Nate watches Blade Runner 2 [049]

This is probably the first film I’ve seen where I can say ALL reviews of it are true.  Positive, negative, all of them are accurate.

It’s a bit of a riddle when you think about it.  Should a sequel stand alone or should seeing the previous film be a requirement?  Make it too much like the first and people complain about it being a repeat.  Make it too different and we wonder why the film wasn’t just made it’s own original piece.  In theory there’s a very precise sweet spot for sequels to aim for.

So on one level Blade Runner 2049 (BR2) hits that spot.  You don’t have to have seen any of the myriad versions of the first film to follow the story in this one but you will get a lot more out of it.  The sequel does continue that world and build upon the foundation of what the first created.

I must confess, Blade Runner never quite “synced” with me.  Oh I recognize it as visually beautiful and acknowledge that it has a place in sci-fi history, but it just doesn’t grab me personally. (or at least, none of the cuts I’ve seen yet)  Certainly not like Inception or Interstellar did.  The sequel?  Eh… a bit more.

Part of the issue is that the movie has many long, slow moments, which are great for atmosphere, but also invite my mind to wander and start analyzing the world.  Then I start noticing things don’t always “sync.”  For instance, the police chief in the film talks about a “wall” with civilization she’s trying to maintain.  Yet when the main character goes home, we see that he lives in a building with regular humans, not in a separated section with other replicants.  The “wall” is more implied by the racist terms tossed out by faceless extras – but then we have the xmen problem where the difference between a replicant and a normal human isn’t readily visible.  How can racism work in a society where one race can pass for the other?  It just doesn’t seem functional.

My other problem is that the main conflict of the movie (no spoiler, you’ve seen this in trailers) is that the main industrialist wants to make replicants that can self-breed.  But… how can he not?  Reproduction is not some great mystery to us NOW and we regularly have technology that works to solve couples’ infertility.  If you’re a company who can create entire humans from scratch – AND make them better – how can you have trouble making them fertile?  It would take a bit more effort to render them infertile.  Heck part of the movie revolves around implanting memories – which is HARDER than breeding!  So for much of this movie I kept wondering where the central problem was coming from.  It’s like watching the head of microsoft, while building xboxes, complaining that he can’t construct a tire-swing.

Still, the movie is well made all around.  You can follow it well enough on its own but it does pay more dividends if you’ve seen the first film.  I would say that it nails the sweet spot for sequels.  Of course the irony is that it does this with a film that never really needed a sequel.

The question of “what is Harrison Ford” from the first movie is… left open.  It’s heavily implied Deckard is a replicant, but never outright stated so there are still places the “Deckard is human” camp can weave their case*.

The writing is quite good in its competence, and I enjoyed how it assumed and played on the audience’s expectations.  The film is beautiful to watch, worth the price of a big screen viewing (but avoid 3D, it’s very dark).  It’s one of those I don’t regret watching it.

Objectively the movie is about a 4 out of 5 – it is good scifi.  But for me personally, it is about a 2.

Base whether you should see it on how you felt about the first one.








*I’m a bit more on the “Deckard is human” side, especially since it could change the problem in this sequel to trying to interbreed humans and replicants could be workable.

Also I can’t help but wonder how “the child” – if she had an autoimmune disease, lasted any amount of time in that orphanage/workshop we saw in the film.  Just… how???

I do really respect the writers for setting up the twist by using the expected twist of “Ryan Gosling is Ford’s child” to misdirect the audience.  That was a masterstroke and writers everywhere should probably take notes.


2 thoughts on “Nate watches Blade Runner 2 [049]

  1. Nice review – I haven’t seen it yet, probably wait until it hits Netflix. I was a bit ‘eh’ on the original, so not lining up to see the sequel.

    Small disagreement, neutered a bit by my not knowing the argument as presented in the film: it’s one thing to genetically engineer an eyeball, say, or even a whole human grown in a vat. It’s another altogether to engineer it so that all that previous engineering is present in any gametes, AND that such gametes combine correctly and fruitfully with appropriate gametes from other natural or engineered people. I’d say orders of magnitude more difficult – the first (plenty difficult itself) just has to concern itself with making, say, an eyeball that works well for a single limited lifetime. The second has to solve: make whatever engineering used in that eyeball present in any gametes the engineered human produces, AND engineer it so that it can combine and function correctly with any number of other possible ‘build an eye’ instruction kits that might be out there in natural or engineered other humans. Multiply by however many other parts or systems have been modified. These problems have been solved via trial and error over a couple billion years and trillions of individual gamete-gamete blendings, such that every living creature today produced by any variant of sexual reproduction has inherited what works. Unless you engineer replicants from the fertilized egg point, having done your engineering in the gametes, you, the brilliant scientist, must solve all the issues trillions of trials worked out. It might just take trillions of trials to get it right.

    But hey, I’m no scientist, I just play one on the internet.

    • Part of what people don’t get about Genetic Engineering is that the reason we take genes we want from already existing sequences and plug them into where we want them than to try and build that exact same sequence from scratch. Bio-engineered people would probably work along similar lines.

      Yes, part of the movie’s issue is that they don’t go into how the replicants are made. Whether they took existing human features and modified them OR are building them from scratch up isn’t established. The former method would be a lot easier than the latter, and solve the reproduction problem. And if you can do the latter, then why not do the former?

      Furthermore your listed problems mostly arise from sexual reproduction. So then the question is, why not have the replicants reproduce asexually? Make them all female-ish and they can just have copies be activated and grown in their wombs. It would solve just about all of your listed hurdles and be easier to accomplish given that earth shows most life resorted to asexual copying long before the more advanced sex work got into beta testing.

      Also like I said, this is a world where they can manipulate MEMORY. Say what you will about getting sex to work, but it’s still going to be easier than getting memories in and out of the brain to the point they can tell which are legit and fake memories.

      And indeed that could be another interesting world building feature. Have a variety of replicants: Vaguely female replicants who perform various tasks and reproduce copies at regular interval. Stronger, more male-like replicants who are designed with greater muscle mass to make them functional soldiers, cops, and any other job requiring strength. Then you can have the sterile replicants designed for sex work (oh yeah, that’s kind of in the movie).

      I should note this one definitely earns its R rating for nudity and some themes. A couple of F-bombs but not constant. The violence is about the same level as the original.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.