BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012.


You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



October 20, 2017 11:18 am  #801


Re: Recently watched movies.

After only one viewing, and there won't be a second one:

The first thing that struck me was that American values seem to have changed quite a bit: Not so long ago, the guy who rode into a place to kill the people living there  - people who just went about their work and never did anybody any harm - that would have been the bad guy!

Then the whole scenario is completely illogical: An overpopulated, underfed world doesn't need  human-identical beings, even if they are a stronger and more resistant - they still need air, food and water - all in short supply on earth and even more so in space and on other planets. But okay, the replicants were invented (1982)  before human-looking cyborgs (1984), so I'll accept them. I can't accept that breeding them - i. e. 9 months of gestation, 20 years of growing up - would be quicker than having them fall out of a plastic bag fully formed. There the film either showed too much, or much too little: It's quite possible that the production needs some incredibly rare element, or huge amounts of energy, or whatever - but I want to know what! As the film stands, the bad guy doesn't make sense.

So, I don't believe in either the hero or the bad guy - but the film should still be saveable, it has Harrison Ford in it. Unfortunately, no, not really... He appears much too late, and has too little to do.

As for the rest of the protagonists: I rather liked the police commander (even if I don't understand why she believed K had killed the Child without bringing the eye as proof), but maybe she should have pushed an alarm button or grabbed a weapon instead of chucking back a last drink when Luv appeared in her office (and how come a civilian just walks into the morgue and a police office to kill people? And walks out again?) And could somebody clarify: Wasn't it Luv who set the prostitutes on K/Joe - so why did the one who hooked up with him and slipped the tracker into his pocket not report back to her, but instead brought other people to Vegas? If she was a double agent, she'd have deserved more screen time! But for me the absolutely worst sin against common sense was Luv in Las Vegas taking only Deckard with her but leaving K behind. Even if she didn't believe that he was the Child (which I did at the time) - it should be obvious that two people to interrogate are always better than one. 

Oh, another thing in the basic situation that doesn't make sense: The Blackout destroying most computer records. How? Well-stored data doesn't disappear without power - that's why we have hard drives (and are told to save our work often...) 

And of course the film was much too long and slow. I don't mind long cuts if there's something interesting to see - but water reflections in a room don't cut it for me. Neither does Ryan Gosling - there's not enough showing in his face for the camera to stay on him for several minutes (might have been shorter, but it sure seemed an eternity).

In short: The film is in no way entertaining, and the messages it might want to transmit (slavery is bad, blind obedience is bad, mankind needs to mind its ways before disaster strikes) are neither new nor well-presented.

Tonight I'll have a look at the original Blade Runner (Final Cut, 2007) to see whether I had imagined its greatness.

 

 

October 20, 2017 12:29 pm  #802


Re: Recently watched movies.

You just reminded me that one thing that bothered me while watching it was K believing he was the Child after going to see (I've forgotten her name) the real Child.  All she tells him is that the memory is real - something he already knew because he found the horse.  There is no new information to convince him that the memory is his rather than implanted ... unless it's simply that he doesn't believe something illegal could happen.   Then there was the fact that the real Child was the one who made memories for implantation - it made sense that the memory would be hers, particularly as she became emotional when she saw it.  Why didn't K work that out?   Although I suppose in the context of film, it was that he wanted to believe that it was him, that he was special, and that skewed how he reacted to the information.

 

 

October 20, 2017 1:41 pm  #803


Re: Recently watched movies.

Liberty,

In my opinion this works perfectly in the context of the movie. When she mentioned that the memory was real, it at first didn't really register with me that this doesn't mean it's HIS memory. I only realized this a while later (and when I leaned over to my spouse saying "She only said it was real, not that it was his memory", it turned out that it hadn't registered with him, either). I suppose that for K it works the same way it worked for us: He heard what he wanted to hear and so he didn't really listen to what she actually told him and what this might actually mean.
In my opinion there is nothing wrong with this scene. It's actually intended that K only thinks he got some new information when he actually hasn't. I think he is so intrigued by what is going on and what this might mean for his life (or what he thought was his life), that he only sees but doesn't fully observe. He wants this to be his memory and that's the reason why he doesn't work it out.

 

Last edited by SolarSystem (October 20, 2017 1:42 pm)


___________________________________________________
"Am I the current King of England?"

http://picload.org/image/lcpldgo/berlinsigneu2.jpghttp://picload.org/image/lcpldgc/berlinsigneu3.jpghttp://picload.org/image/lcpldgw/berlinsigneu.jpghttp://picload.org/image/wcodogr/jungssignatur.jpg

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant
"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

 
 

October 20, 2017 4:56 pm  #804


Re: Recently watched movies.

Oh, I didn't mean there was anything wrong with the scene. 

As I said, it's explained later why he would assume what he did: because of his need for that to be the truth.   But I think that at the point when you first see it, it does seem odd that he would assume that.  (And actually, what bothered me was that I thought we were expected to assume that too - that we were just expected to accept he'd been proven to be the Child when nothing of the sort had happened!  So I was pleased when what seemed like a flaw ended up being explained later).   In fact, I wasn't really clear about what his purpose was there, and what he thought he'd heard.  He knew the memory was real, because of the horse.  There wasn't any more reason to think it was his, rather than implanted, after talking to the Child.  Just wishful thinking.  And of course also because there had to be that scene, playing out the way it did, for the story to end the way it did!

Last edited by Liberty (October 20, 2017 4:57 pm)

 

October 21, 2017 2:09 am  #805


Re: Recently watched movies.

I just saw Blade Runner 2049 this morning so it's both fresh and jumbled in my mind, and I'm glad to find this discussion. Just want to address a couple of things Kittyhawk said.

The Blackout was an EMP detonation, not a power cut. Read more about this here: https://www.polygon.com/2017/9/27/16374742/blade-runner-2049-anime-short-shinichiro-watanabe

The prostitute was working for the one-eyed lady, not for Luv.

Last edited by Meretricious (October 21, 2017 2:13 am)

 

October 22, 2017 11:54 am  #806


Re: Recently watched movies.

Thanks for clarifying that, Meretricious.

Was it ever mentioned in the movie that the blackout was due to an EMP? The movie was certainly long enough to give all the explanations anybody could wish for... Though I probably would have forgiven the blackout if I hadn't been bored to the point of considering walking out altogether or at least getting a bag of M & Ms to sweeten things. 

So I've watched the original Blade Runner, and I still like it. It's a well-made, visually interesting and entertaining movie, with a fascinating production history  (I just love bonus materials!) - and all that in under two hours! By now I'm firmly convinced that two important requirements for a good film are runtime and budget limits...

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum