals on display here and that imagery gets pretty mind boggling- especially that sex scene.

The only real arguments that I think anyone could seriously make over something the original does better than 2049 are the score and the villains. From there on out, it's either toe to toe or 2049 taking the lead.

 

[KraftyKrankins]

Just noticed this about my watching history for the past few days. I need to change it up a bit lol

 

[jett]

One Blade Runner has Rutger Hauer going on about Tanhauser gates and c-beams. The other doesn't.

Not even close people.

 

[Sean C]

Nah fam, Villeneuve and Deakins knocked it out of the fucking ballpark with this one. It owes just as much to films like Stalker, The Sacrifice, The Shining and Se7en as it does the original Blade Runner. There's a much wider range of visuals on display here and that imagery gets pretty mind boggling- especially that sex scene.

The only real arguments that I think anyone could seriously make over something the original does better than 2049 are the score and the villains. From there on out, it's either toe to toe or 2049 taking the lead.

The original Blade Runner was genre-defining on an aesthetic level. Blade Runner 2049 is gorgeous, but it will not have that level of impact; it's hewing within a template for post-apocalyptic futures that other films, including the original, helped establish.

 

[KraftyKrankins]

One Blade Runner has Rutger Hauer going on about Tanhauser gates and c-beams. The other doesn't.

Not even close people.

One has a naked Ana de Armas, the other one doesn't.

Clearly 2049 is the Citizen Kane of Blade Runner movies.

Spoiler

I don't know where I'm going with this.

 

[Adaren]

I think 2049 is better than its predecessor on a story level (at a minimum, it doesn't contain a scene as badly misjudged as the Deckard/Rachel sex scene).

This is accurate. When I think back to the original, I grimace at the Deckard/Rachel scene.

On the other hand, it's kind of funny that 2049's entire plot stems from that scene. It certainly paints Deckard and Rachel's relationship in a less creepy light. So in some ways, 2049 is directly trying to fix one of the weakest aspects of the original.

 

[NealMcCauley]

One Blade Runner has Rutger Hauer going on about Tanhauser gates and c-beams. The other doesn't.

Not even close people.

I took it as 2019 off world was new and fascinating. 2049 off world was old hat and standard.

 

[Chained Prometheus]

The original Blade Runner was genre-defining on an aesthetic level. Blade Runner 2049 is gorgeous, but it will not have that level of impact; it's hewing within a template for post-apocalyptic futures that other films, including the original, helped establish.

By that token though, I could just as easily point back to the works that inspired the look of the original Blade Runner. It's more like Citizen Kane in that it took from various existing works visually and laid it all on the table as one unified vision.

That doesn't change the importance of Blade Runner or how visually stunning it is, but it's really more of a very important link in a long, storied chain of a visual style that traces back to Fritz Lang's Metropolis and possibly even before that. 2049 is now the latest link in that chain- time will tell what sort of impact it has on the template moving forward. It certainly offers some new ideas, or at least repurposes ideas from other films to new use here.

 

[zelas]

Nah fam, Villeneuve and Deakins knocked it out of the fucking ballpark with this one. It owes just as much to films like Stalker, The Sacrifice, The Shining and Se7en as it does the original Blade Runner. There's a much wider range of visuals on display here and that imagery gets pretty mind boggling- especially that sex scene.

The only real arguments that I think anyone could seriously make over something the original does better than 2049 are the score and the villains. From there on out, it's either toe to toe or 2049 taking the lead.

Come on. Sure this movie is better in certain regards but its not topping the original when it comes to visual influence. Compared to the original it may have had a wider range of visuals, but not compared to the work already done in the genre influence by Blade Runner. The visual concept has been worked over for decades, there are plenty of scenes in 2049 that you can connect to the original film and films that were inspired by it years later.

Like almost every scene in Blade Runner was unprecedented. Outside of 2049's take on AI love making what hasn't been done before?

 

[BronsonLee]

Blade Runer OG really hasn't aged well
Visually 2049 is ridiculous

 

[broncobuster]

As I said, it's open to you to read it that way, but I don't see that that fits with the film's thematics at all, or how the film handles her. We're even shown her interacting with people when K isn't around, where she displays emotional attachment.

I actually agree with your take, but also feel it’s ambiguous enough that even those scenes could be read as Joi acting in service of K.

 

[Einchy]

Blade Runer OG really hasn't aged well

what are you doing

 

[ronaldthump]

Come on. Sure this movie is better in certain regards but its not topping the original when it comes to visual influence. Compared to the original it may have had a wider range of visuals, but not compared to the work already done in the genre influence by Blade Runner. The visual concept has been worked over for decades, there are plenty of scenes in 2049 that you can connect to the original film and films that were inspired by it years later.

