Number One is very, very clearly answered in the movie itself, they even literally show Miles handing his glass to Duke and Beniot Blanc explains it in the movie as well.
Number 1 was directly answered in the movie and your setup even confirmed it. Norton switched the glasses so that Bautista couldn't blackmail him. And how is that number 1?🤔
I don't care what anyone says but Fury losing his eye to the flurken kitty is the best explanation possible. Fury is so good at what he does, he's often many steps ahead that it would be hard to believe that someone did actually get the drop on him. But with it being the cat it wasn't someone actually outmaneuvering him but him just not even thinking there was an issue in the first place by something that could never be a threat. Antman and Hawkeye not being in Infinity War is also explained in the movies. Both took plea deals and where not supposed to even interact with other superheroes. Hawkeye was home and Antman was helping Hank Pym with the quantum realm which we got to see in Antman and Wasp.
Deckard: First, in the book, Deckard was 100% Human, no doubt. Second, I cannot stand when a director or anyone else attached to a project comes out and says "this is what I meant" in a movie. Your mileage may vary, but as far as I'm concerned, if it wasn't in the movie, it didn't happen. And f you leave it vague enough that I have to decide for myself, don't get mad if my decision doesn't match your vision. If you didn't put it on the screen, that's on you. This happened WAY too much in the MCU and the Star Wars sequels.
i'd like to remind that the doubts about deckard's status arose after the Director's Cut was released. Watching the theatrical cut (and the 3 short movies and a sequel after it) wouldn't really give you any other idea. also, making him a replicant is an idiotic move.
Normally I'd agree, but in the case of Blade Runner, so much of the original version was studio interference, and the director's cuts clarify a muddled story. Gaff knows Deckard's dreams about a unicorn (hence the origami unicorn), indicating that Dekkard's memories are implants--this is in the "text" of the movie, so to speak, and not some added element later explaining away the mystery. Deckard is a replicate, period...but who's memories? My college friends debated that his memories either come from Gaff, the other blade runner who is walking around with a cane indicating an injury that prevents him from being a blade runner, or from a deceased or retired Deckard who is "resurrected" into a replicant body, potentially multiple times, and that we start watching him mere moments after his activation.
Did your feelings get hurt? If you disagree with an artist about their work, you’re free to ignore their opinion & just enjoy the way you’d like to. I always pretend that “A Nightmare on Elm Street” ended just before the last scene (the Freddy car and mom getting ripped through the door) because I think it would have been better if we didn’t know whether it was a dream or not.
@@rossalbert937Normally, they don't due to the very short life span. However, it is implied that Rachael and Deckard are made different from all other replicants, and that they might not have their life span shortened as with the others. Still, a retarded "decision" by Ridley.
5:14 Actually the more important question concerning Rocky and Apollo's third fight isn't who won but rather who told Adonis about it?? No one was in the scene with Rocky and Apollo, and it also seemed like the gym was closed for the night. THAT'S what always bugged me when they talked about it in Creed.
About fury’s eye. It did feel somewhat underwhelming, but after learning about what Goose could do, fury did say that he was trusting her not to attack him, lo and behold. Plus, him hyping the event up ties in with his character of many with many layers few are privy to. Plus Natasha said Clint and Scott were under house arrest (even though Scott’s was up by the time of infinity war he still was on probation). So I was in no way expecting them to show up in infinity war.
Yeah, I have mixed feelings about the reveal. Anticlimactic sums that up nicely, but on the other hand, maybe the incident was embarrassing to Fury, so it's concealed under a clandestine mystery to hide his, dare I say, shame.
@@CitrusXVA I see it as amusing, but also Fury was an opportunist. He never said anything about it and people spread rumours to make him sound cooler. This is what happened in real life too.
Personally, I loved the Fury reveal. It even goes with his character's nature, not wanting to reveal the truth to people, because yes, it is embarrassing, but still needing an explanation that is superficially true enough that he could rattle it off without flinching.
Right I completely agree with the Nick fury one … a lil simple scratch lol especially when he said “last time I trusted someone I lost an eye “ he said it with hella emotion
When it comes to Deckard being a replicant I always have the follow-up question.... Then why all the other replicant were always kicking his ass? I'm just saying his suffering made him seem pretty human to me.
😂 Excellent observation! Also, he is hyped as this great Blade Runner, almost mythical, but when you look at it, he's one of the worst Blade Runners ever! He gets his ass kicked by Zhora who flees from the scene, and kills her by shooting her in the back. He gets almost killed by Leon and gets saved by Rachael. He also almost gets his ass kicked by Pris, the pleasure replicant 😂 and Roy just dies on his own. Worst... Blade Runner... EVER. He's portrayed way more competent in the book, though.
The Birdbox monsters are show in the show, the guy with the briefcase had drawings of them? and wasn't Any man stuck in that other dimension or something?
