|
https://twitter.com/electrolemon/status/916889399941505024
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 02:59 |
|
|
BarronsArtGallery posted:Going to see it again later tonight. One thing I'm going to look for is if the terminology used in the "testing" scenes matches or describes what's going on in the overarching plot quote:And then it happened—the attack, the trance, I'm sure there's some thematic significance in the lines that were used, but I'll leave the theorising to more literate people than me. e.  Missed the discussion on the last page, some good stuff in there
Pretty good fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Oct 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
So I'm dumb but did this film actually tell us whether deckard was a replicant. Again they hinted at it and were vague, I'm assuming the assumption is, yes he is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
Gaff certainly seems to think so, but it might have been a hunch he had tbh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
Re. Deckard being a replicant - no, they don't really confirm either way. His age, his living in an irradiated town, his fight with K, the importance of his child with Rachael--all these can be explained whether he is or isn't.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
I'm not sure the film considers it relevant. When Wallace implies that Deckard is artificial, he responds with, "I know what's real." K asks a similar question with regards to Deckard's dog and gets an ambivalent answer. His origins may be unclear, but Deckard's memories, experiences, and feelings are real and that's what matters. He's more human than Wallace.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:I'm not sure the film considers it relevant. When Wallace implies that Deckard is artificial, he responds with, "I know what's real." K asks a similar question with regards to Deckard's dog and gets an ambivalent answer. That is my take away too I just have a friend who is super smarmy claiming that he is 100% confirmed a replicant and also its true because ridley scott said so once.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
Knifegrab posted:That is my take away too I just have a friend who is super smarmy claiming that he is 100% confirmed a replicant and also its true because ridley scott said so once.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Wallace is blind because he's the least human and most overtly villanous character in the Blade Runner universe. He's surrounded by mechanical "bees" (I am sure I read somewhere there's some apocrophya about Satan being surrounded by mechnical/metallic insects but I can't find it anywhere) contra Deckard's real bees. Luv takes a lot of style points from Rachel and is sort of her dark mirror. I thought for a while she might be the daughter. I liked Joshi; I thought she was a good character. Not a bad person but not necessarily capable of general good either--she looks out for Ryan Gosling because she likes him but she wouldn't have a problem putting a bullet in a random replicant's head. Contra Gosling's character who goes to bat for Deckard despite there being nothing to connect them. I didn't really like how Luv can just go around murdering cops though that felt like a bit of a stretch. Loved the contrast between this one's bleak, foggy, rained out California and the smoky hellscape oil refinery of the original. The Neo Voigt-Kamp was fantastic, as good and evocative as the original. I find myself almost never getting bored during movies anymore. Not sure if that's a function of getting older or just learning to appreciate images more or what. Not to say I thought this was especially slow though. Not sure what to make of JOI. It's weird to think she's "just" a simulacrum of a person, since that's the mistake/sin of the original movie. She may just be following her programming, but who isn't? But is she real? And therefore Gosling's slave?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Wallace is blind because he's the least human and most overtly villanous character in the Blade Runner universe. He's surrounded by mechanical "bees" (I am sure I read somewhere there's some apocrophya about Satan being surrounded by mechnical/metallic insects but I can't find it anywhere) contra Deckard's real bees. You might be thinking about how one of Satan's names is Beelzebub, which is literally "Lord of the Flies."
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 03:19
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:You might be thinking about how one of Satan's names is Beelzebub, which is literally "Lord of the Flies." I could swear they were literally made of bronze or something but yeah good enough.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 03:21
|
|
|
This movie really made me want to read KW Jeter's Blade Runner novels (and the couple-odd proto-cyberpunk novels that he wrote).
