I saw it in matinee today. A few things:
- The stylistic continuity really impressed me. They did a great job continuing the cyberpunk-noir feel of the world, the story pacing, the stylized composition and visuals, etc.
- I thought the Joi subplot was pretty self-evident, not a lot of questions about it. I never thought she was "real" nor even thought I was supposed to think she was "real" in any way. In fact, I felt that the relationship between Joi and K carried the largest portion of thematic weight when it came to uncanny artificiality.
- It seems to me that the "compromised immune response" thing is likely untrue, a lie told Dr. Ana to keep her under wraps until the resistance activates her. There is nothing much to back up this impression, except that so much of the film is lie and illusion, including not knowing who or what onself is.
- After being thoroughly creeped-out by CGI Carrie Fisher and Peter Cushing, it was nice to see a film that harnessed the actual creepiness I felt in service of the plot. That's good film making.
- I felt the misogyny undercut the impact of the film as a whole. The cutting of the "womb" of the new model, the prostitutes, the "threesome," the unnecessary murder of Madam, the porn statutes and adverts, the weird ocean choke-out scene, when added together reveal a constant current of misogyny on the part of the film makers. The story could have been effectively told without these elements, but it is clear that the film makers wanted a world where women are relegated, with one or possibly two exceptions, to objects of lust or violence. In fact, the exceptions throw the broader misogyny into bold relief.
Bookmarks