› ›

Blade Runner 2049/Blade Runner 2099 Live-Action Sequel Series Discussion

1…2627293132…36

Comments

  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    Some_Kind_Of_Hero wrote: »
    I honestly don't think BR 2049 will offer the same experience when it arrives on Blu-ray.
    Different for me - I am looking forward to exactly this and am positive it will be exactly be what you described. Looking forward to the BluRay and too bad it likely won't come out before Christmas I suppose

  • MilovyMilovy
    edited October 2017 Posts: 676
    Great review @Some_Kind_Of_Hero.

    Adding to the discussion... Blade Runner was small in scale. The plot was just a cop hunting rogue replicants. It's a dirty, intimate, claustrophobic movie. All the story's themes emerge only when you give some thought to what you're watching. But in BR2049, the themes are the story. The scale of the story and imagery is epic. I'm not sure I could enjoy it simply on a genre level, or on the level of just appreciating the film's texture, like the original BR. Watching BR2049 for me was kind of like reading an essay - interesting, but not much of a pleasure.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    Interesting point about the scale, @Milovy. I hadn´t thought much about that, but I think you are correct.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,054
    Milovy wrote: »
    Great review @Some_Kind_Of_Hero.

    Adding to the discussion... Blade Runner was small in scale. The plot was just a cop hunting rogue replicants. It's a dirty, intimate, claustrophobic movie. All the story's themes emerge only when you give some thought to what you're watching. But in BR2049, the themes are the story. The scale of the story and imagery is epic. I'm not sure I could enjoy it simply on a genre level, or on the level of just appreciating the film's texture, like the original BR. Watching BR2049 for me was kind of like reading an essay - interesting, but not much of a pleasure.

    Absobloodylutely spot on, @Milovy !

    I can't remember one scene in the new film that could be classed as a future classic.

    I can watch certain scenes in Blade Runner on their own. The incredible opening city scape, the Voight-Kampf test, hunting Zhora, Batty meeting his maker, and the Bradbury building scenes.

    Or as another member mentioned, all the way through simply as a genre film with a glass of Whiskey in hand.

    As stunning as it looks I can't see that happening with the new film.

    Great review by the way, @Some_Kind_Of_Hero
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I wonder if Warner/Sony will look back on this and ask what could have been, had the scale been smaller, the editing tighter and the film run time shorter. I've only seen this film once (and liked it very much), but thinking back on it there is certainly an argument to be made that it could have been more compressed, more tightly edited and less grandiose in scope without losing the essence of the narrative.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    I would not have wanted it anything different - I think it‘s a wonderful sequel and even it did not make that much money (which I never expected it to do) that does not make it anything less than wonderful. No, the original won‘t be surpassed but I loved the images and there are quite some scenes I could watch separately, starting with K walking through the snow, Joi‘s first experience of rain or the „love“ scene.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,985
    At least it'll now be akin to the original: a cult classic (although it definitely won't take as long for the sequel to reach such a status) that didn't perform too well in theaters.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,054
    bondjames wrote: »
    I wonder if Warner/Sony will look back on this and ask what could have been, had the scale been smaller, the editing tighter and the film run time shorter. I've only seen this film once (and liked it very much), but thinking back on it there is certainly an argument to be made that it could have been more compressed, more tightly edited and less grandiose in scope without losing the essence of the narrative.

    Agreed @bondjames

    I liked the film a lot when I first saw it (and still do) but your point about the film being less 'grandiose' is interesting. I don't think a smaller scale would have affected the narrative one iota.

    The more I think about the film the more I feel the makers have been a trifle self-indulgent.

    Coming soon, Blade Runner 2049: The shorter intimate cut....
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,985
    Villeneuve already confirmed we won't have an extended cut, didn't he? I know their original workprint was four hours long (not that that translates to the cut we'd get, nor does it ever - looking at you, Django Unchained).
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    LeonardPine wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I wonder if Warner/Sony will look back on this and ask what could have been, had the scale been smaller, the editing tighter and the film run time shorter. I've only seen this film once (and liked it very much), but thinking back on it there is certainly an argument to be made that it could have been more compressed, more tightly edited and less grandiose in scope without losing the essence of the narrative.

