|
Xealot posted:I can see that argument. This is how I choose to interpret it as well (what can I say, I'm a romantic optimist) but the film does leave it open enough to where we can never really be certain, which I like. But in regards to her agency: Does that change if her personality and emotions are only a reaction to what her owner wanted from her? DC Murderverse posted:I think I read the relationship between K and JOI way differently than some of you. Or Joi's "death" for what she believed in (him) ... maybe Sgt. Politeness fucked around with this message at 01:27 on Oct 7, 2017 |
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 15:20 |
|
|
I loved this movie. Absolutely phenomenal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
Wow. That might have been the most enjoyable movie to look at that I've ever seen. Just all around a home run holy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Wow. That might have been the most enjoyable movie to look at that I've ever seen. I feel like I missed half the movie just admiring how gorgeous it was. I really hope Deakins gets best cinematography this year. Guy elevates whatever movie he's a part of.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
Sgt. Politeness posted:See a few people have mentioned this but he did not strike me as unphased. Quite the opposite actually, to me it sounded like he got emotional/defensive like it struck a nerve. As if maybe this was something he had doubts about and needed to remind himself of. It's also a small wink to fans. At least to everyone who is familiar with the fact that Ford is 110% against the idea of Deckard being a replicant. It was almost as if Jared Leto was Ridley Scott. I kind of smirked at that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 02:20
|
|
|
I just had to leave my screening of this about 30 minutes in due to a crippling tooth ache. How mad should I be at my mouth, and is it worth buying another ticket some day later?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
jivjov posted:I just had to leave my screening of this about 30 minutes in due to a crippling tooth ache. How mad should I be at my mouth, and is it worth buying another ticket some day later? Punch your mouth and yes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
Deckard's dog is a replicant, ya'll.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:08
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:Deckard's dog is a replicant, ya'll. survived an explosion even
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Well I saw the new Blade Runner and... unfortunately I didn't think it was very good. It was about 45 minutes longer than it needed to be, pacing was really off, every female character felt really underwritten, Robin Wright was criminally underused. Zimmer was a horrible cacophonous mismatch on the score and I don't feel like it even shared the same DNA as the original. The replicant revolution subplot went absolutely nowhere and just springs up in the third act. It felt unnecessarily wide in scope for the story it was trying to tell. Good visuals, that's about the only nice thing I can say about it, which is unfortunate because Blade Runner is probably my favorite movie of all time. You really appreciate how economical Ridley Scott was with his storytelling compared to this languishing, overwrought mess. Do not recommend!
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
Gonz posted:Punch your mouth and yes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:31
|
|
|
Sgt. Politeness posted:survived an explosion even  Totes a replicant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:Yeah - rip that sucker out and get back in there. Incidentally, I learned that there's not a single 24-hour emergency dentist anywhere in the Kansas City metro.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Incidentally, I learned that there's not a single 24-hour emergency dentist anywhere in the Kansas City metro.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
Saw it today, and it was way better than the first one. Probably because Villeneuve is a great director while Scott is a hack.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
3peat posted:Saw it today, and it was way better than the first one. Probably because Villeneuve is a great director while Scott is a hack. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
Villeneuve definitely has a better batting average at least.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Villeneuve definitely has a better batting average at least. He’s yet to make a bad movie
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
Villeneuve is great but I dunno if anything he's done has had the impact of something like Thelma & Louise yet either, let alone Alien or the original Blade Runner. Oh well his movies are still dope at any rate. Raxivace fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Oct 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
I'm ready for Altered Carbon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 04:06
|
|
|
This movie was wonderful. I can't believe they actually made a Blade Runner sequel that didn't suck and pretty much lived up to the hype of the first one. I'm gonna sleep on it before writing more, but it is really amazing to me that Zimmer did a passable impression of Vangelis and they welded that onto some absolutely gorgeous cinematography. If that Rachel that appeared in the third act was CGI, then this movie has the best special effects I've ever seen. That would make the atrocious Peter Cushing/young Carrie Fisher in Rogue One look like even more rear end by comparison because holy poo poo. Serf fucked around with this message at 05:04 on Oct 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
