Support NeoGAF

[DarkLordMalik]

So 55m to be even.

There's 2 countries to be released:

China 27 October 2017
Japan 27 October 2017

Go China and Japan.

That's not how it works. It needs to make back atleast twice its budget to recoup its cost and be considered even. That won't satisfy anyone though since it will have barely broken even with no profit. Nowhere a blockbuster despite having its budget.

 

[Stinkles]

To derail the discussion a little bit, but this underperforming blockbuster has the greatest scene transition of all time.

Embers to snow to city.

I still love Highlander for its time transitions.

 

[The Jazz Cabbage Master]

Just saw it.

This movie is incredible.

Need time to digest.

 

[Dr. Black Jack]

None of this posts attempt at all to mitigate backslashbunny's concerns, and boil down to "nuh uh"

Yup. Super gross.

I love the movie but her concerns are perfectly valid.

 

[Jarmel]

Yup. Super gross.

I love the movie but her concerns are perfectly valid.

No they’re not. Male gaze is probably only used in one scene and it’s depicted in a way of pointing out the commercialization of Joi. As to Orientalism, there’s barely anything Asian in the movie besides a few props/costumes. It’s not even close to the level of the original.

 

[tauroxd]

Spoiler

the big hologram calling k "joe" is all the closure you need

Exactly.

So 55m to be even.

There's 2 countries to be released:

China 27 October 2017
Japan 27 October 2017

Go China and Japan.

That's not how it works. $150 million it's how much they spent making the movie. You need to add how many millions the spent in distribution and marketing.

Also you need to know that every theater takes a little out of every ticket, and the international market gets an ever bigger cut, especially China.

So the movies need more than just $150 millions to break even.

 

[Lunaray]

I just saw this movie at the local theater. We caught the 6pm viewing, and there were maybe 20 people in the theater (this is on a Saturday). Five teens seating in front of us walked out of the movie halfway. I know this is anecdotal, but I was hoping it would do better. Though this movie was a swing and a miss for me, I'd like to see more movies in this vein. There's so much good material in New Wave science fiction to draw inspiration from.

 

[Curious Puppy]

Yup. Super gross.

I love the movie but her concerns are perfectly valid.

The concerns are rooted out of a complete misrepresentation of the film. You can’t just divorce context from the images and then make a claim of male gaze, and the orientalism point doesn’t even make sense.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

My wife and I were just discussing how the movie is a critique of male gaze. It's all portrayed as gross or heartbreakingly shallow. It skeeves you out, because it is supposed to.

I can get behind a person not wanting to experience that, but not critiquing the film for somehow supporting it.

Didn't notice any orientalism except in the advertising.

 

[prag16]

Yup. Super gross.

I love the movie but her concerns are perfectly valid.

No, the concerns aren't valid. Have you seen the movie?

Any oriental stuff really only seems to be there in keeping with the original, nothing more. And as for male gaze, there was basically nothing, and certainly nothing that the movie seems to be glorifying. I actually came across a couple articles this week explaining how the film has a feminist message. I didn't really think about it at the time, but it actually makes sense after further reflection.

You can't just jump to random conclusions from a place of ignorance and then claim the concerns are legitimate, and expect to be taken seriously. Or maybe you can. Trump's president now.

However, I doubt nonsense like this is hurting the film commercially. The vast majority of the "problems" likely have more to do with the original's cult status (never really was mainstream in any way), the long run time, and the lack of by-the-numbers summer blockbuster formula.

 

[Window]

None of this posts attempt at all to mitigate backslashbunny's concerns, and boil down to "nuh uh"

Let me take a stab at it.

First of all, there's no hint of Orientalism in this film. This is largely because the world of 2049 does not appear to be the multi-cultural melting pot of the first (but even then it was mostly East-Asian thus the Orientalism claims). The 'foreign' aesthetics are more indirect here.

