From 1982 to 2049: the past, present and future of artificial humans

"Everyone is a whole world of many appearances, and all these appearances are buried in the night of this self."
-Hegel ("Little Logic", p.82)

35 years ago, as a NEXUS 6-type artificial human When Roy released the pigeon on the screen, the science fiction fans off the screen might not realize that this psychedelic pigeon will linger in our minds for more than 30 years without stopping.

Over the past 30 years, we have asked ourselves countless times, why it’s hard to get a moment of being moved by another “creature” from the screen. This is because the old version of "Blade Runner" gave us a completely new definition. Look at the "things" created after we dare to become the Creator from a compassionate perspective.
Interestingly, although various film critics are used to calling Blade Runner a cyberpunk work, strictly speaking, although its play originated from PKD, one of the standard bearers of cyberpunk, it only carried forward the original PKD work. A description of the urban background "gray, crowded and messy". The core content of the old version is the philosophical dilemma of "artificial creatures" and human self-cognition, which is far from the technological core of cyberpunk (artificial intelligence, neural network) proposed by Gibson back then, and is even more thematic. Frankenstein, who is close to the originator of science fiction, just retains cyberpunk's consistent fear of technology and a pessimistic view of the future world.

Compared with cyberpunk, it has a stronger dystopian flavor. Humanoids are the objects of this dystopian world that are locked in the future by "technological systems". However, the goal of the whole movie is not entirely on the human beings, and the perspective of telling the story is a person who is "normal" in most sense, so it is hard to say that this is a work that has the spirit of resisting dystopia. , This is a huge difference from the perspective of human cloning to examine "Don't Let Me Go" which has no power to change fate. Of course, the restricted party will inevitably resist, and if it does not resist, it will fall into the reincarnation fate of copying humans in "Air Killer".

But in essence, how different is the theme between Blade Runner and Frankenstein that gave rise to our fans? From the perspective of the outer core of the artistic image, Frankenstein is ugly and sturdy, and forms a sharp contrast between beauty and beast like Elizabeth, which makes the audience feel fear rather than pity. However, in Blade Runner's hands, whether it is Roy who is "perfect as Jesus", Zhora and Pris who are slender and well-proportioned, or Rachael who is not as beautiful as the fireworks of the world, these images are completely indistinguishable from our humans and are Implant the same memory as us, or even closer to "perfect" than us. Then, for the "death" they have to accept, the audience will naturally feel compassion.

"Humans" are inherently dead. If the positioning of the film is to say that artificial humans have short and limited lives, it would be like depicting a kind of people who have gotten sick. The impact on the ethical issues generated by this technology is not so great. The problem is that the life of an artificial human is written to death. It is the four years that humans cannot change in their genes. This is like the helpless refugees who have been pushed into the Auschwitz concentration camp, leaving only the slaughter. Therefore, Roy will stifle the "Creator" as fiercely as Frankenstein, because what he wants is "existence", which is the most basic need and the most primitive motivation for a species to call it a "species".

This brings us back to a question that the old version of Blade Runner did not delve into: Can an artificial person "create humans" (reproduce offspring) on ​​their own?
It seems to be impossible, Scott did not elaborate in the old edition. According to the hint of "Blade Runner 2049", it should not work (so the appearance of the child will shock the lieutenant sister). Then we also know that the first mission of all species is to continue the offspring.
The core issue here is that if humans insist on calling artificial humans a "thing" instead of a "creature", it should be a "tool" that is at least lingering no matter how it is called, and should not be like a living thing. They can also reproduce their offspring independently, otherwise they should be called "species".
When treating species, there should be an ethics of treating species. This is the old version of 2049, the biggest difference from the old version, from the personnel to the pictures to the music to the sentiment.

At the same time, this is also the cleverness of Villeneuve in directing 2049. He knows that movie fans love to see the apocalyptic scenes of Blade Runner's wasteland, and also like the endless psychedelic music background, but he can't be exactly the same as Scott's old version, in the most attractive "philosophical view." There must be a difference in the above, so he chose to avoid several questions that Scott did not answer but the fans were concerned about:
1. Is Deckard a cyborg?
2. If an artificial human can pass the Voight-Kampff test, will it become a new "intelligent species" just like passing the Turing test?
3. In Roy's last monologue, Orion, C-Ray, Don Wiseman, what did he see?
After ignoring these (for example, he can answer the first question in the old Ford scene), Villeneuve puts forward a very existential point of view: What is the difference between us humans and highly emotionally developed artificial people?
In the old version, everyone doubted whether Deckard was a human. There were several hints, including Gaff's folded paper cranes, including Roy who rescued Deckard after a crushing cat and mouse game, but after all The positive point is broken.

