Movies BLADE RUNNER 2049 Thread v.2
- Thread starter Dragonlordxxxxx
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2006
- Messages
- 20,760
- Reaction score
- 65
Beautiful film. Ana de armas tho
Harrison wasn't in it as much as I thought he'd be
Harrison wasn't in it as much as I thought he'd be
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2006
- Messages
- 61,991
- Reaction score
- 16,744
She's like Miley Cyrus gone right.
G
Guestx
Guest
That's what I said about Leto. I expected more than 10 mins of screen time.
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2009
- Messages
- 4,910
- Reaction score
- 4,268
I saw it last night. I have some general musings...
- It was a good movie, but somewhat longer than it needed to be.
- It's been at least 15 years since I saw the original, and I think my experience watching this one was diminished because I didn't remember all that much about the details of the original. But I hesitate to recommend that you make sure to watch the original right before going to see this one, because there's like three or four versions that apparently differ in pretty significant ways and I have no idea which one fits better with this one.
- Ana de Armas literally took this movie, put it in her pocket and walked out with it. Stole it right from under everyone else. And here I thought she was only good for eye candy. I seriously underestimated her.
- Seriously, I admit that the movie is gorgeously photographed, but if you cut the sweeping vistas of the spectacular scenery by half you could shave a good 30 minutes of the run time of this film.
- As a fan of space opera, I got a mild case of genre blue balls with all the references to off-world colonies and battles. As if the famous monologue of the first one wasn't enough!
- Speaking of blue balls, there is a scene at the climax of the movie that one gets the distinct impression would've been awesome if we could actually see what the fuck was going on. You'll know the one when you see it.
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2010
- Messages
- 1,182
- Reaction score
- 0
Honestly I kept thinking "Her"
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
- Messages
- 35,141
- Reaction score
- 951
G
Guestx
Guest
Hmm?
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,298
- Reaction score
- 16,059
Loved it. Giving it an 8 right now, but it definitely warrants a second or third viewing.
Saw it in IMAX. Would recommend everybody who has to opportunity to do so as well.
Still marinating.
Saw it in IMAX. Would recommend everybody who has to opportunity to do so as well.
Still marinating.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,298
- Reaction score
- 16,059
Same. That scene plays out almost identically. The big difference being:
Samantha had legitimately evolved, whereas Joi was just a program
Bautista is a gem, btw. I hope so much the he continues to get great roles.
Also good to see Dana DeArmond getting legit roles.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,298
- Reaction score
- 16,059
I would also recommend that everybody watch the shorts before seeing this.
I don't even think its necessary to watch the original to enjoy it.
I don't even think its necessary to watch the original to enjoy it.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2009
- Messages
- 86,744
- Reaction score
- 26,249
Update: October 7, 2017
Dragonlord's Review of BLADE RUNNER 2049 (No Spoilers)
Ridley Scott's Blade Runner is considered to be one of the best science fiction films ever made and changed the genre landscape immeasurably in all storytelling medium format. Armed with the best cast and crew working in Hollywood today, on-fire director Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners, Sicario, Arrivial) dares to revisit Philip K. Dick's dystopian neo-noir world in hopes of capturing lightning in a bottle twice.
Set thirty years after the events of the first film, Blade Runner 2049 follows LAPD Officer K (Ryan Gosling), a blade runner whose investigation on a replicant leads him to a shocking discovery that could potentially cause cataclysmic upheaval in their fragile society. Ryan, who is no stranger to characters glowering and with little dialogue, carries the film admirably, giving a fine performance despite the limitations of his role.
2049 retains the original's existential main theme of "what it means to be human" but a new gamechanging element adds another layer to the philosophical discussion and hints at an even bigger story that might be told in another sequel. Further adding more insight to the subject matter is a minor subplot that's reminiscennt of Spike Jonze's Her. It's a bit disappointing though when an answer to the main theme is spoon-fed to the audience via one of the latecomer character's speeches near the end.