Seeing this in IMAX is an experience I am never going to forget. The sheer scale it added to the already amazing and ominous visuals just drew me in so much more. Made me feel so small. I wouldn't see it any other way in a theater unless you have no choice. Those shots passing through LA, the ruins of Vegas, the approach to the monolith-like Wallace headquarters that dwarfed the old Tyrell headquarters, and even just the opening exposition on that huge screen are things I can't get out of my mind.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
Serf posted:This movie was wonderful. I can't believe they actually made a Blade Runner sequel that didn't suck and pretty much lived up to the hype of the first one. I'm gonna sleep on it before writing more, but it is really amazing to me that Zimmer did a passable impression of Vangelis and they welded that onto some absolutely gorgeous cinematography. fix your spoilers son edit for content: i cannot believe that i am considering watching this long rear end movie again just because i didn't get to see it in IMAX. it is just loving gorgeous and i want to shoot it into my eyeballs so i never have to stop watching it
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
In an effort to be fair and to stop my brain from hyping this movie up in my head too much before I get to see it again, here are some things I did not like about the movie: *Holy mother of jesus it is 168 minutes long. Like, I dunno where I would cut things because it is all so essential and beautiful but that is very long. *Robin Wright's character was almost comically thin *was it really necessary to have everyone want to gently caress Ryan Gosling? I understand that's how it works in real life because he is Ryan Gosling, but i dunno if it was necessary for the police chief to come onto him *Jared Leto was boring and underwhelming, as is his wont in life. I'm sad that I read that story about Villanueve wanting Bowie because that would have been a million times better. Could he not have gotten Tilda Swinton or something instead? Leto was so predictably weird. *this isn't really a complaint so much as a query, but how much do you think they had to pay the woman who gets birthed from that bag? She has to be completely naked her entire one scene, covered in yellow goopy poo poo, writhing around like a newborn, and then poked at and stabbed by creepy-rear end Jared Leto. I hope they gave her a lot of money.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
Agreed completely. And to add one more to that: *The entire "resistance" quasi-storyline that came up for all of ten minutes was rather shameful. It reminded me of The Matrix in ways I don't want to entertain, but it also had such a small bearing on the story that I feel as though they could have fit something a lot better in there. The "chosen one's resistance" thing is just woefully overdone. If anyone feels differently, I really hope that someone can help me be okay with it being in there, because I'd love to not have that part of the movie stick out like such a sore thumb.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 05:39
|
|
|
Idk, I thought it was just a natural continuation of Batty's rebellion in the first movie and another reminder that the system was unsustainable in the long run.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 05:46
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:I doubt that was intended to be ambiguous. I don't think there are millions of bottles of fake whiskey hanging around Vegas, no one's lived there since before it was nuked Whiskey is aged in oak barrels for 8 years, and trees seem to be in majorly short supply. That, and Vegas is famously fake as hell - there is a hologram Elvis scene that helps to lend a bit of credence that the "is that real?" line has a double meaning, especially since things with natural ingredients or materials are insanely expensive in this world and so "replicated" with synthetic materials whenever its cheaper. Tumble fucked around with this message at 05:59 on Oct 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 05:56
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:Idk, I thought it was just a natural continuation of Batty's rebellion in the first movie and another reminder that the system was unsustainable in the long run. Plus, it gives K a choice to make, sacrifice the girl for the good of the many? And he says f that and saves Deckard. Still leaves the ending open too. Will Deck run away with his girl? Will she decide she's been hiding long enough and join the resistance? Will Leto keep trying to find the child, or does he think its a dead end? Thats why this is a true sequel, it throws some thin characters and philosophical questions together and lets you make up your own mind
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 06:07
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:In an effort to be fair and to stop my brain from hyping this movie up in my head too much before I get to see it again, here are some things I did not like about the movie: You dumb assholes and your spoiler tags. Let me answer your questions for you. I agree. Yes. The point is that she's exercising power over him as a human, and he's resisting, which upsets her. This ties into the (what we people who read things) call the "themes" of a story. That was also the point of [spoiler]Jared Leto's[spoiler] character. He was not meant to be either imposing nor interesting. He was a dumb rear end in a top hat (you should be familiar) who got lucky, and the film never wants us to be awe-struck by him as a villain. I'm not sure, OP, but I found that scene extraneous and odd.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
Like, what's the use case for having spoilers at this point? How stupid can the administrators of a forum be?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 06:28
|
|
|
sector_corrector posted:Like, what's the use case for having spoilers at this point? How stupid can the administrators of a forum be? the movie was just released man. Get a grip.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 06:38
|
|
|
