Loved this picture.

I definitely thought it was visually stunning. (I watched on Vudu 4K HDR, which isn't as good as Blu-Ray, but it was only $5.99 to rent it on there.)

The best sci-fi movies to me are ones where they don't explain the world at large, you're just dropped in. This isn't a movie really about the future, it's about a story that takes place there. We don't need a lot of time explaining how everything works, let's just go. I love that in Sci fi movies. But at the same time, the writers/director/etc do pay attention to the details. A small thing I liked is that there was still a Pan Am building, even though that's a company that doesn't exist in our reality anymore. The original already showed a Pan Am building in 2019, so it's still there.

But man, this story is a lot to unpack.

bobinator said:

---

A small thing I liked is that there was still a Pan Am building, even though that's a company that doesn't exist in our reality anymore. The original already showed a Pan Am building in 2019, so it's still there.

---

I think I remember seeing an Atari logo, too.

So cool that this thread has kept developing. I watched it on Jan. 17, 2018 (last night). This thread is an awesome discussion.

1. Why does K set his gun on the table in the first scene? He opens himself up to attack. (Btw, cool role for the actor who plays Drax in Guardians of the Galaxy)

2. I think the beautiful Joi character is intended to bring sadness to the viewer, driven home by the "you've had a day" comment by the giant naked Joy towards the end. It shows the bitterness of life if we truly have no free will.

3. In contrast, K's deference to Joi (e.g., "don't fuss") shows him as more human than human. A lot of humans would first abuse Joi, probably sexually. Their "preferences" - which she would fulfill - would be rather dominating and sexually focused. Then, they would lose respect for the Joi program and start to despise her. Only by treating Joi with love (putting her interests ahead of his own) did K start to have a rewarding relationship with her. That's a lesson for all of us.

4. The Jared Leto character was poorly developed.

5. Why did Luv need to proclaim herself as the best?

6. Why did Leto kill the replicant he witnessed being born? Just because he somehow knew she couldn't have babies? I must have missed something there.

Fightin TX Aggie said:

---

1. Why does K set his gun on the table in the first scene? He opens himself up to attack. (Btw, cool role for the actor who plays Drax in Guardians of the Galaxy)

---

His name is Bautista.

This post made me so happy. Love the enthusiasm.

I've watched it three times now. It truly is a masterpiece. It is gorgeous to look at, all of the characters are well developed and interesting, and the musical score is perfectly in tune with this movie's atmosphere. I love the real feeling of this movie, which builds on the reality that Ridley Scott established back in 1982. I never expected that anyone could do a worthy sequel to Blade Runner, or that anyone would even try. So I was pretty much of a meh attitude when this sequel was announced, but of course, having loved the original, I was going to see this one. I was blown away at my first viewing in the theater. They came up with a story that is compelling, and even sets us up for another chapter if they choose to continue.

The only downside here is that, for my third viewing, I showed it to my wife. She is not really into science fiction unless it is flashy with lots of out of this world gadgets or what-have-you. Think Star Trek. She fell asleep during the middle of the movie, and she was not terribly pleased with the ending, in that she wanted more than what they showed of Deckard meeting his daughter.

I have now elevated this one above Dunkirk as my favorite movie of 2017, as Dunkirk does not play out the same way on TV as it did for me at the theater.

Fightin TX Aggie said:

---

2. I think the beautiful Joi character is intended to bring sadness to the viewer, driven home by the "you've had a day" comment by the giant naked Joy towards the end. It shows the bitterness of life if we truly have no free will.

---

Joi also, like an Alexa, seems to be connected to a central server that is used to gather info on the people (or replicants) that use them. They were using it to monitor K right? Which is why Luv reacted when he broke the chip in the wall? When he did that he disconnected Joi from the central server.

I thought that's why the catwalk seen with the giant nude Joi was especially poignant. It calls him John which was the name that 'his' Joi picked out. (It's unclear if it recognizes him, or if that's just a name that all Jois use, but either way it's a look inside the true soul-less-ness of the AI)

The plot point I have the biggest issue with is why he took his car to Vegas? They could obviously track that. He basically knowingly led them to Deckard right?

It goes without saying they absolutely nailed the look and sound of the movie in terms of comparing to the original.

But outside of that I am most pleased that the main story elements were easy enough to follow, but also deep enough to warrant multiple viewings and conversations / debate about certain things.

My main concern when this movie was announced is that they would get too "creative" with their story telling and people like me would walk away not really knowing what the hell was going on half the time.

I've just got this huge sense of contentment that this movie delivered. Easily my favorite movie of the year! I'd watch it again tonight if the wife would let me (she won't).

One thing I didn't particularly care for was the bees. I watched the director's video about them, and it still seems just weird.

What a good movie! I'm kicking myself for not seeing this in the theater, visuals were fantastic.

YouBet said:

---

The bees confused me at first because there is obviously no way real bees would survive in an environment like that. Then once K asked about the dog I realized they are replicants.

---

Except the director says they're real (in that link I posted.)

For me, it was the only moment in the whole movie that seemed weird just for the sake of being weird.

Well, then that is really dumb considering the massive sensitivity bees have to even normal environments with actual plant life.

But, oh well.

Yeah it didn't change my view on how much I loved the movie, was just one moment where I thought "what was that...?"

ATM1876 said:

---

When K first arrives to Vegas there's a scene when his computer is scanning the city and a message pops up stating that radiation levels are nominal. If Deckard has been living there for so long I don't see why bees couldn't.

---

There is no plant life and nothing else in the ecosystem to sustain them. Regardless, it won't change my opinion of the movie at all. It's just a minor nonsensical 30 seconds.

Yeah, I read that theory also, but the director didn't say anything about that. But, it also doesn't make any sense that Rachael would have implanted memories of bees/wasps but the new generation of replicants wouldn't.

I don't mind that theory, but again, that's not what the director said, but it's not worth derailing this thread for talk about bees, it was just one tiny part that I didn't really care for. It didn't seem to add anything to the movie, and it was the only time in the whole movie that I just found myself for a second think "what the **** was that...?"

I'd be interested in other questions people had about the movie, I love a good debate about these kinds of things.

I think the other inconsistency I noticed that no one has pointed out was the fact K could bleed and receive physical punishment like a normal human.

Yet, he ran through about a 1 foot cinder block wall with no physical repercussions when they were attacked in Vegas. I get replicants are highly enhanced but that scene seemed inconsistent with the other physical punishment he took throughout the movie.

I believe the text at the beginning of the film mentioned their incredible strength. We also witnessed it when Batista knocked him through a wall.

Yeah, the times we see him take physical punishment is at the hands of other replicants. He shakes off a series of punches from Deckard like its nothing.

Jim01 said:

---

I believe the text at the beginning of the film mentioned their incredible strength. We also witnessed it when Batista knocked him through a wall.

---

That was a thin ass balsa wood looking wall though that took multiple hits to break through it. He ran right through a thick, concrete looking wall in Vegas.

Anywho, I think the next movie will be called Bladerunner: Offworld.

Looks like this one got a handful of Oscar nominations for effects, sound, editing, etc. I will be upset if it doesn't win at least 1 or 2. I personally would have given it a best picture nomination too.

2 hours and 43 minutes.

waste of a redbox

Caught the first half on the plane and the second half at home. Better than the original.

I thought the bee symbolism was that only the queen is fertile and the rest of the bees/replicants are sterile drones working for the queen.