However, in 2049, K's identity (not spoiled here) is clear, and K's doubts about himself are the dilemma of this philosophy: how different is I from you? Put this point on the "child" again. If Deckard is not a man-made person, what is the child? What is the difference between a man and a man-made person? ferry.
Under the compassion for "people", 2049 discusses its own plight more than the old version, especially the cyborg evolved from Nexus 6 to the disobedient Nexus 8 to the Nexus 9 implanted in strict compliance with instructions. , 2049’s discussion of the philosophy of technology has been upgraded from the 1999 college entrance examination essay question "If memory can be transplanted" to "If you and I can be copied and you can have children."
Putting aside the topic of neural networks, 2049's thinking about the "human nature" of artificial humans is one step ahead of "Ghost in the Shell". It is no longer necessary to ask whether "it" has a soul, but, it is a soul. If we look at it sadly, it is Ayanami who was blown to death by the apostle's attack but still laughs; if we look at it with joy, it is No.16, No.18 in the Dragon Ball, who can resist, fight and love. After all, it should be treated as a "person".
The great thing is that Villeneuve has a discussion about upgrading. This time, Blade Runner 2049 is really a bit cyberpunk.
He introduced a virtual projection artificial intelligence.
Joi is beautiful and pleasant.

Although this part has not been dug in depth, and it seems to be a bit of a steal from "She" and "Mechanical Ji", the theme is very suitable.
Since the previous question is about the difference between humans and artificial humans, the next question can be more generalized. What is the difference between humans and artificial intelligence?
In the old version, we feel that Roy is full of emotions and full of human wisdom. The offspring Nexus robot is also evaluated as "more human than human" in the previous short film. And in 2049, we will feel that Joi is such a caring existence. For K, she is not a purely passive or procedural need. Her performance "seems" to prove her autonomy in emotions. Only when the phone task comes will switch back to "machine" mode.

Now that there is an autonomous thinking mode, why can't it be called "me" like a man-made person? As Hegel said: "As far as thinking is recognized as a subject, it is the thinker, and the short for the thinking subject that exists is called me." (Little Logic, p. 68) From a perspective, whether it is Joi or K, it is no different from our general public.
On the other hand, Luv of Nexus 9 type cannot feel the humanized "self" because of strict implementation of instructions, and it is difficult to get our resonance. Therefore, Joi in 2049 replaced Roy's role on the screen, giving While the audience pity the emotion, they break it in a tragic way.
I have to say that the circle of K and Joi's virtual fusion of reality is really beautiful. Through this performance, Villeneuve wrote his own chapter in the history of science fiction. And K looked back and saw another magnificent projection of "Joi" on the bridge, which not only projected the loneliness of contemporary people relying on virtual reality, but also reflected the emotion that Joi seemed to have come out of the program from the phoenix nirvana. This is far Super this year's "Ghost in the Shell" picture performance.

If you look deeper, whether it is the old version or the current 2049, the two stories are not complicated. The main theme of the appearance is searching, and the underlying content is questioning. Both works maintain a poetic and picturesque style, although the poem may be in Baudelaire style, and the pictures, especially the nuclear ruins, desert yellow sands and huge statues created during the 2022 blackout, There are still a few cans of bees, which is really Dali.
That's right, the large yellow background, of course the bees are also yellow.

The final duel scene is also extremely shockingly beautiful, the waves are rolling in front of the dam, Villeneuve, are you sure you didn't get inspiration from "Transferring City"? Of course, the picture here is much more exquisite, and it is full of various intentions like the old version. This makes me admire Scott’s artistic design even more, a silver wing and an alien. Looking back after so many years, the sense of sci-fi design is still so strong, and the props in the old version are still awesome, only like " The kind of picture tube television frequently appearing in "Brazil" shows that these avant-garde artists lack the imagination of technological progress.


However, relatively speaking, the plots of the two works are also slightly simpler. Therefore, a friend of mine commented: "I can easily count a dozen of the various iconic shots of the Blade Runner in 1982, but the impression of the plot is very vague."

In the performance, the last shot of Commander High was beautiful, but White always reminded me of Mrs. Shimogi in the house of cards, slightly stiff. Old Ford's meeting with Commander High in the voice of Elvis Presley was also a bit weird. Leto, who had no eyes, was the highlight.

Although the aforementioned plots were specially made for 2049: 2022, 2036, and 2048, we can still find a lot of ambiguities in the new work, which also retains the style of the old work, leaving a blank space to ensure the aftertaste, so that it will not fall into the traditional Hollywood style. The pale and happy ending brought about by blasting and killing will make us look forward to a city wasteland 30 years later.

John Donn once said: "No one is an island and can be self-
sufficient ." However, in the world of Blade Runner, everyone is an island, whether it is Sushi Master and Tsingtao Brewery in the old version of the movie. The damp city, or the ant-like criminals in the ruins of San Diego in 2049, highly developed technology does not seem to have brought a highly advanced life, and the barriers between people flood these indifferent light and shadows in the crowd. In a city with virtual reality.


2022 is coming soon. I don’t know if the nuclear bomb will explode just like Watanabe Shinichiro’s preface. If you are an artificial person, you will be grateful that such a blackout wiped out all your criminal records.
But maybe on a cold winter night, you will suddenly see an owl flying in, and then remember what a predecessor said, "These will all disappear in a flash, like tears in raindrops", from nowhere. A sentence. So you start to stand up and get up to watch old movies and see Wu Yusen put pigeons countless times, until the first pigeon that Roy put back in 1982.

Then you will think of the shiny butterfly hanging on Spike's head in "Star Cowboy: Gate to Heaven". It flies and flies like Roy's dove.

Gate of Heaven

Then you will doubt the nature of our world:
perhaps, it is visible but intangible.
Almost human.

(罗祾)

View more about Blade Runner 2049 reviews