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 03:44
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:This movie really made me want to read KW Jeter's Blade Runner novels (and the couple-odd proto-cyberpunk novels that he wrote). They are bad books.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:This movie really made me want to read KW Jeter's Blade Runner novels (and the couple-odd proto-cyberpunk novels that he wrote). Funnily enough, me too. I read them back when they were new and remember very little of them. It also got me thinking about that Blade Runner videogame we got like 20 years ago that was like a side story to the movie. I never got to play it, but reading about it now makes it seem like it had some neat ideas from a game perspective.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 03:50
|
|
|
Knifegrab posted:That is my take away too I just have a friend who is super smarmy claiming that he is 100% confirmed a replicant and also its true because ridley scott said so once. I don't want to start a thing but doesn't the Final Cut pretty much remove any ambiguity here? Disregarding whether you think the Final Cut is the one to go with.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
Nah, the directors cut is the one that most heavily implies Deckard is a replicant. Final Cut is more ambiguous.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 04:11
|
|
|
Does anyone have any theories on why K had the memory of the furnace and carved horse? I'm probably missing something, but I think there are two main possibilities: 1. Ana Stelline, Deckard's daughter, digitizes her childhood memory and sells it off to Wallace to implant in replicants. If all replicants don't have the same memories it's just coincidence that K happens to have this memory. 2. Stelline does not sell the memory because of how deeply personal it is, and instead keeps it to herself. The one eyed replicant that has been plotting the uprising and was involved with creating the misleading son/daughter death breadcrumbs, understands the significance of the memory and uses her network to intentionally implant the memory into blade runner model replicants. The memory serves the purpose to compromise the blade runner should they ever start to get close to the truth. The coincidence here is that K happened to seek out and interview one of the best memory makers and the daughter. I guess another possibility is that Stelline is aiding the replicant resistance. The memory certainly doesn't seem to be one that you would want a replicant to have: guarding and hiding a secret. JibbaJabbaJimmy fucked around with this message at 04:21 on Oct 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 04:11
|
|
|
RichterIX posted:I don't want to start a thing but doesn't the Final Cut pretty much remove any ambiguity here? Disregarding whether you think the Final Cut is the one to go with. Yes, it's not 100% but the unicorn/memory thing that was added and kept in the Final Cut basically confirms Deckard being a replicant according to Ridley Scotts vision. It's unfortunate but whatever. 2049 handled the question really well imo. JibbaJabbaJimmy posted:Does anyone have any theories on why K had the memory of the furnace and carved horse? I'm probably missing something, but I think there are to main possibilities: No theory is needed. It was Stelline's memory. She uses her own memories for implants sometimes. Kaddish fucked around with this message at 04:16 on Oct 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
It is very easy to imagine a scenario wherein Deckard is the pilot program for what K would eventually be a part of. A replicant hunting replicants, implanted with memories and made to think that they are human (in Deckard's case, anyways. By K's time even that isn't considered important as Wallace arrogantly thinks that he can command his slaves to be content forever without issue). Rewatching The Final Cut, I noticed that Bryant behaves strangely around Deckard, treating him nervously and not at all like an old friend. There are shades of K's "I didn't know that was an option" when his programming prevented him from refusing Joshi's order when Deckard attempts to leave Bryant's office. I could totally be reading too much into it based on my knowledge of the theory, though. Things like Gaff saying "You've done a man's job!" after Deckard finishes his confrontation with Batty and the fact that Deckard survives multiple encounters with super-strong replicants (while having no such strength himself) are also indicators that he could be a replicant. But in the end, the whole point of the movie is that it doesn't matter. Replicants are just as "real" as any human being, from the moment they are created to the moment they die, and their experiences just make them more unique. This is something I like about Stelline's character, since she is a person who has stopped having new personal experiences and must imagine more as part of her job. Even complete isolation cannot crush the human spirit, and Tyrell and Wallace are fools to think they could manufacture sentient beings who would not also be people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 04:16
|
|
|
