Blade Runner 2049

Embarrassed to say that I had no idea about the "shorts" released online! These are included as extras on the Blu-ray:

• 2022: Black Out (15:45): In a stylish anime directed by Shinichiro Watanabe
  
• 2036: Nexus Dawn (6:31): Directed by Luke Scott (son of Ridley)
  
• 2048: Nowhere to Run

Wow. Can't wait to watch these.

 

Black Out is the standout, I loved it. The others are very good, but Black Out was awesome.

 

+1 But in all fairness, I'm a nut for Cowboy Bebop so it would have been hard for him to screw this up.

 

Just saw this at a pal's house. It's fantastic!! Both a worthy sequel and updating. The Blade Runner universe seems more terrifying than ever. Atmosphere is, once again, well-served (in particular, the way the soundtrack goes with the landscape of the film.)

 

Saw this in theaters shortly after release and wow what a great movie. This exceeded my expectations. I'll be picking this one up on BD soon.

 

It is a fantastic movie/sequel. Shocked that it did so poorly at box office.

 

I haven't seen it yet, but the original Blade Runner wasn't a big hit at the Box Office. It is one of those movies that has grown in popularity over the years (basically it was a sleeper hit) to the point where there was sufficient interest in a sequel. In a way, I think it is similar to TRON which was not a big hit when it was released (I've always thought that it was released too soon and would have done better had it been released at a time when the General Public was more familiar with computer).

 

I agree with your first sentence, though i'm not shocked it didn't do well. I wish it had done better, but I can't say I expected it to be a sure thing hit.

 

it was not only not a hit, I don't think it even broke even

 

The 1982 original wasn't released as intended. I can't say that the 'Final Cut' would have been a blockbuster necessarily, but perhaps it would have fared somewhat better. Further, I wonder how Alien was promoted by 20th Century Fox compared to BR (Warner)?

 

I don't think it was the ending that harpooned the 1982 cut - or the narration, or whatever other minor variations exist.

I just think audiences weren't in the mood for a dark, dystopian sci-fi flick in 1982. That hurt "The Thing" as well - people seemed more interested in the sunnier views of "ET" and "Star Trek II".

"Blade Runner" would've been more at home in the early 70s or mid 90s!

 

So, fans have been speculating for a 3rd and final film, seeing as Niander Wallace is still out there. It won't do well financially I suppose but fans and critics will certainly adore it. Problem is though, funding and whether WB will take another risk on Blade Runner...

 

While I wouldn't be against a third movie (ideally under different leadership, IMO), the last bloody thing I want is any further exploration of Wallace. Between the terrible character conception and Jared Leto's performance, they can start Blade Runner 3 with a text crawl saying Wallace suffered from a fatal heart attack and won't be seen in this movie and it would elevate the movie right out of the gate.

It's not all dour nonsense with me though. I was actually thinking on this and one actor I think might have been able to yield something meaningful out of that character as written is Mads Mikkelsen, just for example. I think the issue I have with Wallace is that he comes off like a pretentious *****. I can't buy for the life of me that this is a man capable of long-term scheming or of building a corporate empire. I bought that with Tyrell, even if he was an eccentric. Mads might have been able to take the existing script and come off more as a sociopath who was able to compose himself to function in more practical settings (he was great at that in Hannibal). The role required restraint, not the equivalent of mashing together Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now and Hunter S. Thompson from Fear and Loathing...

 

I thought Leto was pretty good.

Anyhow, if there's another BR, then I'd expect it to be "off world" rather than California.

With that said, I'm far more interested in Dune. Villeneuve could cement himself as one of the greatest sci-fi directors of all-time if he nails this incredible story.

 

I'd certainly give an "off world" Blade Runner a shot. Honestly, I'd love it if someone took some real chances on that. They'd need to create an entirely new visual lexicon for the colonies since they're supposed to be far nicer than life for those left behind on Earth (both according to BR and the original story).

As for Dune... I don't know if there's a filmmaker living I'd trust to handle that. So much of its style is informed directly by the books (Herbert didn't leave much vague) and there is a lot of information to pack in. I'm not sure how someone could pull that off in both the narrative sense and visually in a feature film.

 

I loved this movie. FWIW they won an Oscar for cinematography .

 

Roger Deakins

Certainly up there with the best in the business.

 

Blade Runner Universe Birthdays:



Happy Birthday Leon

 

I don't think the mood changed in 2017 either, I totally understand why this failed at the box office after seeing it yesterday for the first time. The movie is visually stunning, the mood/tone is set perfectly and you just need to let yourself sink into the whole experience in order to enjoy it. I think it's far too dark for mainstream audiences and with little to no humour to offset it can be a bit of a chore to get thru.

It grossed $259 million worldwide on a production budget of $150 million, the marketing was rather extensive which means it probably ran deep into the red. I don't see a BR III being made anytime soon given the numbers.

 

I don't see why a serious movie needs 'humor' to sell it. It's not a comic book movie and it's not like the original was a chucklefest.

 

I really wanted to enjoy this film but it left me cold. I found it tough to get through. A snooze fest. All style and no substance. Great visuals but something missing.

 

I know that the original wasn't comedy central, quite the opposite, it wasn't a box office smash either. I'm pretty sure the makers of BR2049 knew full well that this type of movie wasn't going to gross $1B, it doesn't tick all of the necessary boxes for mainstream success.

 

Someone else, possibly in this thread, pointed out how singular the supporting characters were in the original film. Every one makes a distinct and memorable impression, even if they're only on the screen a short time. That doesn't happen in BLADE RUNNER 2049.

 

Yeah, that’s a good point. I love sci-fi movies but something was lacking in this film. Maybe expectations were too high.