|
Tenzarin posted:What would be their goal though? To make new robots in a factory that can breed or do some kind of upgrade on the other older models? It's like they are almost just doing the same thing the evil corporation Wallace guy is trying to do. At least hes trying to push humanity to the stars. The rebels are trying to pull a skynet on humanity. The main difference is that Wallace wants to keep them enslaved
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 07:47 |
|
|
Thread title: Blade Runtime: 2 long?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
More like Blade Weekend Jogger.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
Cacator posted:The main difference is that Wallace wants to keep them enslaved He had some with some degree of freedom though. Its not like he had them in chains. Somehow he would stop them from escaping? Wouldn't they just escape and breed anyway? He would just make some huge robot sex factory?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:The original Blade Runner is not even 2 hours long, and accomplishes a lot more in its runtime than this film. Counterpoint: The original was 90% style 10% substance and this one accomplishes more in both aspects. Talk about chaff that should've been cut: the dressing room scene is the original is just Bad. My wife was amazed when I told her this was longer than the final cut that we watched the day before which we both agreed felt a lot longer than it should've.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
Bio-bots. Meat-droids. Nothing is inorganic about them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
Why does every argument about some new piece of media on the internet have to become some iconoclastic "well actually, nothing prior to this was ever good" defensive position instead of acknowledging that it's a reasonable criticism that Ryan Gosling could have spent about five fewer minutes staring at furnaces.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:Why does every argument about some new piece of media on the internet have to become some iconoclastic "well actually, nothing prior to this was ever good" defensive position instead of acknowledging that it's a reasonable criticism that Ryan Gosling could have spent about five fewer minutes staring at furnaces. Where are you even seeing the imagined argument you're arguing against?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Counterpoint: I liked it immensely even with moody staring. I liked the pacing and I'm glad they took the time to let things happen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:He had some with some degree of freedom though. Its not like he had them in chains. Somehow he would stop them from escaping? Wouldn't they just escape and breed anyway? He would just make some huge robot sex factory? The systemic oppression of an entire set of people is not justified or excused if you pick a couple of them to help you subjugate them with. Baseline testing as the new V-K test and their shared consequence for failure should be pretty clear about what exactly happens to replicants who gain enough independence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Thread title: Blade Runner: 2049 Minutes
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Maybe I am just racist against holograms but I didn't find anything involving Joi to be the least bit compelling. I know her entire raison d'etre is to be a perfect CGI waifu but that means I didn't "believe" a single thing she ever said or did was anything more than just her programming doing what it was supposed to be doing. I can't get emotionally involved with a character when I don't believe there's any glimmer of real consciousness there. I know this ties into the themes of Blade Runner and humanity and all that stuff, but it prevented me from responding to it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:Ryan Gosling could have spent about five fewer minutes staring at furnaces. The music got so loud during that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
I appreciate that the movie let its lead performance breathe in a way that most blockbusters do not allow for. I also appreciate that if a movie doesn't work for someone that the movie being 3 hours long might really suck for them. If they were to cut it even by 15-20 minutes, I dunno if we would see entire scenes be excised, I think it's much more likely that we would have gotten a movie with a much different pace, and a lot less gorgeous establishing shots, which would be a huge bummer for those of us who love gorgeous establishing shots. Occasionally, there are even little jokes hidden in those shots, or the architecture that might not get caught if they didn't last that long. For example, the establishing shot of the LAPD building was hilarious, because in the future of course a major city's police headquarters would be a big scary fortress. Or the monolith that was the Wallace HQ which made the flying cars look like little ants.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:The music got so loud during that. Zimmer was such a tone deaf choice to score this film. I know they were under the gun and had to quickly recruit a replacement, but the soundtrack was so blaringly obnoxious at points.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
Linguica posted:Maybe I am just racist against holograms but I didn't find anything involving Joi to be the least bit compelling. I know her entire raison d'etre is to be a perfect CGI waifu but that means I didn't "believe" a single thing she ever said or did was anything more than just her programming doing what it was supposed to be doing. I can't get emotionally involved with a character when I don't believe there's any glimmer of real consciousness there. I know this ties into the themes of Blade Runner and humanity and all that stuff, but it prevented me from responding to it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:Zimmer was such a tone deaf choice to score this film. I know they were under the gun and had to quickly recruit a replacement, but the soundtrack was so blaringly obnoxious at points.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
