Support NeoGAF

[Fjordson]

The unicorn stuff has always been a clear and firm statement on Deckard being a replicant to me.

Which is fine. I know I'm in the extreme minority, but Deckard being a replicant doesn't hurt the film really for me. And that ending is awesome. The smirk and recognition on Deckard's face as he closes his fist around the unicorn with Gaf's echoing voice. Pretty great moment.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

I think Denis is the kind of film maker who doesn't give a shit. He just makes the movies he wants to make, he doesn't go to studios and pitch a movie from a business perspective unlike Nolan does. I get the feeling Nolan wants to please his investors, and simultaneously wants to get artistic praise. After a few successful projects Nolan felt dat thirst for artistic recognition, so he made Dunkirk, ticking all the boxes,in his mind. The crazy thing is that 2049 will potentially have much larger artistic ramifications.

I feel like you pulled this out of your ass. There's no indication of this being the case unless you think Dunkirk was made for investors and not just because he wanted to make it. I can understand liking/disliking directors, but you're literally making up reasons to dislike some and extraordinarily bad ones too. Nolan doesn't have to "please" investors. He has enough clout and successful movies under the bag that he can make whatever he wants to

 

[Zakalwe]

The unicorn stuff has always been a clear and firm statement on Deckard being a replicant to me.

Which is fine. I know I'm in the extreme minority, but Deckard being a replicant doesn't hurt the film really for me. And that ending is awesome. The smirk and recognition on Deckard's face as he closes his fist around the unicorn with Gaf's echoing voice. Pretty great moment.

I mean, it's clear and firm in that Scott says it is. I don't know if he intended the ambiguity or if it was accidental, either way it works however you decide to interpret.

Still, the idea of a human falling in love with a machine lends the themes of the film far more weight, imo.

I mean, at the start Deckard is a human regardless of your interpretation, and it's only at the end that you realise he's a replicant. And as we've already had this story of a brutish man finding his humanity in the last place he thought to look, I think it's a bit redundant layering that with "oh, and he's also a machine finding his own humanity!".

It just never sat neatly for me, like Scott was doing what Scott and tended toward in the latter pat of his career: forcing something he wants into the film despite the objections of others because he always knows best.

 

[Kaizer]

Well I just watched the first Blade Runner earlier today, went with the Final Cut. I enjoyed it a lot for the most part. I paused the movie at one point to use the bathroom & noticed apparently an hour had already gone by but it only felt like I'd been watching the film for 5 minutes. If 2049 is similar in tone & pacing to the original at all, I know I'm probably going to love it.

The most intriguing thing about the movie is how it's made me all the more interested in seeing 2049 since the original very much feels like a self-contained story that wraps up with questions left for ambiguity. There was nothing that screamed out "we need to make another of these", but the fact that they did & that it's a continuation of Deckard's story in part now has me really interested in 2049. Definitely gonna watch the film again & also check out the other cuts though.

 

[dmshaposv]

While I disagree with the guy, Nolan is better at making blockbusters than Denis, simply because he has made more of them and got a lot of practise while making the TDK films.

He keeps exposition dumps so that even his smarter films like inception can be understood by the masses (and in turn make them feel smart about themselves). He generally casts big ensembles and at least one major star with box office pull/draw. He knows how to make set pieces (chases, action scenes) with the best craftsmen in hollywood. And lastly, while his films are sometimes cold, he injects some level of humor that makes for some kind of comic relief/entertainment.

 

[Zakalwe]

While I disagree with the guy, Nolan is better at making blockbusters than Denis, simply because he has made more of them and got a lot of practise while making the TDK films.

He keeps exposition dumps so that even his smarter films like inception can be understood by the masses (and in turn make them feel smart about themselves). He generally casts big ensembles and at least one major star with box office pull/draw. He knows how to make set pieces (chases, action scenes) with the best craftsmen in hollywood. And lastly, while his films are sometimes cold, he injects some level of humor that makes for some kind of comic relief/entertainment.

2049 isn't supposed to be a blockbuster, though. Which is exactly why Denis was so fucking perfect for a Blade Runner sequel (those three words still feel infinitely weird!).

 

[-Plasma Reus-]

Edit: wrong vid!

 

[Fjordson]

I mean, it's clear and firm in that Scott says it is. I don't know if he intended the ambiguity or if it was accidental, either way it works however you decide to interpret.

Still, the idea of a human falling in love with a machine lends the themes of the film far more weight, imo.

