Bladerunner is Redpilled

Bladerunner 2049 is /ourmovie/, pol.

>future where multiculturalism and consumerism have dominated the globe, making everything shitty
>MC is an archetype of Julius Evola's "Man Among the Ruins", AKA - one of the last true men in a sea of degeneracy
>ironic because he's a replicant, but the movie uses the phrase "more human than human" to describe some like him
>police chief is an ugly bitch that treats him like a slave cuckboi, obviously she's symbolic of modern feminism's desire to dominate and demean men
>the only women men like are either hologram waifus or sexbot replicants, because they have actual feminine qualities
>MC's hologram waifu is literally dressed like a 1950s housewife at first, and she's all cute and submissive to him
>MC truly loves her and tries to treat her like a real woman with respect; again showing that he is a "man among the ruins"
>the main villain is a lanky soyboy numale
>there are virtually no gays or POC in the movie, except for a black guy in the wasteland who keeps little white orphan boys as slaves; symbolic of how black nationalism and leftist pandering to it is enslaving future generations of whites
>the main message of the movie is that having children is what makes you truly human, and this pissed-off a bunch of leftists, feminists, and fags IRL

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=rrZk9sSgRyQ
youtube.com/watch?v=UgsS3nhRRzQ
youtube.com/watch?v=aZ9Os8cP_gg
youtu.be/auQNWRm7iDM
webm.land/media/dBDw.webm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Also, grub farmer was based.

It really was fantastic
I was pleasantly surprised
Much more in keeping with the message of Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? than the original

>Also, grub farmer was based.
>tfw that scene was supposed to be the opener for the original Blade Runner

ESCAPE PLEASURE ISLAND

RESCUE YOUR FATHER FROM THE WHALE

BECOME A REAL BOY

DIE

>having children is what makes you truly human

there are a lot of true great humans that were childlish

Dammit, stop deconstructing things Peterson!

GO AWAY, BATIN

Stop posting here, the catalog over there is full of blade memer threads. It’s an incredible movie, but let’s keep this board political.

LMAO wtf I love Pinochet’s movie

>Stop posting here, the catalog over there is full of blade memer threads. It’s an incredible movie, but let’s keep this board political.
>implying art can't incorporate politics

Bump.

Best film I've seen in a long time. Just a thoroughly enjoyable film from the score, the cinematography, to the set pieces. Some stand out acting here and there, excellent themes throughout. Some plebs will say it was slow but it methodically set up each shot and scene. It was excellent.

The fact that it bothers roasties and there was no SJW shit is just icing on the cake. Sure, there were feminist themes but they didn't hamfistedly shove it in your face YASSS QUEEN SLAY style.

Probably gonna go see it a third time before it's out of the kinoplex. Can't wait for the BR release.

This is political.

Sarkeesian and a bunch of SJWs are condemning Bladerunner for being racist/sexist/homophobic/etc.

>luv

Who was the best waifu, IMO?

>Sarkeesian and a bunch of SJWs are condemning Bladerunner for being racist/sexist/homophobic/etc.
ok seems like it might be actually a good movie then

It really is man. I'm sure some of these posts are for marketing purposes but even then it's because they know we're the target market. They get the archetypes correct....it's basically the plot of Pinocchio in a dystopian fash wavy future ruined by jew feminism.

Very lewd webm, user. Luv was best waifu by far. She was an angel. JOI™ was a programmed tool, and Mariette was a used up roastie. Although I have to say having my own personal JOI™ wouldn't be bad.

I also forgot to mention that MC is an aesthetic, Aryan white male with a chiseled jaw like Chad; and for much of the movie he autisticly stares at all the degeneracy/sadness around him.

Also he gets offered sex by some street whores, and basically says "begone THOTs, I'm loyal to my hologram waifu."

have more Jerk-Off Instructions butt

...

There are some really interesting, disheartening ideas about the decay of relationships in the movie. It has a lot to say about the commodification of intimacy, domesticity being taken over by appliances, and the changing roles of women. I'd like to see a full gendered analysis of the movie from a legitimate source, because I'm sure there's a lot going on I'm too incel to understand.

But the way Sarkeesian talked about it was so blatantly wrongheaded she must have gone out of her way to misunderstand that part of the film. You can't be that wrong by accident.

Honestly I just like discussing it because it's been a great experience. I went into the movie with huge reservations since it's a sequel and we know how that goes. Came out in awe that a movie like that was actually greenlit for major production.

I'm just thankful it happened. I doubt we'll see another like it for a long time. More rehashes and capeshit for the foreseeable future.

I never watched anything Blade runner related

Where do I start?

Pinocchio.

>Where do I start?
Blade Runner: Director's Cut
Optional: Dangerous Days: Making Blade Runner
Blade Runner 2049

>But the way Sarkeesian talked about it was so blatantly wrongheaded she must have gone out of her way to misunderstand that part of that part of the film.

Absolutely. I think she does it for (You)'s essentially. She knows her outrage videos get hits because so many people disagree with her.

blade runner final cut otherwise if you watch 2049 you just won't get things

so only two movies? thanks

Start by giving back Transylvania to its rightful owner you gypsy nigger.

>albanian hiding behind his flag
whatever, nice NO whatsoever contribution to the thread you metaphorical nigger

Give up, Dracula.

There's a series of 3 short films on YouTube that are the prequel to 2049. They take place between the first and second movie.

1st one is about the first replicant revolution and the "blackout", and it's animu:
youtube.com/watch?v=rrZk9sSgRyQ

2nd is where the soyboy CEO unveils his new replicants (after they had been previously banned):
youtube.com/watch?v=UgsS3nhRRzQ

3rd is some backstory for the based grub farmer:
youtube.com/watch?v=aZ9Os8cP_gg

I got memed into seeing this movie. Am I literally the only one who didnt think it was genius? Too many empowered females , too many unnecessary plot lines , harrison ford , and 3 hours long. The final fight was boring.
I do want a cyber waifu tho

I mean there's only the original made in 1982. There are several different cuts (edited) versions that people disagree which is best. I like the Director's Cut best.

is it out on...umm..DVD yet?

>skinjob this, skinjob that
>racial epithet spraypainted on the door
>there's a wall in our society
>you bring that wall down and you start a war
Nice try shlomo. No way anyone here actually buys this amerijew garbage. This is the most hamfisted propaganda on the market right now. It's trying to mobilize people around a FICTIONAL racism. You'll probably hear "skinjob" more times in this movie than you've ever heard Spic thrown around in real actual life. This is the second film about this same thing(second being logan) and it was also written by the same guy who also wrote alien covenant(white blonde aryan is evil)

Totally agree user. It was a nice reminder of what art can be when it isn't polluted with post modern deconstructionist trash. I don't see how anyone could watch that and not be captivated & uplifted.

Lol, this OPs baby's first deep movie clearly.

It's a deep movie for the feeble-minded, very little depth, says nothing new. Massive anti-climax (certainly not worth 2.5 hours build up and investment in the story), plot holes all over the place and extremely self-consciously tied to the original. Beautiful fx and cinematography though.

Unironically this user .

Familiarize yourself with the archetypes and watch some Jordan Peterson vids, then you'll really be able to pick up what is going on while you enjoy the aesthetic.

This is why they're making it intentionally flop. It's done pretty badly in the box office due to virtually no advertising.

...

youtu.be/auQNWRm7iDM

I reviewed it, lads.

It wasn't the best movie, but it was great for thinking. Dropping questions on you, then offering space and setting to consider.

First movie in a few years I don't regret watching in theaters.

Agreed. It's a nice methapor for post-modernism too, took the aesthetic of the first brilliant movie, re-created it, but it's devoid of all meaning or depth. Yet all the fags love it.

Talk a little faster, bby.

>ironic because he's a replicant, but the movie uses the phrase "more human than human" to describe some like him

You let on that you didn't see the original.

Should I watch the original before watching the new one?

Actually they never say skin job at all in the movie, it only shows up as written on the wall once. Nice try gook.

