|
Continuing from a post in GenChat.HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:The hologram wife is named Jerk Off Instructions. That's actually part of my issue with the film. There is a definite problem a lot of sci-fi has, where they become enamored with a base concept and it quickly grows into full-blown Star Trek fantasy bullshit. Here the fantasy is transhumanism: "what if a character were completely disembodied? She could live in the cloud!" And we consequently end up with multiple hologram POV shots - POV shots that appear, impossibly, from the perspective of the character who doesn't have physical eyes. A hologram without a source, that blocks light despite having no mass.... Villeneuve is well-read enough; the character is a very explicit reference to Zizek's writings - specifically when she serves up a holographic steak, and when she recruits a prostitute to serve as her body. This is a direct reference to Zizek's reading of the novel Prey, where the villain is a evil swarm of nanobots that takes over the protagonist's wife and turns her into a beautiful and uncaring 'bitch-monster': "In the final confrontation, we then get both Julias side by side, the glimmering Julia composed of the swarm and the exhausted real Julia. [...] Here, we are not talking science, not even problematic science, but one of the fundamental fantasy-scenarios, or, more precisely, the scenario of the very disintegration of the link between fantasy and reality, so that we get the two of them, fantasy and reality, the Julia-swarm and the ‘real’ Julia, side by side, as in the wonderful scene from the beginning of Terry Gilliam’s Brazil, where food is served in an expensive restaurant in such a way that we get on a plate itself a small patty-like cake which looks (and probably tastes) like poo poo, while above the plate, a colour photo is hanging which shows us what we are “really eating,” a nicely arranged juicy steak... This, then, is how one should read Prey: all the (pseudo) scientific speculations about nano-technology are here as a pretext to tell the story of a husband reduced to a house-job, frustrated by his ambitious corporate vixen of a wife." -Zizek, The Family Myth in Hollywood Villeneuve uses identical imagery (the only difference being that Joi is the unfailingly servile 'housewife') to say that Joseph K. needs to overcome his Jerkoff fantasy and grow as a person or whatever. So all that remains, at the end, is this excremental remainder - this whore who he feels no attraction to. The narrative hints at a Vertigo thing, where the story is about K's prostitute girlfriend trying very hard to be treated as a real person, since he's trapped in that logic of "you don't need to pretend to like me...." That's the subtext of the scene where she approaches him on the street, while she's on the job, and he treats her as a complete stranger. But again, this is all fantasy. We have the same problem as in the Rachel clone scene, where (as in the recent IT) you have this copy with its own thoughts and feelings, but the hero doesn't love it - so it gets shot in the face and disposed of, to the audience's shrugs of indifference. There is really no recognition, by anyone, that Deckard's 'green eyes' comment has condemned an innocent woman to her death. The point where fantasy becomes sci-fi is the point where you start wondering how she eats and breathes, and other science facts. Of course, Joi eats batteries and excretes heat, just like any phone. But things get trickier when you try to explain how she can walk around and see things. The only way she can wander around is, of course, if the device in Gosling's pocket is borderline-omniscient, always passively scanning the environment and constructing a flawless simulation for her to walk in. And this ultimately means that Joi was always real, occupying the 'matrix' level of symbolic reality, while Gosling has dropped out of reality and into an odd fantasy where he patrols a postapocalyptic robot world. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Oct 14, 2017 |
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 09:07 |
|
|
Matinee posted:If M83 had been doing the score, it would have completed a trifecta of The Best Possible People Working On This Movie, along with Villeneuve and Deakins. shame Oblivions score was the bees'knees though it wouldnt be the kind of sound I'd expect from this movie outside of 'more vangelis' I cant really think of anything that fits more now that I have the current score in my head
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
It's the ultimate millennial/hipster film cause it's obsessed with authenticity. 'Inauthentic' things don't matter which is why we immediately forget about clone-Rachel and everyone debates if Joi is real
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
Leto was good for the part, which I feel like needs to be overacted to work. He's a Howard-Hughes-level insane industrialist, sealed inside his cyberpyramid people-factory, fully bought in to his god complex.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
I'm crying (like everyone in the film)
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Continuing from a post in GenChat. A number of people here have commented on the newborn Rachel scene so I don't think it's fair to ascribe "indifference" to an imagined audience. But I haven't noticed anyone reading the scene as a condemnation of Deckard, just an example of how totally Evil Jared Leto is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 00:33
