• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Blade Runner 2049 |OT| Do Androids Dream of Electric Boogaloo? [Unmarked Spoilers]

D

Deleted member 102362

Unconfirmed Member
Having watched it twice in a row...I liked it and what it was doing with the story and how it connects back to the first movie. The 2.5 hour running time went by very quickly both showings. Also the IMAX screening was great, so I'd highly recommend it to anyone considering seeing it in that format.

The music was good. Less distinctive and melodic than Vangelis' work but I still liked it.

Gonna need time to process everything, but after seeing this...bring on Denis' Dune.
 
I don't think this movie is 30 years too late at all. The short films and the movie gave me the feeling that this world is a breathing and living place, and I totally bought the 30 years of time difference. Some stuff has changed, other things stayed the same.

Blade Runner topics are timeless.
 

kmax

Member
Massive spoilers below. Don't read if you haven't watched the film.

Blade Runner 2049 is a film that Ghost in the Shell wished it had been.

The movie has a heavy aura of mystique surrounding it. It doesn't spoonfeed you as many questions are left open for interpretation. It subtlety lays out a beautiful story about love in a world that is seemingly hollow from it. It is an incredible crafted film that felt like an anime in a many regards, which I thought gave the film depth that I wished that the hollywood adaption of GiTS had.

As a replicant, Agent K is in search for finding the truth as an artificial man. Being told that he shouldn't worry about things since he doesn't have a soul, perfectly captures many themes that are being alluded to in the film. K is a rebellious character that goes to great lengths in a journey to discover himself by looking for a mysterious man that might have the answers to the questions that he seeks. Little did he know that he wasn't just discovering his genesis, he was ultimately the one that came through.

Having faith that a replicant was out there, the miracle child had to find candidates that seemingly had human elements, for which K ultimately possessed - in that regard, he was much like Rachael in the original film. The miracle child's faith and his resolve perfectly came together in tandem, because I think the film asks the question about "having a soul" truly was exclusive to humans. Can artificial beings have souls? Did K have one? These are all open questions, but I think that If K didn't have "a soul", he wouldn't of been able to carry out his duty to fulfill his resolve, even after finding out the truth. Believing in miracles is one of the major themes of the film, after all.

In an effort to aspire to create the most beautiful of specimens, Wallace discovery of "the miracle" started a process of deterioration in which his world that he meticulously had built up - started to crumble. Seeing the pain through Luv's eyes perfectly portrays the reaction of losing absolute control that they safeguarded and nurtured, thus strenghthening their resolve to do anything possible to continue to uphold that position of power.

There are so many elements in this film that makes you appeciate the way the story is being told. From Sapper mentioning "the miracle" before his retirement - to the long game played by the miracle child to connect with her distant father, are all impressively executed. When she finally sees her own memory return back to her, suggesting that one of the replicants finally came through is one of the most powerful scenes in the entire film, since it's a scene that you don't fully appreciate until we later uncover the truth. Majestic. Everything is laid out with finesse and detail that makes the film such a powerful experience.

As for the cinematography, Roger Deakins will without a doubt win an Academy for this. Every scene was absolutely amazing. The visuals, the camera angels. Incredible. Absolutely incredible. The direction was on point by Villeneuve that creates a film that he wants to create. Nothing here is rushed, nothing here is in there for the sake of things. It's all there to tell you something.

As for the acting, this was an incredible feat from everyone. They were all on point. Everyone was playing their A game in this, and it truly shows.

This film is incredible, and I can't wait for the 4K bluray collectors edition for this one. I need to see it again, and again.

A+
 
Damn, wish they didn't cut this shot:
Blade-runner-3.jpg


Maybe it'll pop up in deleted scenes.
 
I'm still processing that, and will probably need a second viewing to fully form my thoughts, but I mostly loved it, and felt pretty much everything from K travelling to Vegas on was fantastic.

I'm also over the moon they they left the question of whether Deckard is a replicant unanswered.
 
D

Deleted member 102362

Unconfirmed Member
Maybe it'll pop up in deleted scenes.

Oooh, where's that from? Ah, found it.

I also noticed that the trailers have at least one alternate shot, a different angle of K shooting at the Wallace henchmen after they blow up the spinner.
 

Dead

well not really...yet
I'm still processing that, and will probably need a second viewing to fully form my thoughts, but I mostly loved it, and felt pretty much everything from K travelling to Vegas on was fantastic.

I'm also over the moon they they left the question of whether Deckard is a replicant unanswered.
Yeah, it honestly leaves me feeling that way too. Was the child born of a human and replicant? Both Replicant? Great move on Villeneuve's part.
 

thenexus6

Member
I wish the film ended with Joe on the steps outside in the show. I don't think we needed to see Deckard go inside - plus we see him and his daughter look at each other but thats it. I feel less is more in this situation.

I still can't help but wonder what Jóhannsson's version of the soundtrack would be. Biggest disappointment of the film for me. There was very little music and it was either massive and loud or just a rehash of the original. I know that sounds harsh, but I did enjoy the music.
 

black070

Member
I'm still processing that, and will probably need a second viewing to fully form my thoughts, but I mostly loved it, and felt pretty much everything from K travelling to Vegas on was fantastic.

I'm also over the moon they they left the question of whether Deckard is a replicant unanswered.

Yup, was really happy about that.
 

Unit 33

Member
I'm having a difficult time thinking of anything that matched it in visual quality.

It was pretty beautiful innit
 

Violet_0

Banned
nobody wants a movie about the REPLICANT REVOLUTION. That was the single least interesting aspect of the movie. The other few disappointments were Luv (Leto was more compelling despite having way less screen time) and dad Deckard, surprisingly
 
I don't want to be a downer to the party but I really didn't enjoy it. Huge fan of the original etc etc.

I think for me it fell a bit flat and felt too contrived especially in the last act. The romance backstory felt somewhat forced, as well as little things like Leto's hand killing the clone of Rachel - okay we get it, you're the bad guys. The orphanage with all the slaver kids as well felt very.. bleh. It was lots of little things that the first one handled gracefully without it needing to be spelled out on screen.

I just felt it just lacked the subtle nuanced beauty of the first one in that respect - but then tried to force certain elements thinking they were being subtle when it really wasn't.

Sorry for the mini-puke post of thoughts, still trying to process it, but it just didn't sit right. I felt like even still after the greenlight to make it nearly 3hrs etc the plot was still dumbed down a fair bit and went cliche sci fi, and it lost the noir edge.

Was pretty disappointed, it's good just not great. And Hans Zimmer needs to chill the fuck out.

that's it really, it was a good looking sci fi film that felt a bit hollow.
 
It's funny, I was anticipating this scene and was so disappointed when they just cut to the next scene. I felt like we were missing a good convo between the two of them before saying goodbye.

Yeah, and the seawall is just stunning looking. I wish that final sequence took place at dawn with the lighting in that pic rather than at night.
 

Lan Dong Mik

And why would I want them?
This movie was absolutely stunning from a visual standpoint. I can't remember the last time I was this impressed by how a movie looks. Those wide shots of flying vehicles with the futuristic landscape were breathtaking. One of the best looking films I have ever seen.

Some quick thoughts:

Absolutely loved Luv. Bitch was menacing as fuck. I also liked Jared Leto a ton in this, though I'm disappointed that they kind of left his character unscathed. Felt like there should have been a climax or something.

Was a bit thrown off by the abrupt ending.

Not a ton of action but it didn't bother that bad.

My two friends I went with both passed out multiple times lol. It's a major slow burn. I'm not sure how this is gonna hold up at the box office tbh.

I became a huge fan of the actress who played Joi. My god she is gorgeous and has some pretty decent acting chops. I had my doubts after seeing her in Knock Knock but she did great in this.

Ryan Gosling was....eh. Not terrible but not amazing. Ford on the other hand...wow! Thought he was supberb in this.

Kinda wish they didn't kill off Batista so quickly. Seemed like a very interesting character

It kinda seemed like only 10 people lived in an over populated L.A in 2049. Sort of broke immersion for me.

Absolutely loved the score. Very subtle synth sounding stuff but i thought it worked perfectly with the tone of the film.

It was was a bit too long. Some stuff probably should have been cut imo

7.5/10
 

El Topo

Member
nobody wants a movie about the REPLICANT REVOLUTION. That was the single least interesting aspect of the movie. The other few disappointments were Luv (Leto was more compelling despite having way less screen time) and dad Deckard, surprisingly

I think with Luv there are these interesting little moments that hint at so much more, such as the conversation with Lt. Joshi, her cheerful (?) reaction after seemingly having killed K or proclaiming they are taking Deckard "home" when they leave at the end.
 

Waldini

Member
Goddamn.

The more I think about this movie ... the more I love it. It is incredibly slow though ... but in the end, it just works.
I love how they just left de "Deckard is a replica" in the middle. Yeah, fuck you Ridley Scott. Atleast, thats how I look at it anyway.
 
Goddamn.

The more I think about this movie ... the more I love it. It is incredibly slow though ... but in the end, it just works.
I love how they just left de "Deckard is a replica" in the middle. Yeah, fuck you Ridley Scott. Atleast, thats how I look at it anyway.

Left it purposefully ambiguous. Wallace says something like "you were designed this way... or not designed".
 

Waldini

Member
Left it purposefully ambiguous. Wallace says something like "you were designed this way... or not designed".

"Love or mathmetical precision. You would know ... if you were designed".

Great line. Shows even Wallace doesn't know.
When Rachel walked out I was shocked as fuck. Great stuff.

Though I think Rachel was designed to appeal to just Deckard though. She was the only replicant designed that was able to reproduce.


Sylvia Hoeks's "Luv" was fantastic. Same goes for Joi. In the end, her characters's death made an impact on "K" because she told him what he wanted to hear. When I saw that piece of advertisement regarding "Joi's" model I was like ... what? You mean she wasn't thinking!? She was just doing what she was programmed to do.
 
I loved the movie. It handles the character development really well and you still get a glimpse of the dystopian world, while the overall circumstances of the world are not in focus and are just mostly shown by the camera and art work.
 
I loved the movie. It handles the character development really well and you still get a glimpse of the dystopian world, while the overall circumstances of the world are not in focus and are just mostly shown by the camera and art work.

The fleshing out of the dystopia was amazing. North of LA seems to be massive farms, and all of San Diego is a fucking ship wasteland lol.
 

Saturnman

Banned
Big BR fan here.

Thumb down for 2049. Movie's too long, plot is stupid, especially by the last hour. Villains suck. Ryan Gosling plays a Ryo Hazuki on screen. Visuals pretty but very uneven (depends on the location). Music only shines when old themes are remixed. Some interesting elements still, but not enough to sway me.

If this was a movie by any other name, it would probably be seen as a flawed but interesting sci-fi flick. But with the BR name, you expect more.

Lower expectations and you might enjoy this more than I did.
 

A-V-B

Member
Fucking christ what a film. How lucky are we that we get a Blade Runner sequel this fantastic? Damn. Different from the original but it's its own thing.
 
I tend to lean forward, literally "on the edge of the seat", once I get really interested in a film. This happened after about forty minutes or so with this film.

People who found it slow: which parts seemed to drag? How would you have told the story with a faster pace?
 

MrS

Banned
Best sequel to anything ever? Best sequel to anything ever. Sorry ESB, or Godfather II, or....Fuck it.
Watch your mouth. Resident Evil 2 (the game) is the best sequel ever.

I need to make some time to see it again because I'm conflicted over how good it was.
 

Monocle

Member
Big BR fan here.

Thumb down for 2049. Movie's too long, plot is stupid, especially by the last hour. Villains suck. Ryan Gosling plays a Ryo Hazuki on screen. Visuals pretty but very uneven (depends on the location). Music only shines when old themes are remixed. Some interesting elements still, but not enough to sway me.

If this was a movie by any other name, it would probably be seen as a flawed but interesting sci-fi flick. But with the BR name, you expect more.

Lower expectations and you might enjoy this more than I did.
God this grates on my soul. We get an insanely great followup to a classic film, on par or better in every way, and there are still reactions like this. Nostalgia casts a hell of a spell on people.

It's like The Force Awakens all over again. Only this movie is less vulnerable to shallow critiques because it doesn't have a franchise to redeem by treading the elusive border between homage and repetition.
 

