Blade Runner 2049 (Post-release)

I'd seen conjecture someplace (just fan rumination) that due to lacking their own memories, replicants could start to develop obsessions, compulsions and so on that would lead to fixation with such things. Trying to fill the space left inside them so to speak. It isn't some official thing, but it does fit fairly well, and seems quite a human drive. Everyone wants something to hold on to. Especially if you may be suffering from the type of existential angst that being a manufactured product, and a fugitive as a result would dump on you.

It's equally possible that's just the way Leon was, and is just a personal foible of his, and not really a big deal beyond that.
 
Leon's photos are effectively his memories in physical form, evidence that he has 'lived'. It's also fairly clear that the replicants had developed friendships, relationships and attachment to each other - Roy and Pris, and Leon and Zhora, so the photos would also be mementoes of their relationship(s). Given their impending proscribed deaths, it's not hard to imagine why he would consider them prescious. Leon was also not on the same intelligence level as Roy (Level C vs. Level A) which may have made him more prone to sentimentality.

Attachment to and curiosity of photos seems to be a theme amongst replicants across both films though - Rachael has the photo of herself (actually Tyrell's niece) as a child, and is fascinated by the old photos on Deckard's piano (which also leads into the big debate about his origins). K keeps the evidence photos of the tree and Freysa holding the child, and they are also the first thing Mariette looks at when she meets K.
 
Last edited:
Because those were among the few genuine memories he had.

Ah ya beat me to it. Real memories would be very important to replicants, even Roy recounting the things he had seen at the end of the movie was representative of this. I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. All those moments lost in time.
 
So, according to Wallace, Deckard was "set-up" to meet Rachael? You mean to tell me that Tyrell hoped to put those two together and let them fall in love...So Deckard is human and impregnate Rachael. A kind of experiment that has been done before (Joseph Mengele did try that with his horrific experiments on humans during the Holocaust).
If true, then the "Deckard is a Rep" doesn't hold water anymore. What we have, is cross-bread child (a degenerate) isolated in a bubble because of that experiment gone wrong.
 
NIANDER WALLACE (cont’d)
That is, if you were designed. Love...
or mathematical precision... Yes?...
No?... You are a window to me.


The question lingers. What everyone wants to know. Except
one man.

Even the shooting script is basically laughing at attempts to lay down a completely definitive answer, and that bolded section is meta as hell. The script, and the movie, and this scene especially basically go out of their way to not answer that. Do you trust Wallace, is the question really. Particularly, do you trust him when he's saying things specifically to disorient and basically head**** Deckard?

Not sure what the comment in parenthesis is though. We have no evidence whatsoever that Ana's condition has anything to do with her genetic heritage, or that she is "degenerating".
 
This may have already been discussed, but how do Wallace's interests differ from Freysa and the replicant resistance? I mean, aren't both groups ultimately "pro-replicant"?
 
What we have, is cross-bread child (a degenerate) isolated in a bubble because of that experiment gone wrong.
Replcants are derived from the human genome. Just because their DNA was artifically sequenced instead of biologically created doesn't make them less human (in fact that's the point of both films - replicants are 'more human than human', and both Roy and K make moral choices to save Deckard that most humans would not in their position). Regardless of whether she's a child of a a human and a replicant or two replicants, it doesn't make Ana any less human, As @Augh says above, there is nothing to suggest Ana's genetic condition is anything other than a fake construct, part of the plan to keep her hidden. She supposedly has Galatians syndrome, and the Book of Galatians contains the following verse - swap 'son' for 'daughter' and it's a very fitting description of Ana and how the resistance view her future role.
"But when the right time came, God sent his Son, born of a woman, subject to the law.
God sent him to buy freedom for us who were slaves to the law,
so that he could adopt us as his very own children."


This may have already been discussed, but how do Wallace's interests differ from Freysa and the replicant resistance? I mean, aren't both groups ultimately "pro-replicant"?
They are both ultimately pro-replicant, but for very diferent reasons. Wallace wants a race of his perfect 'angels' to colonise the stars, but which is still ultimately subservient to him. Freysa and the resistance want self-determinism, an end to the replicant slavery and the racism they endure, and if that ultimately means a war with the 'natural' humans so be it. Ana would in effect become the 'Eve' of a new species of human evolved from replicant DNA, removing the replicants' dependency on Wallace to continue their species.
 
