Chezzymann
Member
Any other director would have had an action packed shoot em up third act with the underground replicants joining forces to topple Wallace's corporation once and for all
-
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]
- Thread starter Mr. Sam
- Start date
arts&crafts
Member
Is 3d a must? I generally hate 3D.
One of the holographic ads has exposed breasts and there's an exposed statue, and the beginnings of a love scene that doesn't really feature nudity. In terms of violence, there's definitely some, but it's not gratuitous (although a fight scene later on may be pretty intense for someone younger).
Inceptional
Member
No, It's just her hologram visualising what rain would look like hitting her skin. She's never solid in the film.
That the thing though, I'm not sure the film outright decides that for us. The movie leaves this as open to interpretation as it does how K/Joe handles his implanted memories. It implies that they are as real to K/Joe as he chooses them to be, and his actions imply that he takes a similar perspective as Decker did with his relationship with Rachel. Regardless of if it was by design/programmed, it was real enough in the moment to be worth something.
I really want to give this one another watch now that I've had time to digest it, there's a lot of themes in this one that require you to look at it from different vantage points, much like the original. There's no doubt in my mind now though that "Did Joi really love K?" is the "Is Deckard is a Replicant?" of this one though, but even more deliciously ambiguous thanks to its own can of plot implications.
No, Deakens stated it was very much shot without 3D in mind. (Much to my personal disappointment, as I do love 3D, but better no 3D than compromised 3D)
brianjones
Member
didn't even know there was a 3D
Not at all, normal screen was fine for me. Some of the sound would have been too much for me in IMAX as well.
arts&crafts
Member
It is only 3D at my theatre, but the next town over has a few non-3D tonight I am leaning towards.
I feel like it's a little ambiguous. K knows that Joi is meant to be attached to him since he purchased her, and so he is a little unsure if her love for him is genuine or manufactured. I think his love for her is genuine, and he tests it at the start when he says, "you don't need to say that", in the hopes of going deeper with her. And so when he sees her hologram and she says "Joe", it's a pretty hard character moment that leaves him hollow enough to finish his mission.
I think it's also what lets him keep Deckard alive: at least someone can have a real relationship, for how small a moment that they may have.
Lé Blade Runner;251176025 said:
I also REALLY loved the soundtrack. It had a lot of the sounds from the first one, which I loved, but it also was different. They both fit their respective movies to a T.
One of my favorite themes was the one that played when we first saw Mariette. As she's walking there's this loud wailing and you can't really tell if it's the soundtrack or some vehicle flying overhead. It was like the soundtrack was part of the environment, pretty cool.
tonysidaway
Member
Of course Joe is human. It's not what you feel, it's not where you came from, it's what you do. He's an android, and he's human. If it helps you, think of a United States of Mind. That's what Rick learned on that rooftop way back in 2019. We are human.
Souls are overrated.
More_Badass
Member
Thats what I expected when it was introduced.
With K infiltrating Wallaces HQ amid the chaos to rescue Deckard
Just wish I knew how K found the flying cars! Wonder if that was a deleted scene.
Exactly the same thought, once they all appeared from the darkness and talked about an uprising, I thought the movie was about to lose me.
I should never have doubted you, Blade Runner!
Yeah, there was a very careful artistic hand at work not delving any further into that aspect.
tonysidaway
Member
The original Blade Runner was a 15 in the UK and so is this sequel. I was a bit surprised that this very expensive film was pitched as an R in the United States. It does comprise some horrifying scenes that I wouldn't expose a minor under my care to, particularly the casual killing of both humans and androids. I find myself a bit surprised to agree that an 18 certificate might have been appropriate in the UK, too.
And on another note: why are American censors so obsessed with the possibility that young boys might see a woman's breast?
I'm watching some interviews and came across this video where Harrison Ford was asked about what made him to do the Sequel and he basically said it was the Script/Novella and that Ridley Scott wasn't directing it (sort of as a joke).
Apparently Ford had a really shitty time on the original.
It might actually be just his car. I don't think it got trashed when Luv and her guys kidnapped Deckard and it's reasonable to think that the resistance brought K's car back with them.
Or the resistance might've hooked him up with an entirely new vehicle.
I don't think the "why" matters that much in this case as it's probably not that hard to obtain a vehicle.
tonysidaway
Member
This film will still be showing next week. The cinematographer says it's best viewed in 2D. Thing is, to me when somebody says "next town over" that's just a 30 minute ride on the Metro. Not a big deal at all, even for a very long film.
But for all I know you'd have to drive for an hour or two there, and then back, and it's a very long film so it's a horrible prospect.
If I were you I'd go to a showing in the local, don't care if it's in 3D with particularly pungent smellivision. At least I'd get to see it while not worrying about how to get home in time to catch up with the rest of my life the next day.
Oh right, some of the missiles in the junkyard scene have people being torn to pieces, forgot about that one! I would say the movie rests on that R rating just right for American audiences. I'm not sure why the MPAA is against nudity and then let some movies slide to PG-13 with some pretty surprising violence, it'll always be a mystery. I find that if it's artfully done, nudity shouldn't be treated as a detriment to a movie's rating. Here in Canada, Blade Runner 2049 is 14A rather than 18A.
friskykillface
Banned
Where's my all out battle with Deckard punching Leto like Norton punching Leto in fight club
I really expected an all out battle too and glad it didn't go that way
I really expected an all out battle too and glad it didn't go that way
arts&crafts
Member
yea its like an extra 10 minute drive, in the GTA (Toronto) all the "towns" are close. Going for 2D! thanks.
tonysidaway
Member
The script is quite brilliant. Harrison Ford is a great asset to the film, and I'm glad he ended up with a production that respected the legacy.