As for the film being misogynistic (I'm responding to the points raised in the Vice article), that depends on whether one considers depiction of a subject as endorsement or if not that then as further propagation of it (regardless of intention). The film's depiction (and criticism) of women's subjugation and objectification I think is a deconstruction of the Male Gaze. A fair point can be made though about the film not offering these criticisms through a direct voice of a woman instead of being filtered through the experience of the film's central character who happens to be a white male, adding to Hollywood's diversity issues. The film however does sport a cast of female characters who are central to the story but they are mostly relegated to supporting roles. The claim about the fetishization of women's death vs the poetic death of men is absolute bullshit though. I'm happy to go into more detail on the specific points raised in the Vice article in the spoiler thread.

In short, the film fails the Bechdel Test but it's not without merit in its exploration of the role of women in society.

 

[Eylos]

That's not how it works. It needs to make back atleast twice its budget to recoup its cost and be considered even. That won't satisfy anyone though since it will have barely broken even with no profit. Nowhere a blockbuster despite having its budget.

Exactly.



That's not how it works. $150 million it's how much they spent making the movie. You need to add how many millions the spent in distribution and marketing.

Also you need to know that every theater takes a little out of every ticket, and the international market gets an ever bigger cut, especially China.

So the movies need more than just $150 millions to break even.

Ok, welp

 

[radios shipping overview]

I'm really wondering where backslashbunny read about the movie.

 

[Turbo Killer]

I don’t get how somebody claims they were excited to watch the film, and the film get overwhelming positive reviews and then they are so concerned by something they read that they can’t watch the film anymore, smells like bullshit to me.

 

[Piggus]

I really, really enjoyed it. People are doing themselves a disservice by not seeing this. Was disappointed to see so few people in the theater on a Friday night.

It might be too slow for some people though. A saw one couple walk out, which I rarely see at any movie.

 

[prag16]

I don’t get how somebody claims they were excited to watch the film, and the film get overwhelming positive reviews and then they are so concerned by something they read that they can’t watch the film anymore, smells like bullshit to me.

Concern trolling 101. We fell for it.

 

[neurosisxeno]

I really, really enjoyed it. People are doing themselves a disservice by not seeing this. Was disappointed to see so few people in the theater on a Friday night.

It might be too slow for some people though. A saw one couple walk out, which I rarely see at any movie.

I went with the GF last night for the 8:40 showing, and there was probably like 25-30 people in the theater total. It was pretty empty for a Friday night, that's for sure. Nobody walked out, and I absolutely loved the movie. I had been up all day (since 5am) so the first half dragged a bit, but the second half really picked it up, and I might even go see it again. The cinematography was absolutely stunning. Big fan of Villanueve's handling of this film.

 

[Aurongel]

Saying Blade Runner 2049 supports male ogling of the female form is like saying it glorifies mega corporations and unchecked climate change. Just because it depicts it, doesn't mean it supports it 🙄

Also, the "orientalism" is in keeping with the alternate reality of this world, as is the same for the presence of the USSR. Japan was hot shit economically and in terms of cultural cache during the 70/80s when the first film was conceived. At that time, a Japan-American hybrid mega city wasn't such an unbelievable concept.

It's like some people in here see an isolated image and then immediately react with whatever kneejerk emotion just pops into their head.

 

[Fast Forward]

Regardless, if you are a fan of Sci-fi, this movie is worth watching for damn sure. Things like discussion on box office, original vs. sequel, and potential flaws of the film (and it definitely has some), should not distract from that. This movie is great Sci-fi regardless.

 

[Arc]

I don't know how anyone who enjoys Sci-fi could ignore this. Get ready for a ton of filmmakers to borrow the ideas and elements of the world, just like the first film.

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

It's too bad. I was excited to see the movie, but decided against it after reading about it.

Unfortunately, I'm not a fan of supporting by buying tickets a movie that is obviously male gaze AND chock full of Orientalism.

I'll watch it when it becomes available on Netflix.

wow bunny, you got piled on a bit there lol

i went to see it ("did my part") and i sort of regretted it

am a woman and that movie is gorgeous from beginning to end but it also made me feel completely uncomfortable and excluded throughout its running time. i have held back from saying my perspectives on the movie's threads on gaf since i dont want to be a buzz kill but, bunbuns....... i dont think you are making a wrong decision from not wanting to spend money to see it at the theatre. it's definitely a competently made movie, so worthwhile seeing. netflix, ahoy.

