Puzzled by the eyes... Wallace was the only one with the older model replicant eye glow. I'm going to assume that the guy that replaced Chew improved upon his design.
Actually, the weird eyes on Wallace was just to emphasize his blindness; he is not (as far as we know) a replicant himself.
As much as I worship RScott and "Blade Runner," and as much as I think the eye glow effect used in the first film was cool looking, I've always hated it lol. It's a narrative cheat. None of the characters within that world can see it; it is just for us, as a "wink wink" pointing out replicants, so RScott can then use it with Deckard as another clue to further RScott's notion that Deckard is a replicant (also something with which I disagree).
Sure. I wasn’t suggesting that Wallace was a replicant but I will confess that I totally missed that he was blind - I assumed he maybe had modified eyes and knew he was using the drones to augment but thought he was going nonvisible spectrum.
Puzzled by the eyes... Wallace was the only one with the older model replicant eye glow. I'm going to assume that the guy that replaced Chew improved upon his design.
Actually, the weird eyes on Wallace was just to emphasize his blindness; he is not (as far as we know) a replicant himself.
As much as I worship RScott and "Blade Runner," and as much as I think the eye glow effect used in the first film was cool looking, I've always hated it lol. It's a narrative cheat. None of the characters within that world can see it; it is just for us, as a "wink wink" pointing out replicants, so RScott can then use it with Deckard as another clue to further RScott's notion that Deckard is a replicant (also something with which I disagree).
Going back to this, even without the eye glow, there's plenty there to support Deckard as replicant:
Deckard has the same affectation for pictures as the replicants
Gaff: "You've done a man's job" later expanded to include "but are you a man"
Unicorn dream + Gaff's origami unicorn.
I feel like Gaff's dialog in 2049 was crafted to stir the pot nicely.
@hauberk Oh I'm not against making the question of Deckard's biological status ambiguous; that's part of the fun of Blade Runner, as well as life itself - constantly wondering just what he is, and what we are, etc. Philip K. Dick even played with that in his original novel, before his own narrative then discounts it and plays Deckard as a real human for the rest of his story. That's one reason I don't like Ridley's unicorn dream (which does not exist in the original film's Theatrical Cut, which happens to be my favorite cut of the film). Like the cat eye effect in that original film, the unicorn dream goes too far narratively - it goes past ambiguous and subtle hint, and goes right into the area of solid definitive proof. It kills any discussion. You can't have a fun ambiguous story if we see Gaff has read a file about Replicant Deckard's recurring unicorn dream. As someone who believes Deckard is not a replicant, I was grateful that the sequel is not merely a sequel to the Blade Runner Final Cut (which includes the unicorn dream), but in fact continues the wonderful ambiguous nature of the "what is true life? what do you believe Deckard is? are humans and replicants equal?" discussion.
@hauberk Oh I'm not against making the question of Deckard's biological status ambiguous; that's part of the fun of Blade Runner, as well as life itself - constantly wondering just what he is, and what we are, etc. Philip K. Dick even played with that in his original novel, before his own narrative then discounts it and plays Deckard as a real human for the rest of his story. That's one reason I don't like Ridley's unicorn dream (which does not exist in the original film's Theatrical Cut, which happens to be my favorite cut of the film). Like the cat eye effect in that original film, the unicorn dream goes too far narratively - it goes past ambiguous and subtle hint, and goes right into the area of solid definitive proof. It kills any discussion. You can't have a fun ambiguous story if we see Gaff has read a file about Replicant Deckard's recurring unicorn dream. As someone who believes Deckard is not a replicant, I was grateful that the sequel is not merely a sequel to the Blade Runner Final Cut (which includes the unicorn dream), but in fact continues the wonderful ambiguous nature of the "what is true life? what do you believe Deckard is? are humans and replicants equal?" discussion.
Well put. I'll shamefully confess to having not yet seen the Final Cut. I've seen Theatrical and Director's and also tend to prefer the Theatrical. For all that Ridley didn't like it, I really felt that the voice-over added a lot to the movie.
I would submit that the whole eye thing doesn't have to mean replicant... merely artificial eyes. One of our VPs recently had eye surgery and, under certain lighting, has a similar effect. Replicants are certainly the most likely candidate for the eyes, but anyone able to afford artificial replacement eyes could end up having the same effect.
All that being said, I am now dwelling on what exactly K is, in our new sequel.
* SPOILER! *
Clearly, K is no run of the mill Nexus-9, because we see him disobey his Madame's orders. So is he a Nexus-8 who was told he is an N-9, for some reason? Is he an N-9 who malfunctioned due to trauma? Or is he something special? We know he's not human; he's got superstrength, he seems to have passed his Baseline Tests up until his last one, and he must have his Nexus serial number imprinted under his right eye. Hmmm...
...the unicorn dream goes too far narratively - it goes past ambiguous and subtle hint, and goes right into the area of solid definitive proof.
Agree 100%. I too prefer the original Theatrical Cut.