Last edited:
Regardless of whether she's a child of a a human and a replicant or two replicants, it doesn't make Ana any less human, As @Augh says above, there is nothing to suggest Ana's genetic condition is anything other than a fake construct, part of the plan to keep her hidden.

I strenuously disagree. Ana was the result of a natural conception. If you recall Tyrell's discussion with Roy, there is now way to make those kinds of modifications ex post facto. Why would you engineer a child with an immune deficiency? You wouldn't, especially since moving her offworld would make her far easier to hide. It's a trait passed on from a parent, suggesting that Deckard was, in fact, human.
 
I strenuously disagree. Ana was the result of a natural conception. If you recall Tyrell's discussion with Roy, there is now way to make those kinds of modifications ex post facto. Why would you engineer a child with an immune deficiency? You wouldn't, especially since moving her offworld would make her far easier to hide. It's a trait passed on from a parent, suggesting that Deckard was, in fact, human.
I never said Ana was engineered. She is the product of 'natural' reproduction. The reproductive process involves an element of randomness in which characteristics of each of the parents' DNA become dominant in the child (a child is rarely a perfect clone of either parent, and can never contain 100% of the father's DNA) so even if both parents had been genetically engineered there is no way their creator/engineer would be able to select the characteristics of the child as well or that there would be no resulting genetic abnormalities without access to the zygote post-fertilisation (i.e. like an IVF procedure)

There's nothing to say the story Ana was told of not being able to be moved offworld due due to a genetic disorder that would kill her if he left her 'bubble' wsan't part of the resistance's plan either - it would be the perfect excuse to keep Ana in isolation without her questioning why or trying to escape. Given that Wallace was attempting to take Deckard offworld to try and extract information out of him, it suggests he has more power and there is even less oversight of his activities offworld, which would make it even more dangerous to try and take Ana out there. Also, the fact that all the rebel replicants we have seen so far have run to Earth (which also seems to be the base of action for the resistance). would suggest that being offworld is a more dangerous place for replicants outside Wallace's control than being on Earth (despite the presence of Blade Runners).

In my previous post I stated that Ana's heritage is no different whether Deckard is a replicant or not. If we follow your line of reasoning about her having a real genetic abnormality meaning Deckard mst be human, it's not necessarily the case. If Deckard is a Nexus 7 like Rachael, there's nothing to say there couldn't be a fault in his reproductive genetic design (just like there potentially was with Rachael's - she died under an emergency C-section, presumably because the baby could not fit though her pelvic outlet due to a lack of foresight in her genetic design). She was a prototype with an experimental reproductive capability, so if Ana's condition was real there' nothing to say it wasn't also a product of a genetic error in either her mother or father's experimental DNA sequencing.

However, there is also an equal possibility that if her condition is real it's not just the result of a random genetic error - genetic diseases can happen due to random mutation in the child's genes without being inherited from the parents' DNA. The mutation could equally have happened during her childhood due to exposure to radiation, and there must have been nuclear fallout in the environment around LA and Las Vegas (were are told there was in Las Vegas' case)) after the events of the Blackout in 2022 (Ana was born in 2021) as her toy horse was contaminated with radiation.
 
Last edited:
I just figured replicants have reached a point where they aren't really any different from biologically forged humans. When you have to stamp molecular trademarks inside of them, and there's no real way to differentiate between a real memory and, say, a holographic memory implanted under hypnotic suggestion while incubating (we don't know how they're placed, but I guess it's something similar to this), then the difference between a replicant and an IVF baby is down to a serial number you need an electron microscope to confirm. You end up with a person any way you cut it, a person who has extraordinary abilities sure, but that will happen when you're dealing with an individual whose every identified gene is so strong as to set precedent, at least as many as Tyrell and/or Wallace found a way to soup up. Kinda like someone who underwent the mother of all gene therapy.

By that line of reasoning, if Tyrell and Wallace have absolutely perfected genetic design, they have a perfect imitation, and replicants would be prone to environmental factors and genetic disorders. If Tyrell and Wallace haven't absolutely perfected genetic design, they have an imperfect imitation, and replicants would be prone to environmental factors and genetic disorders.