Emulating the sluggish pace of the original, 2049 lacks any sense of urgency or a compelling narrative, unlike the original film where it had the threat of rogue replicants moving the plot forward and keeping things interesting. So when Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) finally shows up, it's a refreshing jolt of energy. For a film clocking in at 163 minutes, it feels there should be more. When the movie ends, some of you will ask, "that's it?" At times it feels like an incomplete movie, especially with the introduction of a bigger subplot brewing in the third act.
As for the rest of the main cast, Robin Wright and Ana de Armas were very likable while Jared Leto was part-fascinating, part-pretentious as the megalomaniac CEO of Wallace Corp. with a tendency for overbearing try-hard philosophical monologue. Dave Bautista gave a surprising good performance.
Beautifully capturing the desolation and harshness of a world barely hanging in there, this might be the film that finally wins uber-cinematographer Roger Deakins an Oscar after 13 nominations. Villeneuve mutes the colors and imbues a minimalistic approach visually but fails to recapture the nitty-gritty and bustling look of neo-metropolitan city of Los Angeles. The city oftentimes look abandoned, barely showing any people on the streets or lights from the buildings in the aerial shots and also discouraging to see only one car flying around the city. The practical sets look amazing and some of the set design are intriguing. They went out of their way to make the future tech compatible with the 1982 film, giving them a retro (and at times outdated) feel.
Fantastic score by Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch, synchronously in line with Vangelis' haunting synth music from the original film. But there are times when Zimmer and Wallfisch's ominous blaring score gets tiresome, like when there's nothing exciting happening but the music says otherwise.
Many are throwing around the word "masterpiece" in regards to the sequel but for me, Blade Runner 2049 was an entertaining and ambitious but somewhat underwhelming detective noir sci-fi film that was overlong and had pacing issues. But just like the original film, repeat viewings might bring more insight and a better appreciation for the sequel.
Preliminary Rating: 7.5/10
The new replicants are programmed to obey their superiors. So how come K was able to lie and disobey orders.
Why give replicants emotions in the first place if they're just meant to be slaves for all intents and purposes. This would be akin to giving intelligence and the ability of speech to farm animals and pets - nothing good will come out of it.
Wallace confessed wanting to create more replicants to be added to the work force across the many off worlds. So why would he want to know how to reproduce replicants the natural way when it takes years for one to reach adulthood. I assume he can just create hundreds of replicants in an assembly line in a single day.
It would have been more believable motive if Wallace wanted the replicant child to quash any potential replicant uprising in the future.
I like Joshi, she seems like a sharp, tough cop but was disappointed with her last scene. She already suspects that the mortician/lab guy was killed by Wallace Corp to cover up the existence of the replicant child. So when Luv entered her room, Joshi already suspects that Luv wants to know K’s location. And since Joshi was not going to give up K, she should have known that she would also be killed. Joshi should have drawn her gun from a drawer or something the moment Luv showed up.
Luv killing Joshi in the middle of a police station and nothing happens to her seemed ridiculous. I’d buy it if they explained Wallace Corp’s influence is great and the cops are corrupt.
I'm normally a romantic but for some reason Joi's death didn't hit me emotionally.
Luv not taking K into custody or killing him when she abducted Deckard was just stupid.
Despite what Ridley Scott said, it is still unknown if Deckard is a replicant or not.
Dragonlord's Review of BLADE RUNNER 2049 (No Spoilers)
Ridley Scott's Blade Runner is considered to be one of the best science fiction films ever made and changed the genre landscape immeasurably in all storytelling medium format. Armed with the best cast and crew working in Hollywood today, on-fire director Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners, Sicario, Arrivial) dares to revisit Philip K. Dick's dystopian neo-noir world in hopes of capturing lightning in a bottle twice.
Set thirty years after the events of the first film, Blade Runner 2049 follows LAPD Officer K (Ryan Gosling), a blade runner whose investigation on a replicant leads him to a shocking discovery that could potentially cause cataclysmic upheaval in their fragile society. Ryan, who is no stranger to characters glowering and with little dialogue, carries the film admirably, giving a fine performance despite the limitations of his role.
