Blade Runner 2049

post 1118 cleared it up for me

 

The child is not a “human”, but she is not a “replicant” in that she grew up from her infancy and has her own memories - not implanted ones

 

Late to the party, but could not help commenting.

I watched the trailers and clips and listened to the soundtrack. Being against the sequel from the start, I was appalled by second-rate music, polished computer-generated backplates lacking detail. The computer-rendered scenes of physical impact or explosion are so fake. Rounded computer screens are a nice stylistic touch, but make no sense.

I thought that Ryan Gosling and Ana de Armas were horribly miscast with their round, cheeky, well-fed happy faces. Other faces that I saw in the trailers also did not do much for me.

So, haven't watched it and not planning to. Watched the original, like, two dozen times, it is my all-time favorite movie. Whenever I am in that mood — and I am often in that mood — I put it on. Watched the 35-anniversary final cut in a theater — hated the experience because of the morons chewing popcorn, slurping Coke, and putting feet on backs of the chairs in front of them. I usually avoid movie theaters because of the unwashed public.

I have a soundtrack CD (to the original movie, of course) in my CD player by my bed, turn it on whenever I go to sleep, although I skip track 11 with final credits, wakes me up. RIP Nexus 6, RIP Rutger Hauer.

 

All I can say is that I was as sceptical and actually worried as you before watching the new movie.
And then I went and saw it anyway, in a huge movie theatre.
And then I went again the next night, and then again the next week.
And I think that is the only way you will initially be able to appreciate it - not by watching some clips on a tiny screen, but by seeing it in a big theatre on a huge screen with an excellent sound system.
You should still give it a try when you get a chance. You have no idea what you are missing.

 

well, I saw 2049, and I thought it was awful. for me, it failed the "why is this character doing that?" test.

 

Really, not interested in a sequel that many consider superior to the original? (I’ll admit the score is much worse than the original)

 

I don't know...I find critique on a movie by people who haven't been willing to spend the time to watch that movie to be very helpful...

 

Doubleplusgood!

 

When I heard there would be a sequel I wondered why we needed one but as a Blade Runner and movie fan I went to see it opening night, again a few nights later and have seen it twice when it was shown again as part of a double bill with BR. I think it is stunning. Perfectly cast and a delight to see where it was taken. I think it enhances the original by making what was at stake that much more important.

I think the fight scene in the water is one of the best pieces of film making I have experienced and the sheer violence and fight for 'life' left me stunned. The direction the movie took was fresh and doesn't harm the original if one decides it is not for them.

As for people not watching a movie and still passing judgement on it I can only yawn and move on. One who has no knowledge of art has no right to then judge it, and anybody who claims to be a Blade Runner fan but then refuses to give it's sequel a chance is not really a fan in my eyes. More like someone who was never going to like the sequel no matter how good it was, if they could be bothered watching of course.

Thank goodness real movie fans don't sound like you. The morons chewing popcorn and slurping Coke are the people keeping movie theater's open while you sit at home calling them morons and judging movies you have not seen.

 

Apparently, not. You stopped by and commented. ;-)

 

You have changed that reply 3 times now. You done?

 

Does it irritate you? Then yawn and move on.

 

No not at all and I will. Got a midnight viewing to head to, want to get my popcorn and Coke so there is a movie industry for people like you to complain about from your armchairs.

 

As a card carrying member of the "don't remake films or create pointless sequels" club, I can say that I found this movie to be certifiably excellent. This, and the Mad Max sequel whose title escapes me are the lone two I'd say that about. Unless you count The Dark Knight.

 

Still irks me that a rep can beat up/retire another rep twice his size.
It was all uphill after that.
Bautista should have had a bigger role in the Film.

 

+1

 

2049 is one of the ages, and will date extremely well, like the original... it was almost too ahead of its time...

 

2049 is pure crap and it won't age well. In a few years, it will be seen for what it truly is: a nonsensical vision of the future, full of sci-fi cliches, with no artistic qualities to speak of, and horrible, forced acting.

 

What a lot of folks said about a scifi/noire film back in the early 80s...

 

thats what a few people said about the original.... they were proved wrong

 

I’m pretty sure that scene was originally cut from a version of the original script. I also want to say it was in the book.

I’m sure packing power into a small package is completely something a biotech company would do. Seems like something an undercover replicant would need. Makes Schwarzenegger in Terminator almost seem silly from a logic standpoint. But it’s the movies! I’m also not implying that Arnold was not the perfect choice, because there is no other. However... Yul Brynner would have made a great Terminator too.

 

This actually isn't true at all. Many reviewers back in the day said it's a complex work of art and predicted it would stand the test of time. The negative reviews centred around the plot being dimmed by the special effects and its slow pacing. All of the negative ones were quickly nullified by the incredible success in the home video format. Even academics noticed the film as soon as it was released.

Nothing like that is happening with 2049 because 2049 is a crap sequel with forced acting (you can easily tell the actors are self-aware and it absolutely kills the movie for me), sci-fi cliches, and a crappy plot.

 

It always fascinates when people hate something so much that they simply cannot bear other people enjoying the same thing... to the point where they truly seem to believe there actually is a truth of the matter. Very strange.
I mean, how about a simple "I didn't enjoy it at all, but hey, glad you did!" ?
Like, you know - we are talking entertainment

 

Early on in development of The Terminator, Cameron felt the very thin actor, Lance Hendrickson, could be the terminator. But I am glad they went with Schwarzenegger because we more naturally accept that bulk equates to strength.

Similarly, there is no reason for Superman to look like he’s a gym-rat. He could be slim and would still be invulnerable to everything under our yellow sun. He’d also have no way to exercise to bulk up, since every weight feels as light as a feather to him. At best he could do aerobic exercise. So he should be slim. (Maybe we are supposed to believe that his body looks like he works out because his body efficiently produces the best-possible form regardless of any activity, and the best-possible form just happens to be neanderthal-like.)

 

I have never understood the need from those who don't like something to talk in such a final manner. I didn't enjoy Gladiator when it came out and honestly never expected to yet here we are 20 years later and it is a movie I really enjoy. The need of some people to declare the things they don't like as being crap or rubbish while trashing the actors amazes me. Don't like it, then move on, end of, and maybe in 20 years your attitude may change.