Somebody already mentioned it, but I loved the solar towers as a sort of mirrored callback to the fire towers in the original opening (although I was kinda wonder how well they would work, but maybe the fog dissipates at some point). In the intro, it looked like there was a massive patchwork of warehouses covering the land. The shapes suggested fields that had been covered, but does California actually have fields in jigsaw shapes like that? It looked more European to me; I would assume American fields are giant and more rectangular but that wouldn't have been as striking of an image. david_a fucked around with this message at 04:19 on Oct 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
Krazyface posted:Re. Deckard being a replicant - no, they don't really confirm either way. His age, his living in an irradiated town, his fight with K, the importance of his child with Rachael--all these can be explained whether he is or isn't. Hes not. His partner knows he thinks of unicorns when he drinks because he is simply his partner. I like how they were similar, his partner made origami animals and deckard being more down to earth, he carved animals.. It was all made to fit in with everything, you can watch any version of bladerunner and it fits in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
Kaddish posted:No theory is needed. It was Stelline's memory. She uses her own memories for implants sometimes. This is the simplest explanation. I assumed that all replicants do not share the same memories. In the first Blade Runner Deckard recalled Rachael's implanted memories to reveal that she's a replicant so perhaps things have not changed. It seems odd that all replicants would have the same carved horse memory, unless only a certain number do and K happens to be one of them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
JibbaJabbaJimmy posted:This is the simplest explanation. I kinda feel like it's not an explanation or theory but rather spelled out extremely clearly in the movie several times. Really a lot of the themes, motivations, explanations, etc are presented pretty clearly in this film. A lot of the debate in this thread is making mountains out of molehills, which I suppose is par for the course for Blade Runner. 2049 was loving awesome. Kaddish fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Oct 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 04:42
|
|
|
I guess I should read this thread and I probably have a longer post about Blade Runner in me, but I just got back from it so: this movie loving rules
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
I saw it in imax and it reminded me why imax is loving awesome as well. The weird thing is it wasn't offered in imax 3D, which most modern blockbuster type movies are, like Marvel, etc. I was totally fine with non-3D and I'm actually kind of fine with the 2D imax only option but it was still kinda weird.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
interesting article on BR2049's failure at the BO came up on my Facebook feed, and I figured it'd be interesting to share. It covers a wide variety of reasons. The one I didn't even think about was how It stole BR's thunder by being the kind of R-rated movie your general audience will burn their movie-seeing allotment on. The others are more obvious - the nicheness of BR, its runtime, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
Kaddish posted:2049 was loving awesome. Yeah, I agree. It's just fun to think about... particularly whether all replicants have the same memories or not, and if they don't, K by chance happens to have that particular memory. And if it's by chance, then why not by design? etc etc The scene where Wallace tells Deckerd that him falling in love with Rachael was not coincidence but instead by design primed me to question other parts of the plot. Wallace may have been making it all up, of course. I felt that 2049 really captured the tone and pacing of the original. The original is pretty slow and I'm glad I watched it the night before. If I hadn't, I'm not sure that I would have immediately been sucked into 2049. JibbaJabbaJimmy fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Oct 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:Hes not. His partner knows he thinks of unicorns when he drinks because he is simply his partner. I like how they were similar, his partner made origami animals and deckard being more down to earth, he carved animals.. It was all made to fit in with everything, you can watch any version of bladerunner and it fits in. I never understood why the Unicorn meant that Deckard was a Replicant, I guess because Gaff also knew what Deckard dreams a la Deckard knowing Rachel's memories? Why would they use a Replicant to hunt Replicants when they're are banned on Earth and Deckard doesn't even have the super strength or agility that the film states that all Replicants have? Seems like it would be useful to have a super human killer to hunt down illegal super humans.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
How often do we get a blockbuster film (by which I mean pretty much any genre film with a big enough budget) that critics love while failing at the box office?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 05:28
|
|
|
jeebus some people are bad at watching movies. Blade Runner and 2049 both have simple questions as their main focus; "Why do we treat people like poo poo just because they're different?" or "What does it mean to be human?" I don't think the first movie bothers to answer the question as much as just ask it, but in 2049 they show time and again that replicants and AI can be so close to "human" that old style humans treat them like poo poo because they are deathly afraid of them - they don't want to evolve. Replicants are not robots, they are not run by AI, they are just genetically enhanced versions of us that are not perfected yet because people saw what was possible and poo poo themselves. Every part of 2049 was saying "look at how we treat those we consider 'others', isn't it wrong?" it's pretty straight forward. And don't take everything each character says as a reliable source for fucks sake, characters lie, have clouded emotions etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 05:31
