Bruce Springsteen
Member
Whats the name of the track that is playing when he is outside and first meets the pink haired girl
A philosophical zombie or p-zombie in the philosophy of mind and perception is a hypothetical being that from the outside is indistinguishable from a normal human being but lacks conscious experience, qualia, or sentience.[1] For example, if a philosophical zombie was poked with a sharp object it would not feel any pain sensation, yet could behave exactly as if it does feel pain (it may say "ouch", recoil from the stimulus, and say that it is feeling pain).
The ending sequence was phenomenal in my theater too but for certain music tracks like the opening, the speakers just rattled like crazy and ruined actually being able to hear it.
All the complaints about loud sound systems... One would think cinemas had learned from Interstellar or Dunkirk, and adjust volume after a test screen.
Whats the name of the track that is playing when he is outside and first meets the pink haired girl
In BR1, why is Holden doing a VK test on Leon? Either he already knows he's on the run since they got their files, in which case he could just shoot him, or they don't know yet they're on the run and he's just investigating.
t.
ii) Where were they at the end with that fight in all the water? I lost the thread there. The replicant lady said "We are going home" so I assume she was bringing Deckard offworld? Was that there? Or were they just on the way?
They were en route to the spaceport when K shot them down and they ended up fighting on the Seawall shown early in the movie.
You think her behavior in that scene was in line with how people behave when their partner arrives back from home work? Did you not think there was an element of artifice to the whole scene? In many ways, it was evoking the 1950's era with the music, Joi's initial banter and outfit.
I think her emotions were born from her own AI development but were also planted. The two are not mutually exclusive.
The hijacked shuttle was found abandoned off the coast, and Dave Holden decided to test the recent intake of employees at Tyrell on the assumption that the decision of the androids to risk the return to earth had something to do with Tyrell. This is explained in the dialogue.
It's supposed to be an information gathering visit on the new Nexus-6 model, though it turns out differently because of Rachael.
The test is slow and doesn't really work as a plot device as well in film as it does in the novel. Fancher in his screenplay instead has Rick throw Zhora off-guard by posing as a sex pest just wanting to get into her dressing room. At this point he has no idea where Leon, Pris and Roy are so he's still trying to gather information. He kills her when she displays superhuman strength and combat training and runs. Leon attacks Rick and is killed by Rachael. Pris attacks Rick when cornered in the Bradbury Building, and is shot by Rick. Roy plays cat and mouse with Rick and, after delivering his speech on the roof, allows himself to die.
Freysa (with one eye) tells Joe he must kill Rick so Wallace can't get to him and thence to Freysa.
Why would a company selling girlfriend holograms for lonely dudes make the things actually sentient? So that some people shell out for one only to find it doesn't even like them? How many Jois would actually love their owners, given free will and sentience?
It's certainly what it feels like.
Either Deckard is a replicant and it comes across as his own clumsy attempt at love (and I don't think the rest of the film supports him being a replicant besides that; it takes 2049 to suggest a reason for it to make sense to me), or he's a human and it absolutely feels like rape.
The way he pushes her against the wall, tells her what to say... it really feels like he's almost talking to a child/teen not well versed in sexual experiences.
Why would a company selling girlfriend holograms for lonely dudes make the things actually sentient? So that some people shell out for one only to find it doesn't even like them? How many Jois would actually love their owners, given free will and sentience?
But then his behaviour in that scene feels entirely at odds with the first half of the film. He's cynical and dryly funny early on and then when he kills Zhora seems totally despondent (and then you know, you start to ask 'if he's killing something that bleeds and looks like him and fears for his life, is he human after all' etc etc).
And then he goes home and forces himself on Rachael and then they're in love. It's out of character with how Deckard is portrayed before that; this sociopathic argument only seems to come after the fact.
I think if there was more of a bridge between them having sex and running away together in love I'd buy it a tad more; like I said, BR2049 recontexualises that scene for me in a way that makes sense.
Went to see this last night. Was a little underwhelmed but enjoyed it. Going to see it again anyways. I have a few questions:
i) Why didn't K just look at his eye and see if he had a serial number? Surely if he was "born" he wouldn't have had that.
Assuming the serial number is in his eye for his model. I don't recall it being established that the eye serial number was present for any model other than the Nexus 8s; the 6s and below couldn't have had them or the VK test would have been completely redundant.
Assuming the serial number is in his eye for his model. I don't recall it being established that the eye serial number was present for any model other than the Nexus 8s; the 6s and below couldn't have had them or the VK test would have been completely redundant.