 

[kirblar]

None of this posts attempt at all to mitigate backslashbunny's concerns, and boil down to "nuh uh"

It is near-impossible to address the first issue without going into massive spoilers about the narrative and what it's trying to accomplish.

 

[Arc]

wow bunny, you got piled on a bit there lol

i went to see it ("did my part") and i sort of regretted it

am a woman and that movie is gorgeous from beginning to end but it also made me feel completely uncomfortable and excluded throughout its running time. i have held back from saying my perspectives on the movie's threads on gaf since i dont want to be a buzz kill but, bunbuns....... i dont think you are making a wrong decision from not wanting to spend money to see it at the theatre. it's definitely a competently made movie, so worthwhile seeing. netflix, ahoy.

If you are being serious then there's really nothing to say other than you've completely missed the point of the entire film.

 

[Magilla]

In short, the film fails the Bechdel Test but it's not without merit in its exploration of the role of women in society.

Not to ignore all your points, but how does it fail the Bechdel Test?

1.The movie has to have at least two women in it
2.who talk to each other
3.about something besides a man

It has (at least) Joi, Luv, and Lt. Joshi. They talk about Joe, the "baby", and more grandiose themes.

That is ignoring Freysa and Mariette's scenes.

I'm not dismissing, I'm genuinely curious if I'm misunderstanding the Bachdel Test.

 

[Window]

Not to ignore all your points, but how does it fail the Bechdel Test?

1.The movie has to have at least two women in it
2.who talk to each other
3.about something besides a man

It has (at least) Joi, Luv, and Lt. Joshi. They talk about Joe, the "baby", and more grandiose themes.

That is ignoring Freysa and Mariette's scenes.

I'm not dismissing, I'm genuinely curious if I'm misunderstanding the Bachdel Test.

I don't recall a conversation between them that didn't involve Joe in some capacity.

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

If you are being serious then there's really nothing to say other than you've completely missed the point of the entire film.

please, are you trying to tell me that your way of seeing the film is more valid than my experience

the film made me felt uncomfortable and my feelings shouldn't be dismissed as me not seeing it the 'right way'

 

[Timbuktu]

I don't know how anyone who enjoys Sci-fi could ignore this. Get ready for a ton of filmmakers to borrow the ideas and elements of the world, just like the first film.

2049 looks really great, but I don't think it really breaks new ground like the original to have the same sort of impact.

 

[Magilla]

I don't recall a conversation between them that didn't involve Joe in some capacity.

That's fair and I might be mis-remembering the scene. To me the crux of the scene is less about Joe and more about the grander implications of the "baby". He is brought up, but only in respect to the greater thread. Luv and Lt. are bantering about how important the "baby" is and it's role in the coming revolution.

I'm up to other interpretations though!

 

[kirblar]

wow bunny, you got piled on a bit there lol

i went to see it ("did my part") and i sort of regretted it

am a woman and that movie is gorgeous from beginning to end but it also made me feel completely uncomfortable and excluded throughout its running time. i have held back from saying my perspectives on the movie's threads on gaf since i dont want to be a buzz kill but, bunbuns....... i dont think you are making a wrong decision from not wanting to spend money to see it at the theatre. it's definitely a competently made movie, so worthwhile seeing. netflix, ahoy.

It's a near-100 page thread - It'd be really nice to hear your thoughts over in it.

 

[Arc]

please, are you trying to tell me that your way of seeing the film is more valid than my experience

the film made me felt uncomfortable and my feelings shouldn't be dismissed as me not seeing it the 'right way'

To Kill A Mockingbird is not supposed to make you feel comfortable either. The film dipicts these things for a reason. It's one thing to say it's not your cup of tea, but you and bunny are dismissing it as if it's malicous in intent.