Did you even see this trash?
>le comic relief cellphone app girlfriend
>le skin job harrassment
>le SOCIETY
>le WALL OF SEPARATION
>YOU TEAR DOWN THAT WALL AND YOU START A WAR

This movie is propaganda compared to the original. It scarcely more substantive than quippy marvel movie #23

>Actually they never say skin job at all in the movie
Some guy yells it at K in the hallway of the police building

They say it the moment he walks in the door at LAPD.

Explains why burgers let this film down at the box office right there though, even the ones that saw it didn't actually see it.

The replicants are Nietzschian Overmen in a world where the humans are becoming increasingly ape-like.

Didnt even hear it but ill take your word for it leaf. But anyways the south korean dude exagerated.

>still haven't seen the original one
fag

Philip K. Dick is a postmodernist.

He is writing about the fallibility of the narrator, the multiple views on reality and relativism in general.

It seems near the middle that the main character is a Jesus figure, born of an immaculate union, the first of his kind, hidden for his safety (like baby moses floating down the river). The typical biblical hero myth. Rachel is somewhat of a Mary figure (also referencing Rachel, mother of Joeseph).

K whatever his name is (hero replicant) embarks on a path to find his destiny as the savior of the replicants, him being the only one with special genetics etc. needed to cleanse all the replicants of their original sin.

But what haplens in the end? Disaster when K boy finds out he is not who he thought, he is actually a no one and the woman takes his place as savior of the world. He dies in the snow, happy, totally cucked.

The future is female, bois

Agreed

This is correct, but it doesn't change the overall point. If you showed this movie to an ape with understanding, it would be enough to encourage him to be a human.

If you have any sort of taste you'll hate the new one then.

Nah, my guy. Slower pacing is my brand.

>devoid of all meaning or depth

We see smaller problems, from a limited perspective, in a bigger picture. It leaves you alone with your thoughts for at least an hour, with sweeping landscapes and songs. It's for reflection.

It offered a sci-fi frame for considering average problems. A better tool than a movie. The only refreshing thing I've seen from Hollywood in a while.

Did she love him?

Does your phone iOS love you?

Cop literally yells, "Fuck off skinjob!" to K in the beginning.

Nope. They hammered home the "everything you want to see, everything you want to hear" line at regular intervals. His feelings were real, she was just programmed.

>3 anti white movies all in the same year
Who are you trying to trick OP?

holy shit my dick

this was directed by a french canadian who made the "amy adams saves humanity while her male companion flops around like a retard" movie

He obviously wasn't the hero, despite everyone pushing it on him, just like they push it on you.

But he wasn't special, just like you. Nobody is, ultimately. That was the point, though.

It encourages the viewer, projecting themselves on K, to not get lost in hopelessness, but to stand for their beliefs. Even in his limited scope, he still took control and played his part.

If he was cucked, he would've killed her father and drowned, like he was told. He didn't, though. He did what he thought was right, then died, like we all will and should.

It was telling the audience to master themselves and control their lives. It was good desu

No it wasn't redpilled. It was r9k pandering garbage. "So you dont like real women" waifu and oneitis garbage; The girl doesn't even love him, she just said what he wanted to hear; the entire fucking plot is the MC being a cuck for people who he ows nothing to; and in the end he fucking dies, he dies for a princess. The MC is a cuck, and a real human shit from drive.

I loved the original, thought the message was great and went with high hopes after hearing how redpilled it was from you guys. And you know what? it was great... until they had to say the real son was the fucking princess, and yet he kept going.

What a fucking cuck

Dark Knight rises

This.

>His feelings were real, she was just programmed.

He instructed here once that "she doesn't have to say that", i.e. what he wants to hear is whatever she wants to say. It might have been real.

On the other hand, real or not: how much say does one have in falling in love or not?

That's my takeaway from it as well.

It's very anti-snowflake mentality. You're not special, you're not a hero on a quest, but you still have to find meaning for yourself despite that.

The main message of the movie isn't that having children is what makes you truly human. The main message of the movie is that sacrificing your own happiness for the sake of someone else's is what makes you truly human. Only white people are capable of that though.

