Blade Runner 2049 - Part 3

[TheVileOne]

That's pretty cool that they did bring in Sean Young to perform that scene. Props for that.

 

[dark_b]

my post was confusing. that is not her. Loren Petais was the body double. Sean Young was on set.
''Since her son was on the film as a production assistant, "Sean Young got to be on set while actress Loren Peta acted out the performance that would be the foundation for the effects work. And later, both Peta and Young spent a day in Budapest in facial motion-capture rigs, with both women performing Rachael’s scene in the film", according to reporting on io9.''
https://www.fxguide.com/featured/mpc-replicating-rachael-in-blade-runner-2049/

 

[JtheDreamer]

Just saw this. I'm kinda torn.

I like how the original film didn't really put plot at the forefront. It was so simple, and it just reveled in its noir atmosphere and theatricality.

But here, the film pushes its simplistic story to the forefront with a focus on a drawn out predictable mystery, and some of the long atmospheric scenes, while alluring and gorgeous, don't entertain the way the first does with its more noirish theatrical sensibilities. 2049 is a lot more dry. Just compare Tyrrell with Leto, or the villains. And then on top of that, it goes on for much longer.

2049 was definitely impressive in some regards. But I don't see myself rewatching it.

Also, I think Her took some of the wind out of 2049's sails when it comes to providing an interesting look at the future.

It's extremely dry.

The original had eccentric characters like Gaff and JF Sebastian to break things up a bit. Hell even replicant Roy Batty was entertaining.

 

[Gold Samurai]

movie is out for over 2 weeks so not going to hide this into spoilers.

Sean Young performance in the first had an uncanny feel to it. Her fake cgi face in the new one was not a problem when they show her. I mean the cgi face was obvious cgi. but still good enough for that moment.

SNIP

The eyes are always a dead giveaway but this is just incredible. It looks like they kept the eyes of Loren maybe that's why it's so believable.

 

[TheVileOne]

my post was confusing. that is not her. Loren Petais was the body double. Sean Young was on set.
''Since her son was on the film as a production assistant, "Sean Young got to be on set while actress Loren Peta acted out the performance that would be the foundation for the effects work. And later, both Peta and Young spent a day in Budapest in facial motion-capture rigs, with both women performing Rachael’s scene in the film", according to reporting on io9.''
https://www.fxguide.com/featured/mpc-replicating-rachael-in-blade-runner-2049/

So in the photos it's Loren Peta, but she and Sean Young actually both performed it?

 

[Consona]

 

[OutOfBoose]

Came to say that Rachel CGI was absolutely fantastic. Insanely hard to pull off.

 

[Faora]

Device for Joi.

 

[Iceman]

Came to say that Rachel CGI was absolutely fantastic. Insanely hard to pull off.

Yes very impressive.

 

[Faora]

Beautiful parallel.

 

[Pennywise]

Saw the film yesterday, and I thought it was really good! 8.5/10 would be my rating!

Visuals, score, acting was really good! Only part I didn't really like was Jared Leto.

 

[Faora]

Joi (Ana de Armas). New promo.

 

[InvisibleWoman]

Joi (Ana de Armas). New promo.

Beautiful.

There's a feauturette on YouTube called "Experience Joi" (sorry I don't know how to embed on my mobile but you can find it by just typing that into YouTube) and it's really interesting. Shows they cut some scenes including one where...

Spoiler

Joi tells K she loves him when they first reach Las Vegas. He replies she doesn't need to say that and she says "I know". Guess they decided it had more impact to have her say it as she dies? Also perhaps to leave her more ambiguous. Joi saying "I know" kind of establishes that she's not just saying what he wants to hear and answers that question

 

[Faora]

Beautiful.

There's a feauturette on YouTube called "Experience Joi" (sorry I don't know how to embed on my mobile but you can find it by just typing that into YouTube) and it's really interesting. Shows they cut some scenes including one where...

Spoiler

Joi tells K she loves him when they first reach Las Vegas. He replies she doesn't need to say that and she says "I know". Guess they decided it had more impact to have her say it as she dies? Also perhaps to leave her more ambiguous. Joi saying "I know" kind of establishes that she's not just saying what he wants to hear and answers that question

Here.

[YT]8l3rK4ZCZOE[/YT]

I really like how you deeply analyze K and Joi relationship.

Also here interesting video.

[YT]yw3BQgY8fBk[/YT]

 

[InvisibleWoman]

Here.

[YT]8l3rK4ZCZOE[/YT]

I really like how you deeply analyze K and Joi relationship.

Also here interesting video.

[YT]yw3BQgY8fBk[/YT]

Ah thank you! I didn't know how to post them.

I think their relationship is the most interesting and complex of the entire film. It's the whole question of "what is real?". I think it also made me realise I'm a lot less cynical than I thought I was. I could have concluded that she was just telling him what he wanted to hear, but I've clearly decided she had a soul and was as "real" as any human.

 

[Marvolo]

Humans are made up of their experiences and memories so if a human can be molded and "made" by memories and experiences I don't see why Joi couldn't be also. So put me in the camp that believes she had a "soul"

 

[TheVileOne]

I dunno. I think there's a difference between the Replicants and an iPhone which was basically what Joi was. She was a holographic Siri.

