Bladerunner 2049: Sins of the past

Denise Villeneuve’s 2049 is a masterful display of visual and audible artistry. Beautifully shot and methodically paced.

It's a purely atmospheric film that (much like a replicant) draws you in and makes you forget its not real.

The Earth is a living breathing character in a film largely brimming with artifice. Our planet may be dying in 2049, but it’s doing so with an impressive display of raw power in its final death throes. It is not going silently.

A massive seawall at the coast merely delays the inevitable as the pacific ocean threatens to overtake Los Angeles. Ceaseless storms batter the landscape, buildings, and people. It is at once a hauntingly beautiful and equally unforgiving world. 

As gorgeous and captivating as Bladerunner 2049 is, it is not without fault. It’s most glaring —to me personally— was its inability to shake off the less admirable qualities of the original Bladerunner: It's male-centric perspective and dated gender-roles.

I won’t go so far as to say the film is ‘sexist’ or any of the immeasurable ‘-phobic’ labels as some have in the time since the release, but I do think it ultimately does fail in respect to some harmful gender tropes. I couldn't shake this uncomfortable feeling that I had during several scenes, in particular those about JOI and Rachael amongst others. I feel 2049 deserves to be critiqued as much as it deserves praise.

Nearly all the women in 2049 are relegated to passive roles where they have little to no agency or purpose in the narrative other than to motivate or appease the male characters.

Deckard’s daughter is the object of all of the central characters plans. She is what the men are searching for; the princess in her tower. She has had no say in how her life played out for the past thirty years.

A.I. girlfriend JOI’s sole function in the story is to “die” in order to further motivate K. JOI has no free will, and never could. Joi is a pre-programmed "product" who's seemingly real love for K is not an actual choice. If K had elected to somehow alter her code and allow for the free will to choose whether to stay with him.

Rachael, one of the two central characters of the original film, is killed off-screen, her only act deemed of any value in the narrative being to give birth to a child.

Luv, on the other hand has a good deal of screen time but lacks in any character development. Her only motivation is to please her master Niander Wallace out of fear of what he will do to her if she fails. The bleeding out of the newly 'born' replicant at the hands of Wallace serves the narrative purpose of introducing the antagonist and his goals to the viewer, however within the context of the story this monologue and display is meant entirely for Luv alone to witness. It's a reminder that she is expendable. Her emotional trauma is evident as she begins to cry, first at the act of Wallace and gain during her own act of inflicting pain on another. Her actions are driven By fear of losing Wallace's approval.

There are two women who do show some agency: Madam, K’s boss shows her own will in defying Wallace and the law for the greater good and for K whom she has a soft spot for, and the rebel leader who also seems to be acting of her own will, however we don’t get a great deal of screen time with either of them.

Instead, the majority of the narrative is men overly fetishizing and obsessing over females and their wombs. Rachael is overtly praised for her beauty and ability of reproduction, and those female models that are barren are discarded and tossed aside by a man who sees them as useless.

Let’s talk about Deckard and Rachael. One of it’s glaring failings that makes me uncomfortable to this day is the toxic masculinity displayed by Deckard during the unfolding of his “relationship” with Rachael. Namely the scene in Deckard’s apartment where he forces himself on her despite her clear signals of discomfort and even clearer attempts at escape.

In 2049 the narrative repeatedly romanticizes the Rachael/Deckard relationship of the original BR. It’s referred to as “that beautiful night, and how perfect it all was.” I admit the scene I which they meet at Tyrell’s beautiful office is gorgeously lit and shot. The chemistry between the two then is as equals. Rachael toys with Deckard and even outwits him at his own test.

It is after this first meeting that the dynamic shifts completely and the enigmatic and intelligent Rachael turns to Deckard in a state of vulnerability and fear, falling into the helpless woman trope. Deckard takes advantage of the shift of power and forces himself on her instead of helping her. Rachael denies his advances and tries to escape but is unable to. That does not sound like a romantic or perfect night. Slamming a door shut on a girl, throwing her against a wall and kissing her when she is crying makes me uncomfortable to this day. 

If not for Vangelis’ soaring saxophone this “romantic” this could easily be a horror sequence out of the Shining. Perhaps in the 80’s this passed as romantic, but I feel that the scene’s problem’s have gone largely ignored.

The problems of a male-centric fantasy largely remain into the sequel.

Some might argue that the male-centric perspective may somehow be baked into the DNA of Bladerunner; a pre-requisite of the sc-fi noir genre.

But I don’t think this is the case.

In 2049 we see many sexualized holograms of women, and female replicants, but not men. Are there no ads with men? Have all non-Hetero male orientations disappeared?

The recently released Netflix Series Altered carbon borrows a great deal of the Bladerunner DNA, aesthetic queues and genre tropes. But it takes what it established and adds to it further by creating a sci-fi noir setting with realistic cultural and sexual diversity. Men are sexualized in equal degrees to that of women. The male characters are often coerced by women that have power. The world feels dynamic and lived-in by an amalgam of varied people and not just a white male fantasy. 

The central women have character development, display their own free will, and share equal screen time to their male counterparts.
Perhaps as I suggested earlier Bladerunner is defined by this male ego centricity. It may be part of the Noir DNA, etc If K had been a woman for instance would it possibly have been too similar to ghost in the Shell’s Motoko Kisangani? The BR fan base as well seems to be largely male dominant, thus this caters to that audience as well.

I would say that the series requires a reevaluation past this juncture. Denise and Scott have contributed a great deal in artistry and story telling alone , but there is a need to diversify roles and gender stereotypes.

If there is a third installment, and I hope there is. I would hope we see the Replicant Rebellion and the Deckard & daughter reunion and the closing of the Wallace storyline. And most importantly the daughter as the main character we follow, with her own motivations and ambitions. 

How would she react to the rebellions plans to use her as an icon for war Like Katniss Everdeen in Hunger games? How would she feel about her father having abandoned her for so many years? And how would she choose to live her life now that she is free of her cage? Do the ads and holograms change to show men when we follow her around the city, implying that they display something different depending on the observer?

Most importantly, would she finally be able to to verify whether Deckard’s memories are authentic or those of a replicant? 

I would find this change in perspective extremely refreshing for the series. Instead of treading old water we would be crossing over the seawall into a new ocean, a new Bladerunner.

---