Linguica posted:I know her entire raison d'etre is to be a perfect CGI waifu but that means I didn't "believe" a single thing she ever said or did was anything more than just her programming doing what it was supposed to be doing. I can't get emotionally involved with a character when I don't believe there's any glimmer of real consciousness there. I know this ties into the themes of Blade Runner and humanity and all that stuff, but it prevented me from responding to it. They showed that the Luv was monitoring the chatbot. I think someone already implied that they made it to trick a robot to reveal itself as the Rachael spawn but they never knew for sure one existed until the movie started.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
Too bad we can't hear what the original Johannsson score was like as the scores for Arrival and Sicario were great, Villeneuve's reason for replacing it was that he wanted something more like Vangelis but even then Zimmer's score didn't really evoke that in me, maybe in a couple pieces. It's serviceable and suits the bleaker atmosphere of the film but I do wish they went for something more iconic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Too bad we can't hear what the original Johannsson score was like as the scores for Arrival and Sicario were great, Villeneuve's reason for replacing it was that he wanted something more like Vangelis but even then Zimmer's score didn't really evoke that in me, maybe in a couple pieces. It's serviceable and suits the bleaker atmosphere of the film but I do wish they went for something more iconic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
All the really bass-heavy synths in the BR2K49 score reminded me of the Doom 2016 OST, weirdly enough.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:Yeah. I found that relationship pretty fascinating, but it never felt to me like Joi was actually a self-conscious person, as opposed to being a super-advanced chat bot that was effectively adapting to its conversational partner. I'm sure that comes down to assumptions that I have about organic brains having a certain something that computers lack, and that something being necessary for consciousness. That's basically the attitude that humans take against replicants in both movies, though. And the first movie definitely makes you come down on the side of the replicants. Everyone's preprogrammed to some extent. It's what you do afterwards that make you you. Tenzarin posted:They showed that the Luv was monitoring the chatbot. I think someone already implied that they made it to trick a robot to reveal itself as the Rachael spawn but they never knew for sure one existed until the movie started. Are you sure? I remember the sequence of Luv following the hovercar with a ... remote operated missile platform, I guess. I mean it wouldn't surprise me if she did follow K at some point via the emanator, because Act 2 ends with Joi telling K to download her and break the emanator antenna afterwards. Luv tracks K down not via the emanator but via probably some kind of implant all the Blade Runner replicant officers get, from Joshi's station at the police HQ.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
VAGENDA OF MANOCIDE posted:That's basically the attitude that humans take against replicants in both movies, though. And the first movie definitely makes you come down on the side of the replicants. Everyone's preprogrammed to some extent. It's what you do afterwards that make you you. It's worth adding that it's impossible to know whether anyone or anything other than yourself subjectively experiences being, but most people are going to assume that their computers are simply machines, no matter how advanced they become. Ersatz fucked around with this message at 22:07 on Oct 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
I guess you can argue that Joi telling K to break the antenna was showing that she had grown beyond her programming and had become self-aware and self-determining to some degree, given the assumption that Evil Corporation was monitoring K through her. But without more fleshing-out it wasn't enough to make me actually believe Joi as a "person," if I was meant to, and it just confuses the issue if I'm not. I sort of feel like "is Joi a person" is meant to be the evasive, unclear "is Deckard a replicant" of this movie. Except the problem is that your opinion on it directly affects your emotional engagement in a major subplot. Linguica fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Oct 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
I think there is a degree of interest in making either reading viable. The film presents you with a decent amount of questions that you have to answer for yourself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
Linguica posted:I guess you can argue that Joi telling K to break the antenna was showing that she had grown beyond her programming and had become self-aware and self-determining to some degree, given the assumption that Evil Corporation was monitoring K through her. But without more fleshing-out it wasn't enough to make me actually believe Joi as a "person," if I was meant to, and it just confuses the issue if I'm not. Totally agree that "is Joi a person?" is this film's "is Deckard a replicant"? Ersatz fucked around with this message at 22:15 on Oct 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