 

[Rktk]

I don't recall a conversation between them that didn't involve Joe in some capacity.

The conversation Magilla refers to is not about Joe, it's about the baby.

 

[Fast Forward]

I don't know how anyone who enjoys Sci-fi could ignore this. Get ready for a ton of filmmakers to borrow the ideas and elements of the world, just like the first film.

Too earlier to say either way, but I think the sequel for all of its flaws (and yes it has them), does a clear/better job of exploring the human condition than the original, and I thought the original was pretty damn great to begin with.

And really, to me, considering Sci-Fi at its core is about exploring the human condition, or at least should be, this film deserves a lot of props for just that IMHO.

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

To Kill A Mockingbird is not supposed to make you feel comfortable either. The film dipicts these things for a reason. It's one thing to say it's not your cup of tea, but you and bunny are dismissing it as if it's malicous in intent.

i dont.... i dont know if i can compare it with "to kill a mockingbird" in terms of its themes and social justice commentary.

and i'm fine with uncomfortable themes. i saw Agora last night by chance on the television and it was very uncomfortable. i have watched heavy movies that deals with complex themes and dark tones.

but what br2049 did, to me, as a woman audience, was disappointing since if it wants to say "oh this movie is made as a critique of sexism issues" then it failed to deliver it (for me) (do i have to keep saying "for me" throughout this now) (geez) because throughout its running time, it kept glorifying and using women figures, and often naked women figures. i mean that's just the tip of the iceberg. but i dont wanna bash the movie, good sir, i really dont. i just cant gush for it. and if that offends you, then i am sorry i guess.

It's a near-100 page thread - It'd be really nice to hear your thoughts over in it.

:> thank you~

i can PM you about it instead? i really think my voice wouldn't be welcomed in that thread. don't get me wrong, there are a lot of stuff that the movie did that was super well, so i'm not unappreciative.......... but yes, i have not recommended other women friends to go see it after i went since i've got sads about it . __ .

 

[kirblar]

:> thank you~

i can PM you about it instead? i really think my voice wouldn't be welcomed in that thread. don't get me wrong, there are a lot of stuff that the movie did that was super well, so i'm not unappreciative.......... but yes, i have not recommended other women friends to go see it after i went since i've got sads about it . __ .

Sure thing.

 

[Aurongel]

:> thank you~

i can PM you about it instead? i really think my voice wouldn't be welcomed in that thread. don't get me wrong, there are a lot of stuff that the movie did that was super well, so i'm not unappreciative.......... but yes, i have not recommended other women friends to go see it after i went since i've got sads about it . __ .

Science fiction has historically always benefitted from alternative perspectives and contrarian viewpoints. You should articulate why you feel the way you do about it in the main thread, regardless of my opinion on it.

But there is perhaps a kernel of truth to what you're describing. The demographic data for this film was overwhelmingly male if I recall. Perhaps influenced by the reasons you describe.

 

[Window]

The conversation Magilla refers to is not about Joe, it's about the baby.

The core subject of the conversation may not be Joe but his actions and current whereabouts were of importance to this subject and were brought up.

Spoiler

The conflict in the conversation stems from the Lt. unwilling to reveal the baby's and Joe's location.

Pretty weak argument I think for the film passing the Bechdel Test.

 

[starsky]

No they’re not. Male gaze is probably only used in one scene and it’s depicted in a way of pointing out the commercialization of Joi. As to Orientalism, there’s barely anything Asian in the movie besides a few props/costumes. It’s not even close to the level of the original.

There are too many female objectification in this movie, not just once. On top of my head: the newborn replicant, the big female statues, the sex workers, the house AI. It's easy to notice that all the women in this movie are attractive (except maybe the one eyed rebel) but I can't say the same about the men. Funny that because aren't they in an age where replicants are ubiquitous and everyone should be gorgeous? Yet somehow there are no demand for male beauty.

I don't actually believe that this movie intends to criticise male gaze. Instead I actually think it's one of those movies where it's giving a heavy nod to the good old days, where women are objectified and used in many stereotyped female roles ie. MacGuffin, femme fatale, sexy sidekick, but always put in a second rate position to the white man hero.

