Bladerunner 2049

  • 343 Views
  • Last Post 28 December 2017
TheCholulaKid posted this 30 September 2017

Surely deserves it's own thread.

I wasn't holding out much hope after the trailers and was going to dodge it.....but the reviews are universally shit hot positive so I've cracked.  3D Imax booked for next Friday.  Excited.

  • Liked by
  • Rallyboy
  • gavstar
37 Comments
Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
pap posted this 30 September 2017

If you like your Blade Runner this review is probably worth your time.

I think I saw it later in life.   Wasn't as good as it had been hyped by my geeky mates, perhaps undone by the passage of time a little bit.  The world building was amazing.   Some individual performances are excellent.  Plot, not so much.

  • Liked by
  • gavstar
  • TheCholulaKid
Fowllyd posted this 30 September 2017

Interesting viewpoint there, papster. I liked the original film, and thought the director's cut (minus the pointless voiceover narrative) was excellent. I can see what you mean about the plot, given that there isn't an awful lot of it, but even then I like the ambiguity (the comment "She won't live, of course. But then, who does?" (not verbatim) is beautiful in its variety of possible meanings).

Compared to the book it's taken from (Philip K Dick's brilliant Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? - as if you didn't know), there's quite a bit missing. But it does capture Dick's vision of a dystopian future world pretty nicely, and I certainly liked that side of it.

 

Rallyboy posted this 30 September 2017

My all time fave for lighting, sound, and some great characters - the last of the great non-CGI movies.

Booked to see the new one and quietly confident from the trailers that it has retained the feel of the original.

It had better be good!

 

  • Liked by
  • Bathsaint
Bathsaint posted this 30 September 2017

Yep, I'm with you Raleigh Boi - I had very low expectations, assuming it would be shit (much like that fucking awful remake of the Prisoner). However, reviews are universally good. I'm going to have to go on my own as Mrs BS will have no interest whatsoever...

gavstar posted this 30 September 2017

First saw it was I was about 7 years old, I shared a room with my older brother and he was watching it late one night and i was captivated by it (I should have been sleeping), and when I say 'I saw it' that's literally what it was as he had his headphones on.  Don't think I saw it again til a few years later and got to listen to it as well, I think 10 year old me liked the voiceover because I was stupid and didn't know what was going on.  Watched it a couple of years ago (the 'final, final, yes this is defo the last cut' cut at the harbour lights cinema and it still holds up.  Very excited about 2049.

  • Liked by
  • TheCholulaKid
  • pap
SaintBristol posted this 30 September 2017

Denis Villeneuve directing and Roger Deakins as DP. safe hands laughing

  • Liked by
  • Bucks
cellone posted this 30 September 2017

First off I'm amazed that it's been covered, although really it is another interpretation of the novel. 

Now looking forward to seeing it (and then watching the old/original pretty soon after and I bet most do.). Tried getting my partner to watch the first one so she can compare it to the new and she thought it was better not to watch the old one because she has no intention of watching the new.  Fair do's.

TheCholulaKid posted this 30 September 2017

Originally posted by Rallyboy

My all time fave for lighting, sound, and some great characters - the last of the great non-CGI movies.

Booked to see the new one and quietly confident from the trailers that it has retained the feel of the original.

It had better be good!

 

 Still astonishing how good it looks. 

pap posted this 01 October 2017 - Last edited 01 October 2017

Originally posted by Fowllyd

Interesting viewpoint there, papster. I liked the original film, and thought the director's cut (minus the pointless voiceover narrative) was excellent. I can see what you mean about the plot, given that there isn't an awful lot of it, but even then I like the ambiguity (the comment "She won't live, of course. But then, who does?" (not verbatim) is beautiful in its variety of possible meanings).

Compared to the book it's taken from (Philip K Dick's brilliant Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? - as if you didn't know), there's quite a bit missing. But it does capture Dick's vision of a dystopian future world pretty nicely, and I certainly liked that side of it.

 

 The director's cut is the only version I've seen.  I've no real interest in the theatrical release, mostly because it fucks with the room for interpretation,   The unicorn is not exactly screaming out that Deckard is a replicant, but you can take that from the film should you wish.

It's a shame then, that Ridley Scott has pretty much committed the same sin in interviews as them meddling studio bosses did with his picture.   There's no room for interpretation in his version of events, which pretty much poops on the subtlety he tried so hard to establish.   You've ultimately got to believe Ridley Scott; it's not like he didn't leave enough clues, even in the original.

The film introduced the possibility of replicants that don't know they are replicants, which Deckard pretty much has to be for the replicant Deckard to work.   It's all there if you're confident enough to make the assessment.  I know people go apeshit over this movie, and I understand why.  Just a bit gutted to have not been there at the time.   It was one of the first DVDs I'd ever owned -  that was the first time I ever saw it.

  • Liked by
  • TheCholulaKid
  • SaintBristol
SaintBristol posted this 01 October 2017

Peter Bradshaw is usually pretty reliable as a critic.  I'm pretty hyped laughing

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/sep/29/blade-runner-2049-review-ryan-gosling-harrison-ford-denis-villeneuve

Dubai_Phil posted this 01 October 2017 - Last edited 01 October 2017

Originally posted by SaintBristol

Peter Bradshaw is usually pretty reliable as a critic.  I'm pretty hyped laughing

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/sep/29/blade-runner-2049-review-ryan-gosling-harrison-ford-denis-villeneuve

 Yeah, all well and good but did he like the movie?

Dubai_Phil posted this 01 October 2017

The problem i have is that Mrs D_P hasnt seen any of the first film(s)

Obviously my plan is to be at the Imax at dawn next Friday but will she sit through it without knowing the delight of the original story.

If I go alone she will eventually catch up but will have missed the big screen experience.

Strange they didn't let Netflix have the film for us to remind ourselves.

Hi hum.

Rallyboy posted this 01 October 2017

That's the key Phil - the big screen.

Sitting in a cinema watching the opening cityscape scenes of Blade Runner accompanied by the amazing audio is one of the great film experiences.

You can put aside any wobbly plot or complex narrative, Scott created a visually stunning and plausible new world.

It's also difficult to believe that it was just shot in a small room with models and a smoke machine!

cellone posted this 01 October 2017

First off I'm amazed that it's been covered, although really it is another interpretation of the novel. 

Now looking forward to seeing it (and then watching the old/original pretty soon after and I bet most do.). Tried getting my partner to watch the first one so she can compare it to the new and she thought it was better not to watch the old one because she has no intention of watching the new.  Fair do's.

Cobham Saint posted this 01 October 2017

Originally posted by cellone

First off I'm amazed that it's been covered, although really it is another interpretation of the novel. 

Now looking forward to seeing it (and then watching the old/original pretty soon after and I bet most do.). Tried getting my partner to watch the first one so she can compare it to the new and she thought it was better not to watch the old one because she has no intention of watching the new.  Fair do's.

 Same post 18 hours apart @One Cell ?

Must be some sort of record

 

lou_wink2

  • Liked by
  • gavstar
  • Fatso
Rallyboy posted this 01 October 2017

In all fainess it was brave of @cellone to tackle a remake of his original post after the first one has been held up by critics as a classic.

While this latest post clearly borrowed from the iconic original, I thought the subtle nods to nostalgia through lighting and plot, and the limited use of CGI gave the new post a fresh feel while remaining loyal to the spirit of the book - and in years to come, many may regard this remake as a worthy addition to the future forum boxsets.

So for me, not a classic like the first post, but a great remake.

BTripz posted this 01 October 2017

I'm lost, remind me did the original original have the voiceover saying what was going on?

Dubai_Phil posted this 02 October 2017

Originally posted by BTripz

I'm lost, remind me did the original original have the voiceover saying what was going on?

 There were 3 originals.

HTH

BTripz posted this 02 October 2017

Yes, Yes, I and I have 3 or 4 versions on DVD but what was the first original.

Was it really released in 1982? Wow, I seem to remember watching the original in the cinema but we were stationed in Germany at the time so it was either that or on VHS!!

cellone posted this 02 October 2017

Originally posted by Rallyboy

In all fainess it was brave of @cellone to tackle a remake of his original post after the first one has been held up by critics as a classic.

While this latest post clearly borrowed from the iconic original, I thought the subtle nods to nostalgia through lighting and plot, and the limited use of CGI gave the new post a fresh feel while remaining loyal to the spirit of the book - and in years to come, many may regard this remake as a worthy addition to the future forum boxsets.

So for me, not a classic like the first post, but a great remake.

 I would like it known that the use of CGI was more of a subtle enhancement that I felt the original had lacked. The development of CGI over those eighteen hours was considerable and I felt that the changes brought more of the book to life. 

I can understand why anyone would question the idea off a remake and in truth I'm the same. It was more of a board decision taken by my cunt of a phone.

Rumours of a third Director's cut version are true but at the moment I'm working on other projects, so anything like that will have to remain on the back burner for now.

In all honesty I'm just glad the second version has been recieved so well.

One Cell