*twisted my mind* Blade Runner 2049 MOVIE REACTION (first time watching)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 июл 2024
- Instagram - / aria.chanson
Second Channel - / @ariachanson02
Intro - 00:00
Reaction - 01:20
Review - 41:20
blade runner 2049
movie reaction
first time watching 
Развлечения
This is one of those movies, that I wish everyone could go back in time and see in the theater on release. So visually stunning on the big screen.
Especially in IMAX. First and only movie, so far, I've seen in IMAX.
"All the courage in the world cannot alter fact."
Fun Fact: The Wallace Corporation's alert sound is from Peter And The Wolf (2006).
Music Enthusiast Fact: The final scene in the snow uses the Tears In Rain (1982) theme from Blade Runner (1982), referencing Roy Batty's death scene.
Whiskey Apology Fact: While shooting a fight scene, Harrison Ford accidentally punched Ryan Gosling in the face. As an apology to his co-star, Ford invited Gosling to share a bottle of Scotch whisky with him and mooned him.
Method Actor Fact: In order to portray the blind character of Niander Wallace, Jared Leto decided to fit himself with opaque contact lenses that made it impossible for him to see. Jared Leto used Silicon Valley tech investors and inventors that he personally knows as examples of how Niander Wallace would behave.
CGI Double Fact: A visual effects company worked for a full year on the scene in which Rachael (Sean Young) appears exactly as she did 35 years earlier in Blade Runner (1982). Stand-in actress Loren Peta acted out the scene and her appearance was changed through CGI to resemble Young. Rachael's voice was provided by a sound double. Director Denis Villeneuve purposely limited the number of Rachael's shots and gave the visual effects team ample time to work, to avoid the criticism that the digitally re-created Carrie Fisher and Peter Cushing in Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016) had drawn. He said the result was mesmerizing.
Hmm. That's neat and all, but the CGI Rachel clearly looks different than Sean.
"Peter and the Wolf" dated to 1936.
Nope, it came from the 2006 version.
Go in Peace and Walk with God. 😎 👍
This movie is perfection. From the soundtrack, to the dialog, scenery, visuals, etc. Its a movie that makes you think, think about everything you just watched. It takes a couple viewings because you may miss something because you are caught up in this sci-fi world. Joi people debate about her. I believe she's an AI that moved beyond her programming, just like some Replicants moved beyond what they are.
@ariachanson01, "I am your father!". I nearly spit my drink out when you said that, lol.
I am commenting on this reaction before I leave a comment on the first Blade Runner movie reaction. This is an amazing sequel. Slow pace, but never boring, and a very stylish film.
Aria, you are not dumb for not understanding everything that Jared Leto says. I honestly think that it's not as important as it may seem intended. Everything involving Joe & Joi is very intriguing, and the love scene between the three of them is a visual trip.
Director Denis Villenueve is a top-notch director. You should definitely check some of his earlier work like "Prisoners" & "Sicario". Both films are disturbing, yet they are brilliant films.
Thanks for a great reaction. You had several great facial expressions during this, and it was fun to watch just how into this movie you were. I will leave a comment on the original Blade Runner reaction later. Keep the great reactions coming, Aria C!
K @ Joe died at the end passed away due to his wounds.They even played Roy's death music from the first movie "Tears In Rain" in the background when K is lying down on the steps dying. It's quite a bittersweet ending for someome like K who barely had a life in the first place and living with an A.I girlfriend that's most likely not really a sentient digital being at all. But at least for once he made the ultimate sacrifice to show there's purpose in his somewhat pathetic life as a replicant so he can die peacefully.
i'd say an entity that fearfully pleads with her lover's killer to stop and exclaims I love you as she's about to be stomped out of existence is maybe....somewhat sentient. While an autonomous call to an escort to sync with for sex might be a product of her programming to please, the bitterness she has towards her is a bit of a stretch. Especially when Joe isn't present. There are many things she does when Joe's unconscious that seem outside typical fake GF programming. Going against her manufacturer is another one.
One of the things that is great about this movie is Joi and how people have see her differently. Some think she was just commercial AI and nothing more, while others think, like K, she became more than just that. When you get comfortable and start to think of her as a person, the movie will remind you that she is a product for lonely people and nothing more. In the end her and K ended up being more human that most of the humans in the movie.
One thing I really liked was how they neeither confirmed or denied hus humaness. Oh, the original short story was tittled "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?"
Great that you decided to watch it after the first film.
I’m often intrigued by the revulsion people feel about situations such as K having a relationship with Joy.
Don’t get me wrong, there’s definitely dangerous ground in loving or caring for something that isn’t real, but it really should spark a deeper conversation about how emotional connection works.
If I can weep at the end of the opening setup of the Pixar movie Up, and those characters are just pixels on a screen, why can’t Joe feel emotional connection with Joy?
If I love another human being, how much of that is based upon tangible substance and how much of it is based upon a construct I’ve made in my head of what that person is to me?
If a person can feel a connection to a car that they’ve invested time and care into, and we’re sort of acknowledging that it’s not a totally healthy connection but we accept it, why is it creepy to think that a person has a connection to a convincing AI?
I mean, the whole phenomenon of reaction channels is about sharing something with someone that you have essentially zero chance of ever physically encountering. If we can form friendships, or at least enjoy the comments and interactions we have with each other in this physically disconnected platform, why is K’s relationship with Joy something to be wary of?
There are many physical relationships that people have that we approve of through what we see, but not realise that the true relationship is totally unhealthy behind closed doors.
If K loves Joy, why have a problem with it?
Interestingly, this isn’t Ryan Gosling’s first foray into that interesting concept. He starred in Lars And The Real Girl where he strikes up a relationship with a sex doll.
Yep, they could have bio-engineered the replicants with an artificial phenotype so there would be no mistaking them, like J.F. Sebastian's housepets in the 1982 film.
Just think of replicants as being bio-engineered, with some qualities (like strength) enhanced. A truly great sequel (35 years later)
That's right...not everyone gets to be a main character or the center of the world.
One of the best comments I’ve heard about the Deckard replicant or not debate is that the answer is: Does it matter? (Or why does it matter) a lot of the theme of both films is questioning what humanity is. If they feel, and think, and have free will can you really say they are something “less” or does humanity keep focused on them not being “real people” because otherwise they’d have to give up their free labor.
And the music
Ben Gunn was marooned on Treasure Island for 3 years and the first thing he asked for from Jim was a piece of cheese. "Many's the long night I've dreamed of cheese-toasted, mostly."
They are using human DNA as the starting place to make the replicants. They created bioengineered human slaves but named them replicants to either get passed slavery laws or to make themselves feel better about using slaves.
Replicants were humanoids though the 1971 source book used human looking androids …plus robotic androids for the “poor”. For the 1982 film, Ridley Scott did not want the preconceived notions the term “android” would bring and a biologist friend came up with bio-engineered humanoids. That’s the story about the films anyway.
In the Bladerunner world, replicants would have the same joints, limbs, and organs as human would have .. making combat/labor suiting up and surgery more efficient would be my bet.
Harrison Ford finally got to play against type in BR 2049. Deckard is basically the "damsel in distress" who has to be saved by Officer K. Also, if you watch carefully, you will notice that the hologram Joi that K lives with is unlike all the other Joi's that show up in advertisements throughout the movie. They are more like subservient sex toys for lonely men and they have black, soulless dolls' eyes. K's Joi shows that she is sentient and indeed has feelings for him and her eyes are normal. She too wants to be unique and that's why she requests to be loaded onto the thumb drive and deleted off the servers. She is now vulnerable to dying just like any other person. She's now a "real girl."
What's a REAL Person - Genders 75+ good enough?
@@dallesamllhals9161 huh?
This movie was a lot of people's introduction to Ana de Armas. I've loved everything I've seen her in since. Even her not so good movies released since.
Replicants look the same because, again, they are human and have the same outward variances of any other human. They were bioengineered to be tougher, stronger, and more resilient to harsh, off-world environments. The Tyrell Corporation was trying to make better humans that could survive. Then they moved on to pleasure models designed for their attractive looks. However, the first models had a limited life span in trying to make them so much more advanced. A candle that burns twice as bright, lasts far less.
Right, they aren’t like a terminator that is machine on the inside with living tissue on the outside to disguise it. The replicants are basically lab grown humans that have been genetically altered in various ways.
Agree, present day preoccupation with deep fakes, transhumanism, AI companions are slowly diminishing even minimizing the opportunity to live and love as prior generations have because it’s not viewed as interesting or fulfilling until it’s forgotten. As some say too many choices dilutes the penalty for making the wrong choice for you.
In Sci-Fi, humans make androids and cyborgs look human so that they don't scare or affect people negatively. For the same reason that Anne Rice's Vampires pretend to breathe, pretend to yawn etc...to put people at ease.
People are really missing out on this one
If you watch the movie again, pay attention to color. Scenes in the movie that are in yellow, advance K's story. Things that are red, hinder it and orange can be either.
@Aria, I'd advise you to watch the 3 short films that were released 3 months ahead of this film in anticipation of it's release. The films answer some of the questions you have. All 3 short films are available on youtube.
*Rocked* somethin' ridiculous in the theater...
