Mr Webber
Master Member
Of course. Of course.
Your jokes are as funny as your ability to comprehend a movie.:lol
Of course. Of course.
You dont really have to make a solid decision one way or another, thats the beauty of the movie Scott made. If Deckard is or isnt doesnt effect the outcome or the way we watch the movie. But he is a replicant.
On the bee`s , I have two thoughts. They are canaries for Deckards coal mine and they are also a reference to the first movie. Will let someone else elaborate on that one
I think this film, on a thematic level, is better constructed and more nuanced than the first film. Visually it’s a rival to the first film.I really enjoyed the movie. I went in expecting the worst, but still hopeful for a miracle. It really hit the target for me. It felt like a return to the world I enjoyed in '82 as a 16 year old theater goer. I enjoyed the music, the cinematography, the story, the depth... My only disappointment was that it was over too soon. Seriously, another two hours would have worked for me.
I saw it twice in the theater. The first time with my wife and her brother-in-law. She enjoyed it. We picked at it a bit, but nothing stood out so much that I even recall now what it was. The in-law didn't "get" the first film, so he was silent.
The second time was with my best friend of nearly 40 years. He had some great insights on Wallace's perspective. He conjectured that his position was that the replicants were simply products. In the cases where he killed the one that wasn't pregnant, or had Luv kill Rachael2, he simply thought of them as defective and needing to be disposed. Wallace seemed a little less evil then.
I look forward to watching it with my eldest and gaining her perspective on this layered movie. Maybe it is as deep as the first one.
CessnaDriver and I had a very interesting and productive two page discussion on the issue in this thread not long ago. If you didnt catch it, its a great read. It may help you come to a final decision on the Deckard is or isnt a replicant question.No, no, no...I can't have this undetermined question in the back of my mind! I have to make a decision here! This definitely makes me appreciate the original even more though. I was firmly in the human camp, but now I'm doubting that after several viewings over the years, and I enjoy the developing mystery and potential explanations I am considering.
I didn't see your question until just now. I have a tab open to the RPF almost continuously, but it doesn't mean I'm looking at it every minute. I wasn't even at my computer.
Thank you for answering and sharing your take on it. I wasn't going to say but since you asked, I don't think it's very conclusive. Deckard could have carved those other figures any time, and I assumed it was after he got to Vegas (they did look newer, although I grant they hadn't been buried in soot for a couple decades). It doesn't mean the horse had ever before been in their company.
Deckard's dialogue about "the plan" gives no indication he had been coming and going. It was decided he should be away from the child and should go away without telling anyone where. So he would have had to carve the horse before going to Vegas. If he had been making prior trips to Vegas, he wouldn't have gone back there to hide, because no one could have any idea where he might go.
So it still doesn't make sense to me that the horse would have Vegas radiation on it.
No, no, no...I can't have this undetermined question in the back of my mind! I have to make a decision here! This definitely makes me appreciate the original even more though. I was firmly in the human camp, but now I'm doubting that after several viewings over the years, and I enjoy the developing mystery and potential explanations I am considering.
Probably the same place where Luke Skywalker gets green milk.But serious question, where does Deckard poop? Because we didn't see that on screen either, and it's keeping me awake at night.
Bee Answered: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utsPTIL0ACE Spoilers obviously
It didn't need to be fixed - the scavengers harpooned a kite to it so it would get struck by lightning which caused it's electrical system to trip out (which sometimes happens to planes in real life) and K had to perform a manual forced landing. You see the systems rebooting and coming back online while K is out cold and the scavengers are cutting the lock on the door, After Luv blows them all up K releases the drone to watch the car and the doors close on their own - it's working again by that point.the peugeot spinner used tis drone, r2d2 like to self repair
It didn't need to be fixed - the scavengers harpooned a kite to it so it would get struck by lightning which caused it's electrical system to trip out (which sometimes happens to planes in real life) and K had to perform a manual forced landing. You see the systems rebooting and coming back online while K is out cold and the scavengers are cutting the lock on the door, After Luv blows them all up K releases the drone to watch the car and the doors close on their own - it's working again by that point.
Why was K on the run? What did he do that was wrong? He was doing his job like he was told.
I didn't understand the whole "baseline" thing either.
Hologram projection into air already exists (n a lab, at least), though not with the definition to project an image as realistic as Joi.I’m luving this thread. Some really great insights here. One thing that I’ve been mulling over is the technology behind enabling a 3D hologram (Joi) to be projected into the real world. I heard someone suggest that when she first left the apartment and looked at the rain, her perception was that the rain was hitting her hand (even though it was passing through), so the software enabled raindrops to render on her skin. I like that idea...but I’m struggling to envisage how she might appear, often at quite a distance away, from essentially a small box inside K’s pocket. I don’t have a problem that the technology might exist in that universe...but I’d love to hear the opinion - of minds more familiar with hologram/video technology - how something like that could potentially work one day.