    Agreed @bondjames

    I liked the film a lot when I first saw it (and still do) but your point about the film being less 'grandiose' is interesting. I don't think a smaller scale would have affected the narrative one iota.

    The more I think about the film the more I feel the makers have been a trifle self-indulgent.

    Coming soon, Blade Runner 2049: The shorter intimate cut....
    Now that is an interesting idea. If they want a broader section of the viewing public to even consider this film on DVD/Blu they may want to package the first and second film together with a shorter edit. I'm quite certain that eventually they will be bundled together anyway.
  • MilovyMilovy
    edited October 2017 Posts: 676
    Blade Runner 2049 is practically made for fan editing. There's so much material, it's like they cut nothing from it. I'm probably going to do an edit rescoring most of the movie with Vangelis. It will be shorter as well - either an abridged version of the film's story, or a new narrative focused entirely on Gosling with no appearance by Ford. I'm sure there will be other fan edits by other people, too.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    In the book, Rachael Rosen and Pris Stratton have identical looks. The desription fits Sean Young.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    Posts: 6,844
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    In the book, Rachael Rosen and Pris Stratton have identical looks. The desription fits Sean Young.

    Yes, that is a very interesting aspect of the book. Curiously, Stacey Nelkin—who was cast as the sixth replicant Mary before her part was dropped from the film, resulting in a dialogue continuity error—does rather resemble Sean Young.

    snipic1.jpg

    There's a lot of fascinating material in the book not to be found in the films. I've read the book many times, and I'm certainly due to read it again.

    Any thoughts on an MI6 book club once we finish the current Flemingathon? Just a thought...
  • mattjoesmattjoes THE MOONRAKER TAPES ARE LOST THE MOONRAKER TAPES ARE LOST
    Posts: 7,040
    I liked, but not loved, this film on first viewing, but like some of you, my impression of it has gone down. It's like all the pieces are there, but the film lacks something. I found a IMDb review that, while way more critical than I am, reflects something of what I feel about the movie:
    (...) Blade Runner 2049 is none of these things. (...) If there is one word to describe this movie, it's "replicant". Not the kind of replicant who realizes that "all those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain" as he dies, but a sleek, expensive and obedient skin-job that will try to entertain you and if it succeeds will return as a sequel that will eventually become yet another franchise. I spent 160 minutes of my life watching a pleasant and perfectly constructed piece of nothing, and I didn't care for a moment about any of the characters or a storyline that was designed without the intention to question and redefine a single thing. All its moments have already been lost in my memory, while the original Blade Runner remains vivid in my mind, as if I only saw it yesterday.
    I don't know... I think for me, the film may have going against it the inevitable fact it's a sequel to a 35-year old film. That effort, that intelligence... could it have gone toward creating something new? On a surface level everything appears to be right with the movie, but deep down it feels a bit pointless.

    Do keep in mind I have my problems with the original Blade Runner: I find it to be a slightly "empty" film, in terms of narrative and character, though I think it's got a great atmosphere. All things considered, I definitely prefer it to 2049.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited November 2017 Posts: 17,804
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Do keep in mind I have my problems with the original Blade Runner: I find it to be a slightly "empty" film, in terms of narrative and character, though I think it's got a great atmosphere. All things considered, I definitely prefer it to 2049.
    "Empty" applies also to to the "Final Cut" IMHO. The narrated version is where it's at.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    There really isn t much in the book that made it into the film. The premise is there, but the only scenes I can think of are Holden shot (lasered) by Polokov, the Voight-Kampff test on Rachael (this is all we see of Rosen/Tyrell in the book) and the scene where R.J. Isidore meets Pris. The characters and their relations are pretty much altered as well, for many of them.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,054
    mattjoes wrote: »
    I liked, but not loved, this film on first viewing, but like some of you, my impression of it has gone down. It's like all the pieces are there, but the film lacks something. I found a IMDb review that, while way more critical than I am, reflects something of what I feel about the movie:
    (...) Blade Runner 2049 is none of these things. (...) If there is one word to describe this movie, it's "replicant". Not the kind of replicant who realizes that "all those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain" as he dies, but a sleek, expensive and obedient skin-job that will try to entertain you and if it succeeds will return as a sequel that will eventually become yet another franchise. I spent 160 minutes of my life watching a pleasant and perfectly constructed piece of nothing, and I didn't care for a moment about any of the characters or a storyline that was designed without the intention to question and redefine a single thing. All its moments have already been lost in my memory, while the original Blade Runner remains vivid in my mind, as if I only saw it yesterday.
    I don't know... I think for me, the film may have going against it the inevitable fact it's a sequel to a 35-year old film. That effort, that intelligence... could it have gone toward creating something new? On a surface level everything appears to be right with the movie, but deep down it feels a bit pointless.

    Do keep in mind I have my problems with the original Blade Runner: I find it to be a slightly "empty" film, in terms of narrative and character, though I think it's got a great atmosphere. All things considered, I definitely prefer it to 2049.

    Wow, that review really hits the nail on the head.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    Posts: 6,844
    A bit hyperbolic—I wouldn't say the film was saying nothing—but there was a lot of obvious homage (a trend of our times, unfortunately) and there was certainly room for improvement in the story and character departments.
  • mattjoesmattjoes THE MOONRAKER TAPES ARE LOST THE MOONRAKER TAPES ARE LOST
    Posts: 7,040
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Do keep in mind I have my problems with the original Blade Runner: I find it to be a slightly "empty" film, in terms of narrative and character, though I think it's got a great atmosphere. All things considered, I definitely prefer it to 2049.
    "Empty" applies also to to the "Final Cut" IMHO. The narrated version is where it's at.

    Haven't seen the theatrical version, only the Director's Cut and the Final Cut. I do suspect narration improves things, by making the film speak a bit more directly. I'll have to check it out.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,489
    I saw this film a few weeks ago. I was definitely satisfied with what I got. I knew I wouldn't like it more than the original (Final Cut to be precise), but as far as sequels go, it would rank up there for me in favorites. I'll buy it when it comes to DVD. I'll post detailed thoughts later.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    edited November 2017 Posts: 5,767
    mattjoes wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Do keep in mind I have my problems with the original Blade Runner: I find it to be a slightly "empty" film, in terms of narrative and character, though I think it's got a great atmosphere. All things considered, I definitely prefer it to 2049.
    "Empty" applies also to to the "Final Cut" IMHO. The narrated version is where it's at.

    Haven't seen the theatrical version, only the Director's Cut and the Final Cut. I do suspect narration improves things, by making the film speak a bit more directly. I'll have to check it out.
    Wether the spoken narration improves the film or irritates is up to personal flavor.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited November 2017 Posts: 17,804
    boldfinger wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Do keep in mind I have my problems with the original Blade Runner: I find it to be a slightly "empty" film, in terms of narrative and character, though I think it's got a great atmosphere. All things considered, I definitely prefer it to 2049.
    "Empty" applies also to to the "Final Cut" IMHO. The narrated version is where it's at.

    Haven't seen the theatrical version, only the Director's Cut and the Final Cut. I do suspect narration improves things, by making the film speak a bit more directly. I'll have to check it out.
    Wether the spoken narration improves the film or irritates is up to personal flavor.

    Definitely. One of my friends said The Final Cut gave Deckard a clean slate detached from the audience that he liked. I was like that's exactly why I disliked it! I'm just glad both versions exist so we can each watch our own favourite.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,985
    Incredibly satisfying behind the scenes look at the miniatures:

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited November 2017 Posts: 17,804
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Incredibly satisfying behind the scenes look at the miniatures:


    Just wow. The photography and EFFECTS MINIATURES were the most astounging part of the film for me. But I had no idea as to the extent of the practical that went into it... now I know a big reason why it all looked so fabulous. Thanks for this!
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Thunderfinger wrote: »

    That is... insane
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    edited November 2017 Posts: 45,489
    A bit unsettling that last year she got the question "Do you want to destroy humans? Please say no!" and her answer was "OK, I will destroy humans."

