Blade Runner 2049 (October 6th, 2017) *SPOILERS*

[greygoose]

3rd viewing tonight with the wife on her first....much Like Fury Road, you see or realize things on multiple viewing you may have missed.

Here are my questions and ponderings.....

1. Did Ana set up this whole thing just to find her Dad? I got that feeling this time. She was responsible for planting the memories of the horse after all. I think her tears when seeing K’s memories were because she realized a Rep was on the path to find her Dad. Since she couldn’t leave she used K as a proxy to find Deckard and get him back to her.

That was my thinking. The beauty being that someone else could think differently and neither of us would be wrong.

 

[xipotec]

I took it (her calling him Joe) as indicative of the shared programming between all the Joi programs and that a "Joe" might be the common nickname for all Joi clients the way clients of today's prostitutes are sometimes called "Johns." However I do believe that both K and his particular Joi did indeed will themselves into having souls, so to speak. Joi was listening in on Lieutenant Joshi and K's conversation where Joshi declared that "we're all looking for something real." So Joi took it as her new prime directive to help K become a "real boy" and since a real boy needs a real girl she strived to become that for him which is why she had to make herself less plugged in and more "mortal." K adopted the same mentality after speaking to the leader of the replicant resistance and deciding that he agreed that dying for something you believed in would be the final step toward true humanity.

Not that the film totally spells it out of course but that's my interpretation. Others might come to different conclusions which is just one of the many beautiful things about this movie.

This was my line of reasoning as well....but one might assume Joi’s programming might lend her to become human in a lot of cases.
Because a lot of people who would want a Joi would want her as a companion like a human would be.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Khev]

This was my line of reasoning as well....but one might assume Joi’s programming might lend her to become human in a lot of cases.

Agreed, which is why I am inclined to think that the next "AI uprising" will be on the part of self-aware virtual companions. Not that I ever want to see a movie depicting such events but I think it's fun to imagine such a scenario. The sex scene even begs the question as to whether they could "possess" flesh and blood replicants if they really wanted to (or possibly after a few more upgrades down the line.)

Because a lot of people who would want a Joi would want her as a companion like a human would be.

True. Though K seemed to crave a possibly unusual amount of realism from his Joi since he didn't even want her to be play acting that it was their anniversary or saying that she was happy if it was only on account of her programming. I imagine that most guys would be content with such facades and wouldn't push their companions to be more "real" than that.

She's an interesting counterpoint to the replicants from the first film who were flesh and blood, strived for self-preservation at all costs, and had no empathy for anyone else. Joi is literally the opposite in every capacity.

 

[Mad Old Lu]

Treated myself:

FANTASTIC!!!

Where and how much?

 

[Username]

This was my line of reasoning as well....but one might assume Joi’s programming might lend her to become human in a lot of cases.

My thinking(And merely opinion, not fact at all), is that Joi might *seem* human if you've only seen one(Your own). But in fact, she's made by the same people that make replicants, and very well programmed to *seem* human. But when even the large billboard ad calls K "Joe", he realises she was always only programmed to seem human. She could never be human. And i assumed that was what he realised when he saw that big version of Joi. His version was personalised(Able to talk about things he had confided in her about), but they were all the same in the end.

 

[Khev]

My thinking(And merely opinion, not fact at all), is that Joi might *seem* human if you've only seen one(Your own). But in fact, she's made by the same people that make replicants, and very well programmed to *seem* human. But when even the large billboard ad calls K "Joe", he realises she was always only programmed to seem human. She could never be human. And i assumed that was what he realised when he saw that big version of Joi. His version was personalised(Able to talk about things he had confided in her about), but they were all the same in the end.

And I absolutely love that the film allows for both viewpoints. Wallace sees all of his own creations as nothing but glorified walking toasters and the audience can see them that way too. I like to think that his physical blindness is a metaphor for him being blind to the fact that they are capable of achieving a more human level of "life" if they so choose. If he only brings out his little seeing eye drones for special occasions then it's possible that he's never witnessed (or paid attention to like during the "birthing" scene) Luv herself displaying open emotions.

 

[Username]

And I absolutely love that the film allows for both viewpoints. Wallace sees all of his own creations as nothing but glorified walking toasters and the audience can see them that way too. I like to think that his physical blindness is a metaphor for him being blind to the fact that they are capable of achieving a more human level of "life" if they so choose. If he only brings out his little seeing eye drones for special occasions then it's possible that he's never witnessed (or paid attention to like during the "birthing" scene) Luv herself displaying open emotions.

Of course. The beauty of this movie, like the original, is that it allows for a hundred different ideas, all of which have the capacity to be correct.
It's amazing.
And the really great part is that the people who *get* this movie, aren't your average argumentative idiots. We are all able to take new ideas on board and discuss, not argue.
It's refreshing.

 

[crows]

Agreed, which is why I am inclined to think that the next "AI uprising" will be on the part of self-aware virtual companions. Not that I ever want to see a movie depicting such events but I think it's fun to imagine such a scenario. The sex scene even begs the question as to whether they could "possess" flesh and blood replicants if they really wanted to (or possibly after a few more upgrades down the line.)



True. Though K seemed to crave a possibly unusual amount of realism from his Joi since he didn't even want her to be play acting that it was their anniversary or saying that she was happy if it was only on account of her programming. I imagine that most guys would be content with such facades and wouldn't push their companions to be more "real" than that.

She's an interesting counterpoint to the replicants from the first film who were flesh and blood, strived for self-preservation at all costs, and had no empathy for anyone else. Joi is literally the opposite in every capacity.

 

[Khev]

Of course. The beauty of this movie, like the original, is that it allows for a hundred different ideas, all of which have the capacity to be correct.
It's amazing.
And the really great part is that the people who *get* this movie, aren't your average argumentative idiots. We are all able to take new ideas on board and discuss, not argue.
It's refreshing.

Absolutely! I've basically washed my hands of participating in the movie threads that attract the most "argumentative idiots" as you rightly called them, lol.

But in BR 2049 I could even see Wallace as being too arrogant to run his own baseline tests on his creations which might have paved the way for Luv to go more and more "off the reservation" on her own.

So while I like to think that K and Joi (and possibly Luv) do acquire "souls" you see them as machines merely acting out the motions of being "real," which means in the scene where Luv stomps on Joi's remote it's just three soulless products all "pretending" to be at odds with each other in that moment? That is so trippy and unsettling, lol. I *love* the various interpretations of this flick.

 

[Username]

Absolutely! I've basically washed my hands of participating in the movie threads that attract the most "argumentative idiots" as you rightly called them, lol.

In an enlightened environment, you can add ideas and your peers will possibly take them on board. I'm not 100% convinced of my own ideas. You may yet convince me, lol.

So while I like to think that K and Joi (and possibly Luv) do acquire "souls" you see them as machines merely acting out the motions of being "real," which means in the scene where Luv stomps on Joi's remote it's just three soulless products all "pretending" to be at odds with each other in that moment? That is so trippy and unsettling, lol. I *love* the various interpretations of this flick.

Yeah. It all makes you *think*. And THAT is the best part.

 

[Khev]

In an enlightened environment, you can add ideas and your peers will possibly take them on board. I'm not 100% convinced of my own ideas. You may yet convince me, lol.

Ditto, I can easily see myself alternating between interpretations each time I watch it based on my mood. Though I think the sappy part of me will always want to gravitate toward K and Luv being genuinely alive with souls and whatnot, lol.

Yeah. It all makes you *think*. And THAT is the best part.

Oh yes and here's where your interpretation gets *really* interesting: What type of being is Deckard's daughter in your mind (I was going to call her Ana since that's her name in the film but didn't want to confuse her with Joi actress Ana de Armis.) Is she half-human/half-replicant to you or do you subscribe to the notion that Deckard was a replicant thus making Ana 100% artificial? K is under the impression that beings who are "born" inheritly have souls, do you agree and thus consider Ana as having a soul on that basis alone? Or does her human half (if you allow for Deckard to be one as I do) override her artificial half and automatically provide a soul to her entire being?

So many awesome things to wrap your head around.

 

[ZaCHw117]

My thinking(And merely opinion, not fact at all), is that Joi might *seem* human if you've only seen one(Your own). But in fact, she's made by the same people that make replicants, and very well programmed to *seem* human. But when even the large billboard ad calls K "Joe", he realises she was always only programmed to seem human. She could never be human. And i assumed that was what he realised when he saw that big version of Joi. His version was personalised(Able to talk about things he had confided in her about), but they were all the same in the end.