Also it's rich that you all disregard bsb's point of view, isn't this thread made to discuss how poorly received this movie is? Here I quote a sentiment from Paul Dergarabedian, someone who is paid to analyse movies: “The core of enthusiastic and loyal ‘Blade Runner’ fans were over 25 and predominantly male and propelled the film as expected to the top spot, but a lengthy running time and lesser interest among females made it tougher for the film to reach the original weekend box office projections"
"According to PostTrack, males over 25 represented 50% of the audience and females over 25 were 27%, while males under 25 represented 15% of moviegoers and females under 25 were 8%."

But yeah, sure, handwave away all the criticism about this movie, especially if it comes from a woman, right?

Here are some women's pov (in underline), just from this thread...

We thought BR would never happen.

Actually, I knew it would happen.

A woman next to me brought out her blanket and curled up in her seat ready to sleep.

A woman behind me blurted out, "Boring!", all drawn out and dramatic, during a particularly slow but atmospheric sequence. I turned and glared at her, and she in turn started tapping her foot loudly for the next few minutes.

My audience sucked.



Straight nonsense, they were both superb. Incredibly heartfelt and nuanced performances.

When I went to see this on Saturday night this lady kept asking her husband/boyfriend if the movie was almost over and that started before they introduced Harrison Ford. That aside, I thought the movie itself was great, shame it might not be a success.

A conversation is happening behind me now, a girl is saying

"It was pretty, but it was just bland. It had no substance to it at all. I also hated the hologram being this subservient woman. It looked great, but it was just dull and shallow.

I was expecting something rather more substantial.

It has no wit, if someone like Tarantino had written it it would actually have some spunk to it".

A piece of art simply cannot please everyone, and this film was made for fans of a film that didn't do well the first time it was released. I think a lot of the themes won't penetrate this, so it will seem shallow to them.

Villeneuve played to what the film needed to remain true to that, giving him 150 million to do that was a wonderfully terrible idea.

when I was on my way out, I overheard three older women talking. they were complaining that it was 'so boring', 'nothing happened', and 'I guess the future is just naked women everywhere'. actually they sounded pretty offended by the boobs. Lol. I don't even remember that many scenes of toplessness. a couple statues, and maybe 5 minutes otherwise? maybe I'm misremembering.

but yeah... it's not for everyone. I loved the pacing.

Man, the film generally doesn't seem to do anything for many women my age. Just talking about anecdotal evidence here. People I know or conversations I've witnessed... I've heard things like "dull, boring, sexist, macho".

What. Is this a guy-movie? A female friend really liked it and appreciated it for its subtle tone and heavy messages. Still...

And finally, this gem...

I am a man, but I can objectively tell you that this is 100% a film for women.

Yes, guys, you certainly know best of what women want.

 

[Window]

There are too many female objectification in this movie, not just once. On top of my head: the newborn replicant, the big female statues, the sex workers, the house AI. It's easy to notice that all the women in this movie are attractive (except maybe the one eyed rebel) but I can't say the same about the men. Funny that because aren't they in an age where replicants are ubiquitous and everyone should be gorgeous? Yet somehow there are no demand for male beauty.

I don't actually believe that this movie intends to criticise male gaze. Instead I actually think it's one of those movies where it's giving a heavy nod to the good old days, where women are objectified and used in many stereotyped female roles ie. MacGuffin, femme fatale, sexy sidekick, but always put in a second rate position to the white man hero.

Can I ask you why you feel this is the case?

I don't really know how to respond to the beauty statement except I think only Luv, Joi and Gosling can be considered as exceptionally beautiful which is definitely an uneven balance.

 

[Nesotenso]

I have read articles where people have an issue with the fact that you are following K's story for the duration of the movie.

Yes he is the protagonist and the movie follows his arc, with everyone else being a plot device advancing his story. So what?