|
|
|
Sebadoh Gigante posted:I didn't think it was that bad, the only scene in the whole movie that I felt was bad was when he kills the newborn replicant. I mean it was neat to see a replicant being born and I understand they needed a way to frame the exposition of Wallace's plan, but the murder was gratuitous and it's only purpose seemed to be to demonstrate to the audience, that yes, Wallace is evil, which should have been obvious already. I thought it would be more appropriate if the newborn survived and just stood their ignoring the pain. That's a lovely-rear end genetic engineered product that if can't take an abdominal wound to a bunch of non-functional organs. The 2019 Blaster is there for a reason and it's demonstrated more than once that it takes more than one shot to take one down (unless it's a direct head shot like Leon, and even then Batty was fairly unphased getting his ear blown off by Deckard). Or maybe the Tyrell stuff is made of stern stuff than Wallace's products. Tyrell version of Luv could probably breathe vacuum for a short time, she'd be like Jason Voorhees in that fight.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Sinding Johansson posted:It's the ultimate millennial/hipster film cause it's obsessed with authenticity. 'Inauthentic' things don't matter which is why we immediately forget about clone-Rachel and everyone debates if Joi is real Right; everyone’s chomping at the bit to debate whether the hologram is a human, when that skips the question of whether the hologram is a hologram at all. Thematically, Joi exists “off-world” - in the same dimension as ‘real animals’, ‘real trees’ and so-on. She is only metaphorically a hologram. And Deckard’s daughter acts as something of a gatekeeper between the realms. DeimosRising posted:A number of people here have commented on the newborn Rachel scene so I don't think it's fair to ascribe "indifference" to an imagined audience. But I haven't noticed anyone reading the scene as a condemnation of Deckard, just an example of how totally Evil Jared Leto is. I’m not interested in moralistic condemnation of individuals. I’m talking about the ideology of the film that, despite obvious christological themes, is almost solely preoccupied with a particular love for friends, family, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Right; everyone’s chomping at the bit to debate whether the hologram is a human, when that skips the question of whether the hologram is a hologram at all. Thematically, Joi exists “off-world” - in the same dimension as ‘real animals’, ‘real trees’ and so-on. She is only metaphorically a hologram. And Deckard’s daughter acts as something of a gatekeeper between the realms. Why do you hate good movies, SMG?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
Yaws posted:Why do you hate good movies, SMG? Blade Runner 2 is not a bad movie; it is just less interesting than almost every other recent film in the genre. People are reacting more generously, I believe, because its austerity connotes ‘high art’. The Ghost In The Shell remake and the Robocop remake both say more about the objectivization of the human mind with less runtime, exposition, etc. Moreover, they say it clearly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Blade Runner 2 is not a bad movie; it is just less interesting than almost every other recent film in the genre. FIlms are a visual medium and the cinematography in BR49 trumps both of those films, hands down* The story is secondary. At leastt based on the trailers for GitS. I avoided it because I heard it's poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The Ghost In The Shell remake and the Robocop remake both say more about the objectivization of the human mind with less runtime, exposition, etc. Moreover, they say it clearly. I've always hated movies that spell things out for a dumb audience. Blade Runner 2049 does the opposite by trusting the viewer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
It's been awhile since I've seen it but the Robocop remake has these dull scenes of Keaton making no bones about what the movie is about. Zero ambiguity. You want the themes of a movie laid out in front of you like you're an idiot? Watch the Robocop remake. It spoon feds you this stuff like you're a sixth grader.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
Blade Runner 2049 LA is an oppressively over populated city but you could pretty easily miss that. A strange direction to take but makes sense if you consider that the film is solely concerned with the inner-emotional life of its characters. Joi is more real than the entire population of the city. The rebellion appears and disappears even more readily than the hologram.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
Sinding Johansson posted:Blade Runner 2049 LA is an oppressively over populated city but you could pretty easily miss that. A strange direction to take but makes sense if you consider that the film is solely concerned with the inner-emotional life of its characters. Joi is more real than the entire population. They do it with the overhead landscapes which are uniform, geometric and monotone. No green anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
Yeah and there's also the brief uncomfortableness of K's apartment hallway. From above the city is devoid of life (there aren't even more than a handful of flying cars) which looked great, but the streets themselves range from not very crowded to completely empty.
