|
It's very pointedly made not clear because it's irrelevant.
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
Deckard is neither human nor replicant. The ambiguity is the point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:It's very pointedly made not clear because it's irrelevant. Well no; it's highly relevant in this film, because of the infertility plot point. Wallace goes to great lengths to figure out what made Rachel special (studying her bones and attempting to vivisect her child, etc.) - but doesn't think to vivisect Deckard and figure out how his maybe-robot balls work. Weird, right? On top of this, Blade 2049 introduces the very important, overlooked mystery of whether Mariette is a replicant. Most reviewers seem to just assume that she is - but if she's working openly in 2049, then she must be a WallaceCorp Nexus 9. That means she should not consider herself a 'real girl', and should not be able to disobey her owners at the brothel. So Freysa must have somehow discovered and weaponized a property of the child, allowing her to convert Nexus 9s. If Mariette is not a Nexus 9, however, then she must be human - and that would mean Freysa doesn't actually have any mechanism for converting Nexus 9s, and her plan for 'building an army' is simply to rally the remaining Nexus 8s. The result would, effectively, be a war between the TyrellCorp Nexus 8s and the WallaceCorp Nexus 9s. As with the Wallace plot, where it's left pointlessly unclear if he wants humans and replicants to interbreed, the ambiguity with Mariette makes Freysa's objectives pointlessly obscure. The problem is that everyone in the movie talks like this: Detective Joseph: You worked with Officer Deckard, back in the day. What can you tell me about him?" Gaff: He wasn’t long for this world... Something in his eyes... OH, YOU MEAN HE WAS A REPLICANT? No, I mean... he's retired. ‘RETIRED’ AS IN ‘NOT EMPLOYED’, OR ‘RETIRED’ AS IN ‘KILLED BY BLADE RUNNERS FOR BEING A REPLICANT’? I mean he was nyugdíjas. [dramatic pause] That’s Hungarian for ‘retired’. I HAVE ACCESS TO BRAIN SCANNERS. THERE ARE LIKE THREE TYPES OF BRAIN SCANNER IN MY CAR. Pretty much every 'mysterious' interaction could be clarified with a basic followup question. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Jan 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2018 00:49
|
|
|
androo posted:Did this movie answer the Deckard replicant question officially? Watched last night, loved it, but couldn't pick up some dialog. Without spoilers: it's left more ambiguous than everyone initially figured, and while where you land changes the implications of some of the plot, it works either way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2018 02:33
|
|
|
Holy fuckballs I finally got around to seeing this and wish I had in theaters: completely amazing!  It should definitely win all if its Oscars and should have gotten a nomination for Best Picture since Get Out is in the running...
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 03:27
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:
She is clearly a replicant, and it doesn't matter if she is a wallacecorp nexus 9. The new replicants are shown to 'break their programming' multiple times. Love for example mentions that they can't lie, and then IMMEDIATELY tells the chief that she is going to lie to Wallace about how she is going to kill the chief. That's not even mentioning K's whole thing. The whole thing is any replicant is more human than they were originally intended.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 19:45
|
|
|
Kaedric posted:She is clearly a replicant, How so? Kaedric posted:it doesn't matter if she is a wallacecorp nexus 9. It does matter because that determines whether Mariette is legally allowed on Earth or not, whether her memories are directly copied from existing humans or not, etc. And that’s just based on what version she is, not even getting into the human question. If Luv were a Nexus 8, for example, it would dramatically change the film. Wallace‘s ‘best angel’ would be an illegal robot built by his predecessor. What if Luv is a human raised as a machine? SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Jan 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 19:47
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:What if Luv is a human raised as a machine?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
Not to be snarky, but couldn't we just assume the one-eyed lady is also a human since she didn't literally state her make and model number? Plucked out her eye in solidarity with her robo friends?