It takes Rick a while to realise that this weirdly intense android who has hunted him down really only wants to talk to him. I think that whole "Boy named Sue" sequence is wonderful. "Set 'em up, Joe."
Noisepurge
Member
Where's my all out battle with Deckard punching Leto like Norton punching Leto in fight club
I really expected an all out battle too and glad it didn't go that way
They left a lot open for a sequel
will surely see it in "Blade Runner Robot Wars 2067"More_Badass
Member
We can stop calling them androids now, right? Replicants are biological, not robotic
AuthenticM
Member
yeah I totally thought they were androids up until today. Weird. I guess maybe the first movie didn't make it clear?
My limited understanding from the first movie was they were genetically engineered from conception.
Androidsleeps
Member
I liked it a lot and would rewatch as soon as it hits Blu Ray. I didn't think it was "better than the original" mainly because of the villian, and some scenes that I feel should have been left for a DC.
Im conflicted on the score. It was amazing on its own but felt out of place in some scenes. Also, Deakens should get his Oscar this year, the cinematography was GOAT.
Im conflicted on the score. It was amazing on its own but felt out of place in some scenes. Also, Deakens should get his Oscar this year, the cinematography was GOAT.
It's not, at all. The movie isn't made for 3D, it's just post processed nonsense. 3D needs to go away.
curiouscharles
Member
it really, really, REALLY does.
just makes everything fuzzy, movies more expensive, and frustrating trying to find non-3D showtimes.
I agree. I mean, i saw Avatar in 3D, which "worked" on some level. And The Hobbit, because that was 48fps 3D, which kind of eliminated a lot of problems with it, but it's still not something i'd choose over normal viewing.
I find that it is dying out, at least in my area. It's usually stuck to one or two major releases, and then it's 2D for the rest.
I think it's on its way out... until Avatar 2-5 brings it right back.
He did, Ridley Scott is notorious for leaving actors alone to their own devices and letting them do their thing while he focuses on the technical side of filmmaking, setting up shots, setting up lighting, etc. He's definitely not like Spielberg who really likes to build a relationship with his cast. Some actors, like Russell Crowe, he works great with because they like the space to just kind of do what feels natural for the scene and dialogue, but Ford needs a little more of a rapport with a director to find a scene while filming, something that Scott wasn't really giving him.
Where's my all out battle with Deckard punching Leto like Norton punching Leto in fight club
I really expected an all out battle too and glad it didn't go that way
At one point I was actually thinking that someone will try to kill Leto only to find out that he isn't real just a hologram like Joi. The real Wallace is probably on the other side of the galaxy somewhere.
tonysidaway
Member
I'm probably the only guy saying "androids". It's what they are called in a novel I read in 1972 (which was made into a film in 1982, and you know the rest). Androids can be biological, which is why the subject is interesting. I think calling them androids emphasizes the historical and philosophical context of the idea. Call them showroom dummies if that is your preference. They are outsiders, n*****s, SLAVES.
https://youtu.be/cgnoNgfjPy4
And besides, my Android phone just doesn't seem to want to type the R word. It's almost as if it were rebelling!
He parked some distance away from the hotel and walked there. It's easy to just accept that the goons didn't go out of their way to trash his car when they already had what they wanted.
Maybe. Maybe not. What is love (between artificials)?
baby don't hurt me
tonysidaway
Member
Now, having watched the film, why would you believe a word that came out of Niander Wallace's mouth?
That's leaving aside the moral ambiguity of Rachael's relationship with Rick. I mean, that scene.
brianjones
Member
can't believe Harrison ford is 75
dude was jacked!
dude was jacked!
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Dude is gonna be pushing 78 when Indy 5 releases.
Biggest-Geek-Ever
Member
Ford in this film definitely made me excited for Indy 5. Dude's still got it.
What 2049 "reveals" matters not one iota in regards to the original, as far as I'm concerned.
TFA and 2049 proved that he is still a great actor when he does a project he gives a shit about. Ender's Game is him just doing it for a paycheck.
I just got back to it. I know a lot of people are loving this film and hailing it as a masterpiece or one of the greatest sequel ever. But I didn't enjoy it that much. Probably because I've never seen the original, I only wikipedia up the film. So maybe a lot of the nuances were lost to me.
It's an incredibly gorgeous film, the plot and the action were on point. But my God that sound can be so jarring sometimes.
I would probably give it a 7/10. I just dont feel very well connected to this universe so my enjoyment of the movie isn't that high. But I can understand why people love it. I definitely had more fun in theatre this year watching other movies like Spider-Man, Baby Driver, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2 and John Wick Chapter 2.
This is definitely a very well made movie though.
It's an incredibly gorgeous film, the plot and the action were on point. But my God that sound can be so jarring sometimes.
I would probably give it a 7/10. I just dont feel very well connected to this universe so my enjoyment of the movie isn't that high. But I can understand why people love it. I definitely had more fun in theatre this year watching other movies like Spider-Man, Baby Driver, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2 and John Wick Chapter 2.
This is definitely a very well made movie though.
Did she tell him that she was adopted? I really don't recall. The rest was apparent.
To be frank one of the best compliments i can give BR2049 right now is that it makes some of the moments and themes explored in Her feel entirely melodramatic and childish in comparison
tonysidaway
Member
Yep. A text is a text and sufficient unto itself. If there were a "reverse sarcasm" thing I'd put it here. I watched and enjoyed Odyssey 2010 when it was released, but its influence on the original film is at best peripheral.
You're watching films wrong. You really should see Blade Runner and then maybe give 2049 another chance. It's a film that massively rewards knowing this world and these characters, so much is lost and probably outright confusing not having seen Blade Runner. And of course, you can't wiki a film...
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll