Last movie seen — Page 587

Oh wow I just found out the director also did Arrival. A vastly superior sci-fi movie. Too bad.

As you are so fond of saying, no movie is necessary. The MPAA clearly labels when a film has nudity. If you see this label, don’t go see the movie.

And if you think I have to link to every interview an actress has done on the subject, you’re insane. Do your own research. The only ones I’ve found who don’t like having done their nude scenes are the ones who didn’t agree to it, and that’s completely valid.

TV’s Frink said:

Here’s another one along similar but more generalized lines.

http://theconversation.com/blade-runners-problem-with-women-remains-unsolved-in-its-sequel-85398

And that’s probably enough. There’s plenty more of course.

Great argument. Spurt out a ton of links that agree with you. At least mine were the people who were actually involved in the production.

I don’t even know what your argument is.

TV’s Frink said:

Found this immediately when searching for “Blade Runner nudity.” I’m sure y’all will disagree with it though.

http://curnblog.com/2017/11/19/nudity-blade-runner-2049-hollywood-gaze/

I stopped reading at this part

As such, it presents a major dilemma. There is no reason for Joi to be naked here except to titillate the audience, especially when one considers that the actress who plays her wasn’t fully undressed in prior scenes. Here, she could have been clothed and offered the same or even a stronger message: that K is lonely without her. But nude, she makes it clear that there’s something else going on, a different kind of filmmaking choice.

That choice is the objectification of women. And it’s not a valid one to make in this or any case.

The author make no attempt whatsoever to even try to understand the point that the filmmaker is making here, or else he’s purposefully ignoring it to make his point.

Again, I say I have no problem with someone taking issue with the nudity/female representation in BR2049. But it is headbashingly annoying to make an argument about it and either straight up ignore or make no attempt to analyze the intent of the filmmaking.

Cool.

Nah, screw that. Explain the point the filmmaker is trying to make with the last scene of Joi.

…

Nah, screw that. I don’t care what you think the intent was. It’s terribly exploitative and “Blade Runner has a woman problem” seems spot on to me.

Handman said:

I don’t even know what your argument is.

Same. It seems to be “some actress seem to be cool with it (despite there being no way to know for sure) and therefore it’s cool.” Ok.

TV’s Frink said:

Here’s another one along similar but more generalized lines.

http://theconversation.com/blade-runners-problem-with-women-remains-unsolved-in-its-sequel-85398

This is a good article that I mostly agree with, though notably it doesn’t really say anything that you’ve been saying.

TV’s Frink said:

Nah, screw that. Explain the point the filmmaker is trying to make with the last scene of Joi.

…

Nah, screw that. I don’t care what you think the intent was. It’s terribly exploitative and “Blade Runner has a woman problem” seems spot on to me.

Which one do you actually want? You’re playing with my emotions here.

TV’s Frink said:

Handman said:

I don’t even know what your argument is.

Same. It seems to be “some actress seem to be cool with it (despite there being no way to know for sure) and therefore it’s cool.” Ok.

While yours seems to be “I don’t like nudity, and saw a movie with nudity in it.”

DominicCobb said:

TV’s Frink said:

Nah, screw that. Explain the point the filmmaker is trying to make with the last scene of Joi.

…

Nah, screw that. I don’t care what you think the intent was. It’s terribly exploitative and “Blade Runner has a woman problem” seems spot on to me.

Which one do you actually want? You’re playing with my emotions here.

I don’t really care. Do whatever you like.

Handman said:

TV’s Frink said:

Handman said:

I don’t even know what your argument is.

Same. It seems to be “some actress seem to be cool with it (despite there being no way to know for sure) and therefore it’s cool.” Ok.

While yours seems to be “I don’t like nudity, and saw a movie with nudity in it.”

Lol, nice try. Yes, you don’t know what my argument is.

TV’s Frink said:

DominicCobb said:

TV’s Frink said:

Nah, screw that. Explain the point the filmmaker is trying to make with the last scene of Joi.

…

Nah, screw that. I don’t care what you think the intent was. It’s terribly exploitative and “Blade Runner has a woman problem” seems spot on to me.

Which one do you actually want? You’re playing with my emotions here.

I don’t really care. Do whatever you like.

Well if you’re actually curious

There is no reason for Joi to be naked here except to titillate the audience, especially when one considers that the actress who plays her wasn’t fully undressed in prior scenes. Here, she could have been clothed and offered the same or even a stronger message: that K is lonely without her.

Except the point here is that the fully clothed (or, fully formed) version of Joi is dead. That Joi was for K a real person. Their relationship was real. When K was with her, he wasn’t lonely. And when she died, she died for real. If he saw a fully clothed Joi, that would’ve made the deceased Joi less real - oh she’s not really dead, there she is. But the naked Joi - almost unrecognizable with the pink skin, blue hair and black eyes - is this blank slate. She’s nothing but literally an advertisement. Exploited, objectified, used as a prop to titillate and sell. She’s not real at all, she’s not Joi, which is what affects K the most in that moment.