Blade30

Unconfirmed Member
I watched the movie yesterday and to quote Denis V. "I deeply deeply deeply deeply loved it", it made me want to watch the movie immediately again after seeing it which is really rare for me. The movie is on par maybe even better than the original at least to me although a few elements that don't quite reach up to the original and to be fair I'm not a huge Blade Runner fan but I really like the original movie. The 2 hours and 40 minutes went by quickly for me and I really thought there were like 20-30 minutes left when K/Joe was rescuing Deckard.
The story and characters were really well done and I loved the three new main characters K/Joe, Joi and Luv, as for Wallace nah. My only gripe which is just a nitpick is that the soundtrack wasn't as much Vangelis as I hoped it would be, I wanted some more tracks especially this one (Blues) but at least they put Rutger Hauers "Tears in Rain" in it.
 

Waldini

Member
I tend to lean forward, literally "on the edge of the seat", once I get really interested in a film. This happened after about forty minutes or so with this film.

People who found it slow: which parts seemed to drag? How would you have told the story with a faster pace?

There's alot of scenes that have no dialogue that just "add" to the atmosphere. In the end, it doesn't add anything but it's a welcome scene. Some travel scenes took a bit too long. A trim here and there to just keep the low pace. Nothing more.


The part where Luv kills the Police Officer was weird ... same goes for the part where she enters the morgue and steals the bones of Rachel. Why didn't anything happen? She was able to just walk out? Could be that Wallace controls these replicants and gave them an ignore order though.

It's like The Force Awakens all over again. Only this movie is less vulnerable to shallow critiques because it doesn't have a franchise to redeem by treading the elusive border between homage and repetition.

It seems that some people are afraid to remain open to a sequel to a classic. To be fair, Blade Runner wasn't an instant classic though. It grew on people. Same as the Shawshank Redemption. I loved Blade Runner 2049. It's different, feels familiair but strange, in a good way.

The Force Awakens was (for me) the perfect reboot. It contained all elements which made me fall in love with Star Wars in the first place and more. To call it a copy of ANH is just lazy. Cheap shotting a movie ... but to each his own I guess.
 

sarcastor

Member
Big BR fan here.

Thumb down for 2049. Movie's too long, plot is stupid, especially by the last hour. Villains suck. Ryan Gosling plays a Ryo Hazuki on screen. Visuals pretty but very uneven (depends on the location). Music only shines when old themes are remixed. Some interesting elements still, but not enough to sway me.

I agree. the movie was pretty and had great scenes. but overall it was simply too long and had too many plot holes.

1. Security at the LAPD is worse than at the food court at Ikea
2. Luv leaves Kay to die instead of killing him. twice. for no reason.
3. Kay gets suspended but still has the keys to the flying cop car, and magically knows when Luv is flying Deckard to wherever.

I did like it that Kay decided to reunite Deckard with his daughter rather then killing him and starting the revolution.
 

sectionse7en

Neo Member
Saw this last night, and adored every second. It's clear Villeneuve respects Blade Runner, and 2049 feels like a true Blade Runner sequel, with the Philip K Dick dystopia turned up to 11, and yet still feels that it belongs among Villeneuve (and his incredible team)'s previous films.

I can see how people might dislike it. There was only one scene that felt jarring -
Rachel's CGI face
, but they sidestep it nicely.

The supporting cast are also great in this. Ana de Armas is a delight, and she's going places for sure. Sylvia Hoeks is the surprise here. A+
 

A-V-B

Member
Saw this last night, and adored every second. It's clear Villeneuve respects Blade Runner, and 2049 feels like a true Blade Runner sequel, with the Philip K Dick dystopia turned up to 11, and yet still feels that it belongs among Villeneuve (and his incredible team)'s previous films.

I can see how people might dislike it. There was only one scene that felt jarring -
Rachel's CGI face
, but they sidestep it nicely.

honestly that part didn't bother me! It was supposed to be unnerving and it succeeded big time
 

Waldini

Member
I agree. the movie was pretty and had great scenes. but overall it was simply too long and had too many plot holes.

