Sci-Fi Blade Runner (1982) & Blade Runner: 2049 (2017)

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania
But what you seem to be missing from my posts is that this point is ambiguous in the film. Joi may like rain, or Joi may simply parrot back to K about liking rain. It is one of the central mysteries of the film that make it, like BR, so interesting.
I'm not missing anything from your posts, I just don't agree that it is ambiguous as you think it is.
 

Tiran

Ensign
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
I'm not missing anything from your posts, I just don't agree that it is ambiguous as you think it is.
Why do you think they show the second Joi copy toward the end, and K's reaction to it? So we can have an argument?
 

Gurney Man

Ensign
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Off topic as hell, but I'm going for it. Tiran, if I may, I have to humbly disagree with your assessment of the book 1984 in the regard that it hasn't come to pass outside of Maoist China. I recall growing up in the 1960's when privacy was at a premium. In the book, electronic surveillance, newspeak and double speak are at the fore. In our society today, we can't felgercarb in the woods without some form of camera watching a person. (obvious exaggeration, but I have a feeling one gets my point.) Today, electronic surveillance is literally everywhere. Every street corner, shopping mall, library, etc. Everywhere. That can be tapped into by whatever government agency has the tech and/or desire. EVEN inside one's own home if a person has a Siri, Alexa, or smartphone. Maybe not photographic tech, but an individual can certainly be listened to by someone who has the know how to do so inside of one's home. Orwellian by definition.

Then I hear the term "alternative facts" being bantied around by members of an administration. Sir, that is newspeak by definition, to the point of our buddy George spinning in his grave like a whirling dervish. Along with a meek public that takes it lying down. Sometimes I think 1984 has proven to be more prophetic than most of our religious texts, easily.


Thanks for your time and consideration, sir, and am looking forward to your rebuttal. Take care all.








"You run one time, you got yourself a set of chains. You run twice, you got yourself two sets. You ain't gonna need no third set, 'cause you gonna get your mind right...."
 

Tiran

Ensign
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Off topic as hell, but I'm going for it. Tiran, if I may, I have to humbly disagree with your assessment of the book 1984 in the regard that it hasn't come to pass outside of Maoist China. I recall growing up in the 1960's when privacy was at a premium. In the book, electronic surveillance, newspeak and double speak are at the fore. In our society today, we can't felgercarb in the woods without some form of camera watching a person. (obvious exaggeration, but I have a feeling one gets my point.) Today, electronic surveillance is literally everywhere. Every street corner, shopping mall, library, etc. Everywhere. That can be tapped into by whatever government agency has the tech and/or desire. EVEN inside one's own home if a person has a Siri, Alexa, or smartphone. Maybe not photographic tech, but an individual can certainly be listened to by someone who has the know how to do so inside of one's home. Orwellian by definition.

Then I hear the term "alternative facts" being bantied around by members of an administration. Sir, that is newspeak by definition, to the point of our buddy George spinning in his grave like a whirling dervish. Along with a meek public that takes it lying down. Sometimes I think 1984 has proven to be more prophetic than most of our religious texts, easily.


Thanks for your time and consideration, sir, and am looking forward to your rebuttal. Take care all.
Surveillance is rarely good, but I think the defining line is that there really isn't a power that can leverage surveillance to accomplish anything too dystopian. We don't have a secret police the public fearfully complies with, legal challenges to government authority work and whistleblowing is alive and well. Despotism requires power to use surveillance in a society-altering way, and that doesn't seem to be the case.

You could have an utterly open, no privacy society that completely lacked any coercion.
 
Last edited:

almostvoid

Cadet
Joined
Mar 7, 2019
Location
Newcastle Australia
To me, this film from the eighties is about as classic as sci-fi can get. I absolutely love the film noir feel, the way Los Angeles of the future is depicted, the acting of Harrison Ford and Rutger Hauer, and especially the direction of Ridley Scott.

Imho, there is a ton to discuss about this movie, from which version is better, (director's cut to me) to the different ending, all the way to whether or not anyone believes Rick Deckard is a replicant. Any of which I would be happy to debate with you.
Most people realize, this movie was lightly based on Philip K. Dick's short novel, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep", and also, imho, a better story was made for the movie than in the book.
Basically a detective story with sci-fi trappings, this movie is one that I always have listed as one of my all time favorites, along with "A Clockwork Orange". Not just in the sci-fi realm, but in motion pics in general.
Not only Ford and Hauer, but Sean Young, Daryl Hannah, William Sanderson, and Brion James lending more than just credible performances.


I would love to hear everyone's opinions of this movie........
Dick's sheep story was so different. I am glad what the director created. So original in so many ways. 2049 was a fail. Too suburban in scope. Looked good and that was about it
 
Top Bottom