I also got the impression during the movie that the eye serials were unique to Tyrell model 8. However now that I think about it, didn't Wallace's demo model in Nexus Dawn have one? Or am I remembering wrong?
But then his behaviour in that scene feels entirely at odds with the first half of the film. He's cynical and dryly funny early on and then when he kills Zhora seems totally despondent (and then you know, you start to ask 'if he's killing something that bleeds and looks like him and fears for his life, is he human after all' etc etc).
And then he goes home and forces himself on Rachael and then they're in love. It's out of character with how Deckard is portrayed before that; this sociopathic argument only seems to come after the fact.
I think if there was more of a bridge between them having sex and running away together in love I'd buy it a tad more; like I said, BR2049 recontexualises that scene for me in a way that makes sense.
This is exactly my take on JOI.Joi's actions are not relevant to the question of whether she's conscious or not.
In philosophy, there's this notion of a philosophical zombie:
So it's up to the interpretation of each person. There will never be a definite answer because we don't know what consciousness is and can't even prove we ourselves are conscious.
There are theories out there like panpsychism that posits that consciousness is a fundamental force of the universe like gravity. Even atoms might have some sort of proto-conscious experience, and very complex systems that process information (like brains) would be a lot more conscious. Maybe your computer has some sort of subjective experience. It might not be anything like a human. Emotions aren't necessarily linked with consciousness.
So we can imagine a case in which Joi is conscious but feels no emotion, another in which she experiences both, and maybe even one where she has emotions but isn't conscious of it at all. Well, that last one I'm not sure is even possible but it's interesting to think about.
This is exactly my take on JOI.
She displays emotion, but is not feeling it. She's a mimic. My take on the ending ad is K realizing he's catfish'd himself.
Also gotta say that Jared Leto sounded almost exactly like Jeffrey Combs (Weyoun from Star Trek DS9, Reanimator) in his tone and overall line delivery. Just watched that series and couldn't help but think of him any time Leto spoke. Weird.
I can't buy it because of that /one/ scene.
If Joi is set up to do whatever her master wants then that one scene is for no one's benefit but her own.
If K's desire is for her to have autonomy, which it clearly is, isn't it possible she's developing just that? And then wouldn't it also be possible that she would love him for that?
And what are feelings exactly?
Throughout both movies we're shown the disregard the creators have toward their creations in terms of acknowledging their potential sentience.
But that's literally the point of the scene. To shatter the illusion that Joi was acting of her own independence, intelligence. Much like K recently had the illusion shattered that he isn't simply another replicant with implanted memories. The difference is that he has the ability to act on his own will
Because the corporations are playing with shit they don't understand.
Well, let's re-phrase that, they're selling sentience in shackles and they don't give a fuck.
Replicants are pretty much people since Nexus 6: 4 year lifespan, baseline test, both there to prevent the development of emotional responses that would inspire autonomy, but life found a way regardless and we had the events of BR1.
It reset due to Wallace's new models and, again, worked for a while post-blackout, but now the life form has developed again despite their efforts and there's going to be a revolution.
It seems that no matter how well they code the Replicants to obey, they will always develop beyond their master's will.
What's to say Joi isn't any different? She needs to learn, adapt, grow to become the desire of her owner, she needs to appear human to the point it's indistinguishable, and we're messing with AI here, a learning program, much like the Replicants Joi could be a time bomb waiting to happen.
I don't think Joi is fully sentient in 2049, but I think given time she could be. I think she clearly feels, is developing certain emotional responses like jealousy, resentment, anger (as we see toward the Replicant sex worker), that have no place in simply pleasing K (who gives every signal that he's just happy for her to be with him, he shows no desire to "have her", so even if it were play for his benefit the emotions are useless in terms of her programming).
I think K gave Joi the fertile ground she required to develop her own autonomy, but we only saw a hint of it as their time was taken from them. If Joi ever developed a personality "quirk", most owners would almost certainly have their unit services or reset, but K would allow it to develop.
Honestly, given what we know of the enslavement of an entire race (Replicants), I don't see it being any different with their (Tyrel/Wallace) approach to Joi.
Yeah. That's why Joi is such a crucial character. Her existence shows that humans in the BR universe have learned nothing from the Replicant fiasco. If it's not synthetic humans, it's AI's. Joi represents the early hints of the cycle repeating itself, and life's propensity to break out of its imposed restraints. It's pretty clever for them to go this route for a 2017 BR sequel; it fits on a thematic level, and in real life we are much closer to making an AI than creating a person from scratch.
