|
Mariette's line about the horse coming "from a tree" makes a lot more sense when I remembered she was very interested in the tree photograph that K had. I saw it in Dolby this time (is this just an AMC thing?). I don't know if I can really tell a difference picture-wise from the digital IMAX showing I saw, although this one had even more absurd bass. I would be interested in listening to the soundtrack by itself because I can't tell if some of the weird sounds are intentional (one I remember is the bee scene; there was a strange digital distortion over the booms). I'm pretty sure the ceiling tiles and light fixtures were rattling in this showing. One thing I really noticed was how rock-steady the image was in the static outdoor shots; I think I'm conditioned from decades of film projection to look for strobing or jittering. I'm even more torn about Joi after this showing, because in the first scene she's in she definitely comes off as entirely subservient in a fairly cloy way. It appears to be the emanator that sets her free, if you can call it that. I can't make up my mind if Joi or Luv is the more interesting character.
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:49 |
|
|
Serf posted:It's very confusing because I'm trying to decide if I like Blade Runner 2049 or Blade 2 more. Tough call. Both have a scene where someone sees a CG projection of a person in front of a spotlight as we realize life is a joke.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 04:10
|
|
|
AdmiralViscen posted:The morgue guy and the police chief were just simple grunts that were in her way and could create complications by reporting her. K is someone she has personal spite for and who she has to prove that she is better than. Leaving him alive is to torture him and let him see just how good she is. He is already being hunted by the authorities in either case so he has no ability to ruin her plans. She clearly takes a specific sort of glee in her altercations with K. Hmmm, yeah I can see this, she did have some parallels to Pris's character the way K did to Roy, but they're on opposing sides instead of a team. Vhak lord of hate posted:Huhh why didn't Freddie just kill ALL the teens by scooping them into a bed hole like Depp? He would have never been defeated that way,. Yeah, because hokey slasher flick is totally on the same level as introspective hard cyberpunk fiction. Ragnarok the Red fucked around with this message at 04:48 on Oct 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
Ragnarok the Red posted:Hmmm, yeah I can see this, she did have some parallels to Pris's character the way K did to Roy, but they're on opposing sides instead of a team. She's pro-replicant. She's hoping that K will realize he's on the wrong side. She also doesn't know about the resistance. If she did, she might even join it. She wants to gain the key for Wallace so he can unlock replicant potential, but if she knew there was a non-Wallace chance for that, it's possible she would be conflicted.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 04:53
|
|
|
Ragnarok the Red posted:Yeah, because hokey slasher flick is totally on the same level as introspective hard cyberpunk fiction. When you see enough movies you realize these two things are more often than not one in the same. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuvUcKw4Ftk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMz1Bv-OMTQ Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 05:11 on Oct 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
When you see the Joi hologram the first time, she has normal eyes. When you see the Joi hologram the second time, she has weird creepy shark eyes. Is there something meaningful going on here, or is it only there to alienate you from the hologram at a moment when the movie wants you to see her as a soulless product. It kind of feels like cheating at directing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 05:27
|
|
|
david_a posted:Mariette's line about the horse coming "from a tree" makes a lot more sense when I remembered she was very interested in the tree photograph that K had. absurd bass is perfect for this movie, and in fact, all movies. if it is not giving me a mild massage, it is not absurd enough bass.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 05:36
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:When you see the Joi hologram the first time, she has normal eyes. For real it's so lazy, no real director would dare have various characters' eyes be slightly different at key moments as a fourth wall break to make us question the character's nature and motives. You would definitely never have seen something like that in the original.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:For real it's so lazy, no real director would dare have various characters' eyes be slightly different at key moments as a fourth wall break to make us question the character's nature and motives. You would definitely never have seen something like that in the original. haha.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 05:52
|
|
|
I didn't like it in the original either. I mean, why do you need to lug around an expensive fireplace bellows and CRT monitor in a suitcase to test people's eyes. "Her eyes were green" No, they were flashlight colored! Garbage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 06:06
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:When you see the Joi hologram the first time, she has normal eyes. Directing is all about cheating.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 06:14
|
|
|
Nroo posted:Directing is all about cheating. ok roman polanski.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 07:25
|
|
|
Nroo posted:Directing is all about cheating. A theme in Blade Runner 2049 (and 2036, for that matter) is the architecting of situations to evoke emotional responses. This is what film directors do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 13:28
|
|
|
Does anyone have a clear idea of whos eye that first shot of the movie is? It's not a fast shot but it is such an extremely close shot I'm not quite sure if that's supposed to be K, Stelline or just anonymous? I've sort of taken to thinking its K's eye as he is lying in the snow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 13:51
|
|
|
I took it to be Gosling's but hope like in the original it's just some random production person's.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 13:57
|
|
|
Cerepol posted:Does anyone have a clear idea of whos eye that first shot of the movie is? Alternatively it's K's eye as he's waking up after being born and then we see him waking up/turning on in his car.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 15:18
|
|
|
david_a posted:
I thought so also, the emanator probably unlocks certain elements of a previously generic personality allowing growth, or the illusion of, as well as giving portability. For the sort of person who'd buy an expensive upgrade for his virtual girlfriend, seeing how much more attentive and personal she'd become once this is in place would be much more likely to induce a purchase of a future emanator 2.0 or an ongoing expensive subscription of some kind. Not to imply this prevents Joi becoming in some way conscious as a result, because I think it's very likely given some of her actions that she can be considered conscious but with baseline programming restricting some areas of free will such as who she is in love with, but it also doesn't preclude her being nothing more than a sophisticated Tamagotchi either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
You're be more likely to be extra nice to your owner once you get a bit more freedom if your owner can send you back to Bachelor Apartment Prison.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 16:42
|
|
|
Ser Pounce posted:It really is, she’s just an emotionally unstable kid trying to impress and emulate ‘daddy’ in the end, and pays for it very heavily by loving with the wrong replicant. I love the Jaws homage at the end there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 16:47
|
|
|
I liked how the emanator is basically DLC for Joi and she was obviously programmed to ask for it because capitalism~
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
Again Wallace's structure of ideology is informed by his logic vis-à-vis love, his example of Deckard's for Rachel. Just a series of objective conditions met in order to elicit a chemical response that in turn produces the desired predicted outcome. This follows on from the same logic that reduces Joi to a series of one's and zero's, so when entering into this logic just bring it to the end of A and C and T and G - female, male. "One of the ways to facilitate this ignorance is the Cartesian notion of animal machine. Cartesians already in the seventeenth century were warning people against compassion with animals. They claimed that when we see an animal emitting sounds of pain, we should always bear in mind that these sounds do not express any real inner feeling, since animals do not have souls. These are just sounds generated by a complex mechanism of muscles, bones, fluids, and so on. You can clearly see the origin of these sounds through dissection. The problem is that the notion of animal machine has to end up in La Mettrie’s notion of l’homme machine, of a human man, as a machine. If one is a fully committed neurobiologist, exactly the same claim can be made about sounds and gestures emitted by humans when they are tortured. There is no separate interior domain of soul where pain is really felt. Such sounds and gestures are simply produced by the complex neurobiological mechanisms that constitute a human body.[...] What if what we see in this abyss of the other’s gaze is our own abyss or to quote Racine, a wonderful line from Jean Racine’s Phædre: Dans ses yeux je vois ma perte écrite, - In her eyes I see inscribed my loss." -Zizek 
brawleh fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Oct 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
Huzanko posted:Alternatively it's K's eye as he's waking up after being born and then we see him waking up/turning on in his car. No dice on that, they wouldn't call him 'Constant K' if he had only been born just before doing his first mission with Sapper.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
Kaedric posted:No dice on that, they wouldn't call him 'Constant K' if he had only been born just before doing his first mission with Sapper. I'm not saying I disagree, but I don't think that logic holds any water at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
Kind of weird for his boss to ponder how she somehow forgets he’s a replicant if she’s only had two conversations with him at that point. I tried to compare Gosling’s eyes to the eye shot from the trailers. Looks like a match to me. Also in searching for the eye shot I realized the original film was the right eye and the new film is the left eye.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Not saying K was born right before the first mission we're accompanying him on, just saying the shot of the eye may be his eye right after he is born. Also, you guys are forgetting K is a replicant and that there may have been many Ks, each the same. So when Joshi says "I seem to forget with you" or whatever she may be meaning you as in K model replicants. Lots of ways to interepret this movie and I'm not interested in which is the "cannon" interpretation because cannon is stupid.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
Huzanko posted:Not saying K was born right before the first mission we're accompanying him on, just saying the shot of the eye may be his eye right after he is born. I'm not sure we've ever seen any duplicates in either film.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
Technically there was a duplicate Rachel in this film. But yes, you are correct, replicants don't seem to be clones of each other, which is interesting in and of itself. I think it's actually cool that Blade Runner doesn't go that direction, because it's done so much in other artificial people stories.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
I assumed at the absolute most you'd have like a template replicant others in its line of work are based on but they'd still have like a different face/eyes/build/whatever like close relative might. The book hints at the notion of replicants secretly getting made that are 1:1 replacements of actual people (and of course has the whole subplot about getting your dead pet replaced with a replicant based on it) and they were originally going to go with Tyrell being a replicant but it's never been a thing in the actual released stuff until Rachel pops up briefly in 2049.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 21:51
|
|
DandyLion posted:I'm not sure we've ever seen any duplicates in either film. I wanna say that the replicant display in Wallace HQ has a Bautista replicant among its numbers, but I'm not sure.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Babysitter Super Sleuth posted:I wanna say that the replicant display in Wallace HQ has a Bautista replicant among its numbers, but I'm not sure. It does.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
I'm going to see it tomorrow and I want to watch the original again first. I have BD with a bunch of cuts on it, which one am I supposed to watch? Final?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
Yeah watch the Final Cut.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
Obviously, there are only duplicates when it serves the film's themes. I'm sure IRL, there'd be 50,000 alternate models for JOI in particular, half of them otherkin. But that's not where they went with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
I'd guess replicants designed to be the same would only be as close as identical twins, so easily differentiated by retina scan or a highly resolved IR sensor checking capillaries against a database.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Cerepol posted:Does anyone have a clear idea of whos eye that first shot of the movie is? I thought it was interesting that the eye in that shot was green. Also, upon a second viewing, i really liked how the invocation of an ancient Egyptian pyramid in the context of the Wallace headquarters (external architecture, internal use of really warm yellow sand colors, massive rooms with lots of empty space) really drive home Wallace's god complex. One could imagine that his personal office was located right at the center, the same place the pharaohs were buried before they were themselves treated as gods. Also that internal lighting with the water ripples, holy cow that looked great. EDIT: Apparently this is how the lighting was done. Scroll down for pics of the crazy rig. Solkanar512 fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Oct 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:It does. I think if they made duplicate replicants they would stand out a lot more which probably isn't what either Tyrell or Wallace wants. Xealot posted:Obviously, there are only duplicates when it serves the film's themes. I'm sure IRL, there'd be 50,000 alternate models for JOI in particular, half of them otherkin. But that's not where they went with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
 The camera lingers on this one
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
DandyLion posted:I'm not sure we've ever seen any duplicates in either film. K and Luv walk through a room with different model replicants and one of them is Sapper...
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:49 |
|
|
david_a posted:I dunno, I guess it might supposed to be him but it's not a super obvious resemblance to me. Bautista seems to have a pretty round face with kind of a smooth sloping forehead which that thing on the right doesn't have, although judging by the left side the aspect ratio might be hosed. Naaaah that's Sapper.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 04:45
|
|