Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

[ArmyOfDarknessAW]

Went a little overboard ordering some stuff. The deluxe art book has a delivery date pending so hopefully it's out soon. Also ordered the NYCC exclusive of the wooden horse and one of the advance 27x40 posters. For a movie I loved so much the standard poster is pretty crap.

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

[andyk69]

Ive been listening to the soundtrack today and trying to order my thoughts on the film.

The soundtrack has grown a bit more on me, I think "Flying to LAPD" nails down the perfect piece to introduce LA at the beginning. Rain/Joi has an awe and wondrous vibe about it. Wallace is ominous and mysterious, love it!

some thoughts:

I think the movie is brilliant, that's my assessment today after much thought about it since last night, I just can get it out of my head.

[Show spoiler]Does Wallace have some of Tyrell memories/knowledge implanted into him? I did get that feeling.

I want to know more about Wallace origins, he was the head ( being a replicant? ) of a Corporation that saved the world by growing organic ingenerred food, do we know something else, who engineered him? was he a Nexus 8?

I wasnt sure about Leto's performance, I couldnt grasp if it was wooden or it was this brilliant way to portray a replicant completely devoyed of feelings except maybe the love for himself as a god... I am leaning to think it was brilliant direction and acting.

Did anyone got the feeling that everybody was a replicant? I did at various points.

I still think the movie would be more perfect for me if they have cut some of the lingering shots of K looking into nothingless.

I am overjoy that the decision was to fog the landscape of Blade Runner as you can't see clearly anymore the buildings, the neon lights arent visible anymore... is as the movie Blade Runner 2049, grittier, devoyed of colour and sky, is gorgeous blur.

[NegaScott128]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

I wonder if part of the problem here is that we have a situation where a film is extremely well made with great production values, terrific camera work, competent direction, special effects, etc, etc but doesn’t tell a very good story or is lacking in plot development? In this case, sure, people will walk out since they don’t care or appreciate the technical aspects of the film making process like some do.

I think that's also a problem. I felt like I was looking at 2049 rather than immersed or drawn into it. Ideally, the technical aspects of a film should blend in seamlessly with the story being told, rather than sticking out obviously. The first film, while being a masterpiece of cinematography and visual effects, never really calls attention to that fact, instead letting those elements fade into the background. I didn't get that with this new film.

Originally Posted by s2mikey

An analogy I can think of this: imagine two people watching a 3-0 football game that has little action, no scoring and lots of punting. One person is simply an average fan and wants to watch a good game and be entertained. They are bored to death. The other person is an ex football coach who can appreciate the defense and the strategies of the game. They are entertained per se watching the defensive struggle. One viewer IS enjoying it. The other probably leaves early in the 3rd quarter..... see what I mean here?

There's also the issue of the pacing. The original was, and still is, criticized for being slowly-paced, and I think 2049 is if anything even slower, not to mention significantly longer. I am not at all surprised that people don't like that, since they certainly didn't like it back in 1982.

[rubystone356]

I saw both war for the planet of the apes and blade runner 2049.. enjoyed blade runner 2049 much more as a movie.. I think the problem is that the movie is too smart for modern audience. probably because of the bleak stuff going on in real life right now. I enjoyed it very much.. more so then the original movie.
its on the chris nolan level of movie.
Jacob

[ethanwa79]

Box office numbers are looking terrible for this movie today. Sad and ironic that it will probably have the same fate at the original.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

I wonder if part of the problem here is that we have a situation where a film is extremely well made with great production values, terrific camera work, competent direction, special effects, etc, etc but doesn’t tell a very good story or is lacking in plot development? In this case, sure, people will walk out since they don’t care or appreciate the technical aspects of the film making process like some do.

An analogy I can think of this: imagine two people watching a 3-0 football game that has little action, no scoring and lots of punting. One person is simply an average fan and wants to watch a good game and be entertained. They are bored to death. The other person is an ex football coach who can appreciate the defense and the strategies of the game. They are entertained per se watching the defensive struggle. One viewer IS enjoying it. The other probably leaves early in the 3rd quarter..... see what I mean here?

