we need a Voight-Kampff test for boobs, imho
― StanM, Monday, 15 July 2019 11:52 (four years ago) link
my mother? let me tell you about my mother!
― j., Monday, 15 July 2019 16:30 (four years ago) link
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EAQimMgUYAAsG4j?format=jpg&name=small
RIP
― calzino, Wednesday, 24 July 2019 19:34 (four years ago) link
― Le Bateau Ivre, Wednesday, 24 July 2019 19:37 (four years ago) link
Anyone in the Bay Area: previously announced screening that happens at the Alamo Drafthouse on Monday Aug. 19th. A few tickets left:
https://drafthouse.com/sf/tickets/big-screen-science-blade-runner-the-final-cut/0801/31597/showtimes
― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 24 July 2019 21:39 (four years ago) link
caught 2049 again, not sure what edit but at least one scene missing (leto massacres investigating auditor types)
holds up better once you know whether or not gosling is our android messiah tbh
also not sure if i had settled it in my head before watching, but i think it might leave the deckard replicant question still open.......?
― phil neville jacket (darraghmac), Wednesday, 14 August 2019 22:28 (four years ago) link
My internet is down but I have a mad decent 8 gb rip on my laptop, may have to revisit this crap. the night city flying scenes are the highlight for me
― calstars, Wednesday, 14 August 2019 23:35 (four years ago) link
I really, really appreciated that the movie left it open.
― Conceptualize Wyverns (latebloomer), Thursday, 15 August 2019 00:45 (four years ago) link
I don’t know what the consensus is on 2049, BR heads seem split on whether it’s great or a bummer.I still think it’s dope. Honestly like it more with each viewing. Basically how I felt about the original.
― circa1916, Thursday, 15 August 2019 02:13 (four years ago) link
Likes this on release & been meaning to rewatch it - are there different cuts floating around or something?
― “Hakuna Matata,” a nihilist philosophy (One Eye Open), Thursday, 15 August 2019 02:17 (four years ago) link
This sucked, praise itt is baffling
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 15 August 2019 02:18 (four years ago) link
Counterpoint: it did not suck.
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 15 August 2019 02:44 (four years ago) link
otherwise swimming in tits
― j., Thursday, 15 August 2019 03:12 (four years ago) link
Loved Dave Bautista adjusting his tiny glasses. Also, Harrison Ford throwing punches like he’s holding bowling balls in his hands. The sound of the gunshots was great too, it sounded like cannon fire.
― epistantophus, Thursday, 15 August 2019 03:55 (four years ago) link
quietly proud of this, apart from quietly.
― Andrew Farrell, Thursday, 15 August 2019 08:47 (four years ago) link
/also not sure if i had settled it in my head before watching, but i think it might leave the deckard replicant question still open.......?/I really, really appreciated that the movie left it open.
― (Appears only as a corpse) (bizarro gazzara), Thursday, 15 August 2019 08:57 (four years ago) link
if anything the movie is a 164-minute riposte to the idea that that question ever needed answering in the first place
― (Appears only as a corpse) (bizarro gazzara), Thursday, 15 August 2019 08:59 (four years ago) link
This was great, perhaps even more compelling than the original. Catching it on the silver screen when it came out likely helped.
― pomenitul, Thursday, 15 August 2019 09:04 (four years ago) link
otm
― an incoherent crustacean (MatthewK), Thursday, 15 August 2019 09:18 (four years ago) link
I complained to a friend that it was hollow spectacle with no substance, he said that's exactly why he liked it.
― The Pingularity (ledge), Thursday, 15 August 2019 09:19 (four years ago) link
Counterpoint - it was really terrible, but also I would like to rewatch it - some stupidly long movies can be better appreciated as meditative when I can stop the viewing for a piss.
― Andrew Farrell, Thursday, 15 August 2019 09:29 (four years ago) link
it’s an elegant extension of the themes of the first film which examines philip k dick’s obsession with what it means to be human from a couple of interesting new anglesi dunno what else anyone could want from it tbh
― (Appears only as a corpse) (bizarro gazzara), Thursday, 15 August 2019 09:34 (four years ago) link
The artificiality of all created life, especially the paradox of a freely autonomous being set in motion like clockwork by a Deus absconditus-type figure that happens to be 'human', further destabilizing this very category in the process… I fail to see how it lacks substance.
― pomenitul, Thursday, 15 August 2019 09:39 (four years ago) link
it’s all substance! it’s a really clever script!
― (Appears only as a corpse) (bizarro gazzara), Thursday, 15 August 2019 09:40 (four years ago) link
The artificiality of all created life, especially the paradox of a freely autonomous being set in motion like clockwork by a Deus absconditus-type figure that happens to be 'human', further destabilizing this very category in the process
This fog looks solid but when I try to grasp it it just slips through my fingers.
― The Pingularity (ledge), Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:13 (four years ago) link
Put differently: human makes machine. Machine not alive, by definition. Yet this particular machine is so life-like that it might as well be alive, even human.
First question: does this kind of artificial creation differ significantly from 'natural' birth?
Second question: if human can achieve this, is human not a manner of god, or God?
Third question: if humans can create other 'humans' in this fashion, could it be that the original 'humans' were also created in a similar fashion, by a demiurge that has since retired?
All hypothetical, of course.
― pomenitul, Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:25 (four years ago) link
I would totally watch that film, but it wasn't showing anywhere.
― Andrew Farrell, Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:35 (four years ago) link
No, No, and No.
― The Pingularity (ledge), Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:39 (four years ago) link
That settles it then.
― pomenitul, Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:40 (four years ago) link
I mean the first question is not uninteresting, but fleshing it out as the first film did (intentionally or otherwise) in terms of a master/slave relationship is much more compelling than the religious angle.
― The Pingularity (ledge), Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:42 (four years ago) link
I'm more interested in the latter two tbh.
Anyhow, I don't recall the problem of birth being foregrounded in the first film. It's been a while, though.
― pomenitul, Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:43 (four years ago) link
Like, the whole master/slave thing is just… how things are? It's description rather than speculation, which is more exciting to me.
― pomenitul, Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:45 (four years ago) link
have you missed the central premise of 2049, which is that the 'humans' can now seemingly procreate themselves, or is that built in to 'as well to be human'?
― phil neville jacket (darraghmac), Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:47 (four years ago) link
tbh i cannot see how you could have looked forward to this based on the original (well, whichever original) and then not thought it a miraculously worthy addition.
imo yr objections would almost have to be objections in principle.
― phil neville jacket (darraghmac), Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:49 (four years ago) link
You're conversing with ledge, right?
― pomenitul, Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:50 (four years ago) link
How should we and how will we treat artificial beings is pretty speculative?
― The Pingularity (ledge), Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:52 (four years ago) link
xp first q was (clumsily) checking with your three pillar questions to see if that element was taken into account
second post was a fuck yall to anyone claiming this wasnt excellent
― phil neville jacket (darraghmac), Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:53 (four years ago) link
xp its not speculative in the movie, is it
ofc you could argue that any future/science fiction is a question, but
― phil neville jacket (darraghmac), Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:54 (four years ago) link
Ah, I see. Then yes, at least to my mind.
― pomenitul, Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:56 (four years ago) link
the speculation is in whether that's how things should be or will be.
― The Pingularity (ledge), Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:56 (four years ago) link
you may argue that the answer to those questions is clearly a) definitely not and b) most likely.
― The Pingularity (ledge), Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:59 (four years ago) link
Sounds like there's a bit of substance there after all.
― pomenitul, Thursday, 15 August 2019 11:00 (four years ago) link
in the original, yep :)
― The Pingularity (ledge), Thursday, 15 August 2019 11:07 (four years ago) link
I would watch 2049 again, I only really appreciated the original the second or third time around.
― The Pingularity (ledge), Thursday, 15 August 2019 11:08 (four years ago) link
It’s not like those questions didn’t carry over into 2049.
― pomenitul, Thursday, 15 August 2019 11:10 (four years ago) link
ledge, if you rewatch id be interested to see what elements you think it falls down on (ito whats not yknow finn-critique "imo they shouldve done this but where you think whats there botches or is lacking)
― phil neville jacket (darraghmac), Thursday, 15 August 2019 11:12 (four years ago) link
I do remember the obviously sexist elements (low maintenance pleasure gal, giant blue tits) being pretty offputting.
― The Pingularity (ledge), Thursday, 15 August 2019 11:15 (four years ago) link
It’s a dystopia iirc.
― pomenitul, Thursday, 15 August 2019 11:19 (four years ago) link
i’d be with you there if the ‘low maintenance pleasure gal’ didn’t represent one of the most interesting existential questions in a movie which is filled with them
― (Appears only as a corpse) (bizarro gazzara), Thursday, 15 August 2019 11:21 (four years ago) link
i remember, just last night, thinking about how ilx would engage with depiction of things they did not themselves agree with in this movie, a work of fiction showing bad things that clearly invites us to think about these bad things as bad things
― phil neville jacket (darraghmac), Thursday, 15 August 2019 11:21 (four years ago) link