2049 retains the original's existential main theme of "what it means to be human" but a new gamechanging element adds another layer to the philosophical discussion and hints at an even bigger story that might be told in another sequel. Further adding more insight to the subject matter is a minor subplot that's reminiscennt of Spike Jonze's Her. It's a bit disappointing though when an answer to the main theme is spoon-fed to the audience via one of the latecomer character's speeches near the end.
Emulating the sluggish pace of the original, 2049 lacks any sense of urgency or a compelling narrative, unlike the original film where it had the threat of rogue replicants moving the plot forward and keeping things interesting. So when Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) finally shows up, it's a refreshing jolt of energy. For a film clocking in at 163 minutes, it feels there should be more. When the movie ends, some of you will ask, "that's it?" At times it feels like an incomplete movie, especially with the introduction of a bigger subplot brewing in the third act.
As for the rest of the main cast, Robin Wright and Ana de Armas were very likable while Jared Leto was part-fascinating, part-pretentious as the megalomaniac CEO of Wallace Corp. with a tendency for overbearing try-hard philosophical monologue. Dave Bautista gave a surprising good performance.
Beautifully capturing the desolation and harshness of a world barely hanging in there, this might be the film that finally wins uber-cinematographer Roger Deakins an Oscar after 13 nominations. Villeneuve mutes the colors and imbues a minimalistic approach visually but fails to recapture the nitty-gritty and bustling look of neo-metropolitan city of Los Angeles. The city oftentimes look abandoned, barely showing any people on the streets or lights from the buildings in the aerial shots and also discouraging to see only one car flying around the city. The practical sets look amazing and some of the set design are intriguing. They went out of their way to make the future tech compatible with the 1982 film, giving them a retro (and at times outdated) feel.
Fantastic score by Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch, synchronously in line with Vangelis' haunting synth music from the original film. But there are times when Zimmer and Wallfisch's ominous blaring score gets tiresome, like when there's nothing exciting happening but the music says otherwise.
Many are throwing around the word "masterpiece" in regards to the sequel but for me, Blade Runner 2049 was an entertaining and ambitious but somewhat underwhelming detective noir sci-fi film that was overlong and had pacing issues. But just like the original film, repeat viewings might bring more insight and a better appreciation for the sequel.
Preliminary Rating: 7.5/10
The new replicants are programmed to obey their superiors. So how come K was able to lie and disobey orders.
Why give replicants emotions in the first place if they're just meant to be slaves for all intents and purposes. This would be akin to giving intelligence and the ability of speech to farm animals and pets - nothing good will come out of it.
Wallace confessed wanting to create more replicants to be added to the work force across the many off worlds. So why would he want to know how to reproduce replicants the natural way when it takes years for one to reach adulthood. I assume he can just create hundreds of replicants in an assembly line in a single day.
It would have been more believable motive if Wallace wanted the replicant child to quash any potential replicant uprising in the future.
I like Joshi, she seems like a sharp, tough cop but was disappointed with her last scene. She already suspects that the mortician/lab guy was killed by Wallace Corp to cover up the existence of the replicant child. So when Luv entered her room, Joshi already suspects that Luv wants to know K’s location. And since Joshi was not going to give up K, she should have known that she would also be killed. Joshi should have drawn her gun from a drawer or something the moment Luv showed up.
Luv killing Joshi in the middle of a police station and nothing happens to her seemed ridiculous. I’d buy it if they explained Wallace Corp’s influence is great and the cops are corrupt.
I'm normally a romantic but for some reason Joi's death didn't hit me emotionally.
Luv not taking K into custody or killing him when she abducted Deckard was just stupid.
