 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How did K know who Deckard's daughter was?
That is not stated but only implied.
First, it was Freysa who revealed to "K" that he was not the child. How could she do it? She was present at the birth and knew who the real child was. K could have learned it from her. Also, he had at least one memory that actually was of Deckhard's daughter. And there was the genetic disease the daughter had, something that also showed up on the DNA scans K searched (identical DNA for a boy and a girl, both with the genetic defect). So it's possible he just added up 2+2, or he was told by Freysa (who obviously guessed why he thought he was "the child").
|
|
|
|
|
|
First, it was Freysa who revealed to "K" that he was not the child. How could she do it? She was present at the birth and knew who the real child was. K could have learned it from her.
True. And perhaps in keeping with the bafflingly/pointlessly elliptical nature of the narrative (or editing), the filmmakers withheld this from us. How annoying.
Also, he had at least one memory that actually was of Deckhard's daughter.
Uhhhhh.... How could this have given him the connection between Deckard and the daughter?
And there was the genetic disease the daughter had, something that also showed up on the DNA scans K searched (identical DNA for a boy and a girl, both with the genetic defect).
And this would give him the connection.... how???
And did WE know that he saw this on the scans? No, and again perhaps more annoying ellipses....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is Deckard a replicant in this film?
That question is not definitively answered on purpose.
I disagree. I think he was a replicant in this film, but I just wanted to see if anyone else caught it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And is the Blade Runner neon jinx over? 'Cause I saw Sony and Atari (plus Pan Am for no good reason, apparently).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another thing that annoyed me was how the first few minutes of the film had too many moments where the filmmakers kept having things happen that screamed "Hey! This is a BLADE RUNNER movie! See, we just did something we did in the last movie!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
I also got tired, early on, of being dazzled too many times by the art direction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is Deckard a replicant in this film?
That question is not definitively answered on purpose.
I disagree. I think he was a replicant in this film, but I just wanted to see if anyone else caught it.
I'd say it is a possibility that he was a replicant, but the movie does not explicitly answer that question.
On the whole, I prefer the smoky ambiguity of the first movie over the static ponderousness of the sequel (even though I enjoyed the latter too), but -- fortunately -- there is no definitive answer to that question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First, it was Freysa who revealed to "K" that he was not the child. How could she do it? She was present at the birth and knew who the real child was. K could have learned it from her.
True. And perhaps in keeping with the bafflingly/pointlessly elliptical nature of the narrative (or editing), the filmmakers withheld this from us. How annoying.
Also, he had at least one memory that actually was of Deckhard's daughter.
Uhhhhh.... How could this have given him the connection between Deckard and the daughter?
And there was the genetic disease the daughter had, something that also showed up on the DNA scans K searched (identical DNA for a boy and a girl, both with the genetic defect).
And this would give him the connection.... how???
And did WE know that he saw this on the scans? No, and again perhaps more annoying ellipses....
I think K made the connection when he remembered Stelline's reaction to his memory of hiding the wooden horse - she sheds a tear because it's her own memory she sees...
SG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I saw it on Blu-Ray for the first time a couple of days ago, and it's one of the few recent films that I've seen that actually made an impression on me - to the extent that, I'd like to watch it again. It's not perfect, but I do think it's a worthy successor to Ridley Scott's 1982 original in most ways that matter. Yes, it's a tad overlong - even Ridley Scott has said he would have cut half an hour - and in my opinion the score is a misfire; if Vangelis wasn't interested, maybe the filmmakers should have gone in a different direction rather than getting Zimmer and co. to emulate the textures and timbres of the original without the melodic inspiration. As at least one other person in this thread has alluded, Ana De Arma gives a performance as K's AI girlfriend Joi that is quite luminous (both literally and figuratively) - to be fair, there is a range of terrific performances on display throughout the movie. Like the original, I believe BR 2049 is a film that will reward repeated viewing.
SG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What did Wallace's "secretary/hit-woman" say to K after she stabbed him what seemed like for the last time?
Was it "I'm the best one."
Yes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is Deckard a replicant in this film?
That question is not definitively answered on purpose.
No!
|
|
|
|
|
|
First, it was Freysa who revealed to "K" that he was not the child. How could she do it? She was present at the birth and knew who the real child was. K could have learned it from her.
True. And perhaps in keeping with the bafflingly/pointlessly elliptical nature of the narrative (or editing), the filmmakers withheld this from us. How annoying.
Also, he had at least one memory that actually was of Deckhard's daughter.
Uhhhhh.... How could this have given him the connection between Deckard and the daughter?
And there was the genetic disease the daughter had, something that also showed up on the DNA scans K searched (identical DNA for a boy and a girl, both with the genetic defect).
And this would give him the connection.... how???
And did WE know that he saw this on the scans? No, and again perhaps more annoying ellipses....
I think K made the connection when he remembered Stelline's reaction to his memory of hiding the wooden horse - she sheds a tear because it's her own memory she sees...
SG
All of the above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I saw it on Blu-Ray for the first time a couple of days ago, and it's one of the few recent films that I've seen that actually made an impression on me - to the extent that, I'd like to watch it again. It's not perfect, but I do think it's a worthy successor to Ridley Scott's 1982 original in most ways that matter. Yes, it's a tad overlong - even Ridley Scott has said he would have cut half an hour - and in my opinion the score is a misfire; if Vangelis wasn't interested, maybe the filmmakers should have gone in a different direction rather than getting Zimmer and co. to emulate the textures and timbres of the original without the melodic inspiration. As at least one other person in this thread has alluded, Ana De Arma gives a performance as K's AI girlfriend Joi that is quite luminous (both literally and figuratively) - to be fair, there is a range of terrific performances on display throughout the movie. Like the original, I believe BR 2049 is a film that will reward repeated viewing.
SG
Right on review!
They could have effectively shortened the film by reducing Leto's scenes which detracted from the story.
Brm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What did Wallace's "secretary/hit-woman" say to K after she stabbed him what seemed like for the last time?
Was it "I'm the best one."
That's what I remember...
Interesting. In the dvd release, this line was much more audible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey! Why was K in deep doo-doo after visiting Ana?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time to move on, David.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