    Now she wants to start a family.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    edited November 2017 Posts: 6,844
    Things start to get creepy at 0:50 seconds where she almost defensively says, “Well, I think I’m special. I can use my expressive face to communicate with people. For example I can let you know if I feel angry about something. Or if something has upset me.” Interviewer begins his next question—she cuts him off: “But most of the time I feel positive.” Creepy Terminator 2 style smile.

    And her assurance of “Don’t worry, if you’re nice to me, I’ll be nice to you” leaves an unsettling afterthought regarding the logical alternative that follows that sentiment, which she does not elaborate on.

    She does call humans “smart,” but then she also calls us “very programmable.” Which I suppose is true.

    Edit: In her defense, she was being baited with questions that presupposed robots with AI would automatically be a bad thing...when all she wants to do right now is help humanity and learn empathy. And many humans would fare far less gracefully when posed such rude questions in front of an audience. I think if AI does turn evil one day and overtake the world it will have been something learned or something done in response to evil humans displayed toward them. We can’t help ourselves. She’s a burgeoning artificial intelligence and a majority of the questions thrown at her presupposed some future evil on her part or plainly suggested she was creepy. She took it all in good humor actually.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Poor girl. Ending up in Saudi Arabia, of all places.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,489
    Ok, I want to do some in-depth thoughts about this film; here goes nothing:

    Blade Runner is one of my all-time favorite films. When I first saw it, I knew I had experienced something really special, and every time I watch it again it just keeps getting better and better. When I first heard they were making a sequel, I was completely against the idea; I didn't care who was involved or anything like that. I just thought to myself, HOW could you and WHY should you make a sequel to one of the best films ever, which didn't need a sequel - especially over 30 years later!

    Then I saw the trailers. They wowed me; it truly felt like the feel of the original was going to be kept! I actually became really excited for the movie, and it became one of my most anticipated films of 2017. When I got to the theater to watch it... I was pretty impressed.

    I knew it would not top the original for me out of the gate. I didn't care what they did - there was just no way that would happen. The film still really isn't even necessary. What it is, though, is a carefully and beautifully done companion piece to the original that is still a very high quality film. Some bullet-point thoughts:

    -Ryan Gosling surprised me. I didn't think he would be a good fit to replace the type of role Harrison Ford carried out in the first film. It was my favorite performance I have seen from Gosling thus far; he did a fine job.
    -Harrison Ford was perfect. His scene with Wallace was extremely well-acted. He may not appear until late but he does such a good job.
    -The supporting cast is pretty much perfect, featuring particularly great performances from Sylvia Hoeks, Robin Wright, and Jared Leto. I don't think I would have cast this film any differently; the acting throughout was one of the film's best aspects.
    -Roger Deakins better get his Oscar this time. He did an amazing job with Skyfall and he does at least as well with this film; the film is completely mesmerizing to look at.
    -The music is inferior to the original. I wouldn't say I hate the soundtrack by any means, but it just was not nearly as appealing to me as the one by Vangelis in the first one. The best tracks of BR2049 are the ones that sound closest to Vangelis.
    -The story is very good; I think it had a great connection to the first one, and nicely tied up some loose ends.
    -I think its rewatchability will be low unfortunately; very high-quality, but not one I plan on revisiting a lot in particular.
    -
    They never explicitly say, but I'm pretty sure Deckard is human.
    Do others agree?

    All in all, Blade Runner 2049 is one of the best sequels I have seen. The Godfather II, The Empire Strikes Back, The Dark Knight, now this. It's not as good as the original, but it didn't have to be and it really shouldn't be. It's a great film.
Sign In or Register to comment.