This kinda stuff is why it's really moot to me who is and isn't a replicant by this point, there isn't really any difference philosophically. It's why replicants are a valid allegory for baseless racism and classism. It's why Joshi's comment about a soul and K's haunted stare works so well. It's why that beat cop is a dick, moron or both.

"They're practically us!" - Holden
 
No, no, no...I can't have this undetermined question in the back of my mind! I have to make a decision here! :p ;) This definitely makes me appreciate the original even more though. I was firmly in the human camp, but now I'm doubting that after several viewings over the years, and I enjoy the developing mystery and potential explanations I am considering.

But serious question, where does Deckard poop? Because we didn't see that on screen either, and it's keeping me awake at night.

Here`s a great video I just came across that covers the question`s of is he or isnt he perfectly. Its seems from his comments that Ford was simply disagreeing with Scott simply to add an edge to his performance only.;)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alright, then the question remains: do Nexus-8 have "best before date?"...Is a "Cascade DNA Collapse" very possible if the Replicants are reproducing only within the Replicant Community? We know that to have a strong DNA, you need a variety of individuals/mixed marriages, etc to make your future gen better suited for survival.
So to mix human + Nexus is the way to go, in my opinion...even if the very first mix-gen is having some DNA problems.
 
Alright, then the question remains: do Nexus-8 have "best before date?"...Is a "Cascade DNA Collapse" very possible if the Replicants are reproducing only within the Replicant Community? We know that to have a strong DNA, you need a variety of individuals/mixed marriages, etc to make your future gen better suited for survival.
So to mix human + Nexus is the way to go, in my opinion...even if the very first mix-gen is having some DNA problems.

Nexus 8s have natural lifespans and seem to age normally (see Sapper and Freysa) - the memory implants used on Rachael were supposed to make them more emotionally stable, removing the need to have an artificially short lifespan. We can probably assume the Nexus 9s like K and Luv have a similar lifespan and ageing process too as they are supposed to be completely obedient. They may even have been engineered to have continued stem cell reproduction and enhanced healing to extend their lifespan - note how quickly K heals after the fight with Sapper and the amount of damage he can sustain.

On the replicant DNA front - have we seen any replicants that are exact clones of each other (apart from the recreated Rachael)? The fact they all have physical differences would imply they all have different DNA (K even has a blood type listed on his ID, implying replicants are not all the same blood type too), so Tyrell/Wallace either use a large bank of human DNA prototypes that are edited to produce DNA for replicants, or if the customer did not specify particular physical attributes they effectively 'randomised' them. The technology required to create replicants by tailoring their DNA to suit their task would also mean all known genetic disorders and susceptibility to particular diseases could be edited out at sequencing time, before the replicant cell division process starts to create the being (nobody wants to buy a very expensive replicant that develops a disease) . That then only leaves potential biohazards like chemical or radiation exposure that could cause genetic mutation to the replicant (i.e forms of cancer) which could also possibly be guarded against by an having an enhanced healing system.

The problem for the resistance is how they use Ana's DNA. If we go along with the 'Deckard is a replicant' theory, the only male replicant with a functioning reproductive system would be him, so there's no chance of any form of natural reproduction with Ana. They would still need access to DNA sequencing and replicant growth technology similar to that of Wallace to produce a large enough population of the first generation of new replicants with her reproductive ability.
 
Last edited:
They could create clones (Off-World soldiers...canon fodder) with a lack of long term memories. When someone has long term memory loss, that person has trouble recalling "stored" memories, not creating new memories:)
 
This may have already been discussed, but how do Wallace's interests differ from Freysa and the replicant resistance? I mean, aren't both groups ultimately "pro-replicant"?
They are, but the Resistance want freedom/free-will whereas Wallace wants them to pro-create so he can exponentially increase their numbers - for his own purposes ($, reach, etc). Wallace would still want them to be compliant and obedient.

My issue (though minor) of the movie was how Deckard fit into all of this. If he was a key element in the pro-creation of the replicants - why would they want him killed by K?
 
Also a much belated BAFTA Fellowship Award to Sir Ridley Scott for an incredible and continuing contribution that has influenced and redefined the art form forever.
 
This thread is more than 5 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top