Main Menu

Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 12:56:49 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Blade Runner 2

Started by momatt, February 27, 2015, 03:23:07 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Steven

Quote from: greenman on March 05, 2015, 06:06:20 AM
Again though this isn't a Twilight zone ending that shifts our whole understanding of what came before, a few hints to it are there but its real purpose is to be a capstone on the idea that "godless" and short lived replicants (as a stand in for atheistic humans?) have worth. That moreso than an anti slavery message is really the main focus of the film if you ask me.

A Twlight zone ending would be Deckard only coming to the realisation that replicants have worth when he discovers he is one.

Ok, I watched the film last night for the first time since I was a kid, the Director's Cut, and I'd agree with this general message. It's also playing around with mortality and time, with the short life of the replicants yet them ostensibly not ageing and burning 'twice as bright'. Then there's JF Sebastian's early-ageing Methuselah syndrome and outcast loneliness who can only form relationships with automatons, whereas Batty and Pris share an apparent love and physical tender moments. It is unclear whether Rachael will die so soon, her relationship with Deckard could make sense with either interpretation, a redemption of the disenfranchised but very human killer, or a realisation of his true nature and ultimate fugitive status binding both of them together. There are a few moments where it implies ambiguity whether Deckard is a replicant with Rachael goading about whether he'd ever taken the voight-kampff test himself.

There's a few religious images which Scott seems to like to shove in, the stigmata and the image of the dove during the rooftop moments etc. There's also the similar atheistic attack as used in Prometheus of 'meeting your maker' between Tyrell and Batty. Eyes seem to play quite a metaphorical part, being used as a signifier with the voight-kampff, the replicants are seen playing with eyes a few times in the film, Batty kills Tyrell through pressing in on his eyes - God's adversary said on the day you eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil your eyes will be opened, blinding Tyrell may be a play on this notion.

Scott's not directing but he is producing so I'm expecting some play on religious themes, and probably further musings on replicant Deckard at least. There was some byplay between Prometheus/Alien and the Blade Runner universe, so I'd imagine there's quite a bit of Scott's influence on the proposed Prometheus 2 and this sequel.

greenman

Quote from: Steven on March 05, 2015, 06:55:23 PM
It is unclear whether Rachael will die so soon, her relationship with Deckard could make sense with either interpretation, a redemption of the disenfranchised but very human killer, or a realisation of his true nature and ultimate fugitive status binding both of them together. There are a few moments where it implies ambiguity whether Deckard is a replicant with Rachael goading about whether he'd ever taken the voight-kampff test himself.

I don't think it need be one or the other although there's no suggestion Rachael(or Batty) knows his true nature, her line to him seems more a reflection that her situation could potentially be there for anyone. If replicants work on the same emotional level as humans then Deckards being a jaded killer who'se then redeemed isn't really undermined by him finding out he is one afterwards.

SavageHedgehog

Quote from: great_badir on March 05, 2015, 01:54:27 PM
I like Blues Brothers 2000.  Genuinely.

The bit I liked of that is a bit I've heard other people thought was the low point, where Elwood's cop half-brother or whatever it was becomes a Blues Brother through the sheer power of the music or some shit, and hovers up through the circus tent and suddenly has a hat and sunglasses and starts doing sweet backflips and stuff. I thought that was kind of joyful.

madhair60

Quote from: great_badir on March 05, 2015, 01:54:27 PM
I like Blues Brothers 2000.  Genuinely.

Fuck.  Who doesn't?

Steven

Quote from: greenman on March 05, 2015, 07:34:17 PM
I don't think it need be one or the other although there's no suggestion Rachael(or Batty) knows his true nature, her line to him seems more a reflection that her situation could potentially be there for anyone. If replicants work on the same emotional level as humans then Deckards being a jaded killer who'se then redeemed isn't really undermined by him finding out he is one afterwards.

It depends on what form of analysis you take, under formalism, or with the context of what Scott has said about the scenes that implicate Deckard as a replicant, the reflection in the eyes and the unicorn. It's funny you mention capstone in your previous post as Tyrell's office is at the top of a truncated pyramid, reflected in the eye at the beginning, coupled with the eye motif previously referenced he lowers the blind for Rachael to take the Voight-Kampff test which could be interpreted as the closing of an eye.

There's a bunch of God/Lucifer/Jesus/Messianic references as part of the Tyrell/Batty relationship, fallen angels, prodigal son, the stone that the builders rejected shall become the capstone, the snake/serpent. But it's a bit of a mess for me to make any real kind of allegory, but it's certainly making references in this area. You could also make reference to the South American priesthood which would perform their sacrifices to the Sun at the head of the pyramid and to their snake God, this might be me making a stretch but considering the constant gloom of the Blade Runner world could be another notion.

phes

Ford has been injured in another plane crash. Reports variously from 'cuts to head' to 'serious injury'

momatt

He's getting too old for this shit.  :(

greenman

Quote from: Steven on March 05, 2015, 09:14:36 PM
It depends on what form of analysis you take, under formalism, or with the context of what Scott has said about the scenes that implicate Deckard as a replicant, the reflection in the eyes and the unicorn. It's funny you mention capstone in your previous post as Tyrell's office is at the top of a truncated pyramid, reflected in the eye at the beginning, coupled with the eye motif previously referenced he lowers the blind for Rachael to take the Voight-Kampff test which could be interpreted as the closing of an eye.

There's a bunch of God/Lucifer/Jesus/Messianic references as part of the Tyrell/Batty relationship, fallen angels, prodigal son, the stone that the builders rejected shall become the capstone, the snake/serpent. But it's a bit of a mess for me to make any real kind of allegory, but it's certainly making references in this area. You could also make reference to the South American priesthood which would perform their sacrifices to the Sun at the head of the pyramid and to their snake God, this might be me making a stretch but considering the constant gloom of the Blade Runner world could be another notion.

I think the intension is pretty clearly for Batty to "meet his maker" only to find he can't give him immortality and is himself very mortal and fallible. Again playing into the idea of the replicants as a stand in for humans in a post religious enviroment, limited lifespans to cast mortality more clearly and created without any higher purpose.

Steven

Quote from: greenman on March 06, 2015, 06:31:17 AM
I think the intension is pretty clearly for Batty to "meet his maker" only to find he can't give him immortality and is himself very mortal and fallible. Again playing into the idea of the replicants as a stand in for humans in a post religious enviroment, limited lifespans to cast mortality more clearly and created without any higher purpose.

The thing is at least they were created with a purpose, slavery. Man searches or creates purpose where there ostensibly may be none. You could also make an argument that Tyrell is also a contraction of `tyrant' and `El' the Hebrew God  of the Bible, but it is probably unintended which is why I've disliked formalism as a style of analysis and prefer to know what the artist actually intended in their work.

greenman

Quote from: Steven on March 06, 2015, 10:14:28 AM
The thing is at least they were created with a purpose, slavery. Man searches or creates purpose where there ostensibly may be none. You could also make an argument that Tyrell is also a contraction of `tyrant' and `El' the Hebrew God  of the Bible, but it is probably unintended which is why I've disliked formalism as a style of analysis and prefer to know what the artist actually intended in their work.

You could get all Nietzschean with Batty as some kind of Ubermensch if you really wanted to go into depth but as you say I think that's really missing the simpler point I raised above.

The dangerous days documentary does I'd say give you a pretty good idea of Scotts intensions even if he never lays them out in black and white(his producer probably casting more light on them). His brother had just died and he's a self identified atheist, you basically got an atheist meaning of life film.

Buttress

Deckard won't be alive in this one, it will be a replicant series based on him, putting to bed any issues with ambiguities: Deckard is a human. Form. A human form with which a human may (or may not share) but of course replicants can as well. Deckard's a dog.[nb]was initially going to be a goldfish in the early drafts, oh the early drafts[/nb]

kngen

The 'is he or isn't he a replicant?' debate is missing the really important question: when Deckard is looking at Rachel's old photographs, does one of them move or is it just the roaming light from one of the big floating adverts shining in through the window that makes it seem like it's moving?[nb]It's clearly just the light reflecting on the picture, but there's a staggering amount of people - including the goron that uploaded that clip - that seem to think otherwise.[/nb]

Steven

Just watching Dangerous Days and interestingly, they originally wanted Batty to crush Tyrell's skull at which point it would burst into metallic parts to discover he is also a replicant, a surrogate, the real 'maker' being in some kind of stasis chamber in the floors above at the head of the pyramid due to dying some 4 years previously. This is obviously part of the germ of where the idea for Weyland in Prometheus came from, lying in stasis in order to seek his own maker in hope of escaping death just like Batty, an atheist nest of boxes.

Blumf

Never mind Deckard; is Holden one of 'them'?

Yeah, there was that deleted scene where he's in some kind of life support unit (and Bryant mentions it, but can we trust what he says?), but that's not in the official cuts.

kitsofan34


Replies From View

Quote from: kitsofan34 on May 20, 2015, 09:08:55 PM
The Deaks himself, Roger Deakins

ROGER DELGADO WAS NOT A DALEK

Dr Rock

Quote from: great_badir on March 05, 2015, 01:54:27 PM

Although if you really knew your Blade Runner, you would know that that was actually just an on-set cockup where Ford's eyes were reflecting the light set up for Sean Young's eyes.

Doesn't matter, not does the director's intent, which we know has changed over time. The film's the thing, and that his eyes do the same thing as the replicants heavily implies he is one. Amongst the other reasonably heavy hints.

great_badir

Quote from: Dr Rock on May 20, 2015, 10:16:54 PM
Doesn't matter, not does the director's intent, which we know has changed over time. The film's the thing, and that his eyes do the same thing as the replicants heavily implies he is one. Amongst the other reasonably heavy hints.

Oh, I don't disagree - I'm firmly in the "he is a replicant" camp and always have been.  I was just saying that that being given as a reason is technically incorrect as it was just a gaff (no pun intended), and something that Scott, regardless of his changing stance, maintains to this day.


The more I hear about this sequel, the more quietly confident I get.  Unlike Indy, Ford's age will not be a problem for the story or the character, so that is of no concern to me whatsoever.  So, what we're left with is, so far at least, nothing but positives.


Famous Mortimer

Quote from: SavageHedgehog on March 02, 2015, 07:48:57 PM
Escape from LA has its fans too.
Bloody hell, really? I thought it was rubbish, and I love Carpenter and Russell's movies.

Quote from: biggytitbo on March 02, 2015, 07:56:57 PM
30 years later Halloween 3: Season of the Witch is now universally regarded as the best one, so anything is possible.
I hope not. I read this weird critical appraisal of it a few years ago and watched it along with the others, and it's every bit as terrible as I remembered. Surely no-one prefers it to part 1? I thought H20 was surprisingly decent too. Although a blank screen and a low humming sound would be preferable to part 6 or "Resurrection".

Glebe

BLADE RUNNER 2 invites you to off-world colonies in less than two years!

As the article points, Jan 12 is indeed an odd release date for such a movie.

mothman

That'll be about 2 or 4 weeks after SW ep VIII. A bold move? Or a calculated one, perhaps they hope to offer a Harrison Ford fix to those suffering Han Solo deprivation?!

Replies From View

They're trying to outstrip Chris Chibnall's first series of Doctor Who I reckon.

biggytitbo

Will they CGI Harrison Ford in this or otherwise explain why an elderly man is either an android or an android hunter?

Replies From View

Quote from: biggytitbo on February 19, 2016, 08:23:16 PM
Will they CGI Harrison Ford in this or otherwise explain why an elderly man is either an android or an android hunter?

Yeah, probably.  Or they just won't bother.

Glebe

Why was 'Blade Runner 2' dumped into the middle of January? Box-office experts weigh in.

Quote from: mothman on February 19, 2016, 07:47:33 PMThat'll be about 2 or 4 weeks after SW ep VIII. A bold move? Or a calculated one, perhaps they hope to offer a Harrison Ford fix to those suffering Han Solo deprivation?!

From the above article:

Quote"[Warner Bros.] is hoping that the masses that come out for Star Wars Episode VIII that holiday season will see trailers and posters for Blade Runner and then come back for that one in mid-January," says Pandya. "This date could totally pay off."

Bad Ambassador


great_badir

Quote from: Bad Ambassador on February 19, 2016, 08:53:31 PM

*coughcough* http://www.podcastchart.com/podcasts/cinema-limbo/episodes/006-escape-from-l-a

L.A. does indeed have quite a large fan-base, and most of them like it un-ironically.

If they get into Deckard being old and still alive thing, they could easily explain it away by saying that he's Nexus 7, or something.  Even more human than human.

Filming on the sequel has been pushed back from Spring to Summer now, so there's still plenty of time for stuff to go tits up[NB]I hope it doesn't - I'm probably the only hardcore Blade Runner fan who actually thinks it's a good thing and is looking forward to it[/NB].

Bad Ambassador

Quote from: great_badir on February 22, 2016, 01:22:07 PM
L.A. does indeed have quite a large fan-base, and most of them like it un-ironically.

Just to fill in the gap in this conversation - that's MY podcast.

monolith

Quote from: great_badir on February 22, 2016, 01:22:07 PM
L.A. does indeed have quite a large fan-base, and most of them like it un-ironically.

If they get into Deckard being old and still alive thing, they could easily explain it away by saying that he's Nexus 7, or something.  Even more human than human.

Filming on the sequel has been pushed back from Spring to Summer now, so there's still plenty of time for stuff to go tits up[NB]I hope it doesn't - I'm probably the only hardcore Blade Runner fan who actually thinks it's a good thing and is looking forward to it[/NB].
As long as the score is similar and they get the look right there's not much that can go wrong.

Prisoners was a pretty decent film and it's the same guy directing it, I wouldn't say I have high hopes but that's more due to Ford these days, guy has clearly smoked too much pot and just seems constantly in a daze. Wasn't awful in TFA but I think Han Solo is so ubiquitous and not particularly complicated so it wasn't too hard to step back in to that role.

I don't think anyone else could have played Han Solo or Indy better than Ford, he really made those roles his own, but whilst I don't think his performance was bad by any means, I think other actors could have done a better job with Deckard.

Could still be good, I don't think it will be awful and even if it is then I will erase it from memory like some prequels and a couple of those shitty sequels with "The One".

I can still happily watch The Matrix without feeling any need to watch the sequels after and if I'm having a Star Wars marathon then episode IV is where it starts.

Blade Runner is my favourite film so if the sequel is shit I'll watch it once and then go and watch the first one another 100 times.