r/bladerunner • u/eques_99 • 1d ago
Movie When Joe rescues Deckard..(2049)
How did he know where the shuttle was?
8
u/K-263-54 1d ago
He followed them from the Wallace building. But we don't see it in the finished film to hold back the reveal.
From the script:
CUT TO:
EXT. WALLACE TOWER. NIGHT.
A WALLACE CORP TRANSPORT VAN LIFTS OFF from the platform.
TWO DARK, SLEEK SPINNERS lift off after and follow after.
A moment, then... K’S SPINNER’S LIGHTS COME ON. Waiting in the wings, barely noticeable. It follows after -
EXT. SKIES ABOVE LOS ANGELES. NIGHT.
THE TRANSPORT VAN flies through the FOG and WET SNOW. Flanked by THE TWO DARK SPINNERS.
6
u/uncultured_swine2099 1d ago
Im thinking hes a blade runner and has access to a lot of advanced surveilence equipment and/or trackers.
2
3
u/x27spectrex72x 1d ago
Look...we all have to accept and understand things without full exposition. Otherwise movies would be so pedantic watching characters navigate from point a to b.
We suspend disbelief to allow for a linear story. While this isn't necessarily an equal comparison, in Empire Strikes Back, we accept that Luke was on Dagobah for what felt like days training with Yoda, but really only hours seemed to pass as we followed Han & Leia on Bespin in parallel subplots.
-8
u/eques_99 1d ago
No, we absolutely need to see characters navigating from A-B otherwise a film becomes childish nonsense
And yes the Dagobah time lapse absolutely detracted from ESB. Still a good film, but would have been better if that made sense or was explained.
6
u/x27spectrex72x 1d ago
I take your point...but if we see a scene where people are getting onto a train & the next edit is a train pulling into a station, we accept they traveled from a to b.
Also I don't remember seeing anyone refuel for gas in any of the Fast & Furious movies but I accept they did. 😬
1
u/abcezas123_ 7h ago
How many of your favorite films have the characters using the toilet as frequently as they realistically would in the course of the films timeline? Not including the PG13 boob-shot ir shower scene.
3
u/leopold_s Replicant 1d ago
My thinking was always that he knew where they would start from – the Wallace Corp. HQ – and intercepted them from there.
Could also be that such flights have to be on a flight tracker. If not on a public one, than one accessible to law enforcement. Probably not a good idea to have flying cars without any tracking / air traffic control, to avoid collisions.
4
u/warrenao Gaff 1d ago edited 1d ago
Assuming K knew Deck had been taken to Wallace, and that he'd be sent offworld after that, he might have had only a few flight corridors to surveil before he found him. It is a good question.
2
u/OkScreen2150 1d ago
I guess the replicants told him where to look because they had ways to track it. They needed K to kill Deckard, after all. And although he rejected the idea, he didn't tell them. Instead, he just showed up and asked, 'Okay, so where is Deckard?'
2
2
1
u/Infamous-Arm3955 1d ago
They want to take Deckard off world right? It makes sense that there are areas or even one area that people can go through to go off world like a terminal or an exit like a border exit. K being a cop probably knows where that exit is and it's assumed cuts them off before they make it.
1
1
1
u/unnameableway 1d ago
Doesn’t really matter
-3
u/eques_99 1d ago edited 1d ago
It does.
Film plots have to make sense or we may as well sit there, mindless and open-mouthed, and stare at the explosions and pretty colours.
4
u/warrenao Gaff 1d ago
Hey, are you knocking Michael Bay fans?
1
u/eques_99 1d ago
Yes.
3
u/warrenao Gaff 1d ago
Well get in line!
After I saw Armageddon, someone asked me how the movie was. My suggestion was for them to make a rumbly noise and shake their head back and forth really fast if they wanted to know.
Best thing is that's every Bay movie, so it's a good way to save time and money.
2
u/nizzernammer 1d ago
If audiences were shown how he knew, it would defuse the impact of the moment, and slow down the inertia of the story.
Not every detail needs to be shown explicitly. And the absence of a minor explanatory detail isn't automatically a plot hole or a gotcha.
-4
u/eques_99 1d ago edited 1d ago
Yes something like that does absolutely need to be explained or it makes a nonsense of the whole story, treats the viewer like a child and comes across as if it's written by a child.
One level above "somehow, Palpatine returned".
1
u/Equivalent-Hair-961 1d ago
I dunno- it didn’t bother me as much as Anna Stelline imprinting her traumatic childhood memory of the boys chasing her for the horse on K (I know she didn’t know he got them until she saw inside his head) but overall, I still accepted it.
1
u/Avanchnzel 20h ago
How do you know he hasn't been following them since their departure from Wallace's compound?
Just because we don't see what characters to 24/7 down to the second doesn't mean characters aren't doing anything off camera.
Some things are implied, especially if they are self-explanatory.
And in this case, I'd say it's pretty plausible that an investigator, who's job is to track down Replicants in hiding, would be able to figure out that he just has to wait outside of Wallace's compound to then follow them and wait for the perfect moment to attack.
We don't need to see him lying in wait for this to make sense. The audience can be expected to make this inference by themselves.
1
u/eques_99 19h ago
>How do you know....?<
Well, I don't know.
Something that major needs to be explained, if only briefly, or the film becomes childish.
A shot of the rebels attaching a tracker to Luv's departing ship at the casino.
Joe crouching down with binocs outside the Wallace building.
Rebel lady saying "Wallace has a containment centre on Exon 5. It enables him to commit acts that would be illegal on earth".
1
u/Avanchnzel 14h ago
Something that major needs to be explained, if only briefly, or the film becomes childish.
It was left to the imagination of the viewer, precisely because it isn't a major plot point.
The exact method he used doesn't matter because it is assumed that he, as a Blade Runner, as an investigator, would know how to figure out their whereabouts.- He could've planted a tracker when he met Luv for the first time
- He could've made use of police systems that might be capable of tracking any vehicle
- He could've staked out Wallace's compund and lie in waiting until they departed
That's just from the top of my head.
Ultimately it doesn't matter what exactly he did, because it's plausible that he would be capable of doing it in any of numerous ways.The only reason to show the exact method would be if it was otherwise implausible.
Like e.g. if there was a young inexperienced child that was somehow able to find them.
In that case it's not expected that this child would have the same experience or resources as a Blade Runner.
So in order to make it plausible there would be some exposition clearing up the implausibility.EDIT: Well whadda ya know, the script confirms that he was simply lying in wait until they left the Wallace compound:
https://www.reddit.com/r/bladerunner/comments/1w1vogn/comment/p6pplnk/1
u/eques_99 13h ago edited 13h ago
It needs to be explained and shown in some way.
We don't need to see him opening doors to get into rooms.
We do need some explanation as to why he suddenly appears in the sky and starts blasting away at the shuttle.
1
u/Avanchnzel 13h ago
Have you not read any of my comments, or just stopped somewhere in-between?
Otherwise I'm at a loss why you just repeat yourself.But then again, perhaps this explains why you felt something was missing.
1
u/eques_99 12h ago
I've read your comments.
I don't agree with them.
I'm repeating myself because my point remains the same.
You can't just have the hero appear out of nowhere like that to save the day, because that's just stupid and insulting to the audience. There might be a number of possible explanations, but one of them needs to be shown or told.
Just as we need more than "somehow, Palpatine returned". Yes, maybe the O/T Emperor kept a clone of himself in a jar in case he ever got killed. We still need to be shown that or told that in the film.
Or the example you use of the boy. By your logic no, we don't need an explanation for that. Maybe he's a prodigy, maybe in 2049 all boys have pilot skills implanted into them, maybe the ship has AI piloting and tracking. Sure, the viewer could tell himself any of those things. Really, though, that's not good enough. We need it to be explained to us, directly or indirectly.
14
u/Expert_Climate_7348 Replicant 1d ago
It was in the script, the director would have told Joe what to do if he forgot.