Holy crap did I love this movie. It has a different tone than BR but the design linkage with it made it feel like an incredible companion piece, like Alien to Aliens. I love the musings it put forward about how robots consider humanity. I liked how it integrated BR into the storyline and had enough of a new story to justify itself. And also leveraging the time between sequels usefully.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 06:39
|
|
|
Feels weird coming in here and seeing a major complaint being thin characters/underused subplots when the first movie was a stew of ambiguity and characters with very little time in the story to develop. That was the entire point of their presence though and this expanded on that concept in really alluring ways, in my opinion. Also, some of the subplots that weren't given a bigger role: I felt like the point of that was to show how this world *is* massive and goes far beyond beyond the scope of the main characters. It's thriving and living outside what we as an audience were seeing. Which, yeah, could be horribly done -- but with the oppressive and melancholy environment, and the themes about having a soul and what it means to be human in meaninglessness, it felt really good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
I thought it was solid, I had my reservations but I think it is worthy to the Bladerunner name. To be honest when I saw Villeneuve's name, I figured he would have some cards up his sleeve with the film. Throwing out some of my thoughts/responses, mostly minor nitpicks. I really felt for poor K, talk about someone who was totally poo poo on and used by EVERYONE. I mean the guys only meaningful contact was a sex program. Even that is sadder when he has to wonder how much she loved him or was it all just a product of her programming. Best of all, the only modicum of real agency he had was saving Deckard, sort of giving D's daughter a connection he could never have. The whole memory ploy was basically a cruel trick that almost gave him the semblance of purpose and of being special. Robot rebellion was ehh. It does continue on themes of the first film and I agree that you can't create such sentient beings and not expect this to be an eventuality. The blackout felt like a silly plot device to explain why records would be lost. Just too convenient. Just to cover something where I wonder how other people feel. Maybe one of the few aspects of the film where I was a little disappointed. The visuals of the BR world felt a little off. The first one being so many daylight scenes. Maybe it is not fair, but they sort of detracted from the depressing noir feel that permeated BR. It is less that I never wanted to see daylight, but it felt like too much of the film was bright to me. The other half of my nitpicking is the more modern feel of the world. I can't totally fault the film as it is 30 years later, but ehh. I kind of liked the more analogue dumpy tech feel of BR and was hoping they would have kept it a little less digital. Also, I think everyone wanting to bone K was simply two things. He is a handsome dude in the BR world and it fits that film noir hard boiled detective trope. Mostly minor goony nitpicks aside, I liked it a lot. I would be onboard for a 3rd. Either way, I am going to see it a 2nd time because moviepass and why the hell not. I have 2 more friends who want to see it and so I will get some more time to soak in the visuals. GeekyManatee posted:Which, yeah, could be horribly done -- but with the oppressive and melancholy environment, and the themes about having a soul and what it means to be human in meaninglessness, it felt really good. I think they hit this part out of the park with the main character. unlawfulsoup fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Oct 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
oversteps posted:Agreed completely. And to add one more to that: My first read was that the film was a complete inversion of that. He is led to believe he's the chosen one, but he isn't, none of them are. This is reflected in K realising that his relationship, even his name, is just a mass market default. The one thing we know about replicants are their embedded memories - what do those memories do to shape who they are as people, not just mental padding to make them a functional 'person'. Creating compliant slaves with feelings won't work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
I think my one and only criticism of this movie would be that Jared Letos character seemed sort of under developed. Or at the very least it felt odd how little screen time he had considering what a major player he was in the story. Then again I'm not going to complain about not having to watch too much of Jared Leto either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 07:05
|
|
|
did anyone else get that there was never any replicant kid?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 07:16
|
|
|
Is the film as slow as Blade Runner?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 07:20
|
|
|
the opening shots the contrast between the first film's fire-and-brimstone-and-pollutants industrial hellscape and 2049's utterly sterile solar farm wasteland – complete with an interspersed close-up of an eyeball, and oh my god the way the score swelled during that whole sequence – was completely divine. It could have turned out to be a hack-y Hey Remember Blade Runner??? Remember The Beginning Of That Movie?????? thing but somehow it wasn't and maybe my reaction was partially because I was slightly stoned coming into the cinema but I genuinely had to get a grip and try not to literally loving cry at how beautiful it was. I think I gotta see it again this weekend, jesus oh and also, if you see it in IMAX (not a spoiler for the film itself, just a neat surprise) the giant number countdown sequence before the movie is all neon and BR2049 themed and giant hologram Joi makes an appearance 
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 15:20 |
|
|
ThisIsWhyTrumpWon posted:Is the film as slow as Blade Runner? Yeah.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 07:24
|
|