Qt3 Movie Podcast: Blade Runner 2049

“I love it; I deeply, deeply love it!”


Dang. I meant to ask about that as we discussed. What is the deal with going Off World in this movie? Niander Wallace makes a comment about how he is going to be able to torture Deckard Off World in ways that he could not do so here. Something about being able to give him more pain there than he can possibly imagine. What does that mean?

Are there rules On World–which I assume is the related term–about torture? Is there a Sicario connection to be made here?

Good lord I need to see this again.


“Am I the only one who can see the fucking sunrise here? This breaks the world, K.”

For the record, I wasn’t complaining that the music was too loud. I just joked it was loud, and it is. But I love that. And the music. And the movie. I’m going to see it in IMAX for a second time on Wednesday. So there.

“Cathcart’s email is basically ‘Leto what, music loud.’”

I’m assuming his off world location is effectively a blacksite. Regardless of what’s legal, it’s probably a lot easier to run and hide a permanent torture chamber for the purposes of breeding replicants on some moon far from the prying eyes of the LAPD than in your corporate HQ.

“Oh, it’s rendition. Thanks, Dennis Villynoove!” :)

It did seem a bit odd that his assassinbot could stride into LAPD HQ to confiscate evidence and murder police chiefs at leisure, but he has to launch an aging replicant into space before pulling out its fingernails?


So the q23 guys haven’t watched the 3 mini films released on YouTube prior ?

I don’t even know what this means. Is this an “Animatrix” kind of thing?

-xtien (good flawed podcaster)

As part of promoting the film DV apparently engaged three of his friends to make short films to expand/in some back story.
None of them made me super excited in fact they made me worry.

In the end though I didn’t need to worry.

Here’s the links (Kelly will be pleased because one is an anime his favourite thing).

Nexus Dawn

Nowhere to run

Black out

Well, one of his friends and Ridley Scott’s son. :)

They’re just promo shorts. I didn’t care for any of them and I’m certainly glad I didn’t watch them before the movie. The anime one was interesting but about three times as long as it needed to be.

And although I really liked what Luke Scott did in Morgan with limited resources and a great cast, you’d never know from his two Blade Runner videos. They look godawful. Although I did decide while watching the one with Jared Leto that I really like what Jared Leto is doing here. I think I might be ready to pretend his Suicide Squad Joker never happened!


Ok yes sorry I stand corrected.

I agree and luckily they are forgettable.

re Morgan I agree as well.

I’m not soo up on Jared Leto. I thought he was fine in 2049. Maybe a bit mumbly. I seem to remember others suffered from ‘the mumbles’ a little as well.

I can’t comment on Suicide Squad as I steer clear of all super hero movies.

I mostly attend the cinema for horror and sci fi.

I didn’t see why Wallace would use the Rachel-shaped carrot when he already had the stick? He’s proved his evil cred in an earlier scene with a replicant murder in the birthing room. Deckard’s his, take him offworld and do your worst.

I agree the whole point of Wallace needing Deckard offworld for experiment makes it clearer that in this timeline he’s a replicant. Unless … wait … no, they couldn’t be, could they? They couldn’t be sailing close to the whole “love is the secret ingredient of the universe” thing could they? “Let’s dissect him and find the love gene!” No. No-one would do that after Interstellar, surely?

Deckard is at least one of the two ingredients of the “miracle”, and the only one currently available (until they find the child). No matter if he’s a replicant or not, he’s a irreplaceable asset.

Using Rachel and getting his voluntary collaboration seems like a decent enough shot.

I really hope this movie recoups its investment and we get a third movie in a decade or so…

Fairly certain during the scene when Deckard is captured and Rachel is brought out Wallace taunts Deckard by saying were you programmed to fall for her the way she was programmed to have a child. That would heavily imply he is a replicant.

Disappointing. I was giving him too much credit by recognizing that bees have been used as a symbol of transition between death and life in ancient mythology. Here I was thinking he was painting us a picture of Fords little world existing somewhere between death and life. To pass into it Gosling has to pass through the bees… guess sometimes a spade is just a spade.

Finally on second viewing yesterday the little bits of dialogue from Wallace give off a false god/Lucifer vibe. He’s inherited this world and these creations that someone greater has made and hes just thrashing about trying to pry the secrets out playing god with his own little ant hill.

Yes! Thank you, that’s exactly the sort of thing I was trying to remember. And the important thing isn’t whether Wallace it’s lying. The important thing is how the comment impacts Deckard. He clearly knows he’s a replicant and it calls into question the authenticity of love, just like the first movie called into question the authenticity of memory. That’s one of the moments when I was really pleased with Harrison Ford as an actor.

I’d like to hear any ambiguity apologists explain that scene!


Wasn’t there a line that Deckard said about being on the run? And that’s the reason he was in Vegas? I really need to see this movie a second time.

But he doesn’t. He says something along the lines of “If you were designed, you were designed to fall for her.” I can’t remember the precise wording, but it’s definitely a conditional. I distinctly remember it because it was at that moment that I realised the film wasn’t assuming he’s a replicant, as I had been up to that point.

Yes, but this is arguably because he’d absconded with the Rachel replicant. If we take the theatrical release as canon (as if!), that would explain the “we were being hunted” line just fine.

What seals the deal for me is Wallace laying out for Deckard the possibility that he and Rachel were each designed to fall in love, as TREOS pointed out. What a dumb thing to lay out for someone who’s human. And as I posted above, Harrison Ford’s reaction makes it clear he’s stunned at the idea because he knows he’s a replicant.


Oh no… I might have to go see it again… that’s the worst (it isn’t). But even so I agree with Tom that this line works even if yours is the correct wording as the reaction of Deckard tells us everything we need to know about his origin. He knows he’s a replicant and it causes his reality to come into question. It’s much the same bomb being dropped on him as the one being dropped on K when he finds out he wasn’t the special replicant and his memory was just someone elses. Deckard is wondering if he was even in love with her from the start or if this is just a piece of him that someone plugged in.

Ok, forgive me if this has already been answered, but wasn’t that blue-ish view right before the bees showing them as the “living” things flying around? I thought that the little specks flying around, after changing the viewing optics (like Predator view, kinda) were meant to show them, and thus the motes zipping about. And didn’t K then say, “I don’t know, but it’s alive?” or something?

Saw this on no sleep, so need to watch it again.

Also, having worked with Mr. Ford, he is very crotchety at times, but also pretty dang decent and helpful other times. His most famous crotchety line is, “Yeah, yeah,” and Kelly’s voice for him was SPOT on! Loved it!