Harry straight up drops the resurrection stone after using it in the book. Of course it got lost somewhere in the forest as time passed. What was the mystery there? (I'd assume you didn't read the book, but then you mention what happened to the wand so I really just don't understand what was the mystery)
A better mystery answer for number 1 would be explaining how Duke knew he had such an extreme allergy to pineapples. 🤷 Most of the time, people don't know they have allergies to a substance until experiencing the substance. There are also times when people will develop allergies later in life to substances they were fine with previously. In the movie, Duke died with mere seconds of ingesting a few ounces of pineapple juice. If the substance was so deadly to Duke as a fully grown and highly athletic adult, then how could he have possibly survived his initial encounter with pineapples in his youth? The first time Duke had ever drank or eaten something made of pineapple would have claimed his life without IMMEDIATE medical attention.
I don't know how helpful this answer is, as I'm not a medical professional and it's merely one second-hand anecdote, but I had a co-worker who knew she had a deadly food allergy. Her initial reaction (when she was a kid) had been small, easy to write off as something else. The second reaction was strong enough that she started avoiding that food, but she didn't see it as life-threatening. She said the third reaction (an accidental exposure as an adult, at that point) was very severe, a scary, almost exponential jump compared to the previous reaction. Her doctor cautioned her to never eat that food again, as some allergies (like hers) increase in severity with each exposure and at the rate hers was going, another exposure could kill her. Again, that's just the anecdote of a stranger's co-worker and not medical expertise or research. But I hope that helps a little with the suspension of disbelief about that plot point, at least.
I liked Bird Box except for not showing the monster. People in the movie coming up with different theories was interesting. I hate when writers or directors are to scared to say something definitive and leave it ambiguous. But if that's what the monster was gonna be I guess it's good they left it out.
With rare exceptions showing the actual monster is less effective at keeping people scared then just letting imagination run wild. In an essay he wrote on what makes good horror Lovecraft stated that the less we see of the moster the more effective it is. As an example think of the Xenomorph from Alien. Giger's design is amazing and combined with the cinematography of the first film it remains terrifiying thoughout. Later films in the series overexpose the Xenomorph robbing it of the terror it engendered in the first film. Some films even have the Xenomorph behaving in ways that just come across as comical, specifically a Xenomorph headbutting the window of a spaceship to try and break through it.
@christianboehlefeld5168 I get whay you're saying. A better example is Jaws. The shark was actually supposed to be on screen a lot more but it kept breaking down. Seeing the shark less ended up working way better for the film. In Bird Box not only did they not show the monster they never gave an explanation of what it was. In a Quiet Place they did both and those movies worked pretty well I think.
@@christianboehlefeld5168 I myself call that lazy writing/art design. At least Giger did a full creature design; it's up to the director how much to show it.
Not everything needs an explanation. It would have been better if they just left Fury's eye a mystery and introduced him in Captain Marvel with his eye already patched. Instead, the silly explanation they gave us was underwhelming to say the least.
Number 1 is so well made, it actually happens on camera, but you don't notice it until you rewatch the movie. It's a clever piece of storytelling that shows you the importance of small details.
I would just say "much weaker". And yes, both movies left out a lot from the book. In the books, Mikael sleeps with pretty much every woman he meets. It gets embarrassing after a while. Definitely reflects poorly on Stieg Larsson. And I don't see how "what happened to Harriet Vanger?" could be a mystery to anybody who saw either movie.
#7 . Where T F is Hawkeye in the opening of the Marvel Studios title card. He is the only one of the MCUs original six that's not prominently shown, W T F
Number One is very, very clearly answered in the movie itself, they even literally show Miles handing his glass to Duke and Beniot Blanc explains it in the movie as well.
I was completely dumbfounded it was even on the list. It isn’t a mystery. Blanc solved that and told us. Like?
Number 1 was directly answered in the movie and your setup even confirmed it. Norton switched the glasses so that Bautista couldn't blackmail him. And how is that number 1?🤔
Right? Like, that's not a movie mystery, it was very clearly explained and shown in the movie itself.
I don't care what anyone says but Fury losing his eye to the flurken kitty is the best explanation possible. Fury is so good at what he does, he's often many steps ahead that it would be hard to believe that someone did actually get the drop on him. But with it being the cat it wasn't someone actually outmaneuvering him but him just not even thinking there was an issue in the first place by something that could never be a threat.
Antman and Hawkeye not being in Infinity War is also explained in the movies. Both took plea deals and where not supposed to even interact with other superheroes. Hawkeye was home and Antman was helping Hank Pym with the quantum realm which we got to see in Antman and Wasp.