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:Luv is clearly shown to have Batty-esque strength and reflexes, on top of quirky behavior and tics associated with the older replicants. I could buy her being Tyrell-made (and that's an interesting idea) but standard human seems like a huge stretch given her physical capabilities. Not exactly; Roy Batty isn’t a character in this film. Luv has Joseph-esque strength and reflexes. And that didn’t stop Joseph from believing he was human. Of course Luv is rather unambiguously presented as a replicant, but the point is that she also doesn’t do anything humanly impossible. You could easily add a twist ending where she was human all along. With Mariette, we don’t even see her beat anyone up - and the film cuts away before we we can see any superhuman loving ability. Here’s the trouble: Although the first film is set in a world with multiple competing brands and models of artificial person, Blade Runner’s narrative depicts only three types of person. You have humans, Nexus 6 replicants, and Nexus 7 replicants (which collapse the difference between humans and replicants - demonstrating that all persons are disposable under capitalism, and that the notion of humanity is itself an artificial construct). It’s thesis/antithesis/synthesis. In Blade 2049, you have: -Humans -Augmented humans -Nexus 7s -Human-7 hybrids -Nexus 8s -‘Radicalized’ Nexus 8s (i.e. those who saw a miracle, or ‘heard the good news’) -Nexus 9s -‘Real Boy’ Nexus 9s (i.e. Nexus 9s who glitch out and start believing their artificial memories). -Holograms And there are important narrative differences between all these. It’s not just their psychology; now biological differences are extremely relevant to the story. Mariette could be almost any of these.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 22:00
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:And that didn’t stop Joseph from believing he was human. I don't think K thought he was 'baseline' human at any point
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 22:11
|
|
|
starkebn posted:I don't think K thought he was 'baseline' human at any point That’s because of a retcon. As we all know, neither Rachel nor Deckard had any special abilities in Blade Runner, because they were specifically designed to be humans in every possible way - minus the rights and other protections. But in this film, Joseph is told that Rachel is “One of the last gens. Pre-prohibition. Standard issue”. And that means, in the context of Blade Runner 2049, that Rachel is a Nexus 8. So two different viewers can reach two very different conclusions depending on their familiarity with the original film and the extent to which they consider it ‘canon’.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 00:44
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That’s because of a retcon. As we all know, neither Rachel nor Deckard had any special abilities in Blade Runner, because they were specifically designed to be humans in every possible way - minus the rights and other protections. How is that a retcon? Joe's model didn't exist in 2019...he never believed he was fully human, but for a bit he believed he was a hybrid. I think it's heavily implied Rachel was used as a prototype for the N8s, especially when you consider her serial number is still an N7* designation. So if you were just looking it up after the blackout, you would think she was just an old, "standard-issue" replicant from pre-prohibition and not one of the rebel N8s. I suppose you can call that a retcon, but the serial number keeps it consistent in the universe so 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 02:54
|
|
|
Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:How is that a retcon? Joe's model didn't exist in 2019...he never believed he was fully human, but for a bit he believed he was a hybrid. Because of the formal qualities of the film, Joseph believes multiple contradictory things, in superposition. He believes that he is fully human, half-human, and fully replicant - simultaneously. Here is a basic example of what I’m talking about : in Marvel’s The Avengers 1, Steve Rogers says “the last time I was in Germany and saw a man standing above everyone else. We ended up disagreeing.” This line is designed to have two entirely different meanings simultaneously. A person who has not seen Captain America will understand ‘the man’ to be Hitler, while a person who will has seen Captain America will understand ‘the man’ to be an entirely different character called Red Skull. Both interpretations are correct, but neither is true. The result is like Schrödinger's cat: Steve Rogers has both fought Hitler and never fought Hitler. This tactic of deliberately generating contradictory meanings to cater to disparate audiences is part of the familiar practice of ‘soft rebooting’. The studio’s goal is to spawn an entirely new franchise, while disguising it as a sequel to an existing film to avoid alienating fans. Batman Begins is one big example; it is both a functional prequel to the Burton/Schumacher films and the start of a new Dark Knight franchise. So let’s break down a few of the possible interpretations of what Joseph believes about his parents: 1) For a person who has not seen the original Blade Runner, “Standard Issue” means that Rachel is a Nexus 8 superpowered robot. [Nexus 6es and 7s are never actually described in this film.] Joseph therefore believes he is a naturally-born robot, who inherited superpowers from both his robot mother and his robot father. [Deckard is a robot, because Blade Runners are all robots, right?] Joseph thinks he’s special because he would be the first robot to be ‘built’ by the robots themselves. “If a baby can come from one of us, we are our own masters.” 2) For a person who has seen the original Blade Runner, “Standard Issue” means that Rachel is human. [The entire point of Blade Runner that Rachel is human - effectively a ‘transporter clone’ of Tyrell’s niece. “Standard Issue” must mean ‘pure copy, without any superpower enhancements.’] Joseph therefore believes, however irrationally, that he is a normal human, born of two human parents. He thinks he’s special because his birth fully erases the minimal difference between ‘real’ humans and ‘copied’ humans. “The world is built on a wall that separates kind. Tell either side, there's no wall...”