Give ne back my hat!

Bladerunner 2049

Apparently people were expecting explosions every 10 minutes or something, because that's what Disney-Marvel & Hollywood have trained them to expect from a SciFi movie.

Go see it, btw.
Permalink Send private email xampl9 
October 9th, 2017 9:53am
Oh!

I heard it was terrible and everyone hated it. But if that criticism came from Millenial JJ Abrams fans looking for lens flare and explosions, then it's useless criticism.

So maybe I'll see it then.
Permalink Reality Check 
October 9th, 2017 10:11am
The pace is about the same as the 1st film.

Spoilers begin:

There's no question about who is/isn't a replicant.  In K's case, we're seeing what it's like to live as a replicant in a society of/for humans.

Interesting thing to watch for - when he goes back to the tree, look at the hole that was dug.  The sides are perfectly straight and there's no pile of dirt nearby.
Permalink Send private email xampl9 
October 9th, 2017 10:34am
It was good, but I really thought the close up shots of the gay rape scenes was a bit over the top and didn't add anything to the story line.
Permalink Want fries with that? 
October 10th, 2017 9:01am
I have some friends who loved the original so they went and saw the new one. They hated it. Said it was too slow and a straight white male fantasy. Then they realized that the original was also a slow moving straight white male fantasy. And Deckard kinda raped Rachel. So now they hate the original too. Then they went to a modern art exhibit.

This is a true story.
Permalink MS 
October 11th, 2017 12:13pm
That is a good story and I believe it.

A common theme in science fiction is the question whether robots, androids, replicants and clones are human and have rights. The premise is usually that legally they viewed are machines and should have as many rights as an inanimate sex doll or fleshlight, and to suggest otherwise, and view them thus as slaves and victims of rape, is absurd because it threatens the fabric of society based on robot or clone labor. Rights for robots? What's next? We give rights to gears and pistons?

If a scifi fan requires that the protagonist be a SJW PC good guy living in a utopia, then the genre of dystopian scifi is probably not a good fit for them.
Permalink Reality Check 
October 11th, 2017 1:45pm
Regarding the original.

Deckard kisses Rachel. Rachel doesn't want to be kissed, and tries to leave. Deckard runs ahead towards the door, punches it shut, and forces her up against a wall. She begins to cry and  whimper. He kisses her again. He tells her to kiss him. She says she can't. He repeats. She complies. He then feeds her additional lines. She submits, enthusiastically.

All to a porn sounding sax score from Vangelis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjO8wsjPqbg

Rape? Or seduction.

Consensus today is rape. Back then seduction, due to the slow sex music. However, with a scary soundtrack it would be considered rape back then.

In the book it is made very clear that it is rape. Deckard defensively explains that it is not rape because Rachel is not a human being and is incapable of refusing consent.

The way the movie is shot and the way Rachel eventually enthusiastically complies suggests that the Director's take is that as a replicant she does not actually have free will. She exists to serve. And thus Deckard is right, it is not rape because she is not human.
Permalink Reality Check 
October 11th, 2017 2:06pm
In the book Deckard is having second thoughts about killing replicants. He is wondering if they are sentient or human. He speaks to another Blade Runner about this problem. The other Blade Runner tells him that what he does to deal with this is rape replicants. In the process of raping replicants he has discovered that replicants are not real people because if you command them forcefully enough they will always submit, and real humans don't do that. Thus raping is a good test to tell if replicants are human. By regularly raping them he is able to kill them with a clean conscience, knowing they are not human but merely robots that exist only to obey.

Deckard rapes Rachel hoping to achieve this same result. Instead, his being a fool, he falls in love with her. This leads to his doom. Because she is not a human. He never should have fallen in love with a robot. Robots are not capable of true emotion.
Permalink Reality Check 
October 11th, 2017 2:10pm
Intriguing fan fic.
Permalink , Cup 
October 11th, 2017 4:00pm
Yes, a basic understanding of the genre tropes and themes at play (scifi, cyberpunk, noir detective) explains why the rape scene is important to the film. However many people are starting to think depicting rape -even if it is portrayed as an immoral act- is unacceptable. Game of Thrones got flack for this.

I'm not sure if I'm on board with that or not but certainly in a 35 year old sci-fi film that is explicitly questioning what it is to be human based on source material that also has it, I'm willing to give it a pass.
Permalink MS 
October 11th, 2017 4:08pm
The whole point is to ask the question of whether it is rape if the partner doesn't exist or isn't sentient or isn't an actual natural animal. (To allow for horse rape being rape but I'd prefer to put aside beastiality issues to simplify the discussion.)

Is it rape if you beat off to a Manga comic book?

Apparently some SJWs now would say that yes, that is rape, because the fictional character can't and thus did not consent.
Permalink Reality Check 
October 11th, 2017 4:30pm
That may seem stupid, but in much of the world it is prosecutable to beat off to cartoon porn fan fic of the Simpsons.
Permalink Reality Check 
October 11th, 2017 4:31pm
Mmmmmmmmm donuts.....
Permalink Qaz 
October 12th, 2017 4:39pm

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other topics: October, 2017 Other topics: October, 2017 Recent topics Recent topics