Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

Chersk said:

Am I the only person that didn’t hate Jared Leto in the film?

Click to expand...

The role of Niander Wallace was written for and with only David Bowie in mind. Villeneuve imagined the 'blind toymaker', and envisioned a much older and wizened David Bowie from the Labyrinth.

NOW how do you think Jared Leto performed in that role?

Superior, yet subservient. Brainwashing rather than programming. Eugenics instead of robotics, etc.

Mizake said:

I hope the bean counters at Alcon and Sony take into account it's a 3 hour movie and cut it a little slack. Obviously it was a conscious decision on their part to not edit it down, but at 3 hours it's gonna lose a showing every day. A $30 million opening would be like a $45 million opening for a 2 hour movie. That $400 million number they threw out there is a little scary though, I wonder in movie history how many 3-hour + movies have hit that mark. I think this movie will eventually make money down the line, but it's doubtful to me they will hit the $400m mark they are needing. Sad, this movie is so much more cerebral than all those super-hero movies that get shat out every year. I applaud them for taking the risk to make this movie, but if this movie doesn't do well it's just going to give studios more reason to do super-hero and transformer sequels instead of new IPs, which is sad to me.

Click to expand...

Dances with Wolves, Lord of the Rings, Titanic.

Probably not a hell of a lot of them.

And it seems that I was wrong. They DID sort of manage to capture Mercerism, didn't they? Not the way dick did it, but they did keep one of his most important themes.

Loved the movie.

I liked the rebellion, but i'm kinda sad they missed an opportunity for some continuity by bringing in Iggy back from the short. Once the glasses removed, I pretty much mentally let out a long sigh. Instead, Freysa? I don't recall her in the first movie, or is she a book character? idk

I get that the shorts, in a way were an after thought.

Doc Badger best character.

Saw this yesterday at the new imax near me & loved it...now understand why they included 'tears in the rain' in the soundtrack.

For a sequel, I was very impressed. And that spoiler above...I didn't see that coming at all!!!

Mizake said:

Spoiler

I would even go a step further. It doesn't make any sense why someone would create replicants without following Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics. That's the built-in failsafe we already know about. If Wallace had done that (or even going back to Tyrell in the first movie), then you wouldn't have to worry about replicants harming humans and destroying our civilization. You wouldn't have Luv killing the female police chief. Etc. So it does take a bit of suspension of belief. Still, taken as a whole I loved this movie.

Click to expand...

Phazael said:

That is the central dilemma of both movies (and the book that was the source material). You cannot have that level of control/restraint on a biological construct with all the variables involved. And even if you could, it would not be the seemless human seeming product that they were aiming for. "More Human than Human"

Click to expand...

Yeah. The whole point of "replicant" is that they are not robots. It's why the toy maker from the first film began building little robots as a form of therapy--he knew what he made professionally was actual life, not really different from other humans outside of enhancements and a poison pill.

That's why you need a blade runner to detect them, and you can't just use some imagining diagnostic. Physically they are human, cellular based life. The test the blade runners give is really just a psych evaluation meant to test discrepancies in reactions from not having the normal brain development a human has growing up. But that was one of the issues in the first film, memories of childhood were being grafted onto the replicant's brain during development to mimic even that and that was making it harder and harder even for blade runners to tell who was "really human".

Deckard was the bad guy of the film...he was killing slaves who were human and looking for freedom. He was a slave catcher. Which is why he hated doing it, most likely because the replicants had gone from bad copies of human (An obvious labor force), to being fully human in his lifetime.

Well, at least now we now know the rape scene in the first movie wasn't legit rape.

Saw this the second time yesterday. Easily my favorite of 2017.

You want one of them cinemark XD theaters or somewhere with a really blinged out bass section.

khorum said:

Spoiler

Sean Young filmed some scenes in secret though. They prolly tracked her face and used her real voice.

Click to expand...

LOL yeah, i figured they just used motion tracking and the voice track like I said. The result is exactly as it was in the 1982 print. Even the outfit.