Qt3 Movie Podcast: Blade Runner 2049

The idea was that the dirty bomb had stripped all life from the area. The bees on the scanner indicated that life had returned. This doesn’t necessarily have any bearing of whether they were real bees or replicant bees, of course, since both are considered “alive”. It just meant that Vegas was no longer uninhabitable.


Thanks, Tom. Still listening to the podcast as I type, and you did pretty much mention this. I feel like I need to see the first Blade Runner now, but definitely going to watch this one again.

Edit: you just mentioned Predator view. Weird!

The line is about his doubt whether he’s a replicant or not. It plays on his fear, not the certainty he is. Or that’s how I read it.

Otherwise the conditional makes no sense.

I should say I totally accept (2049) Deckard thinks he’s a Replicant, or at least thinks it shouldn’t matter, and that’s why Wallace’s comment has the impact it does.

All I’m saying is the movie goes out of its way, rather bizarrely in fact, not to say whether he is in fact a Replicant.

Here’s that Atari logo, BTW

By the way, Mackenzie Davis is really, really great in Black Mirror’s episode San Junipero. It’s really hard to explain its main theme without completely spoiling it, so just watch it ASAP.

P.S: I love BR2049.

the scene between K and Joi

and Mariette ( the prostitute) evoked Vertigo (Hitchcock) for me … in a very strange way. K wants to replicate the girl, make her real like James Stewart wanted to replicate the dead lover
He “dresses” the prostitute to become Joi… I felt a strong Hitchcock vibe here

Except that no, he doesn’t. Joi does. It’s Joi doing that. It’s her choice. The fact that I don’t know whether to put quotes around “choice” there speaks to the layers of what identity and life mean in this movie.

Now we can go 'round and 'round about the product nature of Joi, but in the end she is a product being used by a product, so her agency is a natural progression in the discussion. That said, it was her doing it for reasons yet to be plumbed here. This was not him dressing her.


“Now who keeps a dead tree?”

Ok thanks I will def check that out :-)

ah right, maybe I got that impression because he let Mariette in, this scene was then totally the opposite of Vertigo… times, they are changin’ … Great scene nevertheless. I have a strong feeling I need to watch it again…

Joi was such a great character! I love how much agency she had/could convey. I also love that she was always slightly transparent, was pieces of the background showing through her. The last visual touch that I liked was the difference between her Vegas ads and the earlier ones from Los Angeles.

The final trailer for 2049 was so misleading, that I’m surprised more audiences didn’t tank the Cinemascore ala Mother. It is, however, hilarious to watch after you’ve seen the film.

To be fair to the studios, this would’ve been a really tough work to promote, and I’m glad they didn’t spoil the plot in the marketing.

haha… that must have been all action sequences packed in 1:30 I think the studios would have loved to produce that kind of movie, instead they got some philosophical discourse. Love it (the movie).
On the other hand I feel bad that they have trouble recouping their investment… but I am sure 2049 will have long legs.

Don´t listen to the podcast much since it got too long for human consumption, but I´m tempted to listen to this one, if only to see if anyone cracked wise about the hero offering his disembodied audience a ¨coffee.¨

Wanted to like it, but all it did was remind what was great about the original. Way too long, for one thing…probably the only movie I´ve ever seen where where people were walking out before the climax (as in ¨OMFG, it´s still not over?!¨).

I´m not up on all the new actors, but this Gosling fellow could have been replaced in the lead very alby by a piece of plywood. One of the least the least convincing tough guys I´ve ever seen on film. Which reminds me, Harrison Ford should probably remember that he is over 70 and quit making a fool out of himself. Stallone and De Niro have that act covered.


Tom Chick on “how Cinemascore works:”

“These are the people who decided on Friday night to go see this movie.”

How do you know they didn’t make this decision earlier in the week?

Just finished listening to a great podcast interview between host Rian Johnson and Denis Villeneuve about Blade Runner 2049, which is well worth a listen. In it, Denis talks about having "make peace with the idea that I could be damned forever by the cinematic community — I could be crucified,” when he took on the project. He says he made it “for the act of cinema itself.”

Honestly, a misleading trailer like that is the best! But I’ve totally stopped watching trailers beforehand, anyway.

In case it’s actually not clear what I meant, Cinemascore polls people who see a movie on the Friday it opens. The timing of the decision to see the movie isn’t part of the survey.


With Deakins at the helm and the iconic BR fundamentals beneath it, this movie was destined to look spectacular. Despite me expecting it, I nevertheless sat there in awe pretty much throughout the movie. So much good world building. The production design and the concept work behind it are fantastic, and the light/color/contrast composition and the framing in every single scene are something I couldn’t help but ogle at. Along with the bassy, booming audio design, this really made it worth watching it in a movie theater - and I definitely will watch it a second time.

I don’t mind Ryan Gosling, and liked him a lot in The Nice Guys, but I can see why others are less fond of him. That said, I think his perceived detachment/monotony worked perfectly for this particular character. I had low expectations regarding Harrison Ford given his performances and efforts in the past 15 or so years, and I was pleasantly surprised.

I was saddened to see that Dave Bautista was in the movie only for the initial minutes, but he surely made those minutes count. (And yeah, I know he’s in one of the three shorts.)

Lots of neat world building bits, and I was glad that K/Joe didn’t turn out to be the special child - that would have been a bit too much clichee and convenience. And boy, when he finally sits down on those stairs and “Tears in the Rain” kicks in - goose bumps. One of BR 2049’s achievements is that it is the sequel to an influential classic, but can stand on its own feet and doesn’t constantly repeat plot beats the way Star Wars Episode 7 did. The “Tears in the Rain” bit is pretty much the single biggest specific nod - and that’s why it has impact.

I adore BR for its production design and the themes it brings up. It undoubtedly was groundbreaking in some ways. BR 2049, however, overall is a better movie. Not perfect by any means, but 3 hours flew really by for me. The only scene that felt a bit too long was the dialog between Deckard and Wallace. Leto didn’t do a lot for me. At least he was not aggressively overacting. Given the runtime, I think his character and Love could have been a bit more fleshed out. Especially Love seemed to have more potential given that she was a ruthless henchmen, but clearly not without emotions and empathy either. I feel the script could have done more with that conflict.

Overall, a very impressive and satisfying cinema experience for me. Villeneuve simply is one of the most interesting contemporary directors to follow. And Deakins is consistently great.