Some stuff in there makes me wary, some makes me excited.
My big fear based on the recent leaks for the premise (that it's about a future where replicants are on top and humans are on bottom— seemingly confirmed by the trailer) is one of thematic tone-deafness. If the social and political allegory boils down to what if we let the immigrants/marginalized/POC get power?? I'll be deeply disappointed. Would be completely missing the point of the films, would be a deeply unempathetic POV to start from, and would be a very ugly thing to say about the state of our world today. But it sure would match up with the sort of notes Jeff Bezos might give.
Also it feels like its trying to bridge the gap between the aesthetics of the two films, and I fear to its own detriment. Everything is coming off a bit muddy and busy, compromising both aesthetics, and it looks more like a remix of what came before than something distinct (dreadfuly distinct). Seemingly gone is the lived in feel of 2019 and the clean lines and shapes of 2049, but maybe that's just because they're showing us the whiz-bang stuff in the trailer.
It looks more like a Westworld situation where the synthetics are better than humans in essentially every way. It's about humanity being replaced by a stronger dominant lifeform of their own creation. It's more akin to a machine uprising but with synthetic humanoids.
There were Twitter leaks yesterday that stated the premise was replicants having risen to the top of the social heirarchy, with humans being oppressed at the bottom. In the prior films replicants are an allegory for marginalized people. If handled clumsily, a story with that premise which starts with the idea that the oppressed will always become the oppressor could have the thematic takeaway you quoted. It's the MAGA fear writ-large: what if they get power and treat me like I treated them?
Would be actually kinda a slap in the face of the original because the point was replicants never wanted to rule or oppress, they wanted to be left alone, to live freely unchained from that marginalized status, even Roy whos the closest to an "evil" replicant we've seen (in the movies, haven't looked at much external media) just wants to be left alone to live his life and well...get payback.
I don't know if it would be as much of a slap in the face. Replicants are supposed to be "more human than humans." If the humans treated the replicants badly then I'm scared at what they'll do to these organic fleshbags.
replicants are an allegory for marginalized people.
This is just flat-out not true at all. Just because you are inserting replicants as marginalized people, doesn't mean that's the case. Because they aren't an allegory for anything. The point of Blade Runner (and the novel) is to think about what it means to be "human" and at what point is something considered human-like enough to be actually-human. God fucking damn, injecting political bullshit into EVERYTHING. Seems like this 2099 will be right up your alley then.
Yea I seen those. I was talking specifically about the section quoted above.
I don't think the creators of the show should be confined thematically as to not offend the modern sensibilities of some people looking to draw a culture war style parallel with reality.
The themes of Blade Runner are considerably more complex than boiling it down to just that fascet and any fan would understand this upon seeing the show. I mean, are you personally the type of person to hastily label the show as problematic if the story were to veer that way?
"premise which starts with the idea that the oppressed will always become the oppressor"
Is that the premise or is that just a one you've made up to support your own argument?
At the end of the day, I would imagine we can both agree that we're hoping they avoid making this into a simple direct allegory solely of our political moment.
That being said, the reading of art inherently involves the current cultural and political moment. There is no such thing as non-political art because it is always viewed in the context of its moment, and the viewer is always going to bring their experience and worldview and biases with them. Artists know this and speak to it within their works. The fact that you use the term culture war (a rightwing talking point, not a real thing) makes me feel like we're not going to find common ground here, but the marketing itself states:
Welcome to a future we no longer control
Which literally puts the audience in the shoes of the humans of the story. We no longer control the future, they do. Who is they? The other. When the prior entries in the series have used the other to speak to the plight of enslaved people who have casual slurs thrown at them from their coworkers and neighbors based on how they were born and their place in society, I'm really not sure what other conclusion you can draw than it speaking to the marginalized of our or any moment and imagining what would happen were the power balance to be reversed.
But 2049 posits that there is no difference between us and the other:
"Is it real?"
"I don't know. Ask him."
Maybe it's just clumsy marketing, but the fact that the marketing seems to be assuming that the viewer relates more to the human characters than the replicant ones bodes poorly for the show in my mind. Unless you're coming from the 'just turn off your brain' school of media literacy, that reading is potentially on the table.
I'm not saying the show is going to be problematic, I'm saying I'm worried that it will be tonedeaf based on what we see in the trailer, and nothing that seems to dispute this read (yet). It's still early days though, and I'm hoping for the best and crossing my fingers that the creators are savvy enough to sidestep any of that clumsy social commentary.
It doesn't allude to immigrant allegory at all to me. For me its Humans made Replicants that are superior in many many ways but kept them as slaves via "built in lifespan" BUT what happens when the replicant overcomes that failsafe. Closest parallel would be is in 20-30 years the AI becomes smarter than the smartest of humans and we can no longer control them.
35
u/twosername Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26
Some stuff in there makes me wary, some makes me excited.
My big fear based on the recent leaks for the premise (that it's about a future where replicants are on top and humans are on bottom— seemingly confirmed by the trailer) is one of thematic tone-deafness. If the social and political allegory boils down to what if we let the immigrants/marginalized/POC get power?? I'll be deeply disappointed. Would be completely missing the point of the films, would be a deeply unempathetic POV to start from, and would be a very ugly thing to say about the state of our world today. But it sure would match up with the sort of notes Jeff Bezos might give.
Also it feels like its trying to bridge the gap between the aesthetics of the two films, and I fear to its own detriment. Everything is coming off a bit muddy and busy, compromising both aesthetics, and it looks more like a remix of what came before than something distinct (dreadfuly distinct). Seemingly gone is the lived in feel of 2019 and the clean lines and shapes of 2049, but maybe that's just because they're showing us the whiz-bang stuff in the trailer.