I've seen a theory that the unicorn represents Rachael:
Unicorns are symbols of femininity; they are strong, they are beautiful, they are unreal. Much like Rachael was when Deckard first met her: very feminine, very no-nonsense, very beautiful, and a replicant. The unicorn in Deckard's dream (or daydream) is an abstract representation of how he views Rachael. Regarding the unicorn origami at the end: Gaff's origami had only ever been used to represent people throughout the film: in Bryant's office when Deckard refuses to come back he makes an origami chicken, symbolising Deckard's cowardice; later in Leon's apartment he makes an origami human figure with a big dick, representing Deckard in his element as a detective. Gaff made the origami unicorn at the end to represent Rachael: he saw her as Deckard saw her, and so he decided to let her live and allow them to flee north without coming after them. When Deckard picks up the unicorn, remembers Gaff's parting line "It's too bad she won't live, but then again who does?" and smiles, he is acknowledging that Gaff is saying to him, "Good luck for the time you'll have together."
It falls apart, for me, in at least two places:
1 - Matchstick person - Pretty sure that the "appendage" in question was a a third leg of a tripod which allowed it to stand up. Admittedly, I've heard that term used to describe the above noted endowment as well...
2 - Deckard and Gaff are just coincidentally coming up with unicorns?
Agreed - if Vangelis' Blade Runner soundtrack were a person, I'd marry it and/or spend my life in service to it! lol
*SPOILER AGAIN!*
On an interesting trivia note, K is renamed "Joe" by the Joi character, and the Biblical Rachel's son was... (wait for it)... Joseph :) Also, one of the aspects of Joseph's Bible story is that he was a dreamer, one who was severely punished for his dreams. Sounds about right for our dear K.
Agreed - if Vangelis' Blade Runner soundtrack were a person, I'd marry it and/or spend my life in service to it! lol
*SPOILER AGAIN!*
On an interesting trivia note, K is renamed "Joe" by the Joi character, and the Biblical Rachel's son was... (wait for it)... Joseph :) Also, one of the aspects of Joseph's Bible story is that he was a dreamer, one who was severely punished for his dreams. Sounds about right for our dear K.
Great observation - I took the simple interpretation and assumed he was a “joe” for the digital escort Joi.
2022: Blackout was spectacular. Curious that they used the angel language WRT to Trixie.
2036: Nexus Dawn did a much better job if emphasizing Wallace's blindness. Overall, I felt like it was the weakest of the three. His demonstration to the compliance of the new model replicant wasn't terribly compelling as it seems that there are numerous other ways to coerce a similar action.
2048: Nowhere to Run was quite good. Great range from Bautista. Took Sapper Morton from a relatively 2D character to someone with much greater depth.
I thought the visual effects were stunning at times. Specifically when Joe landed in Vegas. I thought the “twist” was obvious, as was who the person in question was.
This kind of reminded me of reading a miniseries where the artwork was far superior to the script. There were some parts I questioned the necessity & at least 1 deleted scene I wonder if it’d work better in the final cut.
Comments
Deckard has the same affectation for pictures as the replicants
Gaff: "You've done a man's job" later expanded to include "but are you a man"
Unicorn dream + Gaff's origami unicorn.
I feel like Gaff's dialog in 2049 was crafted to stir the pot nicely.
I would submit that the whole eye thing doesn't have to mean replicant... merely artificial eyes. One of our VPs recently had eye surgery and, under certain lighting, has a similar effect. Replicants are certainly the most likely candidate for the eyes, but anyone able to afford artificial replacement eyes could end up having the same effect.
* SPOILER! *
Clearly, K is no run of the mill Nexus-9, because we see him disobey his Madame's orders. So is he a Nexus-8 who was told he is an N-9, for some reason? Is he an N-9 who malfunctioned due to trauma? Or is he something special? We know he's not human; he's got superstrength, he seems to have passed his Baseline Tests up until his last one, and he must have his Nexus serial number imprinted under his right eye. Hmmm...
1 - Matchstick person - Pretty sure that the "appendage" in question was a a third leg of a tripod which allowed it to stand up. Admittedly, I've heard that term used to describe the above noted endowment as well...
2 - Deckard and Gaff are just coincidentally coming up with unicorns?
I’m such a geek for this flick it’s one of the first soundtracks I bought in CD format.
*SPOILER AGAIN!*
On an interesting trivia note, K is renamed "Joe" by the Joi character, and the Biblical Rachel's son was... (wait for it)... Joseph :) Also, one of the aspects of Joseph's Bible story is that he was a dreamer, one who was severely punished for his dreams. Sounds about right for our dear K.
2022: Blackout was spectacular. Curious that they used the angel language WRT to Trixie.
2036: Nexus Dawn did a much better job if emphasizing Wallace's blindness. Overall, I felt like it was the weakest of the three. His demonstration to the compliance of the new model replicant wasn't terribly compelling as it seems that there are numerous other ways to coerce a similar action.
2048: Nowhere to Run was quite good. Great range from Bautista. Took Sapper Morton from a relatively 2D character to someone with much greater depth.
This kind of reminded me of reading a miniseries where the artwork was far superior to the script. There were some parts I questioned the necessity & at least 1 deleted scene I wonder if it’d work better in the final cut.