Blade Runner 2

[Christopher]

What was the one big, glaring, obvious addition to the '92 release? The unicorn. It was added to tie Gaff's origami to Deckard's daydreaming. The implication being, Gaff knew Deckard's thoughts, the same way Deckard knew about Rachael's spider memory, because they weren't real. That's an intentional counter to the ambiguity that was there before.

Not really. Most people have about 4-6 REM sleep stages per night, give or take. That's over 1800 dream cycles a year -- and each individual dream cycle will likely involve multiple different topics over the course of the dream. With that many chances, it's statistically inevitable that you'll occasionally dream about something one night and then encounter something similar in real life a day or two later. And a unicorn is a popular mythic archetype -- no doubt lots of people dream about them, and lots of people like creating artwork of them, and that means the odds of a coincidental convergence involving unicorn imagery are quite high. So the unicorn thing suggests that Deckard could be a replicant, but it's hardly unambiguous.

So maybe the point was to create the question in Deckard's mind of whether there was a chance that he could be a replicant. That is, it's not about removing ambiguity for the viewer, but about creating ambiguity for Deckard. The unicorn doesn't prove anything, but it could be enough to make him wonder.

 

[J.T.B.]

Not really. Most people have about 4-6 REM sleep stages per night, give or take. That's over 1800 dream cycles a year -- and each individual dream cycle will likely involve multiple different topics over the course of the dream.

I'm not sure what that has to do with it, Deckard wasn't asleep.

So maybe the point was to create the question in Deckard's mind of whether there was a chance that he could be a replicant. That is, it's not about removing ambiguity for the viewer, but about creating ambiguity for Deckard. The unicorn doesn't prove anything, but it could be enough to make him wonder.

Could be, but it's a strong clue for the viewer. As I said, it weighs toward less ambiguity about Deckard as a replicant.

 

[Christopher]

Could be, but it's a strong clue for the viewer. As I said, it weighs toward less ambiguity about Deckard as a replicant.

I don't think it does. I don't think there's anything in the original theatrical cut of the movie that even implies Deckard could be a replicant. At least, I was never aware of that speculation when I first saw the movie. As I recall it, I only became aware of the conjecture that Deckard might be a replicant in connection with discussions of the deleted unicorn dream sequence and what it was meant to imply. So as far as I'm aware, it's only the later cuts with the unicorn dream that suggest any ambiguity about Deckard's nature at all.

 

[J.T.B.]

I don't think it does. I don't think there's anything in the original theatrical cut of the movie that even implies Deckard could be a replicant. At least, I was never aware of that speculation when I first saw the movie. As I recall it, I only became aware of the conjecture that Deckard might be a replicant in connection with discussions of the deleted unicorn dream sequence and what it was meant to imply. So as far as I'm aware, it's only the later cuts with the unicorn dream that suggest any ambiguity about Deckard's nature at all.

It was very much discussed and speculated upon. "Have you ever taken (the VK test) yourself?", the glowing eyes, "You've done a man's job," Gaff's antagonism and Deckard's emotional detachment were some things seen as clues. Of course that was in the pre-internet age and though I read several pieces about it I can't cite them now. I definitely remember an academic article that said European audiences more readily (or even predominantly, I don't recall) assumed Deckard was a replicant compared to US viewers.

 

[Christopher]

Well, the very fact that we're even having this discussion shows that the unicorn dream did nothing to end the ambiguity; it's just added one more thing for viewers to interpret in different ways.

 

[J.T.B.]

^I was not one who said it ended all ambiguity. What I'm saying is, the movie was more ambiguous for ten years, and then a change was made that tipped the scale significantly toward less ambiguity. Which, personally, detracted some from my regard for the film.

 

[slappy]

I have no doubt this will be good and that trailer was awesome.

I'm getting a very Force Awakens type of vibe here though. Not a ripoff, but it's eerily similar. Both have Harrison Ford btw.