Or were they though?

If you look at the power of choice in the film, it almost argues the opposite point, that it doesn't matter what were made of, but what we do and decide that makes us human. (Or more human than human).

One of the biggest choices Joi made in the film was to abandon her home box, so if she was lost or broke, essentially she would die. "Like a real girl." This wasn't K's choice but Joi's. Does that mean she has goals of her own? Same with when Joi decides to take his V card, that wasn't K's decision, but Joi's.

So, when K gets hit with a choice at the end, when he's looking at the billboard, and he knows he's not "special", is the billboard fueling his anger and disappointment, or his power of choice? A replicant wouldn't of made all the choices he made. "Dying for the right cause is the most human thing we can do."

K made his choice. He choose to act on his human instincts and to save Deckard/Anna because it was the right thing to do.

Humans will run into a house on fire to save a baby that they didn't even know because "it's the right thing to do".

The way you describe the scene is, ultimately, the way I saw the scene too. But out of all the scenes in the flick, this one is the most interesting, it's much like the Deckard being a replicant thing, it can be interpreted many different ways.

 

[Cap'n Cook]

that’s damn cool!

Thanks.

SA-WEET!

FANTASTIC!!!

Where and how much?

It's long sold out now (within hours) so I had to go to eBay. Mine was £320.

So, when K gets hit with a choice at the end, when he's looking at the billboard, and he knows he's not "special", is the billboard fueling his anger and disappointment, or his power of choice? A replicant wouldn't of made all the choices he made. "Dying for the right cause is the most human thing we can do."

K made his choice. He choose to act on his human instincts and to save Deckard/Anna because it was the right thing to do.

Absolutely agreed.

 

[Username]

Ditto, I can easily see myself alternating between interpretations each time I watch it based on my mood. Though I think the sappy part of me will always want to gravitate toward K and Luv being genuinely alive with souls and whatnot, lol.

Of course. I had a tear in my eye when Luv stands on the emanator. Till that point, it seemed like Joi had grown beyond her programming and had indeed become more than the sum of her parts. For me, the scene with the big billboard shows that although Joi *seemed* real before, they all had the base code. But i love hearing other interpretations. Just like in the original movie.

Oh yes and here's where your interpretation gets *really* interesting: What type of being is Deckard's daughter in your mind (I was going to call her Ana since that's her name in the film but didn't want to confuse her with Joi actress Ana de Armis.) Is she half-human/half-replicant to you or do you subscribe to the notion that Deckard was a replicant thus making Ana 100% artificial? K is under the impression that beings who are "born" inheritly have souls, do you agree and thus consider Ana as having a soul on that basis alone? Or does her human half (if you allow for Deckard to be one as I do) override her artificial half and automatically provide a soul to her entire being?

That is indeed quite the question. And probably is the central question of the whole movie.
My interpretation is(And has always been), that Deckard *is* a replicant. Just my opinion, based on the unicorn evidence. I have often read your posts on this subject but i am hesitant to engage on the subject, simply because it's a matter of opinion, and i don't mind having a differing opinion. It makes us all unique after all, but allows us to enjoy different perspectives. I have enjyed reading your reasoning and why you hold your opinion.
In any case, my idea has always been that Deckard is kept in cold storage till replicants get loose(Or worse. They keep sending Deckard after Deckard until all the replicants are dead. We DO hear that there were six, and one got fried, then four get retired. My thinking was always that they sent Deckard, he died killing the first one, then they uncrated another Deckard for the rest). The LAPD don't want to get their hands dirty, or are simply unable to deal with replicants on their own terms, so they send in Deckard. He wakes up in his apartment full of a bunch of old junk(And black and white photos? Seriously, lol?), goes to the sushi vendor and gets his orders. In this instance, Ana would have to be a child of two replicants.
I don't see any other explanation for Deckard, not when Gaff knows what his dreams are.
But, i am always willing to hear arguments to the contrary.

So many awesome things to wrap your head around.

Exactly!
It's brilliant.

Or were they though?

If you look at the power of choice in the film, it almost argues the opposite point, that it doesn't matter what were made of, but what we do and decide that makes us human. (Or more human than human).

One of the biggest choices Joi made in the film was to abandon her home box, so if she was lost or broke, essentially she would die. "Like a real girl." This wasn't K's choice but Joi's. Does that mean she has goals of her own? Same with when Joi decides to take his V card, that wasn't K's decision, but Joi's.