Deckard: First, in the book, Deckard was 100% Human, no doubt. Second, I cannot stand when a director or anyone else attached to a project comes out and says "this is what I meant" in a movie. Your mileage may vary, but as far as I'm concerned, if it wasn't in the movie, it didn't happen. And f you leave it vague enough that I have to decide for myself, don't get mad if my decision doesn't match your vision. If you didn't put it on the screen, that's on you. This happened WAY too much in the MCU and the Star Wars sequels.
i'd like to remind that the doubts about deckard's status arose after the Director's Cut was released. Watching the theatrical cut (and the 3 short movies and a sequel after it) wouldn't really give you any other idea. also, making him a replicant is an idiotic move.
He wasn’t a replicant. Do replicants age?
Normally I'd agree, but in the case of Blade Runner, so much of the original version was studio interference, and the director's cuts clarify a muddled story. Gaff knows Deckard's dreams about a unicorn (hence the origami unicorn), indicating that Dekkard's memories are implants--this is in the "text" of the movie, so to speak, and not some added element later explaining away the mystery. Deckard is a replicate, period...but who's memories? My college friends debated that his memories either come from Gaff, the other blade runner who is walking around with a cane indicating an injury that prevents him from being a blade runner, or from a deceased or retired Deckard who is "resurrected" into a replicant body, potentially multiple times, and that we start watching him mere moments after his activation.
Did your feelings get hurt? If you disagree with an artist about their work, you’re free to ignore their opinion & just enjoy the way you’d like to.
I always pretend that “A Nightmare on Elm Street” ended just before the last scene (the Freddy car and mom getting ripped through the door) because I think it would have been better if we didn’t know whether it was a dream or not.
@@rossalbert937Normally, they don't due to the very short life span. However, it is implied that Rachael and Deckard are made different from all other replicants, and that they might not have their life span shortened as with the others.
Still, a retarded "decision" by Ridley.
I actually loved that explanation for Fury’s eye. My son and I both found it ridiculously hilarious.
5:14 Actually the more important question concerning Rocky and Apollo's third fight isn't who won but rather who told Adonis about it?? No one was in the scene with Rocky and Apollo, and it also seemed like the gym was closed for the night. THAT'S what always bugged me when they talked about it in Creed.
About fury’s eye. It did feel somewhat underwhelming, but after learning about what Goose could do, fury did say that he was trusting her not to attack him, lo and behold.
Plus, him hyping the event up ties in with his character of many with many layers few are privy to.
Plus Natasha said Clint and Scott were under house arrest (even though Scott’s was up by the time of infinity war he still was on probation). So I was in no way expecting them to show up in infinity war.
Yeah, I have mixed feelings about the reveal. Anticlimactic sums that up nicely, but on the other hand, maybe the incident was embarrassing to Fury, so it's concealed under a clandestine mystery to hide his, dare I say, shame.
@@CitrusXVA I see it as amusing, but also Fury was an opportunist. He never said anything about it and people spread rumours to make him sound cooler. This is what happened in real life too.
@@yuvi3000 Heh, all he has to do is hold the swagger and control of the situation. Everyone else does the work for him.
@@CitrusXVA Exactly. This was even explicitly shown in the Captain Marvel movie.
Personally, I loved the Fury reveal. It even goes with his character's nature, not wanting to reveal the truth to people, because yes, it is embarrassing, but still needing an explanation that is superficially true enough that he could rattle it off without flinching.
Right I completely agree with the Nick fury one … a lil simple scratch lol especially when he said “last time I trusted someone I lost an eye “ he said it with hella emotion
Honestly i never cared or wondered why fury had only one eye and would have been cool if they just never addressed it there was no reason to
@@BlackHatCinephile which is kind of what I assumed in the movies too, before they decided to give it kind of a lame explanation
Sometimes annoyingly dumb answers are the best lol
Lol yeah, at the least they provide closure
Kind of like real life, most of the time people aren't creating a mystery or suspense, you just to what you do and it is what is ;)
It never crossed my mind to even question that Deckard might not be human.
same. Deckard as a human raises no questions. Deckard as a replicant raises a lot of questions.
When it comes to Deckard being a replicant I always have the follow-up question.... Then why all the other replicant were always kicking his ass? I'm just saying his suffering made him seem pretty human to me.
😂
Excellent observation! Also, he is hyped as this great Blade Runner, almost mythical, but when you look at it, he's one of the worst Blade Runners ever!
He gets his ass kicked by Zhora who flees from the scene, and kills her by shooting her in the back. He gets almost killed by Leon and gets saved by Rachael. He also almost gets his ass kicked by Pris, the pleasure replicant 😂 and Roy just dies on his own.
Worst... Blade Runner... EVER.
He's portrayed way more competent in the book, though.
For some reason Fury seems fitting for any Samuel L Jackson character
Whoa, I didn't realize thats who played him. He really gets lost in the character
The Birdbox monsters are show in the show, the guy with the briefcase had drawings of them? and wasn't Any man stuck in that other dimension or something?