Despite what Ridley Scott said, it is still unknown if Deckard is a replicant or not.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,298
- Reaction score
- 16,059
Update: October 7, 2017
Dragonlord's Review of BLADE RUNNER 2049 (No Spoilers)
Ridley Scott's Blade Runner is considered to be one of the best science fiction films ever made and changed the genre landscape immeasurably in all storytelling medium format. Armed with the best cast and crew working in Hollywood today, on-fire director Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners, Sicario, Arrivial) dares to revisit Philip K. Dick's dystopian neo-noir world in hopes of capturing lightning in a bottle twice.
Set thirty years after the events of the first film, Blade Runner 2049 follows LAPD Officer K (Ryan Gosling), a blade runner whose investigation on a replicant leads him to a shocking discovery that could potentially cause cataclysmic upheaval in their fragile society. Ryan, who is no stranger to characters glowering and with little dialogue, carries the film admirably, giving a fine performance despite the limitations of his role.
2049 retains the original's existential main theme of "what it means to be human" but a new gamechanging element adds another layer to the philosophical discussion and hints at an even bigger story that might be told in another sequel. Further adding more insight to the subject matter is a minor subplot that's reminiscennt of Spike Jonze's Her. It's a bit disappointing though when an answer to the main theme is spoon-fed to the audience via one of the latecomer character's speeches near the end.
Emulating the sluggish pace of the original, 2049 lacks any sense of urgency or a compelling narrative, unlike the original film where it had the threat of rogue replicants moving the plot forward and keeping things interesting. So when Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) finally shows up, it's a refreshing jolt of energy. For a film clocking in at 163 minutes, it feels there should be more. When the movie ends, some of you will ask, "that's it?" At times it feels like an incomplete movie, especially with the introduction of a bigger subplot brewing in the third act.
As for the rest of the main cast, Robin Wright and Ana de Armas were very likable while Jared Leto was part-fascinating, part-pretentious as the megalomaniac CEO of Wallace Corp. with a tendency for overbearing try-hard philosophical monologue. Dave Bautista gave a surprising good performance.
Beautifully capturing the desolation and harshness of a world barely hanging in there, this might be the film that finally wins uber-cinematographer Roger Deakins an Oscar after 13 nominations. Villeneuve mutes the colors and imbues a minimalistic approach visually but fails to recapture the nitty-gritty and bustling look of neo-metropolitan city of Los Angeles. The city oftentimes look abandoned, barely showing any people on the streets or lights from the buildings in the aerial shots and also discouraging to see only one car flying around the city. The practical sets look amazing and some of the set design are intriguing. They went out of their way to make the future tech compatible with the 1982 film, giving them a retro (and at times outdated) feel.
Fantastic score by Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch, synchronously in line with Vangelis' haunting synth music from the original film. But there are times when Zimmer and Wallfisch's ominous blaring score gets tiresome, like when there's nothing exciting happening but the music says otherwise.
Many are throwing around the word "masterpiece" in regards to the sequel but for me, Blade Runner 2049 was an entertaining and ambitious but somewhat underwhelming detective noir sci-fi film that was overlong and had pacing issues. But just like the original film, repeat viewings might bring more insight and a better appreciation for the sequel.
Preliminary Rating: 7.5/10
The new replicants are programmed to obey their superiors. So how come K was able to lie and disobey orders.
Why give replicants emotions in the first place if they're just meant to be slaves for all intents and purposes. This would be akin to giving intelligence and the ability of speech to farm animals and pets - nothing good will come out of it.
Wallace confessed wanting to create more replicants to be added to the work force across the many off worlds. So why would he want to know how to reproduce replicants the natural way when it takes years for one to reach adulthood. I assume he can just create hundreds of replicants in an assembly line in a single day.
It would have been more believable motive if Wallace wanted the replicant child to quash any potential replicant uprising in the future.
I like Joshi, she seems like a sharp, tough cop but was disappointed with her last scene. She already suspects that the mortician/lab guy was killed by Wallace Corp to cover up the existence of the replicant child. So when Luv entered her room, Joshi already suspects that Luv wants to know K’s location. And since Joshi was not going to give up K, she should have known that she would also be killed. Joshi should have drawn her gun from a drawer or something the moment Luv showed up.
Luv killing Joshi in the middle of a police station and nothing happens to her seemed ridiculous. I’d buy it if they explained Wallace Corp’s influence is great and the cops are corrupt.
I'm normally a romantic but for some reason Joi's death didn't hit me emotionally.
Luv not taking K into custody or killing him when she abducted Deckard was just stupid.
Despite what Ridley Scott said, it is still unknown if Deckard is a replicant or not.
1. Did he disobey her, or use her words literally to keep from doing what she wanted him to do.
2. I figure its a Matrix type scenario, whereby they aren't functional as desired without emotions.
3. If these Replicants are on many worlds, a born replicant could be raised by the time a new model could be created and ships millions of miles away in space, and for much less money. His motivations did kind of confuse me, tbh.
4-6. I love Robin, but she was miscast in the role of Joshi. I also felt she was the weakest character in the movie. Was that because of Robin or the writing IDK. But, yeah, she was the weak link of the movie, imo.
7. Agreed.
8. I thought Deckard admitted he was a Replicant in so many words?
2. I figure its a Matrix type scenario, whereby they aren't functional as desired without emotions.
3. If these Replicants are on many worlds, a born replicant could be raised by the time a new model could be created and ships millions of miles away in space, and for much less money. His motivations did kind of confuse me, tbh.
4-6. I love Robin, but she was miscast in the role of Joshi. I also felt she was the weakest character in the movie. Was that because of Robin or the writing IDK. But, yeah, she was the weak link of the movie, imo.
7. Agreed.
8. I thought Deckard admitted he was a Replicant in so many words?
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2009
- Messages
- 86,744
- Reaction score
- 26,249
I love your explanation for No. 3. I can totally buy it.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,298
- Reaction score
- 16,059
Update: October 7, 2017
Dragonlord's Review of BLADE RUNNER 2049 (No Spoilers)
Ridley Scott's Blade Runner is considered to be one of the best science fiction films ever made and changed the genre landscape immeasurably in all storytelling medium format. Armed with the best cast and crew working in Hollywood today, on-fire director Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners, Sicario, Arrivial) dares to revisit Philip K. Dick's dystopian neo-noir world in hopes of capturing lightning in a bottle twice.
Set thirty years after the events of the first film, Blade Runner 2049 follows LAPD Officer K (Ryan Gosling), a blade runner whose investigation on a replicant leads him to a shocking discovery that could potentially cause cataclysmic upheaval in their fragile society. Ryan, who is no stranger to characters glowering and with little dialogue, carries the film admirably, giving a fine performance despite the limitations of his role.
2049 retains the original's existential main theme of "what it means to be human" but a new gamechanging element adds another layer to the philosophical discussion and hints at an even bigger story that might be told in another sequel. Further adding more insight to the subject matter is a minor subplot that's reminiscennt of Spike Jonze's Her. It's a bit disappointing though when an answer to the main theme is spoon-fed to the audience via one of the latecomer character's speeches near the end.
Emulating the sluggish pace of the original, 2049 lacks any sense of urgency or a compelling narrative, unlike the original film where it had the threat of rogue replicants moving the plot forward and keeping things interesting. So when Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) finally shows up, it's a refreshing jolt of energy. For a film clocking in at 163 minutes, it feels there should be more. When the movie ends, some of you will ask, "that's it?" At times it feels like an incomplete movie, especially with the introduction of a bigger subplot brewing in the third act.
As for the rest of the main cast, Robin Wright and Ana de Armas were very likable while Jared Leto was part-fascinating, part-pretentious as the megalomaniac CEO of Wallace Corp. with a tendency for overbearing try-hard philosophical monologue. Dave Bautista gave a surprising good performance.
Beautifully capturing the desolation and harshness of a world barely hanging in there, this might be the film that finally wins uber-cinematographer Roger Deakins an Oscar after 13 nominations. Villeneuve mutes the colors and imbues a minimalistic approach visually but fails to recapture the nitty-gritty and bustling look of neo-metropolitan city of Los Angeles. The city oftentimes look abandoned, barely showing any people on the streets or lights from the buildings in the aerial shots and also discouraging to see only one car flying around the city. The practical sets look amazing and some of the set design are intriguing. They went out of their way to make the future tech compatible with the 1982 film, giving them a retro (and at times outdated) feel.
Fantastic score by Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch, synchronously in line with Vangelis' haunting synth music from the original film. But there are times when Zimmer and Wallfisch's ominous blaring score gets tiresome, like when there's nothing exciting happening but the music says otherwise.
Many are throwing around the word "masterpiece" in regards to the sequel but for me, Blade Runner 2049 was an entertaining and ambitious but somewhat underwhelming detective noir sci-fi film that was overlong and had pacing issues. But just like the original film, repeat viewings might bring more insight and a better appreciation for the sequel.
Preliminary Rating: 7.5/10
The new replicants are programmed to obey their superiors. So how come K was able to lie and disobey orders.
Why give replicants emotions in the first place if they're just meant to be slaves for all intents and purposes. This would be akin to giving intelligence and the ability of speech to farm animals and pets - nothing good will come out of it.
Wallace confessed wanting to create more replicants to be added to the work force across the many off worlds. So why would he want to know how to reproduce replicants the natural way when it takes years for one to reach adulthood. I assume he can just create hundreds of replicants in an assembly line in a single day.
It would have been more believable motive if Wallace wanted the replicant child to quash any potential replicant uprising in the future.
I like Joshi, she seems like a sharp, tough cop but was disappointed with her last scene. She already suspects that the mortician/lab guy was killed by Wallace Corp to cover up the existence of the replicant child. So when Luv entered her room, Joshi already suspects that Luv wants to know K’s location. And since Joshi was not going to give up K, she should have known that she would also be killed. Joshi should have drawn her gun from a drawer or something the moment Luv showed up.
Luv killing Joshi in the middle of a police station and nothing happens to her seemed ridiculous. I’d buy it if they explained Wallace Corp’s influence is great and the cops are corrupt.
I'm normally a romantic but for some reason Joi's death didn't hit me emotionally.
Luv not taking K into custody or killing him when she abducted Deckard was just stupid.
Despite what Ridley Scott said, it is still unknown if Deckard is a replicant or not.
also, the "obey" function must not be as absolute seeing as he had to get debriefed regularly. I highly doubt he would have performed seppuku like Wallace's henchman in the short.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,298
- Reaction score
- 16,059
maybe
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2009
- Messages
- 86,744
- Reaction score
- 26,249
Still not fine with it but I appreciate your reasoning.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 78,298
- Reaction score
- 16,059
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2008
- Messages
- 12,473
- Reaction score
- 8,415
I thought it was a movie that Philip K. Dick would have approved of. There isn't a lot of action but most of the action centers around very interesting concepts. The world that was created in the film felt like the most complete futuristic world since Minority Report. Hats off to the creators of this film. It felt futuristic but grounded in reality. I feel a little bad for anyone who was expecting this to be an action movie, sort of like the first Bladerunner. It is in my opinion though a better movie. The plot of the first Bladerunner movie was very flat, especially in comparison to the source material. There are a lot of concepts brought up that I thought were pretty interesting. I am not going to ruin it by spoiling the hooks but it went a step further as to what makes a machine a machine in a way I don't think has been done before. A lot of things were fleshed out more. This felt like we were seeing an entirely thought out world while the first blade runner movie felt like we were stuck in one city. It is a good movie. A very good sci fi flick. If someone is expecting an action popcorn movie, they will probably be pretty disappointed. Sci-fi fans ,especially people that enjoyed sci-fi from the 70s and 80s, will like this movie a lot.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2015
- Messages
- 14,108
- Reaction score
- 13,674
2 hours and 43 minutes?
