Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by ponkine, Dec 19, 2016.
All will be revealed in the directors cut.
hope so. That was my wife's first question when we left the theater
Sort out plot issues.
Especially the end scenes.
Very dark nighscenes, bad editing.
Looks like it's not happening
‘Blade Runner 2049’ Won’t Have a Director’s Cut, Says Denis Villeneuve
Blade Runner 2049: the four-hour cut we'll never see
I'd give Blade Runner 2049
a 6.5/10 rating.
Blade Runner (1982) 8/10
In 1982 when I viewed it for the first time the rating would be higher 9/10 at least.
Ah! That explains it.
His drone found signs of life - the bee hives, which presumably Deckard had set up as a source of food. He just went to the closest building to that.
It's not a "plane," it's his police car. Which is presumably armed with weapons, which he used to shoot down their vehicle. It's the same police car he had the entire movie, and the same one he uses to...
...take Deckard to see his daughter in at the end.
See above regarding the bees. Also, he was living in a huge casino that presumably had a ton of food (and, apparently, booze) stored away. As for electricity, presumably a lot of it is solar (in fact, all his gadgets in the bar room seemed to be running off of solar panels facing the widows). As for plumbing, presumably if you clog up one toilet in that place, there's hundreds of others to choose from!
enough food that hasn't spoiled or suffered freezer burn to last for years? electricity and plumbing that requires no maintenance whatsoever for years at a time? fails the plausibility test.
Well, so does the idea of sentient humanoid robots with IQ and behavior entirely indistinguishable from human beings by 2049 (or 2019, for that matter). Sometimes you just gotta roll with it.
The guy's been on the run for 30 years. Presumably he's picked up some survival tips along the way. Maybe he's growing protein worms in the basement. Presumably there's vegetation around somewhere (otherwise, how are the bees surviving). I can think of a ton of plausible explanations.
Meaning the one that
he left in radiationland where Deckard lived and which in any event he presumably would have been relieved of at the time he surrendered his badge and gun? I don't care all that much, but this one is really hard to explain -- very poor continuity.
He wasn't relieved of it - if I recall, he's shown getting into it immediately after his boss has him surrender his badge and weapon. That's how he got to Vegas in the first place. Presumably, after his encounter with the "resistance," he went back to Vegas and retrieved it (or they brought it along when they rescued him).
Better than all the new Star Wars whatever's.
"Surrender your badge and weapon! But keep your vastly more valuable and lethal patrol car! The plot needs you to carry on!"
Not my main complaint about this film, but worth bringing up. Thanks for the replies
An absolute failure as a documentary!
But I don’t think this film was ever intended to be a huge box office success anyway, so it shouldn’t be judged accordingly. I think for a big budget film, Villeneuve took a risk. It has a very slow build up, and at 2 hours 43 minutes, doesn’t compromise with audience expectations. However I do agree with the post earlier on which complained that the last half hour undid the long preamble at the beginning, and tied up the loose ends in a rather perfunctory way. I feel resorting to a generic action film for the finale was a concession which I could have done without. In saying this, I thought the film was visually stunning throughout, and I rate Villeneuve as a director highly. I think he works better with smaller budgets, where he doesn’t have to make any compromises whatsoever. Two good examples of this are Enemy, which is extraordinary, and Incendies.
Plumbing and electricity are self regulating with build in robotics and electricity generated by so.ar power. Food, I'm sure they had lots of canned goods.
I also think Leto's manipulating Ford's character trying to get him to buy into his view.
Longer, yes but it was much better developed than the first one. I suspect those that disliked it just had different expectations of the film
His drone spotted the heat signatures. There's a scene where he sees the heat signatures believing it might be Deckard.
He didn't take their advice to kill Deckard. He never indicated he was goi g to kill him at all. He did want to track them down to save Deckard's having figured out who his child is and where. He ended up sacrificing his life which made him, as she stated, may have had a soul after all.
It's not a plane. It's his flying car which he left sitting on the freeway in Vegas.
Maybe so, good point.
Car, plane, whatever . . . it's the
Spoiler: I don't know why I'm covering this with a spoiler tag, but we were using them earlier in this thread, so . . .
vehicle he uses as a police officer, which he was allowed to keep even though he was relieved of his badge and gun, right? It's ridiculous.
A nearly three-hour movie shouldn't need a series of facile skips forward in the final 45 minutes. But that's actually not what bothered me about the movie. What's disappointing is not that we're rushed forward, but that what we get when we reach the end is just trite sentimentalism.
Yup - I expected a compelling story with interesting characters that didn't take 2X too long to get where it wanted to go!
I wouldn't disagree but it was necessary for him to go where he needed to go and his boss told him to take it telling him she wouldn't hunt for him for 48 hours. Perhaps she said he could use it, perhaps he didn't we don't know.
I didn't feel that it was trite sentimentalism anymore than Roy Batty saving Deckard's life because he suddenly valued any life as he died. The whole point of the film was for him to find the child and he did. He believed that Deckard was worthy of saving just as his daughter was worthy of saving.
Separate names with a comma.