1. Security at the LAPD is worse than at the food court at Ikea
2. Luv leaves Kay to die instead of killing him. twice. for no reason.
3. Kay gets suspended but still has the keys to the flying cop car, and magically knows when Luv is flying Deckard to wherever.

I did like it that Kay decided to reunite Deckard with his daughter rather then killing him and starting the revolution.

1. LAPD = mostly replicants. Could have been given an order to just let Luv do her thing for the "greater" good as referenced plenty of times in the movie itself. Besides, she killed her pretty fast. No sound, no alarm. Nothing. LAPD could've found the body and nobody would've known. I was under the impression Wallace owned pretty much the entire force anyway.
2. Luv was monitoring "K" so he could find the child. He didn't find the "child" but found Deckard, who is an important part of the puzzle. You could assume Luv thought "K''s job wasn't finished yet, so she let him go/live.
3. That's ... just how things go in real life too. Whenever you get suspended, you are requested to stay at home. You can take your belongings but everything else has to be handed in.

honestly that part didn't bother me! It was supposed to be unnerving and it succeeded big time

"... she had green eyes"

BAM!
 
I was trying to figure out if the Rachel face was taken from the original film. It almost looked like there was some film grain stuff going on whereas Deckard was super clear digital looking.
 

Moonkid

Member
Just got out of the cinema. I felt catharsis as soon as the credits rolled and in the car on the drive home. There aren't many films that exceed my expectations after over a year of waiting and this wasn't one of them. With that said, I think I'll come to enjoy it more on repeat viewings.

Two things on my mind right now:

- I hate to say it but I have to be honest, the music was a letdown. I didn't have particularly high expectations, especially knowing that it didn't go as planned behind the scenes, but it felt way too subdued. The first moment that really grabbed my attention musically was on their way to the orphanage with the big swell of synths as they passed the sea wall. Not to say there weren't plenty of great moments with silence but in the music side of things, what was there barely did anything for me. I would have liked to see more moments where the music takes the front-seat rather than merely adding another layer of sound. I know Villeneuve has said this is his director's cut but I'd like to see the same film with a different score attached, perhaps Johannsson's. The melody in Mesa is gorgeous and I wish the rest of the soundtrack was as bold as that.

- I loved how the conclusions to K and Deckard's respective lovers tied in together and affirmed that artificial life *is* unique. Big props to both actors and Deakins for the amazing lighting work. Gosling doesn't say a single word in a scene with what is essentially a billboard and sells it.

Overall, an excellent sequel. All the call-backs felt incredibly personal and the variety of settings was exactly what I'd hope to see in a sequel to a film like Blade Runner with such an iconic, ground-breaking style.
 

EVIL

Member
I was trying to figure out if the Rachel face was taken from the original film. It almost looked like there was some film grain stuff going on whereas Deckard was super clear digital looking.

nah was painfully obvious the whole thing was CG. It was borderline ruining for me since I hate it when they do it since they never get it 100% right.
 
I agree. the movie was pretty and had great scenes. but overall it was simply too long and had too many plot holes.

1. Security at the LAPD is worse than at the food court at Ikea
2. Luv leaves Kay to die instead of killing him. twice. for no reason.8
3. Kay gets suspended but still has the keys to the flying cop car, and magically knows when Luv is flying Deckard to wherever.

I did like it that Kay decided to reunite Deckard with his daughter rather then killing him and starting the revolution.

Those aren't plot holes:

1. Security in this world isn't what you think it is. Wallace owns everything. Luv even says she's going to tell Wallace that it was self-defense.
2. Luv was probably under orders to leave him alive by Wallace in case they needed him further. It's also hinted that she likes him.
3. He was only on leave...so yea...he got to keep his car. He knew where they were and waited for them to leave and followed. Is it that hard to believe?
 

Metal B

Member
- I loved how the conclusions to K and Deckard's respective lovers tied in together and affirmed that artificial life *is* unique. Big props to both actors and Deakins for the amazing lighting work. Gosling doesn't say a single word in a scene with what is essentially a billboard and sells it.
I say, the billboard scene will define the movie in the future. It's great visually, has good acting, unique to this movie and an important, emotional scene for the whole story. Loved it.
 
Top Bottom