"Her eyes were green."

>"Her eyes were green."


;_;


Also why did a man like Wallace fuck this detail up? Was it because "muh no eyes"?

Other urls found in this thread:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC305328/
newscientist.com/article/dn28185-patent-for-first-method-to-create-human-sperm-but-does-it-work/
learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/cloning/cloningmyths/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Maybe the top secret records of Rachel never mentioned eye color just like they never mentioned how Tyrell made her fertile.

is this a meme? it's clear Deckard lied to kill the abomination and preserve the soul of the real Rachel.

oh christ that line was right out of a screenwriting 101 student project.

No, it was because Wallace doesn't understand (nor does he care to) relationships between people and their importance. He wasn't trying to give Deckard Rachel back, he was just trying to get him to talk, which was why he didn't care to remember all the details. He sees replicants (and other people) as tools to benefit himself.

It's not a meme, you monkey fuck, her eyes were actally green. Or hazel to be more accurate, but green sounds better

you're a fucking retard

I assumed he cloned her from the bones

clone in a bone?
why are you clowning around like this man we're trying to have a serious discussion.

Wouldn't a clone have the same DNA

Good comeback, shit for brains

No.
Deckard says that as a snarky way of telling Wallace to fuck off, and that his plan of remaking Rachel wont work.

in a matter of hours/days? if he can make replicants that fucking fast then he has no need for womb-able ones

...

The film establishes they only have fragments of records.

However, whereas the first film was surprisingly well-researched with regards to its biomechanical technobabble, 2049 went full retard. If Wallace had Rachel's DNA from the bone and hair fragments Luv recovered from the LAPD, she should have been an identical copy (albeit likely to develop serious issues in time due to being created from deteriorated telomeres - ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC305328/ )

This also raises another gaping hole in 2049's plot, all Wallace should have required to reverse-engineer Tyrell's secrets would be DNA samples from both Deckard and Rachel - he could simply have grown new copies to dissect and analyse. However that in turn pushes the problem of 2049's central plot conceit back a step - someone capable of creating designer biological organisms should have absolutely no problem whatsoever making them fertile. We could technically do it today - newscientist.com/article/dn28185-patent-for-first-method-to-create-human-sperm-but-does-it-work/

Dude what are you talking about, lol

this is the screen cap of her eye during the test in the original blade runner

The fucking state of this board...

I don't think the DNA aspect applies here because in the first movie they establish that they essentially outsource the eyes to the guy who makes them. That means that even if they had all the DNA info they wouldn't have been able to tell what color the eyes were due to them being built separately from the rest of the replicant.

Also you're probably right that in this futuristic world they probably would have been able to make replicants capable of giving birth but the concept of the miracle conception is central to the themes of the film and K's arc.

Wallace is a hack copying from better people like Tyrell and Sebastian, he is basically Tarantino

Wanna go on a real meme rollercoaster, Sup Forums?

Sean Young's eyes are brown, but Deckard says Rachel's eyes were (olive) green when he sees the Rachel Wallace made.

Joi is another Wallace product.
The eye color of K's Joi is listed as brown in the settings.
Ana de Armas' eyes are olive green, and upon close inspection so are Joi's

As far as I understand DNA is not a set of instructions and rules of a person. Picture a mold in which you make a cake. Yes the mold can take up to many shapes and sizes, but how you fill in the gaps changes every time you make the cake. This is why we are not able to make exact clones of ourselves

Was Tarantino in the first one? I don't remember that I'll have to look out for that

why do you need to test whether someone is a replicant when you can clearly see their eyes are wierd if they are

no you stupid mongolid Tarantino is a movie director

We've been able to make exact clones of humans for a long time. It just isn't done (publicly) due to ethical concerns and the problem of accelerated ageing.

Your DNA literally defines every single trait you have, including eye and hair colour.

>If Wallace had Rachel's DNA from the bone and hair fragments Luv recovered from the LAPD, she should have been an identical copy
>all Wallace should have required to reverse-engineer Tyrell's secrets would be DNA samples from both Deckard and Rachel

He specifically said during his talk with Deckard that he had already done all this and that it wasn't quite enough. That he had "built the box and the lock but still needed the key" ie Deckard's daughter, to be able to engineer it into with all replicates.

That still doesn't really make sense unless he's monumentally shit at his job.

The first movie managed to do the symbolism while keeping the science accurate (and surprisingly ahead of its time), this one didn't.

Sorry to burst your bubble but no, thats not how it works.

learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/cloning/cloningmyths/
>Myth #2
>genes help determine traits, environmental influences have a considerable impact on shaping an individual's physical appearance and personality. For example, do you know any identical twins? They are genetically the same, but do they really look and act exactly alike?

Like I said, you can have the same DNA (mold) as someone else and be different, not just on your mind (flavor) but also on your physical appearance (decoration).

Cyberpunk mad scientist Jesus looked pretty cool, though. 2049 is better than 2019. You are being contrarian faggot....

Yes.

I thought Ridley Scott directed bladerunner

No, Ridley Scott directed Prometheus

But that was wayland not Wallace or maybe I'm getting them mixed up I haven't seen Prometheus in a while

>....
What are you, 14?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics