Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by ponkine, Dec 19, 2016.
"in a word: boring"?
perhaps, but not nearly as boring as that horrifically boring 'patrick melrose' show
But I'm sure not by much...
So, what would be the difference in watching the 4K disc or the BluRay disc, it comes with both, is it basically watching it as BluRay no matter what?
I talked with somebody I know about this movie after I finally viewed it and I told her that I wasn't overly impressed. She was as big of a fan of the original as I was, but also loved the new one. She was rather surprised I didn't like 2049 as well. After a brief discussion, she said I should watch the Prologues, then watch the Film again. I finally got around to watching the prologues last night as well as most of the other Extras on the Blu ray disc.
I'll give the Film another shot soon. I did gain a new perspective after watching the 3 Shorts and other Extras. They put a lot of effort into this Film and extending the Universe created in the Original.
It always comes off a bit sketchy to me when one needs to do homework to properly enjoy a movie.
The nearest comparison to those prologues would be the Animatrix, but you can watch the Matrix movies without having seen that and the films still work.
Star Wars has been falling afoul of this as well. "Oh, it makes more sense if you read the novelization." Sorry, squire, but I check out when there's a reading assignment before I can even check out a movie.
The tale being told can be interesting as all get-out and the total picture can be great, but it still adds up to a sub-par cinematic experience if you need to offer supplemental material to tell the full story in some coherent way.
2049 and Prometheus belong on a shelf in the same store room.
Imo, despite its issues, 2049 is a significantly better film than Prometheus.
Seconded. I may not like the way in which 2049 continued the story, but Prometheus was an origin story nobody asked for. Alien: Covenant was even worse on that front.
You don't need to watch the prologues, but you do need to read Nabakov's 'Pale Fire.'
I tried....I really tried but.....youd have to clockwork orange me to keep me awake. l snoozola
San Diego is known as 'America's Finest City'.
Not sure if anyone picked up on the joke, but someone in Hollywood apparently took offense to that and turned San Diego into LA's trash can.
Finally got around to seeing this, and the whole thing struck me as so, so unnecessary. I can't think of another film I love that didn't need a sequel or prequel more than Blade Runner didn't.
I thought Gosling was fine, but no thanks.
I enjoyed it but wouldn't claim it was necessary or enhanced the original in any way. Minor but not awful or detracting at all from the original either.
I enjoyed my first viewing. When I tried to watch it a second time, I thought I'd get even more out of it, but actually enjoyed it less.
The second time, I felt more that it was an overly mannered attempt to replicate the themes and mood of the first. It was beautiful to see and hear, but the characters didn't resonate like the first film's characters did.
I am not sure I entirely agree, but I looked forward to seeing it a second time and had the same reaction of enjoying it less. Not sure why...
K's holographic girlfriend, Joi, was well played by Ana de Armas, and I had no problem with the performances by Robin Wright and Harrison Ford. I guess Sylvia Hoeks was good as Luv, but the rest were mediocre, including Gosling, and Leto was quite problematic. That kind of inconsistent cast performance suggests that the director might have been at fault, but I really liked Villeneuve's work in Sicario and Arrival.
I also looked forward to the scenes in Las Vegas, and they were pretty good on second viewing. Not great, though.
I think on balance the problem was mostly with the writing and that the casting of Gosling was not compelling.
I didn't find it boring.
Separate names with a comma.