 

[More_Badass]

There are too many female objectification in this movie, not just once. On top of my head: the newborn replicant, the big female statues, the sex workers, the house AI. It's easy to notice that all the women in this movie are attractive (except maybe the one eyed rebel) but I can't say the same about the men. Funny that because aren't they in an age where replicants are ubiquitous and everyone should be gorgeous? Yet somehow there are no demand for male beauty.

I don't actually believe that this movie intends to criticise male gaze. Instead I actually think it's one of those movies where it's giving a heavy nod to the good old days, where women are objectified and used in many stereotyped female roles ie. MacGuffin, femme fatale, sexy sidekick, but always put in a second rate position to the white man hero.

I mean, the other main character in the movie is a female AI. She is the emotional and thematic cornerstone of the film. K may be the protagonist, but it is through Joi that the film delves deep into the themes of what is human, what makes something human, the nature of reality versus artifical, and so on. Without her, the movie loses its beating heart and its most important plot

 

[gatti-man]

There are too many female objectification in this movie, not just once. On top of my head: the newborn replicant, the big female statues, the sex workers, the house AI. It's easy to notice that all the women in this movie are attractive (except maybe the one eyed rebel) but I can't say the same about the men. Funny that because aren't they in an age where replicants are ubiquitous and everyone should be gorgeous? Yet somehow there are no demand for male beauty.

I don't actually believe that this movie intends to criticise male gaze. Instead I actually think it's one of those movies where it's giving a heavy nod to the good old days, where women are objectified and used in many stereotyped female roles ie. MacGuffin, femme fatale, sexy sidekick, but always put in a second rate position to the white man hero.

Also it's rich that you all disregard bsb's point of view, isn't this thread made to discuss how poorly received this movie is? Here I quote a sentiment from Paul Dergarabedian, someone who is paid to analyse movies: “The core of enthusiastic and loyal ‘Blade Runner’ fans were over 25 and predominantly male and propelled the film as expected to the top spot, but a lengthy running time and lesser interest among females made it tougher for the film to reach the original weekend box office projections"
"According to PostTrack, males over 25 represented 50% of the audience and females over 25 were 27%, while males under 25 represented 15% of moviegoers and females under 25 were 8%."

But yeah, sure, handwave away all the criticism about this movie, especially if it comes from a woman, right?

Here are some women's pov (in underline), just from this thread...


And finally, this gem...



Yes, guys, you certainly know best of what women want.

Isnt sci fi normally predominantly a male genre? Someone finding a movie boring isn’t the same as finding a movie offensive. My GF loved it and grasped what the movie was trying to say. She never felt uncomfortable with the depiction of a lonely society. Also there were depictions of male beauty. K is treated like a sex object once, there are also statues of naked men depicted but yes there was more women.

 

[Nokterian]

Lots of big movies flops this year, even more than i can count. Yes there are bigger box offices success but overall it has been a bad year, my guess just like me i don't go to the theater that often anymore. I see at 3 or 4 movies a year in theaters or sometimes nothing i just wait that i can see it on VoD or wait for the blu ray.

 

[Einchy]

But yeah, sure, handwave away all the criticism about this movie, especially if it comes from a woman, right?

I've no issues hand waving someone's criticisms of a movie when they've not actually seen the film.

 

[Fallout-NL]

Just got back. Lovely film.

The ai/hooker scene was incredible.

I felt like that relationship didn't get enough closure.

Yeah that was my favorite story line in the film. And that scene was just fantastic.

--------

Also, Joi was one of the most interesting characters in the entire film in my opinion. I strongly disagree that BR2049 would somehow be a male gaze or misogynistic film.

 

[Opto]

Let me take a stab at it.

First of all, there's no hint of Orientalism in this film. This is largely because the world of 2049 does not appear to be the multi-cultural melting pot of the first (but even then it was mostly East-Asian thus the Orientalism claims). The 'foreign' aesthetics are more indirect here.

To go further into the future makes less sense on why we'd have more white people. Infact, the lack of the actual ethnicity that would bring over the cultural markers appropriated makes it even more Orientalism. You can't say there's no hint of it especially with those vending machines.

