Maybe the Peugeot is his own?
Do you mean the car at the very end? Maybe he stole it, maybe the replicants had a spare car.
Maybe the Peugeot is his own?
Sorry if this has been asked but I haven't looked becuase I don't want to spoil the movie. Do you need to see the first one to understand this one?
I mean I will if I have to but if I don't then that's cool.
Yeah, this is not a movie that should be watched without seeing the first one.My viewing of 2049 was significantly enhanced by watching the first one.
Sorry if this has been asked but I haven't looked becuase I don't want to spoil the movie. Do you need to see the first one to understand this one?
I mean I will if I have to but if I don't then that's cool.
Sorry if this has been asked but I haven't looked becuase I don't want to spoil the movie. Do you need to see the first one to understand this one?
I mean I will if I have to but if I don't then that's cool.
Sorry if this has been asked but I haven't looked becuase I don't want to spoil the movie. Do you need to see the first one to understand this one?
I mean I will if I have to but if I don't then that's cool.
Sorry if this has been asked but I haven't looked becuase I don't want to spoil the movie. Do you need to see the first one to understand this one?
I mean I will if I have to but if I don't then that's cool.
How is it not for his benefit if it leads to him hiring a prostitute guilt-free? Having it be her idea is exactly what a dude would want. It's in line with K telling her that she doesn't have to say the things he obviously wants to hear.Her desire to be "real" and the way we're shown her interacting with rain, etc. isn't for K's benefit. There isn't anything indicating that K is awkward arounding dismissing the prostitute or even wanted said prostitute hired, either.
Joi is definitely very focused on K, both because of her programming and because, well, he's the only person she knows, so to speak.
I don't think she realize a Replicant was about to stride into her office and murder her.
Sorry if this has been asked but I haven't looked becuase I don't want to spoil the movie. Do you need to see the first one to understand this one?
I mean I will if I have to but if I don't then that's cool.
That was one of my biggest issues with the movie, these odd moments of levity that Villeneuve put in there that contradict the first film's vibe and are jarring to the audience. Death in the original film is played very seriously and this one had moments like that and when Wallace's little CG robot things are "playing" in the water, just seemed out-of-step with what the original film was and the tone this one is trying to set.Also such disrespect by having Luv bonk her head on the desk after she opened up her computer, people laughed at that and I was like wat
So...is Stelline actually Deckard's daughter? Is the reason we don't get to see her reaction at the end to keep the ambiguity that she might not be?
I took the comments on it being rare to get an older model to mean that they commonly get more recent models (Hope that makes sense)I dont recall anywhere in the film where it explicity shows a newer model being retired for disobeying, even though Ks boss pretty much says so with the 48 hour comment.
This movie has some ambiguity to it but I don't think that's one. From K finding out it was a girl, from a Replicant who was there when she was born, to that scene when she's crying as she watches her old memory being played via K, I think there's no question it's her.
How can two replicants have a baby?
Or how could a replicant and a human have a baby?
They're not machines made of metal, they're organic beings, designed in the image of humans. Artificial humans, in a way. There's some crazy shit in this universe, it isn't that far fetched a replicant could be created for (inter)breeding.
I totally agree, I'm just wondering how she ended up in the glass dome. Clearly it wasn't built for her by her parents if she is Deckard's daughter. If she was in the orphanage (as her reaction to the memory seems to imply - how else would K have that memory after all), how did she end up having such a (comparatively comfortable) life? The replicants seemed keen on keeping her identity a secret, so how did she end up there?
Yeah, you might be right. That would be better. I don't want to believe that Villeneuve and co misunderstood their own character.
But man. Is it tragic that K ended up believing that she didn't love him. They were so cute together. :'(
I wish William Sanderson was in this movie. I forget if his character died.
The conversation with Wallace and Deckard towards the end basically confirmed Deckard is a replicant, right?
Wait.. Joi was a software product designed to fall in love with whoever purchased her as a companion.
So that would mean
The baby would have a "soul"? And be a real human?
So...is Stelline actually Deckard's daughter? Is the reason we don't get to see her reaction at the end to keep that ambiguous?
Wait.. Joi was a software product designed to fall in love with whoever purchased her as a companion. That's basically her point, her programming. .
Not at all. Wallace hinted at the possibility, nothing more.
The conversation with Wallace and Deckard towards the end basically confirmed Deckard is a replicant, right?
So that would mean
The baby would have a "soul"? And be a real human?
No. Wallace admitted he has no idea if he's a replicant or not. There was a recent interview with Denis and Ridley, Ridley was adamant he is but Denis said he loves that we don't know, and I think he wanted to preserve that ambiguity here.
My reading of Deckard's reaction was MUCH different than yours then.
And a real hero!
That's more of a philosophical question. A soul is a religious concept. I guess the replibaby would either still be considered a Replicant or usher in a new species altogether. I'm reminded of A.I.'s coda where (A.I. spoilers)the AI take over the planet after humanity goes extinct.
Whether you like em or not, it seems movies about artificial intelligence always leave you thinking.
I wouldn't spoil myself the exact circumstances if I were you but I'll just say "yes".Is rachel in this movie? If yes in what capacity? Thanks.
The "I know what's real line" is pretty unambiguous in the context of the film.
Oh, does anyone else feel like Wallace's character was wasted a bit.
I don't know why it just hit me that WS also played Farnum in Deadwood.I wish William Sanderson was in this movie. I forget if his character died.
Well I guess what I find interesting is that there is no way to really prove that a replicant has a conscious, right?
I took the comments on it being rare to get an older model to mean that they commonly get more recent models (Hope that makes sense)
I think thats a question for the viewer to interpret, much like whether Deckard is human or replicant - does it make a difference?