This was truly brilliant. For me, story is paramount. If I don't care about the characters, the rest is worthless. That's my problem with 2049 and why I have so little interest in it.

[Shalashaska]

Went in with high expectations and was still blown away.

Incredible film. Not sure you can ask for much more out of a sequel to a 35-year-old cult classic.

[Rory]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

I do know what you mean. And it's one of the reasons I have an extremely low opinion of humanity.

My opinion of humanity matches that of Dr. Zaius.

[mwynn]

Originally Posted by SarahS

it does? It says if you don't like something you can't stick around and join in on discussions? It says that?

No trolling.
Don't threadcrap. In other words don't go into a thread about golfing and post "golf sucks" etc. It's unconstructive and it insults people who like golf.
If you can't contribute anything positive to the thread don't respond at all

[dommie]

I am going to see this today at the Arclight here in my area. It appears, by the amount of tickets shown as sold in advance on line, that the film is doing decent business here but not blockbuster status at all. The Atmos showings, which tend to do better than the non-Atmos showings are the ones that are getting the most sales. My showing (which is Atmos), in about 4 hours, is a little less than half full right now. The later Atmos showings tonight are a about 2/3 full right now. As we get closer to the film's start time, I would expect more seats to be sold but I am not surprised by the less than stellar business as this is a sequel to a 35 year old film that was not seen by many. I would have hoped that the stellar reviews would have helped the film along but it appears that reviews don't carry as much weight as they might have in the past if they ever did in the first place, especially when I see films that get horrible reviews still doing blockbuster type business. People will go see films that they are drawn to emotionally and unfortunately, I don't think that the masses are drawn in that way to 2049.

As with the first Blade Runner, which I first saw in the theater during its initial release, I will expect to have to see 2049 more than once to fully appreciate it. When I first saw the original film in 1982, I was somewhat disappointed like many others. It took repeated viewings for me to come to fully appreciate it for what it was trying to accomplish. Is the original my favorite film of all time? No, but I certainly like it much more than I did after first seeing it. I'll log back in later today with my assessment after having seen 2049.

[captveg]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

This movie was always a big risk, even though IIRC WB and Sony split the cost. WB might end up OK if the movie has legs domestically cuz of good reviews, but yet again Sony is probably gonna get screwed internationally lol

I believe Alcon is on the hook for most of the budget, with WB and Sony only diverting some of the cost.

[Rory]

Originally Posted by mwynn

No trolling.
Don't threadcrap. In other words don't go into a thread about golfing and post "golf sucks" etc. It's unconstructive and it insults people who like golf.
If you can't contribute anything positive to the thread don't respond at all

Blu-ray. com has lots of rules. It the film forum for authoritarians.

[captveg]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

I wonder if part of the problem here is that... [BR49] doesn’t tell a very good story or is lacking in plot development?

If people believe BR49 lacks a good story or plot development then the art of cinema is well on its way to dying. I mean, its only a riddled mystery that explores the human condition. Yep, no plot or story here. /facepalm

[Shalashaska]

BTW, I think this is the first film I've noticed someone sleeping through. And not just sleeping, full-blown snoring.

Took a large explosion on-screen to wake him up.

[West E]

Really want to see this and i never cared for the first Blade Runner. (The last five minutes are amazing cinema though)

Just the look of this film is right up my alley.

[Prog5000]

Opening with $31-36 million. I don't know why WB expected more, its a long awaited sequel to a movie that made no money. It has a cult following but thats not enough.

Personally i'm pleased a sequel to a loved film is very good. It could have been horrendous.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by captveg

If people believe BR49 lacks a good story or plot development then the art of cinema is well on its way to dying. I mean, its only a riddled mystery that explores the human condition. Yep, no plot or story here. /facepalm

I've said many times that plot is the least important element of a film to me (unless we're talking about a classic mystery, or something). But plot and story are such different elements, yet people tend to treat them as the same thing. Some movies have distinct stories but lack what most would consider a plot. Bergman's Persona, for instance. Or Lynch's Mulholland Dr.. I would argue that both have stories that are both powerful and discernable, but neither really has a "plot" -- at least in the sense that most people would use the word.