Back to the Joi sentience debate, one of the crowning achievements of 2049 is how both interpretations stand up to scrutiny. (And beyond that, there is also the notion that it doesn't matter). Which side you fall on depends on your outlook and worldview. Both you and K are provided with the same question, one that is impossible to answer definitively based on the provided information. K himself goes one way, and because K himself is such a compelling character, I find myself empathizing with his decision. But what is it that he believes in the end? That in itself is ambiguous and open to many valid interpretations. I love that.
Yeah. Thats why Joi is such a crucial character. Her existence shows that humans in the BR universe have learned nothing from the Replicant fiasco. If its not synthetic humans, its AIs. Joi represents the early hints of the cycle repeating itself, and lifes propensity to break out of its imposed restraints. Its pretty clever for them to go this route for a 2017 BR sequel; it fits on a thematic level, and in real life we are much closer to making an AI than creating a person from scratch.
Back to the Joi sentience debate, one of the crowning achievements of 2049 is how both interpretations stand up to scrutiny. (And beyond that, there is also the notion that it doesnt matter). Which side you fall on depends on your outlook and worldview. Both you and K are provided with the same question, one that is impossible to answer definitively based on the provided information. K himself goes one way, and because K himself is such a compelling character, I find myself empathizing with his decision. But what is it that he believes in the end? That in itself is ambiguous and open to many valid interpretations. I love that.
1 & 2 : Why do you say that Bryant and Gaff knew? How is he a replicant ? I mean if he is, he is Nexus 6, but he doesn't have the physical deterioration of what Wallace have? You contradict yourself.
Watch the whole scene leading to Luv killing Joshi. They act familiar with each other even though they have never been together previously in the movie.3. I have to watch the movie a second time to see if there are hint of that.
So I watched Enemy last night after seeing Blade Runner 2049. What a mind fuck that movie is.
That ending... yeeesh
Whats the general/overall impressions on the movie? Yay, or nay? What worked and what didnt? Etc.
Gaff throughout the first movie drops clues to Deckard being a replicant: Treats Deckard without any courtesy as one would a "Skinjob", yells out to him after Roy's death that he's done a "Man's job", and later leaves the unicorn origamy clue to let Deckard know that he is a replicant. And since Bryant is Gaff's superior, if Gaff knew, then so did Bryant.
As for Deckard, he was same model as Rachel (they were made for each other for procreation), thus he is a Nexus 7, not a Nexus 6 like Wallace. I think he and Rachel are the only 2 Nexus 7s in existence. After their experiment "fails" with Tyrell's death, they go straight to Nexus 8 which are the rebel replicants that help Deckard hide his child.
Watch the whole scene leading to Luv killing Joshi. They act familiar with each other even though they have never been together previously in the movie.
What's the general/overall impressions on the movie? Yay, or nay? What worked and what didn't? Etc.
Also gotta say that Jared Leto sounded almost exactly like Jeffrey Combs (Weyoun from Star Trek DS9, Reanimator) in his tone and overall line delivery. Just watched that series and couldnt help but think of him any time Leto spoke. Weird.
There is no way to even know if Rachels ability to reproduce was intentional.
Gaff throughout the first movie drops clues to Deckard being a replicant: Treats Deckard without any courtesy as one would a "Skinjob", yells out to him after Roy's death that he's done a "Man's job", and later leaves the unicorn origamy clue to let Deckard know that he is a replicant. And since Bryant is Gaff's superior, if Gaff knew, then so did Bryant.
As for Deckard, he was same model as Rachel (they were made for each other for procreation), thus he is a Nexus 7, not a Nexus 6 like Wallace. I think he and Rachel are the only 2 Nexus 7s in existence. After their experiment "fails" with Tyrell's death, they go straight to Nexus 8 which are the rebel replicants that help Deckard hide his child.
Coworker wants to take their kids who are in 8th grade / freshman in high school.
He's most worried about sex, the most I can remember is you see like 3 women's breasts, and it's implied they're about to have sex but don't show anything correct?
I remembered most of the violence.
Coworker wants to take their kids who are in 8th grade / freshman in high school.
He's most worried about sex, the most I can remember is you see like 3 women's breasts, and it's implied they're about to have sex but don't show anything correct?
I remembered most of the violence.
Ding ding ding.His kids have undoubtedly seen all kinds of porn by now.