It's stupid and backwards that extended and director's cuts come out on the home release and the theatrical versions are shaved down the way they are. I didn't feel like I had enough time in the theater to just marvel at the sets and the composition and the hugeness of everything. If I was watching it at home I might skip ahead or just not bother, but I got more than my money's worth at the IMAX and I'm going to see it again at the first opportunity. There are way too many movies I regret not being able to see in the theater and there's no way I'm going to let this one slip away. I doubt very much that any of it is going to work as well or at all on the small screen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
3D worked for this movie because it was very subtle and used mostly with JOI.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
Since when is there some universally acceptable length for movies? The movie was a wonderful experience. If I had a nitpick it'd be that I can't see how making replicants get pregnant and then waiting 20 years for their children to reach adulthood could possibly be more time or resource efficient than just building them like they currently are. Seems like a replicant creating life would also create a stronger likelihood of them rebelling or complicating their programming. But I accept it as a macguffin
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
Tyrell had his eyeballs crushed, Wallace was already blind. Okay, I guess I get that now. BTW you can actually buy an umbrella with a light on it. Not sure what that's good for except not getting run over in the dark. AdmiralViscen posted:Since when is there some universally acceptable length for movies? The movie was a wonderful experience. Off-world, you wouldn't have to keep sending/build a clone factory. Population would sustain itself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
AdmiralViscen posted:Since when is there some universally acceptable length for movies? The movie was a wonderful experience. ^^^Yep.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Did you guys catch in that penthouse room/bar that Deckard was holed up in, he had a collection of what looked like Sebastian's dolls lined up facing out of the picture window?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
AwkwardKnob posted:
Yea I know. I was agreeing with you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Gorn Myson posted:Give credit to MisterBibs, he's trying something new by mustering up an opinion while waiting for the real barometer of quality; the box office takings. Smokey, this isn't Sony Pictures Classic. This is Sony. There are rules...
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
I watched the original for the first time about a week ago and I liked the new one a lot more. The original had impressive imagery for its time but it felt pretty meandering and I got kinda bored. This one had a plot that was easier to follow and more interesting. It's me, I'm the average consumer that film buffs despise. Edit: my wife came out of this one furious though about the amount of female objectification
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 23:14
|
|
|
Personally thought the introduction to the revolution at the beginning with the one-eyed woman getting the sex workers to warm up to K and it's further momentary glance at the end was perfect. It didn't need more, but it didn't need to get cut either. I mentioned in an earlier post that it was obvious Villeneuve wanted to scope of the film's universe to breathe on its own outside of what the audience was seeing. It wasn't meant to be a central plot point. It was an addition to the world; something for the audience to be aware of but not dwell on. K was on a search for meaning - for finding a soul - and I think that scene at the beginning was supposed to fuel those emotions. He thought he was special, turns out it's he's the polar opposite and not even a centralized part of this revolution the replicants are planning. He's *literally* nobody despite so many grandeur events unfolding around him. In the face of something so massive he still feels empty and as though his personal journey to become special led him nowhere. Which is why he's so somber looking walking down that street when he runs into purple holo-Joi and why that interaction with her finally drove home what he needed to do to become more than human.
GeekyManatee fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Oct 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
Cicero posted:I watched the original for the first time about a week ago and I liked the new one a lot more. The original had impressive imagery for its time but it felt pretty meandering and I got kinda bored. This one had a plot that was easier to follow and more interesting. It's me, I'm the average consumer that film buffs despise. Did your wife not understand that this is a movie about the literal commodification of human bodies and minds?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 23:21
|
|
|
Cacator posted:I intentionally saw the film stone cold sober the first time so I could follow everything with the expectation that I'd see it again stoned as gently caress just to soak in the ambiance. I was referring to the "royal 'you'."
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
LMAO I'm sure she understood it just fine that doesn't mean she can't dislike it. Finally saw this, loved it personally. The best thing about this is that Deckard could stil be human or a replicant.  Well done Villeneuve.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 07:47 |
|
|
Cicero posted:I watched the original for the first time about a week ago and I liked the new one a lot more. The original had impressive imagery for its time but it felt pretty meandering and I got kinda bored. This one had a plot that was easier to follow and more interesting. It's me, I'm the average consumer that film buffs despise. I love the original but its pacing is terrible. the entire sequence with Sebastian takes up way too much time for what it is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 23:26
|
|