I agree

Rachel (the biblical one) also died in childbirth after running away from her father with Jacob.

Here are some questions to ask yourself.
What is the significance of Peter and the Wolf in this movie?
Nabokov's Pale Fire?
The hamhanded nails through the palms of white haired replicant during his tears in the rain monologue in the first movie?
The symbolism of the snake, unicorn, owl, and ziggarauts (along with many other symbols, many egyptian imagery in the first movie) in relationship to alchemy and freemasonry?
Think that last one is a stretch? Dick says one of his biggest influences is Jung. It's not.
What about the name Joe (Joseph)?
The reference to Angels (fallen)? (Assassin bitch)
There's a tiny start. This movie is complicated, because postmodernism is complicated and obsessed with embedding multitudes of meaning and interpretation. Though, even they cannot help but refute their own philosophy by relying on cultural mythos to provide a foundation for story structure.

And that is why Dick was a drug addict.

JOI is the best clearly

You're misunderstanding the savior storyline. K at one point believes himself to be the messiah, just like all the replicants do at one point, according to the one eyed woman. The replicants are willing to kill for the idea she represents, the police/government are willing to kill to hide what she represents, and Wallace is willing to kill for her potential.

But in the end, K doesn't save her because she's the Kwisatz Haderach, and he doesn't save Deckard because he's K's father. He does it because those individuals are closely tied to his final understanding of himself as a whole individual. Ana gave him the memories that gave him an identity (logos), and Deckard's painful move to distance himself for her own good showed him that a person is capable of great self-sacrifice for the people he loves. K ultimately sees through the ideological holy war that's brewing, and instead acts on motives of love, rather than anger.

>that filename

Thanks for condensing it, yeah. That's exactly it. Anti-snowflake story encouraging average men to find meaning and take control.

Wholly unexpected and appreciated message.

>your pure waifu is really just a used-up sex image for other men
>the true waifu is so pure she literally has to be kept locked up behind glass, completely untouchable

iktf, Villeneuve

hnng

this, the entire last half is K disconnecting himself from the brewing politics and doing what HE wants to do.

I'd like to know how old K/Joe actually is,

Who else /martyrdom complex/ here?

Also who else has noticed the increased trend in heroic annihilation in movies recently? In 60's-70's movies the hero dying at the end of the film was always a tragic act of despair, like Vanishing Point or Easy Rider. But recently, with stuff like Rogue One and a lot of Goosecore, we've gone back to full Horatius at the Bridge levels of noble annihilation.

Ana de Armas—who is completely white—is the best girl.

Thanks for the spoilers you utter faggot

Specifically, the end of the first film shows Deckard and Rachael deciding to spend their lives together in freedom. They transcend the moral failures of the society around them by elevating each other, giving each other a sense of purpose. It's a message that says that a big part of becoming a whole individual is learning to trust and invest fully in another person, and that you expand yourself by doing so.

On the other hand, 2049 goes to great lengths to show a man who's invested in the wrong things. K clearly has great feelings for Joi, but it's ultimately show, or at least heavily implied, that the Joi in his mind was a fantasy. He still realizes his humanity through his relationships with other people, but it's in a distant, incomplete way.

Deckard becomes a real boy by embracing life, K becomes a real boy by dying. I don't know if these are just two natural conclusions to the same story, but the timing feels significant.

>cuban
>white

are there anymore anime similar to this? Or is there awhole Blade Runner Anime series?

Good argument. You have a strong point.
Though, he surely still sees deckard as a father figure at that point. His police boss constantly tells him that the leaking of the secret info of the savior of replicants will throw the world into chaos causing mass destruction and loss of life. Knowing that, why would K embark on this journey after finding out he is not "The One"?
Is his personal sacrifice more important than the assumed stability of the world?
Was it his desire for gnosis?
Revenge?
Compassion?
Are replicants really capable of those things?
Or was he still clinging to the belief that it was possible for him to still be a savior of replicant-kind (which, in a roundabout way, he was) and have a connection with his "father". The small possibility that they could be wrong about the girl.
He was "way off baseline" after all.

