Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

[Eye Candy]

Originally Posted by NegaScott128

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adjfTktpIzg

I take the view of the guy on the left as to whether Harrison Ford's character is or is not a replicant.

[Lutz]

The unicorn is not revisionist because there are FOUR unicorns in the movie that point to Deckard being a replicant with THREE unicorns in the original cut.

1. When JF is asleep at his desk there is a model unicorn on the RHS.
2. When Deckard is day dreaming at his piano he has the unicorn dream.
3. During the camera pan at the start of the Roy/Pris/JF breakfast scene (where they have the conversation "there is some of me in you") there is a unicorn at the far left of the room.
4. The origami unicorn at the end.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by Lutz

The unicorn is not revisionist because there are FOUR unicorns in the movie that point to Deckard being a replicant with THREE unicorns in the original cut.

1. When JF is asleep at his desk there is a model unicorn on the RHS.
2. When Deckard is day dreaming at his piano he has the unicorn dream.
3. During the camera pan at the start of the Roy/Pris/JF breakfast scene (where they have the conversation "there is some of me in you") there is a unicorn at the far left of the room.
4. The origami unicorn at the end.

GTFO with your facts!!!

[Det. Bullock]

Originally Posted by Lutz

The unicorn is not revisionist because there are FOUR unicorns in the movie that point to Deckard being a replicant with THREE unicorns in the original cut.

1. When JF is asleep at his desk there is a model unicorn on the RHS.
2. When Deckard is day dreaming at his piano he has the unicorn dream.
3. During the camera pan at the start of the Roy/Pris/JF breakfast scene (where they have the conversation "there is some of me in you") there is a unicorn at the far left of the room.
4. The origami unicorn at the end.

It's revisionist in the sense that Scott decided to put them in without consulting anybody, not even the actors whose characters were supposed to know Deckard was a replicant, I wouldn't be surprised if the unicorns were what clued Ford in that something was wrong with the shoot.
Remember the spat with Ford and the writers was born exactly because Scott messed with stuff and in general acted like a dick with everyone.

[Lutz]

Originally Posted by Det. Bullock

It's revisionist in the sense that Scott decided to put them in without consulting anybody, not even the actors whose characters were supposed to know Deckard was a replicant, I wouldn't be surprised if the unicorns were what clued Ford in that something was wrong with the shoot.
Remember the spat with Ford and the writers was born exactly because Scott messed with stuff and in general acted like a dick with everyone.

There's a great debate here for authorship in a movie but if it's in there when the movie is made there is certainly no debate regarding revisionism.

[NegaScott128]

Originally Posted by Lutz

There's a great debate here for authorship in a movie but if it's in there when the movie is made there is certainly no debate regarding revisionism.

Yet the most prominent evidence regarding Deckard being a replicant - the unicorn dream - is revisionist. It does not exist in the theatrical cut or the workprint, nor any other version of the film that was made during the initial post-production, and was only introduced in the director's cut. And without it, the unicorn has no connection to Deckard. The other unicorns are only in connection with known replicants - Pris, Batty, and Rachel. Without the scene explicitly connecting it with Deckard, you could easily argue that unicorns are just a symbol for replicants in general, or that they represent any number of things that have no relation to Deckard. Just because unicorns feature in the film does not mean that they were originally meant to symbolize Deckard being a replicant - in fact, that very statement is itself revisionist. You're allowing later versions of the film to influence your perception of the earlier versions.

[Bolo Seagull]

I don't think Deckard was intended to be a replicant when they first made the film. I think Ridley Scott has heard this theory and wished he made that movie and has tried to retrofit this twist/ambiguity into the film he made. I don't think there's enough actually in the movie to even substantiate reasonable doubt. It will only ever feel like a neat fan theory to me.

[mrrant_33]

[dallywhitty]

I really ought to subscribe to Empire so I can receive these sexy-ass covers. Is there an alternate cover for us normies?

[mrrant_33]

[Rodney-2187]

C_bnqNFV0AAwsj8.jpg

2bd033d54b734d287303575923ab8797.jpg

[imsounoriginal]

That subscriber cover is hot. Might be phone wallpaper-worthy.

[Darth Marcus]

With Answers Come Questions

[Captain Flint]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

That subscriber cover is hot. Might be phone wallpaper-worthy.

Definitely. As long as someone can photoshop out the Empire logo.

[dallywhitty]

Give me this film now.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by Captain Flint

Definitely. As long as someone can photoshop out the Empire logo.

For iPhone 7:

IMG_1184.JPG

I just cropped it out, I ain't that fancy lol

[eiknarf]

Originally Posted by Captain Flint

Definitely. As long as someone can photoshop out the Empire logo.

I can. I'll just have to hide my signature in somewhere

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

I just cropped it out, I ain't that fancy lol

Just stole it and made it my lock screen wallpaper. Thanks, sweetie.

[eiknarf]

Originally Posted by Captain Flint

Definitely. As long as someone can photoshop out the Empire logo.

I gave it a shot

[dallywhitty]

Still of Gosling and Davis together:



The full name of Leto's character has also been revealed to be Neander Wallace. I'll be picking up the new issue of Empire tomorrow for more juiciness.