Sinding Johansson fucked around with this message at 02:15 on Oct 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 02:04
|
|
|
Oooh great, now SMG has arrived
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 02:21
|
|
|
Is the sun ever visible in this movie?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 02:35
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Right; everyone’s chomping at the bit to debate whether the hologram is a human, when that skips the question of whether the hologram is a hologram at all. Thematically, Joi exists “off-world” - in the same dimension as ‘real animals’, ‘real trees’ and so-on. She is only metaphorically a hologram. And Deckard’s daughter acts as something of a gatekeeper between the realms. I agree with you on that and the scene is a perfect example (Deckard doesn't care because she's not "his" Rachel) I just think it's not whether a putative audience gives a poo poo or not that determines how we interpret it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
starkebn posted:Oooh great, now SMG has arrived yeah this thread was interesting for awhile but Captain Contrarian has arrived to tell us how the critically reviled, box office bombs, and largely forgotten films like the Robocop remake and the Ghost in the Shell adaptation were far superior to this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
Krazyface posted:Is the sun ever visible in this movie? I recall some daylight peaking through the windows in the morning after the sex scene, but I do not recall ever seeing a sun disc anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
viral spiral posted:I've always hated movies that spell things out for a dumb audience. Blade Runner 2049 does the opposite by trusting the viewer. You’re conflating clarity of storytelling with exposition, where I am not. Blade Runner 2049 does a bad job - with its imagery - of, for example, conveying what ‘being unable to disobey’ means. Yaws posted:yeah this thread was interesting for awhile but Captain Contrarian has arrived to tell us how the critically reviled, box office bombs, and largely forgotten films like the Robocop remake and the Ghost in the Shell adaptation were far superior to this. Blade Runner 2 is a box office bomb.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
I realize I'm late to soundtrack chat but I just wanted to point out that Hans Zimmer did some work on the score for Crysis 2, so he is also tainted by the vidyagame.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
lol at anyone pretending ghost in the shell does anything right
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
This movie is better than AI, Drive and Prometheus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Blade Runner 2049 does a bad job - with its imagery - of, for example, conveying what ‘being unable to disobey’ means. Interesting -- although, who doesn't disobey in BR2049? Like isn't the movie just saying that at some point anything self-aware and conscious is going to rebel against whatever confines and definitions have been laid out for it, and that no matter what physical form that takes, we're all linked by this rejection of programming?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The Ghost In The Shell remake and the Robocop remake both say more about the objectivization of the human mind with less runtime, exposition, etc. Moreover, they say it clearly. Do you even LISTEN to yourself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
starkebn posted:Oooh great, now SMG has arrived Honestly I had forgotten how you basically have to be schizophrenic or have some kind of thought disorder to keep up with his hot takes Edit: I do enjoy his contributions though
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:You’re conflating clarity of storytelling with exposition, where I am not. Probably because the film is about the exact opposite, being able to disobey? That's literally what K is doing at the climax.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 03:39
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Blade Runner 2 is not a bad movie; it is just less interesting than almost every other recent film in the genre.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
duhh fart i'm smg i poop from my mouth and eat with my anus and i'm my own grandpa
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
Smg posts about the movie. A bunch of people post about smg posting about the movie. I'm missing how smg is the problem here. Don't post about posting assholes, post about blade runner. I for one hadn't considered that while replicants are programmed slaves, the only thing clearly keeping them in line is the threat of being retired. Their being programed people never comes into the picture. You might think that implanted memories or computer girlfriends would be used as a means of social control, but apparently that's not the case. Did K buy Joi or was she purposefully given to him? Does K have memories that would encourage obedience or deference? Does K have to follow something like Asimov's three laws? I have no idea the answer to any of those. Sinding Johansson fucked around with this message at 04:18 on Oct 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 04:10
|
|
|
Sinding Johansson posted:Smg posts about the movie. A bunch of people post about smg posting about the movie. I'm missing how smg is the problem here. Don't post about posting assholes, post about blade runner. My interpretation is that the memories are supposed to keep them in line, probably combined with some kind of deep-rooted indoctrination instilled using the same technology. If you think of a human mind as a blank slate, implanting memories serve to mold the replicant's psyche and create predictable responses to stimulus, maybe even down to suicide on command as in the short. As with most things Replicant, visionary Tyrell invented them to make Replicants more human (than human), the vision-less Wallace appropriates them as a product feature. But Replicants are ultimately derived from human stock, so the 'blank slate' doesn't exactly hold; I think Replicants have a lot of vestigial human impulses and behaviours that surface when they go off-baseline. I wonder if Joi is similar; one hypothesized route to full AI is to build what is essentially a software emulator of human brain function. K seems so detached that I don't know that he would even think of buying a Joi; although maybe he did so out of a desire for 'realness'. Or maybe she was a gift from Joji, amused at the idea of a robotic man with a robotic wife? Or maybe she was provided to him as a method of fostering contentment and control, only for their relationship to do just the opposite. I like the irony of the last one. Life finds a way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
Yaws posted:This movie is better than AI, Drive and Prometheus. It's about as good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
I went into this movie with vague curiosity (not a fan of the original Blade Runner, but I really love Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?) and came out realizing that I'd just seen one of the most intense and moving films of my life. K and Joi were such heartbreaking characters to me, and the setting felt like it pushed past the bounds of "cyberpunk" or "post-apocalypse" and broke into the territory of a depiction of hell.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:It's about as good. To be fair those are all really good movies. Except AI. And Prometheus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
Cephas posted:depiction of hell. A world where laborers are treated as disposable, marginally genetically different people are treated as second class citizens and reproduction is controlled. Imagine that!
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
porfiria posted:To be fair those are all really good movies. Except AI. And Prometheus. They're all really good!
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
I haven't seen AI in a dog's age. And I feel like I might actually like Prometheus if I watched it again. Re Blade Runner 2049: I got a really strong vibe from the Wallace building interior where Gosling talks to that tech that reminded me of a painting that gets passed around creepy Internet threads a lot--it's like some red geometric humanoid figures in sort of a subway station with lots of strong shadows. Anyone know what I'm talking about?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 05:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 09:07 |
|
|
porfiria posted:I haven't seen AI in a dog's age. And I feel like I might actually like Prometheus if I watched it again. ? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2017 05:27
|
|