I mean, at the start Deckard is a human regardless of your interpretation, and it's only at the end that you realise he's a replicant. And as we've already had this story of a brutish man finding his humanity in the last place he thought to look, I think it's a bit redundant layering that with "oh, and he's also a machine finding his own humanity!".

It just never sat neatly for me, like Scott was doing what Scott and tended toward in the latter pat of his career: forcing something he wants into the film despite the objections of others because he always knows best.

Oh for sure, I don't mean to suggest the Deckard replicant thing is the only possible meaning, that's just how it always struck me personally.

 

[shira]

Haven't seen it yet.
What would you recommend?

1. Recliner seats + non-Imax screen

2. Imax screen + non-recliner seats

 

[robotrock]

Haven't seen it yet.
What would you recommend?

1. Recliner seats + non-Imax screen

2. Imax screen + non-recliner seats

roger deakins recommends non IMAX

i do too tbh. saw it first in standard 2D, then got curious and checked it out in IMAX. he's 100% right, see it in standard 2D

 

[bionic77]

roger deakins recommends non IMAX

i do too tbh. saw it first in standard 2D, then got curious and checked it out in IMAX. he's 100% right, see it in standard 2D

Why did you like it more on a nonIMAX screen?

In any event I would recommend watching it on any screen you can. Brilliant movie.

 

[shira]

roger deakins recommends non IMAX

i do too tbh. saw it first in standard 2D, then got curious and checked it out in IMAX. he's 100% right, see it in standard 2D

ty

 

[Curious Puppy]

Why did you like it more on a nonIMAX screen?

In any event I would recommend watching it on any screen you can. Brilliant movie.

It was mastered for non IMAX, it’s not like a Nolan film that was shot specifically for that format.

 

[robotrock]

Why did you like it more on a nonIMAX screen?

In any event I would recommend watching it on any screen you can. Brilliant movie.

The aspect ratio is different on the IMAX screen, movie is much taller. Looks closer to Villeneuve's Prisoners. Close up shots of people's faces look kind of dumb big too with that screen size

most importantly though I think there's a big difference in contrast. movie's mostly pretty dark, the IMAX screen (or mine, at least) made the blacks look a little washed out.

I agree though, see the movie on any screen you can. If you have the option I'd learn towards the standard 2D presentation though.

 

[Curious Puppy]

I saw it in arclight widescreen and Dolby cinema. I actually think Dolby went too hard on the blacks, certain scenes were noticeably darker than at arclight.

 

[Ctlead]

Haven't seen it yet.
What would you recommend?

1. Recliner seats + non-Imax screen

2. Imax screen + non-recliner seats

How large is your IMAX screen? Mine was huge, and I found it made the movie pretty mind-blowing.

 

[shira]

How large is your IMAX screen? Mine was huge, and I found it made the movie pretty mind-blowing.

Full size, it's going to be around for another week or two so if the movie is good I can always double dip.

 

[bionic77]

It was mastered for non IMAX, it’s not like a Nolan film that was shot specifically for that format.

I see.

I need to see it again on a regular screen.

And also on BR...

 

[Ashhong]

Full size, it's going to be around for another week or two so if the movie is good I can always double dip.

Careful, that's what I thought about it on Dolby Cinema at my local AMC. They canceled it for Happy Death Day due to poor ticket sales. Not sure if they can do the same for an IMAX showing though

 

[TyphoonStruggle]

How large is your IMAX screen? Mine was huge, and I found it made the movie pretty mind-blowing.

I saw it first in normal screening then saw it in IMAX 2d. Gotta say, the IMAX blew me away in a good way. Movie felt pretty damn epic in IMAX.

 

[Megalosaro]

For me in the most iconic seen in the movie very chilly will be the scenes with with Klooking at the giant advertisement. Very visually striking

 

[robotrock]

I saw it in arclight widescreen and Dolby cinema. I actually think Dolby went too hard on the blacks, certain scenes were noticeably darker than at arclight.

HDR implementations in general still seem kind of finicky to me. I dunno man. Can't trust them.

I think Deakins did oversee the HDR stuff for this movie though.

 

[xxracerxx]

For me in the most iconic seen in the movie very chilly will be the scenes with whiskey looking at the giant advertising. Very visual eat striking

Are you drinking whiskey while making this post?

 

[Arttemis]

I thought this movie was one of the best implementations of 3D I've seen. I'll have to give it another go in 2D to compare, but I was very impressed with the exterior shots and their added depth.