 

[HariKari]

I don't actually believe that this movie intends to criticise male gaze. Instead I actually think it's one of those movies where it's giving a heavy nod to the good old days, where women are objectified and used in many stereotyped female roles ie. MacGuffin, femme fatale, sexy sidekick, but always put in a second rate position to the white man hero.

Did we watch the same movie? The protagonist literally

Spoiler

is told in no uncertain terms that he is not special and that the daughter is truly special. She is shown to be of immense talent and the key to the future, while the male lead is just another cog in the machine.

You pointed out instances of women appearing in the film yet you didn't say how they are objectified or how it makes little sense in the context of the movie. A TV show or film depicting something does not mean it endorses it. The future on display is clearly a dystopian one that no one in their right mind would want to live in.

Also it's rich that you all disregard bsb's point of view, isn't this thread made to discuss how poorly received this movie is? Here I quote a sentiment from Paul Dergarabedian, someone who is paid to analyse movies: “The core of enthusiastic and loyal ‘Blade Runner’ fans were over 25 and predominantly male and propelled the film as expected to the top spot, but a lengthy running time and lesser interest among females made it tougher for the film to reach the original weekend box office projections"
"According to PostTrack, males over 25 represented 50% of the audience and females over 25 were 27%, while males under 25 represented 15% of moviegoers and females under 25 were 8%."

You make it sound like it's the movie equivalent of Hooters when that's not the case. The split in the audience has nothing to do with the actual content and message of the movie. It's a sequel to a decades old relatively obscure sci fi film. You really think there will be an even split?

 

[Window]

To go further into the future makes less sense on why we'd have more white people. Infact, the lack of the actual ethnicity that would bring over the cultural markers appropriated makes it even more Orientalism. You can't say there's no hint of it especially with those vending machines.

I never said it makes more sense. It's a facet of the film which I think is weaker than the original. I don't think presence of any Asian iconography automatically qualifies as Orientalism. Neither do I see how a lack of such iconography or non-presence of diverse ethnicities is also Orientalism.

 

[Lunaray]

You make it sound like it's the movie equivalent of Hooters when that's not the case. The split in the audience has nothing to do with the actual content and message of the movie. It's a sequel to a decades old relatively obscure sci fi film. You really think there will be an even split?

What does Blade Runner being decades old have to do with the audience split?

 

[Curious Puppy]

There are too many female objectification in this movie, not just once. On top of my head: the newborn replicant, the big female statues, the sex workers, the house AI. It's easy to notice that all the women in this movie are attractive (except maybe the one eyed rebel) but I can't say the same about the men. Funny that because aren't they in an age where replicants are ubiquitous and everyone should be gorgeous? Yet somehow there are no demand for male beauty.

I don't actually believe that this movie intends to criticise male gaze. Instead I actually think it's one of those movies where it's giving a heavy nod to the good old days, where women are objectified and used in many stereotyped female roles ie. MacGuffin, femme fatale, sexy sidekick, but always put in a second rate position to the white man hero.

Also it's rich that you all disregard bsb's point of view, isn't this thread made to discuss how poorly received this movie is? Here I quote a sentiment from Paul Dergarabedian, someone who is paid to analyse movies: “The core of enthusiastic and loyal ‘Blade Runner’ fans were over 25 and predominantly male and propelled the film as expected to the top spot, but a lengthy running time and lesser interest among females made it tougher for the film to reach the original weekend box office projections"
"According to PostTrack, males over 25 represented 50% of the audience and females over 25 were 27%, while males under 25 represented 15% of moviegoers and females under 25 were 8%."

But yeah, sure, handwave away all the criticism about this movie, especially if it comes from a woman, right?

Here are some women's pov (in underline), just from this thread...












And finally, this gem...



Yes, guys, you certainly know best of what women want.

What does this have to do with the box office numbers? Post this in the OT if you want to try and make an argument that this film is sexist towards women.

 

[Atraveller]

If Asians were economically and cultraully dominant forces in Blade Runner-verse, it made sense if more of them moved out from Earth.