Like almost every scene in Blade Runner was unprecedented. Outside of 2049's take on AI love making what hasn't been done before?

gotta be honest re: 2049. If you subbed in city scapes from Ghost in the Shell in the footage, I'd be like "id buy that".

there's very little iconography that it has that ins't borrowed from BR. It's just newer with better CGI but nothing really stands out. The whole orange city bit, I really don't remember much outside of the weird oversized bent over women.

Blade Runer OG really hasn't aged well
Visually 2049 is ridiculous

disagree. OG BR is very distinctive in its tech noir futurism. the rain, the shadows.

 

[Prompto]

Blade Runer OG really hasn't aged well

 

[Geist-]

How fucking good was this? As far as I'm concerned this is one of the best modern sequels to a classic movie ever, equal to Mad Max Fury Road. So good it actually made the orginal better.

I'll probably go see this a few more times honestly.

 

[BronsonLee]

what are you doing

Telling truths as a noob who watched it last week for the first time

NO NOT AGAIN

 

[F0rneus]

Best sequel to anything ever? Best sequel to anything ever. Sorry ESB, or Godfather II, or....Fuck it.

 

[NealMcCauley]

I liked that the rug in the casino entrance said "Vintage Casino" like the entire building was intentionally created to recall better times.

 

[Chained Prometheus]

Blade Runer OG really hasn't aged well
Visually 2049 is ridiculous

Not sure if you're just trying to kill jett by sending him into an aneurysm brought on by sheer rage, but my dad shares those sentiments with you. I actually got into a bit of a debate with him about that the other day, after we rewatched the Final Cut.

 

[ronaldthump]

Just got back to the house after a 90 minute long drive from the IMAX theater with my dad. Definitely going to be seeing this in theaters again.

And yeah, I personally prefer 2049 over the original film by a significant margin. I wouldn't be surprised if the original still ends up being more influential and iconic as a whole to people in general, but I found myself preferring the overall execution of 2049. The central mystery, even though I'd already been spoiled on it a few days ago, was far more engaging to me than Deckard's hunt to find Roy, Pris, Zhora and Leon was in the original film.

My dad, who really doesn't care much for the original film, felt the same way. He's not much of a sci-fi fan in general, so I was worried he wouldn't be into this film, but he was completely sold on 2049.

I'm just gonna have to say that this new film isn't going to iconic or influential (IMO). the same way Oblivion isn't iconic or influential.


this new film can't and won't diminish the impact of OG BR. It doesn't add much if anything to that film's visual vernacular.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

I loved it. All the slowness really made the brutality pop. The locations were fantastic, and it left me with several questions. So many surreal things. To see AI trying to find humanity in a world where human children are slaves, and sold to anyone with passing interest. It still throws me that there was a multi AI sex scene. Everyone in that room wasn't real. I mean the scene was cool by itself, but everything being a creation itself is what gets me.

It wasn't long enough though, and I genuinely mean that. I wanted it to go past the end. I wanted Joi to have a scene with Decker before she died. Wanted to know more about Leto, and the revolution.

I honestly feel like this was 1.5 movies, I mean I know that it was structured well, low point ,climax and all that, but I feel like you could stop after K gets suspended, and have a second movie introducing Deckard, with a third confronting Leto. I mean I don't think this will get a sequel, and that's perfectly fine, but still, I want more. This is a fantastically horrid world.

<3 Joi

 

[ronaldthump]

I loved it. All the slowness really made the brutality pop. The locations were fantastic, and it left me with several questions. So many surreal things. To see AI trying to find humanity in a world where human children are slaves, and sold to anyone with passing interest. It still throws me that there was a multi AI sex scene. Everyone in that room wasn't real. I mean the scene was cool by itself, but everything being a creation itself is what gets me.

It wasn't long enough though, and I genuinely mean that. I wanted it to go past the end. I wanted Joi to have a scene with Decker before she died. Wanted to know more about Leto, and the revolution.

I honestly feel like this was 1.5 movies, I mean I know that it was structured well, low point ,climax and all that, but I feel like you could stop after K gets suspended, and have a second movie introducing Deckard, with a third confronting Leto. I mean I don't think this will get a sequel, and that's perfectly fine, but still, I want more. This is a fantastically horrid world.

<3 Joi

Don't really think BR needs another sequel. I'll watch it. But I don't think a robot uprising movie is what BR is all about and what you'd want to watch on screen.

especially not with that boring AF daughter, one eyed rebellion leader or the hooker bot.