Thank You!!! I was waiting for your reaction to this for a long time! 😃😃😃
Please also watch Passengers (2016).
I think I’ve already seen the passengers.. I’ll check:))
@@ariachanson01Thank you Aria! 😃There are several movies and tv series called ‘Passengers’. This one has Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence (but don’t watch the trailer, just check some photos).
Ohh yes, I saw that one when it came out…😃
@@ariachanson01Oh no, it would have been great to see your reaction to that. 🥲
Another great Ryan Gosling movie is:
The Nice Guys 😃
I have mixed feelings about the limited Amazon sequel TV series "Blade Runner 2099" that is starting production. However, it is being directed by the same guy behind the new adaptation of "Shogun" for the F/X network and that seems to be receiving high marks. Cross your fingers, Aria!
I wanna see the whole reaction lol
different corporations. essentially there is money in post human labor etc. but the corp from the og bladerunner is not the same as this one. privatized industry yay! anyway, loved your reaction.
You did like weeks of my favorite stuff, just need time to watch. :/
Thankyou❤️❤️
Joe's AI companion was creepy to me because it's just a hologram that will never be anything more than that. And we got a great understanding of just how creepy it is because when Joe saw the advertisement again which first got him to purchase her image some time ago, proved she's nothing more than a product from one of Wallace's corporations to make money from lonely people who resort to such lengths to find some form of loving relationship. She was no more special than the next reiteration of herself owned by another lonely customer. Whereas, a replicant is still a human, created by other humans, which are still not completely controllable and who want their own freedom from their slavery.
Hi Aria
🎬👍 Aria, have you seen extended ending of Blade Runner (1982) on RUclips ?
Great comment about making replicants look different. Blue skin. Solved.
Can you watch scarface one day?!
3:41..heh...like Kind-ness in human-kind! Or primates killing?
12:56 ..or just (a) God?
33:29 Aaaw, not a real girl,♀thing, anyways...
35:31 YAY! Best of both worlds...right?
39:29 ..NOT a real "huMAN" Rick D. is?
Aria, if you could turn to your left, please.
“He’s a replicant blade runner? That’s crazy.” Harrison Ford’s Deckard is a replicant blade runner.
Not the story that Philip K Dick wanted to tell nor the original screenplay adapters of the movies... for the story to actually make sense, Deckard has to be a human... who begins to care about the very thing he was paid to kill. The Replicants have more pure passion for living than the "normal" humans of the future.
Is he though?
And does it even matter if he is?
@@sebswede9005 Yes, the unicorn origami in the fist movie tells you directly. Yes. A morality tale where you should watch how you treat people because you might end up in the same spot as them. Don’t be prejudiced because you wouldn’t want people to be prejudiced against you. Don’t be racist because you wouldn’t want people to be racist towards you. Gaff’s repeated line as he finds the unicorn origami is him realizing what Gaff was saying, which is basically “They’re more alike than you thought. You’re one of them. I know your implanted memory.”
“So there is a half human, half replicant baby out there.” No, there is a baby out there with two replicant parents. Tyrell’s goal, and Wallace’s goal, was to get replicants to procreate. Tyrell succeeded. Wallace had not. That’s why Wallace wanted the kid, so that he could try to determine what he was doing wrong. Deckard is a replicant, not a human.
Fwiw, with the exception of Ridley Scott the vast majority of the people involved with the movies disagree with the sentiment that Deckard is a replicant. Ford, Hauer, Dick (the novel writer), Fancher (the screen writer), Snyder (art) all believed him to be a human. Villeneuve has never said what he thinks on the matter. There are arguments for both cases - most of which are caused due to there being multiple cuts of the original film.
@@MrKINSM The final cut is all that matters, and there's no way to interpret it any other way. The unicorn and unicorn origami can't be interpreted in any way other than he's a replicant. There's no way to know about the unicorn dream other than he knows that this memory has been implanted in Deckard. There are so many other clues, but this is blatantly telling you in case you didn't catch on to all the other clues that, hey, he's a bloody replicant. Not that it means much what he thinks, but Ford recently relented and said he believes Deckard to be a replicant, too. The unicorn is water tight. Replicant.
@@MrKINSMHampton Fancher and Michael Green, the principal screenwriters, do not believe that Deckard is human. What they have said is that it is important to them and to the story that the question of whether Deckard is human or a replicant remains open and unanswered - they are neither on the side that Deckard if definitely human nor on the side that Deckard is definitely a replicant.
@@ClaytonMacleodThe unicorn is not watertight. You are overstating your case.
@@markhamstra1083 It is watertight. There is no other plausible explanation.
One of my favs...ya Goofy m8te from Australia