Blade Runner 2049

User avatar
Listyguy
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1873
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 8:34 pm

Blade Runner 2049

Postby Listyguy » Fri Oct 06, 2017 4:41 pm

So one of the forum's favorite movies has a sequel which came out today. I'll probably see it sometime this weekend. I'm not sure what to expect, but my one hope is that the "is Deckard a replicant" question doesn't get overtly answered.

User avatar
bootsy
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 958
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:38 pm

Re: Blade Runner 2049

Postby bootsy » Mon Oct 09, 2017 4:37 am

Saw this yesterday and it will definitely take me multiple viewings to really appreciate this like the first movie if I do appreciate it at all. There are some really good things about this like the cinematography, the score for the most part although some of it is rehashed, Gosling was good. Leto not really impressed with and felt like his character was needed in this movie. The movie seemed to hint at some things and that is why I need to see it again to see for any signs or clues. Overall it is good, I'd rate it in the 7.5-8/10 range.

Midaso
Let's Get It On
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:01 am

Re: Blade Runner 2049

Postby Midaso » Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:55 am

Opinion seems to be split on this one: it's either a masterpiece or it's boring and dull. Personally,I'm closer to the latter,would give it 6/10. It just doesn't have the intelligence or tension I hoped it would and felt very long and bloated. Don't think I'll watch it again,I don't see it as any more than just another serviceable Hollywood thriller

User avatar
prosecutorgodot
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 5:53 am
Location: San Francisco, California

Re: Blade Runner 2049

Postby prosecutorgodot » Tue Oct 10, 2017 5:26 am

I think it was a very beautiful-looking movie. Cinematography, camera work, framing, etc. etc. all very top quality. Since I am not totally a fan of the original, I cannot in my right mind criticize "2049" anymore beyond that.

Without spoilers, does anyone else think one of the female characters has an accent similar to Bjork? Also, where does the yellow flower come from?

Also, if anyone cares to, please explain the appeal of Ryan Gosling, because to me, he is on par with Johnny Galecki, who I know a lot of hipster-y screen nerds say is a terrible actor. I just feel like anyone can do what Gosling does, at least what he does in every single movie I've seen him in.

I think people who say this film drags haven't seen much anime... I say this because I think "2049" feels so long because it takes time to let the viewer soak in the environment, which the original also did.

To Listyguy's query, I would say that technically Deckard's dilemma is not made crystal clear, you would probably double down on whatever theory you already held...

If I had to give a rating, I'd probably say a "light 8/10." Definitely worth seeing. To me, Interstellar still takes the crown as the most visually stunning film of the past 5 years.

User avatar
bootsy
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 958
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:38 pm

Re: Blade Runner 2049

Postby bootsy » Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:32 pm

prosecutorgodot wrote:I think it was a very beautiful-looking movie. Cinematography, camera work, framing, etc. etc. all very top quality. Since I am not totally a fan of the original, I cannot in my right mind criticize "2049" anymore beyond that.

Without spoilers, does anyone else think one of the female characters has an accent similar to Bjork? Also, where does the yellow flower come from?

Also, if anyone cares to, please explain the appeal of Ryan Gosling, because to me, he is on par with Johnny Galecki, who I know a lot of hipster-y screen nerds say is a terrible actor. I just feel like anyone can do what Gosling does, at least what he does in every single movie I've seen him in.

I think people who say this film drags haven't seen much anime... I say this because I think "2049" feels so long because it takes time to let the viewer soak in the environment, which the original also did.

To Listyguy's query, I would say that technically Deckard's dilemma is not made crystal clear, you would probably double down on whatever theory you already held...

If I had to give a rating, I'd probably say a "light 8/10." Definitely worth seeing. To me, Interstellar still takes the crown as the most visually stunning film of the past 5 years.

Agree with you on Interstellar although I think Gravity, Life of Pi, Mad Max: Fury Road are up there too.
As for Gosling, I think he chooses roles that have a subtlety to them that's for sure. I haven't seen La La Land and I heard he was very good in that. I liked him in The Nice Guys which showed his range. I've also liked him on his two appearances on Saturday Night Live as well. I tend to not be too critical of actors to the point where I'm asking what their appeal is unless they are just absolutely horrible and I can't avoid noticing it which Gosling doesn't fit into that category to me.