. 3) Another person who has seen the original Blade Runner, however, might recall that Pris was a “basic pleasure model” - and could still shove her hand in boiling water and other superpower stuff. In that case, “Standard Issue” means that Rachel is a Nexus 6 superpowered robot. Joseph therefore believes that he is a half-human hybrid who inherited superpowers from his mother - making him an altogether new species of superpowered human. Again: all these interpretations (and more) are correct, but none are true. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 14:38 on Jan 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 14:33
|
|
|
I actually am kinda confused about the Nexus models from Blade Runner to 2049. In the original, Batty and his group are Nexus 6 right? Then Rachel, being a new model that Deckard hadn't known about before, is a Nexus 7. So that means the Nexus 8s that BR2049 is referring to in this opening crawl are an even newer model than what Rachel was, that we never saw in the original? How can that be if Tyrell is killed and replicants are illegal? Are we to assume he just developed the Nexus8s off camera and we were never shown that? Or that Wallace made the Nexus 8s before he refined his techniques? Or am I missing something and we actually did see Nexus 8s in the original Blade Runner? Maybe Batty is actually Nexus 7 and Rachel is the first Nexus 8?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 14:53
|
|
|
Roy Batty and the others are definitely Nexus-6 replicants with the four year lifespan. In the first film it's unclear if Rachel is a newer model or just a Nexus-6 with implanted memories. In the original theatrical release with the happy ending montage, Deckard narrates that surprise, Rachel didn't have a termination date so that they could live happily ever after. Nexus 8s and 9s were totally the invention of BR2049 and just fit into whatever replicant-sized hole the writers needed to fill to make the story work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:19
|
|
|
It's the Nexus 8s that are bothering me, because it's implied that those were made before Wallace came along, and so they're in hiding for a long time before the start of the film. So who the hell was making these Nexus 8s after Tyrell died? Some other company came along and made Nexus 8s(using the same terminology as Tyrell), and then that company went bankrupt before the start of BR2049? Was it a failed first experiment by Wallace? The 9s I get are brand new models made by Wallace, no problem there. But they really should be 8s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:29
|
|
|
They called the 8th line of replicants Nexus-9s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:32
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:So that means the Nexus 8s that BR2049 is referring to in this opening crawl are an even newer model than what Rachel was, that we never saw in the original? How can that be if Tyrell is killed and replicants are illegal? Well again, it’s a partial retcon. The ‘canon’ explanation is that, after Tyrell’s death, TyrellCorp desperately churned out a bunch of shoddy robots before the eventual ban. But, since Blade Runner 2049 is a soft reboot, the narrative presents the Nexus 8s as having always existed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:40
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:But, since Blade Runner 2049 is a soft reboot, the narrative presents the Nexus 8s as having always existed. I think that's the part that made me confused. The way it's presented, these replicants that are in hiding(i.e. Batista's character) may as well just be Nexus 6s or Nexus 7s that just had never been tracked down by a Blade Runner. The addition of this new model Nexus 8 seems unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
I think the only reason why they added Nexus 8's into the story was to explain why there are a bunch of old replicants who are still around, despite the 4-year life span being a major part of the original film. They needed replicant characters who were around over 20 years previously when Deckard & Rachel's child was born, so they made up the Nexus 8's as a model of replicant that presumably have no limited life span. Why Tyrell Corp would do that, I have no idea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 16:28
|
|
|