I dunno. I don't think the video made solid arguments. Your Amazon account knows what you are looking at and like too and then makes recommendations of other products to buy. That doesn't mean your Amazon account has a soul. If it's just a highly advanced AI program, it could be listening in on the conversations and basically acting like your Amazon account and recommending you and encouraging you to do things based off of what it has seen you do to appear more real even though it's really not.

 

[InvisibleWoman]

I dunno. I think there's a difference between the Replicants and an iPhone which was basically what Joi was. She was a holographic Siri.

I dunno. I don't think the video made solid arguments. Your Amazon account knows what you are looking at and like too and then makes recommendations of other products to buy. That doesn't mean your Amazon account has a soul. If it's just a highly advanced AI program, it could be listening in on the conversations and basically acting like your Amazon account and recommending you and encouraging you to do things based off of what it has seen you do to appear more real even though it's really not.

Pft. My Amazon account has plenty of soul.

Your opinion is quite valid. Such is the beauty of this movie. Allows for different interpretation.

 

[DeadPresident]

The main point is if a sentient being reproduces authentic reactions to environmental stimulus, whether it's really human or not, at what point does it become almost indistinguishable?

At some stage, given sufficiently idiosyncratic and unique behavioral responses, which is all that humans actually are, a robot or any other thing exhibiting the same characteristics could be considered 'real'. The concept of a soul in robotic terms goes back to Asimov popularizing it, and I buy into the idea that if it's sufficiently complex, eventually it becomes the same thing whether it's exhibited by a biological human being or not.

 

[Faora]

"Blade Runner 2049" press-conference in Tokyo. October 23.
Director Denis Villeneuve, Harrison Ford, Ana de Armas and Sylvia Hoyeks.

 

[InvisibleWoman]

The main point is if a sentient being reproduces authentic reactions to environmental stimulus, whether it's really human or not, at what point does it become almost indistinguishable?

At some stage, given sufficiently idiosyncratic and unique behavioral responses, which is all that humans actually are, a robot or any other thing exhibiting the same characteristics could be considered 'real'. The concept of a soul in robotic terms goes back to Asimov popularizing it, and I buy into the idea that if it's sufficiently complex, eventually it becomes the same thing whether it's exhibited by a biological human being or not.

Agree. Beautifully said.

 

[InvisibleWoman]

"Blade Runner 2049" press-conference in Tokyo. October 23.
Director Denis Villeneuve, Harrison Ford, Ana de Armas and Sylvia Hoyeks.

Thanks for these, Faora!

Does anyone have the "art of the movie" book? I was tempted to buy it off Amazon but at £39.99 it's quite pricey. Is it worth it?

 

[DACrowe]

It's extremely dry.

The original had eccentric characters like Gaff and JF Sebastian to break things up a bit. Hell even replicant Roy Batty was entertaining.

Roy Batty was the best character in any of the Blade Runner movies. I might even go ahead and throw in Westworld and Her, as others have mentioned both.

With that said, I think Joi and Luv are pretty great characters in 2049 and both leave you wondering exactly what their whole or real motivations were, and how human they really are, or their perceptions. I think it is a bit too easy to ding 2049, especially as Deckard was never exactly its strongest selling point either, nor was its plot, which is why the movie does have an awkward pace that kind of deflates in the third act other than for Roy Batty's big moments.

 

[DACrowe]

I dunno. I think there's a difference between the Replicants and an iPhone which was basically what Joi was. She was a holographic Siri.

I dunno. I don't think the video made solid arguments. Your Amazon account knows what you are looking at and like too and then makes recommendations of other products to buy. That doesn't mean your Amazon account has a soul. If it's just a highly advanced AI program, it could be listening in on the conversations and basically acting like your Amazon account and recommending you and encouraging you to do things based off of what it has seen you do to appear more real even though it's really not.

I saw a piece online somewhere that argued both sides but came down on she was real, and made interesting points. While K clearly decides that it was a lie what with the billboard Joi saying "Joe," and then deciding to go [blackout]give his life to save Deckard's[/blackout], Joi very well could just be the next generation where artificial intelligence is giving life to artificial intelligence. And just because the Replicants view her as lesser, it raises a question of whether they're any less misguided than the humans like Robin Wright who think K (or Roy Batty) have no souls?

And it comes down to her choosing to let herself be deleted off the console. That isn't what K wanted to hear, but she insisted anyway, so I am very open to her being sentient, even if she is less independent or self-aware as K is.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Just saw this. I'm kinda torn.

I like how the original film didn't really put plot at the forefront. It was so simple, and it just reveled in its noir atmosphere and theatricality.

But here, the film pushes its simplistic story to the forefront with a focus on a drawn out predictable mystery, and some of the long atmospheric scenes, while alluring and gorgeous, don't entertain the way the first does with its more noirish theatrical sensibilities. 2049 is a lot more dry. Just compare Tyrrell with Leto, or the villains. And then on top of that, it goes on for much longer.

2049 was definitely impressive in some regards. But I don't see myself rewatching it.

Also, I think Her took some of the wind out of 2049's sails when it comes to providing an interesting look at the future.

Very much agree.