Either way, it took a traditional storyline based on the hero myth (as was heavily established in the 80s movie with the symbolism) and inverted it to suprise the audience with the female savior ending (the passive, nurturing female, mother of dreams and memories vs. the active male wrestling for control of his future and meaning in life) Very typical of postmodernist writers.
Don't get me wrong though, I thought this was a great movie.

I don't expect that everything I'm saying is right, but in Dick's work there will be many ways to interpret, but there is a hidden core from which he draws. I'm only assuming the writers of this movie continued that way of thinking.

There's Ghost in the Shell, Mardock Scramble, Serial Experiments Lain, all kinds of shit.

Bladerunner original was the same.
It showed a world of urban decay and (((multiculturalism))) where languages are so many that no one can truly understand what anyone is saying and the only whites left are either very poor or replicant workers whilst the real ones live on colonies.

the cheesy happy ending was forced on Riedley Scott. Too bad Villeneuve built his story on this ending.

>It's for reflection

- Why the fuck were Willard transporting such a valuable asset with just 3 vehicles?

- Why the fuck didn't they kill an obviously dangerous obstacle to their plan rather than just leave him in Las Vegas?

- Why did K get to keep his car after he was suspended and why weren't his enemies able to keep track of it after he rescued Deckard like they did when he was going to the orphanage?

His actions don't help any of the factions involved, and they only directly hurt Wallace. Deckard basically ruined his life trying to bury Ana somewhere safe, he has no interest in telling the world where she is or what she is. The Replicant woman says she knows where Ana is, but Deckard could find a way to sneak her out and hide her again, taking the energy out of the replicant jihad.

As for the 'stability of the world', the world is clearly shown to be dying, and surviving on slave labor. Many stories would have K siding with the replicants and waging a war of liberation against their natural-born oppressors. K decides that his debt to Deckard and Ana outweighs any resentment he has towards the establishment.

If you want a postmodern element to the story, its that the hero doesn't pick a grand cause to support, but rather makes good on a personal obligation. But when you look back to the old Greek myths, there wasn't a lot of nationalism and grand ideals in the Illiad, just a bunch of greedy, prideful men out for booty.

Personally I've never finished a PKD book. The first hundred or so pages are always interesting and mind-bending or whatever, but then it turns into 300 more pages of amphetamine-fueled ramblings.

Oh, and the obvious Cowboy Bebop, which is the reason the anime short was directed by the Cowboy Bebop creator and why [spoiler]the movie ends with a nearly identical shot[/spoiler]

Why does the spoiler command work even on boards with no spoiler blocking?

webm.land/media/dBDw.webm

- I assume because whatsherfuck was transporting, but don't know and don't care. Seems stupid, yeah.

- Deckard? If I remember, nobody knew where he was. Once they found him, he became a useful asset. But then, that makes you wonder why they protect him better lmao

- Joi, their product, was no longer with him. That one seemed obvious desu

Cowboy Bebpop. Same director.

F

*didn't

Also,
>it's for reflection
Yes. It's not the best movie. Some scenes were hamfisted, like the final joi advertisement, or the "wow it really wasn't you lol" scene. Neither were necessary, and it would've been better without them.

That said, it's one of the few strong reflection frames I've watched. Better as a tool than a movie.

...

Sorry, 2nd point was - why did they leave K in Las Vegas? They could have killed him right there and left no witness to the affair alive apart from Deckard.

Point 3 - If they had access to Joi then how come they didn't have remote access to her files (like Google does with Google Voice)? If they can track her then surely they don't literally need to take the hard drive out of the console in his apartment.

I agree with you mostly.
>The world is shown to be dying, existing on slave labor.
True, but it is also a post-scarcity environment, even if it is dystopic, and run or at least heavily influenced by a form of communism mixed with corporatism (as hinted both subtly and blatantly by the soviet and CCCP references along with chinese influence.)
So it is stable, even if it is a brutal and nihilistic environment.

Also, the christian and occult symbolism in these movies is not accidental(not that you directly disagree with this), it provides meaning here outside of your interpretation.
I'll have to think over the rest of your points. After all, who knows what Deckard is planning?