So, when K gets hit with a choice at the end, when he's looking at the billboard, and he knows he's not "special", is the billboard fueling his anger and disappointment, or his power of choice? A replicant wouldn't of made all the choices he made. "Dying for the right cause is the most human thing we can do."

I feel that the billboard makes him realise that no matter how real *his* Joi seemed, that it was all programming.

K made his choice. He choose to act on his human instincts and to save Deckard/Anna because it was the right thing to do.

Humans will run into a house on fire to save a baby that they didn't even know because "it's the right thing to do".

Of course.
It all starts with him thinking he could be the child, but ends with him realising who is, and the desire to do the right thing.
And also him realising that it falls to him because he has the means and the ability to reunite Deckard and his daughter.

The way you describe the scene is, ultimately, the way I saw the scene too. But out of all the scenes in the flick, this one is the most interesting, it's much like the Deckard being a replicant thing, it can be interpreted many different ways.

Well said. This, above all else is the reason this is the greatest sequel ever made. It perfectly takes the ideals of the original movie, and expands on them. It takes things to a new level, because far from providing answers, it only leaves you with more questions!!!
It's a work of genius, and it may be some time before we see it's like again.

 

[greygoose]

Of course. The beauty of this movie, like the original, is that it allows for a hundred different ideas, all of which have the capacity to be correct.
It's amazing.
And the really great part is that the people who *get* this movie, aren't your average argumentative idiots. We are all able to take new ideas on board and discuss, not argue.
It's refreshing.

Agreed.

 

[xipotec]

I fall into the following.

Deckard is a replicant. Always has been. He was a newer series designed by Tyrell to fall for Rachel. To satisfy Tyrells God complex, and see if he could make a replicant more human than human .

I think Tyrell saw what was happening to the Human race and wanted a better designed human , who would make better moral choices. Deckard , even though he is still killing replicants , it clearly being torn apart inside about it.
K does seem bothered by what he does as well, although not enough to affect his baseline. Luv, for all her anger and hate, is Clearly very upset about the treatment of replicants.

Which is what Deckard chooses for his own child eventually.

Tyrell may have been trying to replace the human species with replicants. The regular humans apparently blew up large areas of the world during the “blackout”.

So that would make Deckard , Rachel and Ana all replicants. But more importantly, hidden replicants, who could procreate and possible take over human kind.

The only problem with this theory is Ana. She is supposedly sick? But is she? Or was the sickness made up to keep people from getting to close to her and possibly seeing whom she was?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JAWS]

Ditto, I can easily see myself alternating between interpretations each time I watch it based on my mood. Though I think the sappy part of me will always want to gravitate toward K and Luv being genuinely alive with souls and whatnot, lol.



Oh yes and here's where your interpretation gets *really* interesting: What type of being is Deckard's daughter in your mind (I was going to call her Ana since that's her name in the film but didn't want to confuse her with Joi actress Ana de Armis.) Is she half-human/half-replicant to you or do you subscribe to the notion that Deckard was a replicant thus making Ana 100% artificial? K is under the impression that beings who are "born" inheritly have souls, do you agree and thus consider Ana as having a soul on that basis alone? Or does her human half (if you allow for Deckard to be one as I do) override her artificial half and automatically provide a soul to her entire being?

So many awesome things to wrap your head around.

Khev... Check your inbox

 

[crows]

I have to wonder, why did they make the advertisement joi so creepy and odd looking?
The joi we know is cute and nice and warm.
The giant joi is creepy and cold and edgy looking, black eyes, weird hair, nude.
Kind of weird that they would advertise her like that. Im sure the nudity olis for the sex appeal but she was so odd, i wonder why the director chose to do this

 

[greygoose]

i wonder why the director chose to do this

Visually, that scene is stunning.

 

[ZaCHw117]

I have to wonder, why did they make the advertisement joi so creepy and odd looking?
The joi we know is cute and nice and warm.
The giant joi is creepy and cold and edgy looking, black eyes, weird hair, nude.
Kind of weird that they would advertise her like that. Im sure the nudity olis for the sex appeal but she was so odd, i wonder why the director chose to do this

sex sells mi boi

pink joi is pretty hawt, still tho.