But BR2049 tells a beautiful, thematically complex story that addresses so many issues. It also, though, has a plot. And actually, when it comes to the plot, it's a fairly simple film. You could explain it to someone in two, maybe three sentences easily. From a story perspective, it's much more complicated obviously. At least that's how I see it.

To my mind, in most films plot is like the chessboard in a match. The actual board itself. Everything else that goes on, in other words, all the important elements, happen on the board. But the board itself is just an 8x8 checked piece of wood, with squares that alternate in color. That game itself -- that's all the story, the theme, the tone, the deep diving into ideas about ... well, about all sorts of things. The characters sort of represent the pieces themselves: they move around the board (plot) and end up deciding how the game itself, each individual move, each plan of attack, etc., is played out (story, theme, tone).

Thus, if you and I have played a lot of chess we don't even need a board. We could play on the dining room table itself. No one who's played the game needs to see the actual squares to understand how a knight moves, for instance. This is why I don't believe plot to be very important -- or to be honest, very engaging in most cases.

And from a character (pieces) POV, it's a fascinating addressing of human nature, what it means to be human, flaws, strengths, what it would mean to "more human than human," freedom, slavery, choice, lack thereof, and a great number of other things. Are there answers? Does asking the questions in the first place set us back? What is a soul?

I think to argue that BR2049 is weak from a story (or theme or character or metaphysical) point of view is to deny 99% of what was on the screen.

[Talal86]

I really can't wait to watch it again

[captveg]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

I've said many times that plot is the least important element of a film to me (unless we're talking about a classic mystery, or something). But plot and story are such different elements, yet people tend to treat them as the same thing. Some movies have distinct stories but lack what most would consider a plot. Bergman's Persona, for instance. Or Lynch's Mulholland Dr.. I would argue that both have stories that are both powerful and discernable, but neither really has a "plot" -- at least in the sense that most people would use the word.

But BR2049 tells a beautiful, thematically complex story that addresses so many issues. It also, though, has a plot. And actually, when it comes to the plot, it's a fairly simple film. You could explain it to someone in two, maybe three sentences easily. From a story perspective, it's much more complicated obviously. At least that's how I see it.

To my mind, in most films plot is like the chessboard in a match. The actual board itself. Everything else that goes on, in other words, all the important elements, happen on the board. But the board itself is just an 8x8 checked piece of wood, with squares that alternate in color. That game itself -- that's all the story, the theme, the tone, the deep diving into ideas about ... well, about all sorts of things. The characters sort of represent the pieces themselves: they move around the board (plot) and end up deciding how the game itself, each individual move, each plan of attack, etc., is played out (story, theme, tone).

Thus, if you and I have played a lot of chess we don't even need a board. We could play on the dining room table itself. No one who's played the game needs to see the actual squares to understand how a knight moves, for instance. This is why I don't believe plot to be very important -- or to be honest, very engaging in most cases.

And from a character (pieces) POV, it's a fascinating addressing of human nature, what it means to be human, flaws, strengths, what it would mean to "more human than human," freedom, slavery, choice, lack thereof, and a great number of other things. Are there answers? Does asking the questions in the first place set us back? What is a soul?

I think to argue that BR2049 is weak from a story (or theme or character or metaphysical) point of view is to deny 99% of what was on the screen.

So well stated that I have nothing to add but applause.

[Thieves Dont]

Originally Posted by Prog5000

Opening with $31-36 million. I don't know why WB expected more, its a long awaited sequel to a movie that made no money. It has a cult following but thats not enough.

Personally i'm pleased a sequel to a loved film is very good. It could have been horrendous.

Agreed. They really could have churned out something awful under the direction of someone who couldn't even sniff the same levels of talent as Denis.