30 years after the monumental events of the original movie, new young, sexy protagonist (Rey, K) goes on an adventure in search of legendary figure from the original (Decker, Skywalker) in order to stop X from destroying the world with Y.

Eventually new young protagonist finds scruffy old original alone, in some distant remote place.

That about right?

 

[Christopher]

^I was not one who said it ended all ambiguity. What I'm saying is, the movie was more ambiguous for ten years, and then a change was made that tipped the scale significantly toward less ambiguity. Which, personally, detracted some from my regard for the film.

Whereas I see it the opposite way, that it added an ambiguity that hadn't been there before. So even its impact on the ambiguity is ambiguous. That's what I'm saying -- it's just added one more thing for audiences to disagree about. The very fact that you and I perceive it in exactly opposite ways is proof of that.

 

[Deckerd]

Hate to be that guy, but it's Rick Deckard, not Deckerd. You're Deckerd.

Slip of the keypad. Easily done.

 

[Samurai8472]

Here's the first official synopsis:

Thirty years after the events of the first film, a new blade runner, LAPD Officer K (Ryan Gosling), unearths a long-buried secret that has the potential to plunge what’s left of society into chaos. K’s discovery leads him on a quest to find Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), a former LAPD blade runner who has been missing for 30 years.

 

[dahj]

Officer K

Any relation to the MiB agent played by Tommy Lee Jones?

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Never used in any cut, probably because it's too much like Rachael's photo. Wasn't her name...Irani? Something like that.

Yes, her name was Irani in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sleep?

I read the novel for the first time a couple of months ago and I was intrigued to notice that Deckard does find himself questioning whether or not he's an android himself after his encounter with another cop who is unknowingly an android (Dick never used the term replicant or blade runner). The question is likewise left unanswered with Deckard concluding that it doesn't matter, partially because of his obsession with having a real pet as oppose to android version, a major theme from the novel that's absent from the film (aside from the presence of Rachel's owl).

Here's the first official synopsis:

Thirty years after the events of the first film, a new blade runner, LAPD Officer K (Ryan Gosling), unearths a long-buried secret that has the potential to plunge what’s left of society into chaos. K’s discovery leads him on a quest to find Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), a former LAPD blade runner who has been missing for 30 years.

Where did you get that synopsis?

 

[Tosk]

Where did you get that synopsis?

It was released by Alcon Entertainment back in December.

 

[JD]

There's a chance we might see a CGI recreation of one of the original movie's replicants.

 

[dahj]

^^
No, just no.

 

[Christopher]

There's a chance we might see a CGI recreation of one of the original movie's replicants.

“The options for which character will return include Rutger Hauer’s Roy Batty, Daryl Hannah’s Pris, Sean Young’s Rachael or maybe even Harrison Ford himself as a young Deckard,” the report says

What, no Zhora or Leon?

 

[The Nth Doctor]

It was released by Alcon Entertainment back in December.

Thanks.

It's always good to have a source backing up claims like that.

There's a chance we might see a CGI recreation of one of the original movie's replicants.

I'm only against that because it seems unnecessary. All of them are dead except Deckard and possibly Rachel.

I'm more interested by this claim: "noting that director Denis Villeneuve (“Sicario,” “Arrival”) hinted that his new film will “take care of” the mystery surrounding Deckard’s humanity."

 

[Samurai8472]

^^
No, just no.

With a director like denis villeneuve I would think he wouldn't resort to such a tacky movie ploy. He would do something smarter than use the CGI deaging/ bringing back someone technique

Gosling VS CGI creations seems uninspired.

I hope it's not a CGI Roy Batty

 

[marillion]

^^ Agreed with that... But secretly, and while it has nothing to do with CGI unless they de-age Kurt Russel, I kinda wish there is some kind of easter egg reference to the movie Soldier... Have always loved that they are two separate stories that share a universe.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Blade Runner 2049 May Feature A Replicant from the Original Film

Well, duh!!! What else is new?