Blade Runner 2049 - question about K's memory

Tools    





How did it happen that K (Joe) received the real memory of Dr. Ana Stelline? The doctor seemed quite shocked when she learned that K's memory was real and one of her own. This seems like too great a coincidence. If not a coincidence then how does this fit in the movie plot?



It looks to be a big plot hole.


K is dispatched to retire Sapper Morton, who was instrumental in helping to hide Rachael & Deckard's baby, who grew up to be Dr. Ana Stelline. And K has the implanted memory of Dr. Ana Stelline (the hiding of the wooden horse sculpture). This memory eventually causes K to fail his baseline and go rogue.


Don't get me wrong, I love this movie. I think it is much better than the first movie, which I also like. I hope they make a third, prequel maybe. We'll see I guess . . . .



Any thought on this unanswered question?

I still watch this movie again every so often. It's a shame it didn't do better financially.



I dunno, I don't think they really thought that part out, like the retcon they pulled when they claimed that replicants can't give birth for some reason, even though Rachel already did (somehow). Still a good movie, though.



The trick is not minding
All replicants are given memories, as stated with Rachel having a memory that wasn’t her own according to Deckard.

She obviously made these memories for replicants, because why else would she make them?

Understanding that, we also are told that she can’t use her own actual memories, but she does so anyways.

Following all of that, I don’t think she ever expected to come face to face with a replicant that actually contained her rnemories, and the surprise was mitigated by her sadness of the memory itself.



Don't get me wrong, I love this movie. I think it is much better than the first movie, which I also like. I hope they make a third, prequel maybe. We'll see I guess . . . .



There are three short videos on YouTube. They cover the time between the movies as best as I remember. Worth the time to watch them.



. . . like the retcon they pulled when they claimed that replicants can't give birth for some reason, even though Rachel already did (somehow). . . ..
That was explained by Niander Wallace in this movie as Rachel being a one-off creation by his predecessor Dr. Eldon Tyrell of the Tyrell Corp. Wallace was striving (and failing) to do the same. The secret to doing so died with Tyrell's death and the demise of the Tyrell Corp.



Following all of that, I don’t think she ever expected to come face to face with a replicant that actually contained her rnemories, and the surprise was mitigated by her sadness of the memory itself.
Yes. It is a HUGE coincidence.

So I guess that is the answer to my question: only a coincidence. Not very satisfying but WTH, it's only a movie, eh?



All replicants are given memories, as stated with Rachel having a memory that wasn’t her own according to Deckard.

She obviously made these memories for replicants, because why else would she make them?

Understanding that, we also are told that she can’t use her own actual memories, but she does so anyways.

Following all of that, I don’t think she ever expected to come face to face with a replicant that actually contained her rnemories, and the surprise was mitigated by her sadness of the memory itself.
This. I thought they made it sufficiently clear in the movie.