User avatar
Listyguy
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1873
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 8:34 pm

Re: Blade Runner 2049

Postby Listyguy » Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:26 pm

Saw the movie last night. I definitely enjoyed the visuals and the score, but I'm lukewarm on the movie as a whole. I do think it raises some interesting philosophical questions though.

I also think it's runtime was too long. Basically every version of the original Blade Runner hovered around the 2 hours long. 2049 was about 50 minutes longer than that. Does 2049 really have that much more substance than the original to warrant the extra time? I think not. There's probably 20 minutes worth of material that could have been cut out (for example. the hologram sex scene went on a little bit too long).

User avatar
Rob
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1105
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 3:53 pm
Location: Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Re: Blade Runner 2049

Postby Rob » Sat Oct 14, 2017 3:30 pm

Listyguy wrote:There's probably 20 minutes worth of material that could have been cut out (for example. the hologram sex scene went on a little bit too long).


That scene was one of the best of the film. I was really blown away by this movie in general. I'm sorry to see that this movie went from extremely high ratings to a lukewarm response almost everywhere within probably less than a week (with apparently no fans on this forum). I was very skeptical about this whole thing, but thought it was very, very satisfying. I'm a big fan of the original and this one nails the strongest quality of its predecessor: it sad, but romantic sense of poetry. Visually and sonic this was constantly inventive. I also liked the narrative a lot, not just rehashing the themes of the original, but finding new angles for them. It is one of the rare sequels that seems to had as a goal to expand on what the original did and it succeeds. Up front I didn't think Blade Runner needed a sequel, let alone one made 35 years later. It ended up being a movie that immersed me like only a couple do each year. A movie to swim in and to drown in.

The weird thing about the criticism is that there it is the same levelled at the original by people who couldn't get into it (and let's not forget that Blade Runner 1 is first and foremost a cult favorite), especially that it is slow and empty. I love this films tempo (and even its length) and I think there is a lot to it. That whole subplot about the hologram for example adds another layer about perception of emotions and captures Blade Runner's odd romantic atmosphere to perfection.

User avatar
notbrianeno
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 724
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 4:47 am

Re: Blade Runner 2049

Postby notbrianeno » Sun Oct 15, 2017 7:21 pm

Rob wrote:
Listyguy wrote:There's probably 20 minutes worth of material that could have been cut out (for example. the hologram sex scene went on a little bit too long).


That scene was one of the best of the film. I was really blown away by this movie in general. I'm sorry to see that this movie went from extremely high ratings to a lukewarm response almost everywhere within probably less than a week (with apparently no fans on this forum). I was very skeptical about this whole thing, but thought it was very, very satisfying. I'm a big fan of the original and this one nails the strongest quality of its predecessor: it sad, but romantic sense of poetry. Visually and sonic this was constantly inventive. I also liked the narrative a lot, not just rehashing the themes of the original, but finding new angles for them. It is one of the rare sequels that seems to had as a goal to expand on what the original did and it succeeds. Up front I didn't think Blade Runner needed a sequel, let alone one made 35 years later. It ended up being a movie that immersed me like only a couple do each year. A movie to swim in and to drown in.

The weird thing about the criticism is that there it is the same levelled at the original by people who couldn't get into it (and let's not forget that Blade Runner 1 is first and foremost a cult favorite), especially that it is slow and empty. I love this films tempo (and even its length) and I think there is a lot to it. That whole subplot about the hologram for example adds another layer about perception of emotions and captures Blade Runner's odd romantic atmosphere to perfection.


I was absolutely mesmerized by this film. Every shot is perfectly composed and brimming with tension. Gosling's performance as K was excellent, and watching his character travel from the "uncanny valley" to genuity was thrilling. Leto, for the scarce moments he was on screen, exuded the menace and gravity that was sorely missed in his performance in Suicide Squad. Ford nails his role perfectly like trying on a familiar, well-worn shirt. The only qualm I have about the film is the apparent sidelining of female characters to function as plot devices and stand-ins, but even with this considered its the best film I've seen this year.
Current AOTY 2017: Björk | Utopia
Current SOTY 2017: Björk | "Body Memory"


Return to “Films, movies, motion pictures...”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests