Blade Runner 2049

[kerraig UK]

21 minutes ago, Trigg said:

 

  Hide contents

Didn't Luv kill the female police superier (I forget her name) of K to get the location from the tracking on the computer?

 

Ah yep, that works, Missed that. Thanks

[Mogster]

I saw this yesterday, and I was pretty blown away. This was in spite of managing to pick the one screen in my local Vue with a dodgy subwoofer. It wasn't too prevalent, but it rattled whenever the bass hit a certain frequency, and this was obviously pretty bassy!

 

It was incredible though. I want to watch the original again as its been a while, but I think I actually prefer 2049! This movie has come a long way from me thinking it was the worst idea ever, through Villeneuve being announced as the director to finally seeing the thing.

 

Our viewing was pretty dead though. My friend and I were the only ones in the theatre for a while, until a handful of others finally turned up. I hope it does well over time, as it really was something special. I had a really strong urge to applaud at the end, before stopping myself as I'd have looked like a crazy man.

[Pob]

26 minutes ago, ngchol said:

 

 

  Hide contents

No, I mean after he was kidnapped by Luv - how did he find him then? And how did he get a new spinner?

 

Spoiler

Yeah that was glossed over. I can only assume he used his detective skillz and staked out Wallace HQ. No idea about the spinner. Was it another police spinner? Did he get it from the resistance?

 

[Talk Show Host]

We don't need another movie in this, as it will probably be about a war and it will end up being shit.

 

The entire franchise is an HBO series waiting to happen now.

[Calashnikov]

 

Does anyone think there might be legs to the theory about the dream designer girl actually being A.I. as opposed to being Deckard and Rachel's daughter by birth? The fact she's bound inside the globe, unable to touch anyone etc? Was there even in fact a baby born to a replicant, or was that perhaps a fabrication to give cause to and mobilise a replicant resistance or whatever? Or do the C-section marks found on Rachel's bones throw that theory out the window? Did she absolutely 100% have a child?

 

^ Regarding snowglobe girl, and general baby question.

[Talk Show Host]

I don't know who negged me but I think 2049 is an astonishing movie.

[Pob]

48 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

We don't need another movie in this, as it will probably be about a war and it will end up being shit.

 

The entire franchise is an HBO series waiting to happen now.

Given how it's bombed I don't think we'll see much else Blade Runner for a while. Although it is the kind of thing to have a legs, much like the original.

[kerraig UK]

It hasn't bombed. It's done very well for what it is. It's below estimates, but the estimates were fucking stupid. 

[Pob]

13 minutes ago, kerraig UK said:

It hasn't bombed. It's done very well for what it is. It's below estimates, but the estimates were fucking stupid. 

Surely judged against its budget it's doing very poorly?

[Talk Show Host]

35 minutes ago, kerraig UK said:

It hasn't bombed. It's done very well for what it is. It's below estimates, but the estimates were fucking stupid. 

 

It has kinda bombed. Its estimates were ridiculous, true, but it's highly unlikely to make any profits, by a big margin. Of course, its initial budget was based on these stupid estimates, so...

[Sidewaysbob]

Cult following. It'll make its money back eventually.

[Magoo]

5 minutes ago, Sidewaysbob said:

Cult following. It'll make its money back eventually.

 

Genuine question, I have no idea about movie economics. But does that still work the same way now? Thought with the astronomical budgets and so many films on the slate if something doesn't take off hugely in at least one territory then it's likely a flop.

 

Went to our community cinema and paid the princely sum of £2.50 for a ticket. Screen was good, thought the rear surrounds were very loud but that actually made the city sections enjoyable with the bustle going on around you.

 

Seriously one of the best films I've seen in ages, a beautiful, tense experience that left plenty of space and room for the imagination.

[ZOK]

11 hours ago, kerraig UK said:

Just back from second viewing and I think it is simply staggering. Not quite there with Tarkovsky or Kubrick, but above Nolan and Spielberg. And far superior than the original. It takes what minuscule lore is there in the original and imparts in it the depth of meaning we all imagined was there when we watched it as teenagers. I was never a fan of the original, but I was a huge Dawn of the Dead fan. I think it's a similar phenomenon. Blade Runner is like Dawn of the Dead. In that it is the imagining of a whole world in the mind of the viewer that allows it to live beyond it's limited means.

Anyway, a couple of random thoughts and observations:

 

 

 

Only the visuals are superior to the original. On every other aspect, it’s clearly inferior.

[DeciderVT]

1 hour ago, Pob said:

Given how it's bombed I don't think we'll see much else Blade Runner for a while. Although it is the kind of thing to have a legs, much like the original.

It won't have the legs of the original. Blade Runner showed us something daring and new that defined sci-fi that followed it, 2049 is highly unlikely to be as influential.

[CS2x]

What do people here make of the accusations of sexism and misogyny being directed towards the film? When looking it up today (not in relation to that question at all) I noticed that was a rising tide of negative articles and responses pointing out that the patriarchy was 'alive and well' in Blade Runner's future. 

 

As I shared earlier I was so positively mesmerised by the film (as was my wife, incidentally) that I didn't notice there were any issues here. The portrayal of virtual women made sense in light of the kind of dystopia the film was painting. Still, I'm not well versed in the more involved feminist critiques that can come against a film like this and would be interested in any alternative perspectives on this 'problem'! (As there doesn't seem to be any responses in defence of it so far - unless I've missed them.)

[kerraig UK]

15 minutes ago, DeciderVT said:

It won't have the legs of the original. Blade Runner showed us something daring and new that defined sci-fi that followed it, 2049 is highly unlikely to be as influential.

 

The new one will be far more profitable than the original. As to what it's influence will be 20 years from now, only a nutnut would profess to know.

I remember being in an academy screening of Big Lebowski and upon exit hearing the chairman state "It will be forgotten come award season". 

[kerraig UK]

37 minutes ago, ZOK said:

 

Only the visuals are superior to the original. On every other aspect, it’s clearly inferior.

No. It is better than the original in every single aspect other than Roy Batty. Clearly. Better score, photography, character, plot, pace, narrative, metaphor, mis en scene etc

I'm disappointed you think differently. I expected better from you.

[kerraig UK]

8 minutes ago, CS2x said:

What do people here make of the accusations of sexism and misogyny being directed towards the film? When looking it up today (not in relation to that question at all) I noticed that was a rising tide of negative articles and responses pointing out that the patriarchy was 'alive and well' in Blade Runner's future. 

 

A much bigger problem was the concept that California would be predominantly white with Japanese as a second language 25 years from now. Where are all the hispanics. Even the original had one.

I guess it's Trumps timeline!

[JohnC]

This had one too. One from the original even. 

[ZOK]

25 minutes ago, kerraig UK said:

No. It is better than the original in every single aspect other than Roy Batty. Clearly. Better score, photography, character, plot, pace, narrative, metaphor, mis en scene etc

I'm disappointed you think differently. I expected better from you.

 

I feel the same. How can you seemingly know so much about film and get it so wrong?

 

Like I said, the visuals in 2049 are better. But you can pick literally any other aspect of the movie, and Blade Runner is clearly the better flick. 

 

And plot?! The plot in this film is a real clanger, the worst part of the movie, and the only part where it’s objectively poor in its own right, rather than by comparison.

[Alan Stock]

2 hours ago, Calashnikov said:

  Hide contents

Does anyone think there might be legs to the theory about the dream designer girl actually being A.I. as opposed to being Deckard and Rachel's daughter by birth? The fact she's bound inside the globe, unable to touch anyone etc? Was there even in fact a baby born to a replicant, or was that perhaps a fabrication to give cause to and mobilise a replicant resistance or whatever? Or do the C-section marks found on Rachel's bones throw that theory out the window? Did she absolutely 100% have a child?

 

^ Regarding snowglobe girl, and general baby question.

 

We've discussed this idea of there being some connection with daughter and AI a little. Someone else put forward your idea about the daughter being a fake to mobilise the replicants. I think its a cool theory but there's a plenty of evidence the baby did exist. Mind you in the world of Bladerunner almost anything can be fabricated. If she was a fake, then a lot of the replicant rebels and Deckard would have to be in on it, in an even more convoluted coverup than the one we uncover during the film. 

 

Re: the globe, I didn't cotton onto the snowglobe comparisons until you said it. Plenty of symbolism there and maybe that was the intention with that final scene.

 

I haven't followed the feminism controversy about the film. I'd agree with CX2s that how women are portrayed in Bladerunner is just a reflection of that dystopian society. But when you look at the core female characters in 2049, they are as strong if not stronger than the male characters. In that society, many female AIs are merely slaves but most of them in the film are rebelling at that. The one human female, Joe's police chief is a strong-willed character who it turns out does have a heart when it comes down to it. I can see why feminists would be angry with the portrayal of many of the women as either slaves, subsurvient and trapped, or mental and murderous, but the males are hardly better. Deckard's a weak, twisted old Bladerunner, Joe is a slave himself, Wallace is a powerhungry mad freak, the orphanage owner is a sick bastard. It's a broken society.

[kerraig UK]

6 minutes ago, ZOK said:

 

I feel the same. How can you seemingly know so much about film and get it so wrong?

 

Like I said, the visuals in 2049 are better. But you can pick literally any other aspect of the movie, and Blade Runner is clearly the better flick. 

 

And plot?! The plot in this film is a real clanger, the worst part of the movie, and the only part where it’s objectively poor in its own right, rather than by comparison.

Well isn't that a thing. two people have a differing opinion over some art. Correct me if i'm wrong but i'm not sure if that's ever happened before.

[kerraig UK]

15 minutes ago, JohnC said:

This had one too. One from the original even. 

One

[Calashnikov]

34 minutes ago, kerraig UK said:

Better score

 

No fucking way, dude. The new score is solid and does a great job, absolutely, but the O.G. is iconic. I'm talking top 10 soundtracks ever. An absolute beacon within the medium. You can't say that about this new score, as good as it is.

[ZOK]

5 minutes ago, kerraig UK said:

Well isn't that a thing. two people have a differing opinion over some art. Correct me if i'm wrong but i'm not sure if that's ever happened before.

 

I thought I had corrected you because you are wrong.

[kerraig UK]

3 minutes ago, Calashnikov said:

 

No fucking way, dude. The new score is solid and does a great job, absolutely, but the O.G. is iconic. I'm talking top 10 soundtracks ever. An absolute beacon within the medium. You can't say that about this new score, as good as it is.

 

The OST to the original is mint. But so little is used in the actual film that it's another one o dem sacred cows

I'll giyan example. Listen to how straight up shit this cut is

 

 

[ZOK]

2 minutes ago, Calashnikov said:

 

No fucking way, dude. The new score is solid and does a great job, absolutely, but the O.G. is iconic. I'm talking top 10 soundtracks ever. An absolute beacon within the medium. You can't say that about this new score, as good as it is.

 

Exactly. I think kerraig was joking about that for effect though.

[kerraig UK]

3 minutes ago, ZOK said:

 

Exactly. I think kerraig was joking about that for effect though.

Just to show me up, hit me with scene with genius Vangelis score magic.

Here's one (hint, it's not the score):
 

 

[kerraig UK]

6 minutes ago, ZOK said:

 

I thought I had corrected you because you are wrong.

And yet, you just dug a deeper hole.

[Calashnikov]

6 minutes ago, kerraig UK said:

 

The OST to the original is mint. But so little is used in the actual film that it's another one o dem sacred cows

 

Good point, actually. There's more like an ephemeral ghostly trace of the OST within the actual film score itself, I suppose, but I think that's entirely in keeping with the film's overall dreamlike quality. I get that you don't regard that particular ambience as being a quality yourself, but it's my favourite thing about the entire Blade Runner thing, I think. I was quite sorry that the new one didn't quite have the same type of atmosphere throughout, maybe only in certain scenes. Still loved it though, obviously.