Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

Blitz said:

Because a "manufactured human being" being able to give birth isn't high stakes enough..

Click to expand...

Which isn't resolved. The film just stops after the rescue. You don't see the impact it would have.

Sure now Wallace can't make reproducing replicants and cause chaos that way, but the rebels still want to show it off eventually and surely if it's been done before someone can do it again.

If anything the stakes were too high maybe. Remember, the first movie was just a simple detective noir story with NO stakes. Roy Batty and friends come down to Earth to try and get some answers, murder a bunch of people, and die wondering about that most human question: did my life matter?

Whatever happens to Deckard and Rachel is completely unimportant, they are just two cogs in a giant machine. Tyrell being killed was the only significant thing that happened.

In 2049 we get the seeds of the replicant revolution, we see that Wallace wants to send trillions of replicants to conquer the entire universe, and there are other hints at more craziness. For example Wallace clearly comes down to Earth from somewhere else (he is greeted by Luv in the dark room), is it possible that Wallace has figured out how to download human consciousness into replicant bodies since that would be far more efficient than coming out from a far flung off world colony? That would mean immortality, multiple bodies existing simultaneously, etc. Maybe the blindness and the creepy hover bots are a side affect of human download not being 100% perfect yet.

Its a $150m art house movie which is just kinda insane, sadly I don't think we're gonna get much more of this kind of movie again. It'll be interesting to see what kind of impact this has on Dune, since its also a similarly niche sci fi high concept that isn't going to appeal to mass box office if they keep the high brow ideas intact.

spronk said:

I

Its a $150m art house movie which is just kinda insane, sadly I don't think we're gonna get much more of this kind of movie again.

Click to expand...

Its ludicrous. These type of "con men" like Villeneuve only come around once every blue moon.

The French accent must have had the producers entranced. One doesn't simply just tell a French accent what to do, you know? Its like Mordor.

*broken French* "You're not telling me what to do man, ok? Don't call this phone again or I'll make this movie 4 hours" Trump'd those producers he did.

i'd rather have one BR2049 or Edge of Tomorrow than a dozen independence day 2, Suicide Squads, Transformers 5, total recall/predator/conan/terminator reboots

spronk said:

i'd rather have one BR2049 or Edge of Tomorrow than a dozen independence day 2, Suicide Squads, Transformers 5, total recall/predator/conan/terminator reboots

Click to expand...

I try to think of it as having a bunch of these shitpiles ends up paying for the good shit. I know that's really only incidental since I'm sure they'd still rather replace the good shit with more money making shitpiles if they could and the good shit only ends up getting made when someone builds up enough clout and goodwill to get it done.

I think this movie will gain more traction as it becomes more accessible and people can digest it a bit more.

One sitting isn't enough, yet the movie is super long and doesn't really lend itself to multiple viewings unless your obsessed with the genre.

Movie reminds me of Fury Road. After Fury Road I was confused, that movie was a constant assault on my senses unlike anything I had seen before. It moved very quickly with a lot of missing context for what was happening.

I was thinking "What was that!? Was it good?". I then watched the older Mad Max movies and rewatched Fury Road, deciding that yes it was pretty fucking great.

Blade Runner is a similar "what the fuck was that?" feeling. But instead of being bombarded by noise and action, I was tested with how much boring I could cope with. I got the point of many scenes half way through yet they kept going.

I think if someone cut an hour or so out of it (don't cut any scenes, just speed most of them up) then you'd have a good movie and we would get the sequels for the rest of the story.

I'd suggest not watching any more movies by this director, like, ever again.

Never ever. Really, no.

I'd suggest he not post about any more movies by any director, like, ever again.

Never ever. Really, no.

It isn't just not being familiar with Villeneuve's preferred style but what the intersection of this director with this genre (sci-fi noir, specifically the noir half of that equation) is likely to produce. Honestly the finished product ran past my expectations as well in some regards.

Article by the Obvious Times, "Why is my noir movie noir?"

Second page featurette, "Lawns, are they really green?"

Hey I don't mind the slow atmospheric style fiilm, I hated Ghost in the Shell because it didn't have the 5 minute long cyberpunk city montage and I thoughly enjoyed Angel's Egg whatever the fuck that movie is. Just because it's in that style doesn't make it good.

Possibly the bland acting from Harrison Ford and Ryan Gosling was the issue. Possibly the replicants not really being sympathetic enough since I don't think they showed quite enough of them being disposable people and most of the legal ones they showed seemed to just have normal lives (Detective, Corporate, Prostitute). Possibly core and interesting concepts not really being explained such as how replicants are made exactly or why Las Vegas? is abandoned or how off world works (though I know filling in the blanks yourself can be a feature of these things).

Not sure what I've said that's trollish.

Great setting/cinematography, some good scenes which are just too long for what you are being shown, bad acting from the two main actors, boring story.

Chris said:

Hey I don't mind the slow atmospheric style fiilm, I hated Ghost in the Shell because it didn't have the 5 minute long cyberpunk city montage and I thoughly enjoyed Angel's Egg whatever the fuck that movie is. Just because it's in that style doesn't make it good.

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't make it good. That's right.


But lingering sequences and poker faces are all a part of the noir genre. That's why people think you're trolling, because you are criticizing the movie based on the precise stuff that makes up the entire thing called "noir" and throwing rocks at it while pretending to like atmospheric movies.

- "Scenes went on too long". Yeah tense lingering noir shots.

- "Actors sucked, terrible". Yeah dispassioned, yet still impassioned, interpretative poker noir performances.


Have you seen Dark City? Did you have the same criticism?


Don't take this the wrong way but you might just be more of a D.C. Marvel guy. There's always that next Batman Supes movie that should kill!

jayrebb said:

No, it doesn't make it good. That's right.


But lingering sequences and poker faces are all a part of the noir genre. That's why people think you're trolling, because you are criticizing the movie based on the precise stuff that makes up the entire thing called "noir" and throwing rocks at it while pretending to like atmospheric movies.

- "Scenes went on too long". Yeah tense lingering noir shots.

- "Actors sucked, terrible". Yeah dispassioned, yet still impassioned, interpretative poker noir performances.


Have you seen Dark City? Did you have the same criticism?


Don't take this the wrong way but you might just be more of a D.C. Marvel guy. There's always that next Batman Supes movie that should kill!

Click to expand...

Fuck you! I'm taking it the wrong way, I don't like Noir so I must only like superheroes... Perhaps this is the first Noir movie I've seen? I was expecting cyberpunk - you know because of the advertising. I didn't see the first one since I wasn't born (I'm 30). My mistake. The cyberpunk style setting was perfect as I've said already, other than the Las Vegas bit.

Now I know that Noir means that I won't give a shit about the main characters because they have no emotions and there'll be tense lingering shots of a hologram sex AI overlaid onto a replicant prostitute or a guy stroking a greased up naked woman.

Is Harrison Ford being the same confused looking wooden grandpa he is in Indiana Jones 4 and Star Wars 7 part of Noir? (now I'm trolling)