Does this film change the way we look at the world the same way its 1982 predecessor and Phillip K. Dick's original 1968 story did? We look at the aesthetics of this brutal dystopian vision and how it portrays women, fertility, power and agency... all while its financiers struggle with creative accounting to justify another sequel.

Interested in the media we discussed this episode? Please support the show by purchasing it through our affiliate store:

• Blade Runner 2049
• Blade Runner
• Fury Road
• Fluorescent Black (rare and way too expensive)
• Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
• Confessions of a Dangerous Mind

Additional Resources:

• Blade Runner 2049 director responds to critique of female characters
• Blade Runner 2049 Is a Worthy Heir to a Classic
• Sedate expectations: will Blade Runner 2049 give birth to the slow-burn blockbuster?
• why blade runner 2049 is a misogynistic mess
• Is Blade Runner 2049 sexist – or a fair depiction of a dystopian future?
• Blade Runner 2049 is an uneasy feminist parable about controlling the means of reproduction
• Blade Runner 2049 screenwriter Michael Green answers our burning questions
• Blade Runner 2 concept art first look
• ‘Blade Runner 2049’ Director Denis Villeneuve Says The Movie We’re Getting Is The Director’s Cut
• Dystopian Box Office Future: Why ‘Blade Runner 2049’ Is Hitting Turbulence With $31M+ Opening
• A body double, CGI skull, and secret filming sessions: Inside the yearlong process to bring this beloved character to the 'Blade Runner' sequel
• Behind the breathtaking visual effects of ‘Blade Runner 2049’
• The Replicant: Inside the Dark Future of Blade Runner 2049