Second time I watched it, first time was during its theatrical release.

Still a very powerful movie. The slow rhythm and the cinematography create a very heavy atmosphere, fit for the universe and message the movie conveys.

Some of the shots give a Dune vibe, nice to see this so many years before the first Dune movie.

Definitely recommended if you like SF and dystopian universes

  • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.mlM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    While I generally agree with all of that, and it is basically what I more or less said at the time, it’s still a film full of women being objectified and in some cases pretty senselessly murdered.

    singling out the objectification and portrayal of women just feels a little odd to me.

    If patriarchy and violence against women weren’t a problem or if the film were about those issues, then all good. But we’re in a world where male v bear is an actual debate and the above are actual issues.

    So I don’t hold anything at all against a woman saying that they think there’s a problem there in the film and that they don’t like it solely for those reasons. And in end, I’m not sure the film’s dystopian or AI-humanity themes really justify or necessitate the portrayal and plot points. It feels like other options were available and, TBH, using female objectification/ownership/subordination/violence as a vehicle and marker for dystopia is perhaps lazy and trope-ish. For instance, the woman who told me they didn’t like the film for these reasons was telling me shortly before the film’s release how tired they were of the sad prostitute and destitute brothel trope for signifying dystopia in sci-fi.

    First(/second) season of west world strikes me as a relevant comparison here, where the agency and subjugation and control was less gendered without hiding at all the reality of what a female AI would go through.

    In the end I think two things can (edit: both) be true here. 1) the film itself isn’t misogynistic and the portrayal of women in it is part of a bigger dystopian theme, and 2) the use of female characters for that kind of story just doesn’t cut it for some/enough women anymore who, without demanding “girl boss” characters, would prefer either direct stories about female oppression or portrayals the lean into more fruitful or interesting ideas and themes.

    For me, as much as I like the film, I don’t think its story and point quite get to the point of making what happens to women in it feel justified in our current era. I think it’s totally fair for women to feel alienated from the film, that it wasn’t made for them. The majority of women aren’t prostitutes or locked down house wives with zero agency (or animals to be slaughtered).

    Whatever dystopia resonates with women today is likely more interesting, frankly. Perhaps a bit more like the story of the protagonist in BR 2049 (who’s of course male).

    • loobkoob@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I think it’s a film where most people are being objectified and in some cases pretty senselessly murdered! Sapper Morton (Dave Bautista’s character) is senselessly murdered. Joe/K attempts to senselessly murder Deckard. Joe/K is left to die on the steps at the end of the film. Ultimately, I think it’s less about any kind of gender divide and more that almost everyone is just a victim of extreme capitalism. Everyone is dehumanised in the name of profits. Everyone is made to compete with everyone else for what scarce resources remain. And that’s especially true for the “secondary citizens” the film largely spends its time with - replicants, women, orphans, poor people. Slaves.

      If patriarchy and violence against women weren’t a problem or if the film were about those issues, then all good.

      I’d go so far as to say that patriarchy, violence against women and fertility are major themes of the film. With replicants existing, we see a world where women aren’t needed to create life. With overpopulation and resource scarcity, we see a world where having children is less desirable anyway. The film’s larger narrative focuses on Wallace, who is very much patriarchal himself and also representative of the patriarchal ruling class in the setting, wanting to discover how to make replicants reproduce because breeding replicants would be cheaper, quicker and easier for him than building them from scratch.

      Wallace is cruel, power-hungry, sadistic, and dreams of electric wombs - of a world where women aren’t necessary (because he only sees them in terms of their “function”) and he can play god. He’s very much painted as the villain - one gory scene shows him quite literally see him cutting into where the wombs of female replicants would be because he sees their infertility as a failure and something that makes them worthless to him.

      Blade Runner 2049 goes far beyond using the sad prostitute and the destitute brothel to signify dystopia; it fully integrates them into its plot and takes a deeply anti-patriarchal stance.

      It feels like other options were available and, TBH, using female objectification/ownership/subordination/violence as a vehicle and marker for dystopia is perhaps lazy and trope-ish.

      I don’t feel like it leans into them so much that they become tropes, personally, and I don’t think men fare much better either. But while women’s sex appeal is commodified - quite literally with pleasure models, the most clinical, corporate name possible for sex robots - we also see combat models and blade runners commodifying violence. Some of these roles are filled by humans doing what they can to survive in a capitalist system trying to crush them; others are replicants or AI literally designed and manufactured for those roles. I don’t think any of them were used as markers for a dystopia so much as being part of the fabric of the world, the story and the themes.

      For me, as much as I like the film, I don’t think it’s story and point quite get to the point of making what happens to women in it feel justified in our current era.

      I really don’t think what happens to men in the film is much better. The film is miserable for everyone in it - it’s an equal-opportunity dystopia. The only person not being crushed by the world and the system is Wallace, and not only is he the oppressor (so, y’know, not much sympathy there…) but he also doesn’t come across as too happy either.

      Perhaps a bit more like the story of the protagonist in BR 2049 (who’s of course male).

      Joe/K might be the main character of the film but he’s not special, and that’s the point. His entire character arc is that he starts off feeling like any other replicant - ie, not feeling much at all because of all the emotional suppression - before daring to hope that he might be special and becoming more and more in touch with his humanity as a result. As the story progresses, he becomes convinced that he is indeed special. And then it turns out he’s not, and he decides to give up his life to help someone - a woman - and that is when he really becomes special.

      Almost everything that happens to Joe/K in the film is at the direction of women. His boss - the police chief - is a woman. The person who implanted his memories - and who is responsible for implanting all replicant memories - is a woman. The person who leads the replicant resistance is a woman. His direct antagonist in the film - Luv - is a woman. A lot of his emotional development comes from being prompted by Joi, a female AI. Almost everything that happens to Joe/K ultimately happens because of a woman, because they are the ones who are really playing the game around him.

      I think Blade Runner 2049 is a deeply, deeply feminist film. It doesn’t shy away from depictions of female objectification/ownership/subordination/violence - they are important for telling its story and getting across its themes - but it sure as hell doesn’t endorse them either.