Oh poo poo, that's the piece I wasn't taking into account, the 4 year lifespan. They had to come up with a new model that didn't have that constraint. Whew, thanks that was really annoying me for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Well again, it’s a partial retcon. Where does this come from? I don't remember that in either film and it seems central to the point you're trying to make...  SuperMechagodzilla posted:Because of the formal qualities of the film, Joseph believes multiple contradictory things, in superposition. He believes that he is fully human, half-human, and fully replicant - simultaneously.  ...okay buddy.Even if he does believe any of this at some point in the film, it is ultimately untrue and isn't it therefore moot? The salient fact is that, if true, he will be hunted by another Blade Runner and have to run (a road with a definitive ending, as we learn at the beginning of the film) and not the metaphysical qualities of the birth. Joe doesn't freak out in the memory lab because he's unsure of his parentage: he could care less about that. He cares that his life, as he knew it, has been completely obliterated by this knowledge. He believes it to be true, even if it is ultimately a lie (like his childhood memories). SuperMechagodzilla posted:So let’s break down a few of the possible interpretations of what Joseph believes about his parents: Isn't this contradicted by the fact that no one realized Rachel was even a replicant until Joe found the serial number? And that Joe found the serial number? Also, a little disingenuous to assume viewers of this film had not seen the original. No where is it even implied that Blade Runners are all robots, in fact, that is directly contradicted in the film: Joe's boss reminisces that there weren't any of "his kind" when she was little. SuperMechagodzilla posted:2) For a person who has seen the original Blade Runner, “Standard Issue” means that Rachel is human. [The entire point of Blade Runner that Rachel is human - effectively a ‘transporter clone’ of Tyrell’s niece. “Standard Issue” must mean ‘pure copy, without any superpower enhancements.’] Joseph therefore believes, however irrationally, that he is a normal human, born of two human parents. He thinks he’s special because his birth fully erases the minimal difference between ‘real’ humans and ‘copied’ humans. What? Where is this even implied? Deckard's parentage is certainly in question, but Rachel is ~certainly~ a replicant. In both films. SuperMechagodzilla posted:3) Another person who has seen the original Blade Runner, however, might recall that Pris was a “basic pleasure model” - and could still shove her hand in boiling water and other superpower stuff. In that case, “Standard Issue” means that Rachel is a Nexus 6 superpowered robot. Joseph therefore believes that he is a half-human hybrid who inherited superpowers from his mother - making him an altogether new species of superpowered human. Wasn't there a paragraph at the beginning of each film that concisely explained all of this? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 03:12
|
|
|
Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:Where does this come from? January 2016: Roy Batty, the oldest onscreen Nexus 6, is incepted. April 2017: Leon Kowalski, the youngest Nexus 6, is incepted. They rebel, and escape to Earth in late 2019. The Nexus 6 design was therefore in the market for well over a year - probably more than three years. But the Nexus 6 design is a failure. They were made to die early, before they can develop emotions - but a flaw is eventually revealed in the design: awareness of their mortality actually causes Nexus 6es to become emotionally unstable. The idea spreads like a virus, causing disobedience, triggering rebellions. Because of this flaw, Tyrell abandons the Nexus 6 design and attempts a very different solution: weaker robots that believe they're human. He dies in 2019, after developing the prototype Nexus 7 series. The Nexus 7s are never put into production. Instead, Tyrell Corp quickly releases slightly-modified Nexus 6es, rebranded as Nexus 8s. The only difference between a Nexus 6 and a Nexus 8 is that the 8s have an open-ended lifespan. That is to say that they are allowed to develop emotions. Tyrell Corp clearly hopes that this lenience will solve the problem. The failure this time is even worse. By 2020, Bautista and his squad of Nexus 8s have already rebelled, and escaped to Earth. The error happened three times faster in the 8s than it did with Batty. The 8 is such a failure that the manufacture of all replicants is banned worldwide. Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:Also, a little disingenuous to assume viewers of this film had not seen the original. I think you may need to re-read what i wrote; all your objections have already addressed in the post itself. This is one example: I am not assuming that [i]all[i] viewers have not seen the original. What I have done is take the viewpoints of multiple different potential audiences into account just as the studio did. The plot point about the collapse of ecosystems circa 2025, for example, was certainly added for viewers of the original theatrical release of Blade Runner (where Deckard and Rachel drive away into a forested area at the end). For viewers of Blade Runner: Final Cut, an explanation for where the forests went is unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 05:57
|
|
|
I like how the opening crawl of Blade Runner establishes that replicants weren't declared illegal on Earth until the Nexus 6 models rebelled, yet the conversation between Deckard and Bryant made it clear that they were newer models that experienced emotions, and not something they were used to dealing with. That's why Deckard was (supposedly) sent to Tyrell, to test the effectiveness of the VK on a model he's never seen ("what if it doesn't work?"). Deckard didn't even know their lifespan, yet Blade Runners were supposedly originally formed in response to the Nexus 6 problem. The point is that there's plenty of holes like this and it's whatever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 06:18
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:I like how the opening crawl of Blade Runner establishes that replicants weren't declared illegal on Earth until the Nexus 6 models rebelled, yet the conversation between Deckard and Bryant made it clear that they were newer models that experienced emotions, and not something they were used to dealing with. That's why Deckard was (supposedly) sent to Tyrell, to test the effectiveness of the VK on a model he's never seen ("what if it doesn't work?"). Deckard didn't even know their lifespan, yet Blade Runners were supposedly originally formed in response to the Nexus 6 problem. The point is that there's plenty of holes like this and it's whatever. I actually like that one because it keeps it vague about how long Deckard personally has been retired and adds another thing that could equally mean he's human or a replicant depending on how you look on it. Like Deckard isn't asked out of retirement because he's "the best," but because he has "the magic" which, as I've rewatched the movie over the years, I realize more and more is Bryant just being an rear end in a top hat and weakly trying to get Deckard interested because like he basically says outright having a retired (  ) nobody do the job ASAP would make it a lot easier for no one to find out about it. It makes you wonder how outdated and/or out of the loop Deckard really is and how quickly the Nexus 6 replicants got their poo poo together to rebel.
Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Feb 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:05
|
|
|
Yeah I never got the impression that Deckard was all that skilled at blade running, whatever that entailed. In BR2019 he was portrayed as a cowardly, alcoholic contract killer who shot people in the back and was hopelessly outmatched any time he went up against a replicant in a fair fight. It felt like the LAPD only employed these guys like you'd hire an exterminator to clear scorpions out of your attic, with their bullshit personality test to create the illusion of legitimacy in the same way the TSA very seriously examines your baggage at the airport.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:Yeah I never got the impression that Deckard was all that skilled at blade running, whatever that entailed. In BR2019 he was portrayed as a cowardly, alcoholic contract killer who shot people in the back and was hopelessly outmatched any time he went up against a replicant in a fair fight. It felt like the LAPD only employed these guys like you'd hire an exterminator to clear scorpions out of your attic, with their bullshit personality test to create the illusion of legitimacy in the same way the TSA very seriously examines your baggage at the airport. His impersonation of an animal abuse investigator was total amateur hour, too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:Blade Runners were supposedly originally formed in response to the Nexus 6 problem. Actually, you misread. The Blade Runners units’ new kill-on-sight orders were given after the initial Nexus 6 rebellions. Blade Runner Units existed long before then, but only did things like capturing escaped robots - killing them if necessary. There are implicitly multiple competing robotics corporations, each with various product lines, and Deckard has years of experience dealing with them. (Even if Deckard is a replicant, his memories were still copied from a natural-born human cop. Maybe even Holden, the dude from the opening scene.) The plot of Blade Runner is that Deckard has been retired for around 3-4 years, and that’s why he’s unfamiliar with the relatively-new Nexus 6 series. He’s called out of retirement specifically because the off-world rebellions have finally spread to Earth. Nexus 6 attacks are exceedingly rare, so few Blade Runners would have experience with them. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 19:18 on Feb 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 19:14
|
|
|
Papercut posted:His impersonation of an animal abuse investigator was total amateur hour, too. I know Zhora is not a naturally born human but drat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:Yeah I never got the impression that Deckard was all that skilled at blade running, whatever that entailed. In BR2019 he was portrayed as a cowardly, alcoholic contract killer who shot people in the back and was hopelessly outmatched any time he went up against a replicant in a fair fight. It felt like the LAPD only employed these guys like you'd hire an exterminator to clear scorpions out of your attic, with their bullshit personality test to create the illusion of legitimacy in the same way the TSA very seriously examines your baggage at the airport. He's basically a big game hunter; he has to take out prey that's faster and stronger than him and will do whatever it takes to get the job done. Deckard never sees Replicants as anything but machinery (until Rachel) so I'm pretty sure he doesn't have any issue shooting them in the back, much like people who actually hunt big game have no problem doing so with high powered rifles equipped with scopes to shoot from a safe distance. It's never a fair fight in any regard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 19:50
|
|
|
