Comics Creators

Blade Runner 2049 SPOILER THREAD


You wouldn’t have needed to cut any scenes/dialogue at all; there’s a lot of trimming that could have been done by just shaving a bit of time off of every lingering shot, and just tightening the whole thing (I think anyway)

I did enjoy it, and I think it’s a good film that does play a lot with the ideas of the original without simply duplicating it but, yeah, I was just a wee bit disappointed at the end.

Those eyes though. Totally worth it :slight_smile:


How dare you?

Everything to do with the Rebellion though - chop that off.
Deckard’s daughter being almost 30 makes it even more ridiculous.
Nice way to bide your time with that revolution.


I was thinking along those lines, yeah. Like how Ridley Scott added a bunch of scenes to the Alien special edition, but it’s about 2 minutes shorter overall.


Agreed. I mean, especially when K is on the hunt for the child/Deckard…that’s when you can start quickening up the transitions.


I felt a bit guilty watching the Kermode interview that I just hadn’t “got it” but I think it’s more that Kermode is so in love with the whole thing rather than me not understanding it.


Two further observations:

  1. At this point, I assume if Harrison Ford is going to show up in a sequel to a beloved 80’s appearance he will be a deadbeat dad

  2. I spent the entire movie convinced Luv was being played by Tatiana Malsany.


Yeah, that is a good way to put it. It does have a bit of too much obsession with the events of the first film to the point that it can’t really be its own story. Really, I was left thinking… okay, Deckard is with his daughter soooo… what happens next? It looks like it’s going to be a really awkward moment there. Do they run away together?

That’s the weird thing about the original Blade Runner when you think about it. In the opening text, it tells us this:

Early in the 21st Century, THE TYRELL CORPORATION advanced robot evolution into the NEXUS phase - a being virtually identical to a human - known as a Replicant. The NEXUS 6 Replicants were superior in strength and agility, and at least equal in intelligence, to the genetic engineers who created them. Replicants were used Off-World as slave labor, in the hazardous exploration and colonization of other planets. After a bloody mutiny by a NEXUS 6 combat team in an Off-World colony, Replicants were declared illegal on earth - under penalty of death. Special police squads - BLADE RUNNER UNITS - had orders to shoot to kill, upon detection, any trespassing Replicant This was not called execution. It was called retirement.

So Blade Runner units were created after a Nexus 6 mutiny. So many, if not all, of the replicants that Deckard had found and retired before he left the force would have been Nexus 6. Possibly, there would have been older models, but if Deckard had been a Blade Runner for any length of time, he would’ve encounter the Nexus 6 since a mutiny by them is what caused the creation of the Blade Runners.

However, when he first sees a picture of Batty, he acts like he’s never seen a model like this before and Bryant says “Nexus 6” like it is a new model. Then he goes on to talk about designers thinking they might develop their own emotions and having 4-year lifespans when, goddamn, that seems like the first thing you’d learn in Blade Runner training. And then he wants Deck to go to Tyrell and run a VK test on the Nexus 6 model they have there when, Jesus, people, haven’t you been running those on Nexus 6 for pretty much all the time? I mean, Batty is already reaching the end of his 4-year lifespan and it’s not like he was the first Nexus 6 they ever made.


How long was he retired?


Careful with that turn of phrase when talking about Blade Runner.


Olmos did it excellently.


The one theory I saw was that Deckard was a Replicant based on Gaff’s memories. Gaff was the best BR until he was seriously injured. Not wanting Gaff’s skills to go to waste, they copied his memories into a Replicant who would become Deckard. It’s one of the reasons Gaff always seemed to know where Deckard was. Gaff knows himself.


But Tyrell also mentions that she is an experimental replicant, with implanted memories that made the process of detecting her more difficult.

And then we also find she was a fertile one, so that’s two new “features” already, and one of them was implemented in the next generation of replicants three years later.


Could be. Given that she dies anyway though, its sort of moot.


It’s too bad she didn’t live. But then again, who does?


I still think that line, the theatrical ending narration, and the set-up of this make up something more poignant than separated.


For me Bladerunner has always been about raising fundamental philosophical questions regarding the human condition.

Most notably, can a mutually loving relationship exist between a human and man made machine?

If we accept the possibility of that then it opens a huge can of philosophical worms, for then cannot such machines be equally as imaginative, destructive, jealous, greedy, compassionate as us humans except perhaps on a more rational basis?

They might even be the legitimate heirs of whatever purpose, if any, humanity ever had.

In B2, the main push on that philosophical side, was the relationship which developed between K and Joi. This not only removed the need for a real human altogether but because Joi was a hologram and not even a physical machine, it suggested that such a level of emotional existence could be possible simply between two entities of sufficiently organised information whether stored in a fixed or mobile receptical.

I can see a B3 but it would have to be based on the fight for equality by the rebel androids. A metaphor for all kinds of minority struggles but one which has been covered many times by other vehicles. I cannot see the philosophical aspect of what it means to be human and whether it is a unique form of sentience would be pushed much further though.


Yeah, the first asked “What does it mean to be human?”, while this echews that and asks “Does being human matter?”


Rachael is definitely referred to as a Nexus-6 in Blade Runner, even if she’s an experimental one. Deckard though, well, I’ve always thought that he was a new Nexus-7. Maybe the first Nexus-7.

And Nexus-7’s could easily have indefinite life-spans like the Nexus-8’s.

Who said he took his wife there when she was pregnant? Rachael died in 2021. Blade Runner took place in 2019. That’s two years that Deckard and Rachael were on the run together, before they separated.

They could easily have hid in Vegas, where Deckard acquired the wood, gone elsewhere and then after they separated, Deckard could have returned there at any point in the past twenty-something years.

If they were on the run, then they would have been constantly on the move, rather than hiding in one place.

Plus at some point they would’ve had to have encountered the Resistance, who were certainly not based in Vegas, since they had no clue where Deckard was.

Tyrell definitely can’t be trusted, if he even is Tyrell, it was the original intention that the Tyrell we meet is just a replicant, and that Batty would find another room containing a life support pod containing the real Tyrell after he’d killed the copy.

JF would then reveal that the life support pod had failed in 2013, and that the real Tyrell was long dead.

Like the scene with the Sixth Replicant Mary, it was cut because of a writers strike.



The writers Fancher and Green and the actor Harrison Ford have stated that Deckard was human.

Apparently Scott wanted him to be a replicant in the 1st movie but after discussion agreed he was human.

The writers were annoyed, however, that Scott still introduced the ambiguity with the eyes test thing.

Since then, the ambiguity has gained a life of its own (irony) and therefore decided to keep it that way for the 2nd.
i.e. You aren’t supposed to be able to tell.

But it is clear Ford played him as a human.