(This all leads to reminding K of the “real” thing that he once had that healed his loneliness that is now gone. Which inspires him to save Deckard and help him find his “real” thing that will cure his loneliness before it’s too late.)

Pretty much what I expected.

TV’s Frink said:

Pretty much what I expected.

You linked to an article that said

There is no reason for Joi to be naked here

which is completely false, as I just pointed out.

suspiciouscoffee said:

┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻| _ it’s okay to admit that some things
┻┳| •.•) you enjoy might be problematic
┳┻|⊂ﾉ
┻┳|

DominicCobb said:

TV’s Frink said:

Here’s another one along similar but more generalized lines.

http://theconversation.com/blade-runners-problem-with-women-remains-unsolved-in-its-sequel-85398

This is a good article that I mostly agree with, though notably it doesn’t really say anything that you’ve been saying.

DominicCobb said:

TV’s Frink said:

Found this immediately when searching for “Blade Runner nudity.” I’m sure y’all will disagree with it though.

http://curnblog.com/2017/11/19/nudity-blade-runner-2049-hollywood-gaze/

I stopped reading at this part

As such, it presents a major dilemma. There is no reason for Joi to be naked here except to titillate the audience, especially when one considers that the actress who plays her wasn’t fully undressed in prior scenes. Here, she could have been clothed and offered the same or even a stronger message: that K is lonely without her. But nude, she makes it clear that there’s something else going on, a different kind of filmmaking choice.

That choice is the objectification of women. And it’s not a valid one to make in this or any case.

The author make no attempt whatsoever to even try to understand the point that the filmmaker is making here, or else he’s purposefully ignoring it to make his point.

Again, I say I have no problem with someone taking issue with the nudity/female representation in BR2049. But it is headbashingly annoying to make an argument about it and either straight up ignore or make no attempt to analyze the intent of the filmmaking.

TV’s Frink said:

Cool.

DominicCobb said:

TV’s Frink said:

DominicCobb said:

TV’s Frink said:

Nah, screw that. Explain the point the filmmaker is trying to make with the last scene of Joi.

…

Nah, screw that. I don’t care what you think the intent was. It’s terribly exploitative and “Blade Runner has a woman problem” seems spot on to me.

Which one do you actually want? You’re playing with my emotions here.

I don’t really care. Do whatever you like.

Well if you’re actually curious

There is no reason for Joi to be naked here except to titillate the audience, especially when one considers that the actress who plays her wasn’t fully undressed in prior scenes. Here, she could have been clothed and offered the same or even a stronger message: that K is lonely without her.

Except the point here is that the fully clothed (or, fully formed) version of Joi is dead. That Joi was for K a real person. Their relationship was real. When K was with her, he wasn’t lonely. And when she died, she died for real. If he saw a fully clothed Joi, that would’ve made the deceased Joi less real - oh she’s not really dead, there she is. But the naked Joi - almost unrecognizable with the pink skin, blue hair and black eyes - is this blank slate. She’s nothing but literally an advertisement. Exploited, objectified, used as a prop to titillate and sell. She’s not real at all, she’s not Joi, which is what affects K the most in that moment.

(This all leads to reminding K of the “real” thing that he once had that healed his loneliness that is now gone. Which inspires him to save Deckard and help him find his “real” thing that will cure his loneliness before it’s too late.)

TV’s Frink said:

Pretty much what I expected.

suspiciouscoffee said:

┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻| _ it’s okay to admit that some things
┻┳| •.•) you enjoy might be problematic
┳┻|⊂ﾉ
┻┳|

You are full of clever posts lately. Hi there lurker dude.

DominicCobb said:

TV’s Frink said:

Pretty much what I expected.

You linked to an article that said

There is no reason for Joi to be naked here

which is completely false, as I just pointed out.

Obviously “there is no reason for Joi to be naked here” = “there is no good reason for Joi to be naked here.”

You can claim that’s also false, but that’s just your opinion.

TV’s Frink said:

DominicCobb said:

TV’s Frink said:

Pretty much what I expected.

You linked to an article that said

There is no reason for Joi to be naked here

which is completely false, as I just pointed out.

Obviously “there is no reason for Joi to be naked here” = “there is no good reason for Joi to be naked here.”

If the article was effectively arguing there was no “good reason,” they would have argued why the reason that was there wasn’t good, rather than ignoring that reason at all as if it doesn’t exist.

You can claim that’s also false, but that’s just your opinion.

Whether I’d claim it as “false” or not would depend on his argument… but since he didn’t present that argument I cannot comment on it.

Ok fine, I say there’s no good reason. You’ve presented a reason, I find it lacking. So be it.

I don’t like nudity of male or female in films. Not because it offends me but because it takes me out of the movie.