Papercut posted:His impersonation of an animal abuse investigator was total amateur hour, too. The funniest part is that he didn't even need to do a weird voice. I guess he was trying to seem weak or unthreatening, but he could've just played it normally and it wouldn't have been so obvious. Cassidy seems to genuinely laugh at how bad it is when she says "are you for real?". SuperMechagodzilla posted:Actually, you misread. Reading it again, yeah, that's possible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:The funniest part is that he didn't even need to do a weird voice. I guess he was trying to seem weak or unthreatening, but he could've just played it normally and it wouldn't have been so obvious. Cassidy seems to genuinely laugh at how bad it is when she says "are you for real?". Ford also slips in and out of the voice as the scene goes on. I can't tell if it's intentional, like Deckard is trying to spook her into doing something irrational, or just Ford being lazy as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
Papercut posted:Ford also slips in and out of the voice as the scene goes on. I can't tell if it's intentional, like Deckard is trying to spook her into doing something irrational, or just Ford being lazy as gently caress. Yes. He even stammers and halts like he forgot his spiel and looks up as if he's trying to remember his lines, it's like an outtake that they just left in. I suppose they could be trying to convey that Deck's heart isn't in it, and he really doesn't want to be doing this. After all, after Taffy gives him the brush off, instead of pressing him further like any good detective would, he just decides to get drunk and call Rachael. He only accidentally finds Zhora because he hung out long enough to see her act. After he kills her, he's shook as hell and has to buy some booze. Maybe he was good once, but despite what Bryant thinks ("he's a goddamn one man slaughterhouse."), Deck's all washed up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
That even assumes that Blade Runners have to be good to start with. If you look at present day ICE in the US, do you think it's composed of the best and brightest? Or just people who are vicious enough to want to do that kind of work?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
FWIW, since it’s not remotely important to follow 2049, the supplemental short Blackout 2022 dramatizes the immediate post-Blade Runner period, and speaks to some of these topics. Its premise is that the Blackout is actually an intentional act by rebellious Nexus 8’s to wipe digital records of who or what they are, so as to continue living in obscurity on Earth. In lieu of other records, the eye is the only easy way to identify N8’s after that point, hence why the one-eyed woman is that way in 2049. It’s mostly cool because Shinichiro Watanabe, though. The other short prequel things are...fine. Totally unnecessary, but fine if you want to kill a few minutes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 02:25
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:That even assumes that Blade Runners have to be good to start with. If you look at present day ICE in the US, do you think it's composed of the best and brightest? Or just people who are vicious enough to want to do that kind of work? Similarly, hired hitmen. Idiot fuckups in general.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Similarly, hired hitmen. Idiot fuckups in general. There are jobs that don't require a huge amount of skill, but require a fair bit of desperation to do. That was the cliche I was saddest to realise wasn't true. The top notch assassin who lives in a mansion not only doesn't live in a mansion, he's not top notch. Chances are he's just a poor kid they've handed a machine gun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 03:39
|
|
|
Of all the fictional universes I was sad weren't true, perhaps what made me saddest of all was the world of No More Heroes...
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 04:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
There is no 'ambiguity' about Mariette being a replicant, she's just a replicant and this is straightforwardly shown to the viewer a bunch of different times. She 'syncs' with Joi and then chides her, saying she has 'been inside' her. She makes the distinction to Joe between 'real' girls like her, and holographic companion A.Is like Joi (she says this in response to Joe's Joi-phone jingle going off). She is an active part of the looming robot revolution. She is like some kind of replicant Mary Magdalene tending to Joe's pseudo-robo-Jesus. I saw it for the first time last night and 'elegant', 'beautiful' and 'unsettling' are the words I would use to describe it. I'm not sure if I like it as much as the original, but the way in which it toyed with the central existential conceit was much more unsettling and effective in resolutely churning around in my head. It might be because Joe is much more of an innocent in 2049 than Deckard or Batty were in the original, more akin to David in Spielberg's A.I (or Sebastian in the first movie) so the question of the 'real'ness of his relationship to Joi is much more painful, more tragic, as opposed to the rage-filled, resentful, passion of Batty and Priss' otherwise similarly doomed, similarly (un)real love. There was a heck of a lot of Spielberg's A.I in this movie, wasnt there?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 04:24
|
|