9:01 “But the truth is but the truth is…” 😂
Harry straight up drops the resurrection stone after using it in the book. Of course it got lost somewhere in the forest as time passed. What was the mystery there? (I'd assume you didn't read the book, but then you mention what happened to the wand so I really just don't understand what was the mystery)
Biggest MCU mystery- in Captain Marvel why does Fury call it SHIELD when it won't be named that until years later (in Iron man)
A better mystery answer for number 1 would be explaining how Duke knew he had such an extreme allergy to pineapples. 🤷
Most of the time, people don't know they have allergies to a substance until experiencing the substance. There are also times when people will develop allergies later in life to substances they were fine with previously.
In the movie, Duke died with mere seconds of ingesting a few ounces of pineapple juice. If the substance was so deadly to Duke as a fully grown and highly athletic adult, then how could he have possibly survived his initial encounter with pineapples in his youth?
The first time Duke had ever drank or eaten something made of pineapple would have claimed his life without IMMEDIATE medical attention.
I don't know how helpful this answer is, as I'm not a medical professional and it's merely one second-hand anecdote, but I had a co-worker who knew she had a deadly food allergy. Her initial reaction (when she was a kid) had been small, easy to write off as something else. The second reaction was strong enough that she started avoiding that food, but she didn't see it as life-threatening. She said the third reaction (an accidental exposure as an adult, at that point) was very severe, a scary, almost exponential jump compared to the previous reaction. Her doctor cautioned her to never eat that food again, as some allergies (like hers) increase in severity with each exposure and at the rate hers was going, another exposure could kill her. Again, that's just the anecdote of a stranger's co-worker and not medical expertise or research. But I hope that helps a little with the suspension of disbelief about that plot point, at least.
@@mrsmolloy Thank you. 🤔🏥
I liked Bird Box except for not showing the monster. People in the movie coming up with different theories was interesting. I hate when writers or directors are to scared to say something definitive and leave it ambiguous. But if that's what the monster was gonna be I guess it's good they left it out.
With rare exceptions showing the actual monster is less effective at keeping people scared then just letting imagination run wild. In an essay he wrote on what makes good horror Lovecraft stated that the less we see of the moster the more effective it is. As an example think of the Xenomorph from Alien. Giger's design is amazing and combined with the cinematography of the first film it remains terrifiying thoughout. Later films in the series overexpose the Xenomorph robbing it of the terror it engendered in the first film. Some films even have the Xenomorph behaving in ways that just come across as comical, specifically a Xenomorph headbutting the window of a spaceship to try and break through it.
@christianboehlefeld5168 I get whay you're saying. A better example is Jaws. The shark was actually supposed to be on screen a lot more but it kept breaking down. Seeing the shark less ended up working way better for the film.
In Bird Box not only did they not show the monster they never gave an explanation of what it was. In a Quiet Place they did both and those movies worked pretty well I think.
@@christianboehlefeld5168 I myself call that lazy writing/art design. At least Giger did a full creature design; it's up to the director how much to show it.
Ridley Scott says Deckard is a replicant. But Harrison Ford says the opposite.
Not everything needs an explanation. It would have been better if they just left Fury's eye a mystery and introduced him in Captain Marvel with his eye already patched. Instead, the silly explanation they gave us was underwhelming to say the least.
Short version: Cause they weren’t in the movie!
Better version: Cause their story was played out later.
The Deckard is still vague, as the director has given different answers to it depending on who and when he is asked.
When will we see the rest of the Gladiator Arena champions? Especially Beta Ray Bill?
Number 1 is so well made, it actually happens on camera, but you don't notice it until you rewatch the movie. It's a clever piece of storytelling that shows you the importance of small details.
Such a simple , mother-flerken thing , ruined one character and completely overshadowed another. Some things just shouldn't be answered
Who were Rey’s parents? They were nobody. 😅
Replicants are made for a specific purpose.
So what's the point in making a cop who gets his ass kicked by everyone
Deckard was built to detect replicants, not to fight. (If you believe the theory, that is.)
Early gang 😊😊😊
If you watch Captain Marvel it's no mystery what happens to Fury's eye
Malcolm's son and wife fate is unknown, maybe alive
The editing on this channel is getting worse every week😂
The Daniel Craig version of "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" was trash compared to the 2009 Swedish version.
I would just say "much weaker". And yes, both movies left out a lot from the book. In the books, Mikael sleeps with pretty much every woman he meets. It gets embarrassing after a while. Definitely reflects poorly on Stieg Larsson. And I don't see how "what happened to Harriet Vanger?" could be a mystery to anybody who saw either movie.
#7 . Where T F is Hawkeye in the opening of the Marvel Studios title card. He is the only one of the MCUs original six that's not prominently shown, W T F
Ridley Scott is wrong :P
DECKARD WAS HUMAN!!! (and the dog was real in the sequel!!!!)