|
|
|
s.i.r.e. posted:I never understood why the Unicorn meant that Deckard was a Replicant, I guess because Gaff also knew what Deckard dreams a la Deckard knowing Rachel's memories? Yes, it implies his unicorn dream was an implanted memory just like the ones the replicants were given. s.i.r.e. posted:Why would they use a Replicant to hunt Replicants when they're are banned on Earth and Deckard doesn't even have the super strength or agility that the film states that all Replicants have? Seems like it would be useful to have a super human killer to hunt down illegal super humans. Nothing about the Blade Runner program really makes much sense. Like why have the Voight-Kampff tests when they know exactly who the Replicants are and what they look like? I don't really feel like any of that hurts the movie, though, because it all just seems to operate by dream logic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 05:44
|
|
|
Kaddish posted:No theory is needed. It was Stelline's memory. She uses her own memories for implants sometimes. In blade runners she's being hidden from, right. If she was ok with doing that why withhold the truth from K when he freaks out thinking it's his? It was shoehorned nonsense because they wanted plot twists.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 05:59
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:In blade runners she's being hidden from, right. What makes you think she knows the truth?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 06:01
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:What makes you think she knows the truth? she knows it's her memory, which is why she's in tears and says it's a real one, she knows she put it in a shitload of replicants, and she knows if she reveals that fact she is turbo hosed
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 06:03
|
|
|
HAT FETISH posted:Forgive me if it's something you were already aware of but those lines were lifted from Pale Fire by Vladimir Nabokov, which K has a copy of in his apartment. Did not know this. I've only read Lolita, but instantly recognized the name at the brief glance when it showed the copy. There was also some other stuff that isn't in the quote that you posted but was representative with what K was going through mentally / physically. Like being in love and feeling with fingers touching.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
starkebn posted:she knows it's her memory, which is why she's in tears and says it's a real one, she knows she put it in a shitload of replicants, and she knows if she reveals that fact she is turbo hosed I meant I don't think she knows the truth about who she is (a birthed replicant).She drew on her own memories to create because that's what people do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
JibbaJabbaJimmy posted:This is the simplest explanation. I assumed that all replicants do not share the same memories. In the first Blade Runner Deckard recalled Rachael's implanted memories to reveal that she's a replicant so perhaps things have not changed. It seems odd that all replicants would have the same carved horse memory, unless only a certain number do and K happens to be one of them. She actually is just lazy and sometimes uses real memories to cut corners and figures no one will really bother checking to make sure she is constructing them 100% from the ground up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 06:07
|
|
|
Lord Krangdar posted:I meant I don't think she knows the truth about who she is (a birthed replicant).She drew on her own memories to create because that's what people do. I agree
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 06:18
|
|
|
Just got out of my showing. I think that might have surpassed the original film for me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 06:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 02:59 |
|
|
JibbaJabbaJimmy posted:I assumed that all replicants do not share the same memories. In the first Blade Runner Deckard recalled Rachael's implanted memories to reveal that she's a replicant so perhaps things have not changed. It seems odd that all replicants would have the same carved horse memory, unless only a certain number do and K happens to be one of them. Rachel from the first film was the first Nexus model to use implanted memories to make her response almost able to pass the VK test. When she sees it in K's room, the prostitute in 2409 specifically remarks that the horse is exactly like the one in her memory, showing that replicants don't all have unique memories, they just use memory packages to build up a decent response to emotional stimulus. Also, I thought the conversation with the rebel leader where K finds out he's not "the one" might indicate it's a known thing. If they tell each other their memories they will quickly figure out that there are some shared. starkebn fucked around with this message at 06:24 on Oct 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 06:22
|
|