Blade Runner 2049 (Post-release)

Not exactly as Apple doesn't play ball that way. You have to play it off your iTunes account (can be multiple registered Apple devices).

My solution for watching movies in my home theater is just to buy Apples HDMI adapter to my ipad. I'm watching a movie via that right now.




Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I figured it couldn't be that easy. I don't have a smart TV, and I don't think my current Bluray player is either. ><

As for the above Scott interview, as much as I respect that man, I don't believe he had that much impact on the script, being as good as it was. Not after Prometheus and Covenant...
 
So bummed we are not getting a crack at the Japanese exclusive. But only 3000 copies is just stupid scalper bait.

Not a huge walmart fan, but I’m a sucker for a spinner. It was out of stock earlier and I placed an email notification and within a few hours had a restock email. I figured I was SOL. What surprised me was a post purchase email notification that my digital copy was now available. If so, not sure I “get” the staggered release date for blu-rays when you get the digital copy immediately.
 
He's insane.

Really? Most geniuses who have shaped their art forms in such a profound and everlasting way are. :facepalm

He is also responsible for the " Her eyes were green" line.

A slightly more interesting part in that little piece that went completely unnoticed by those itching to have a cheap crack at the man who gave form and function to the entire concept once again confirms that Deckard is a replicant. But hey. what would he know ?
 
Last edited:
One day the Theatre owners influence will be so small that it will be possible to buy the BluRay or whatever the medium is at the time of the film you just saw in the lobby on the way out. Wishful thinking I know but at the end of the day makes much better sense than just allowing P2P to take up the slack.
 
No disrespect to the guy as I respect what he's given us,but these days Ridley Scott would never be able to make a better or even equal to blade runner movie than 2049. His ego precedes him.


Ben
 
I don't think it is going to translate well to the small screen. I kept skipping through it.
 
Blade Runner is my favorite movie. I was in the camp that thought a direct sequel was a bad idea.

I have to agree with Sir Ridley, the movie could have been edited down under two hours with no consequence. There were so many shots that went on for several beats too long that I found myself rolling my eyes. The slow pacing is one of the great things about the original. This movie didn't have the substance that the first one did to inhabit those moments, and it came off more like hollow imitation, cinematography porn.

Among the many things that made the original great was that it was a fairly straight forward film-noir detective movie, set in a dystopian future(sprinkled with some heady philosophical ideas). This one missed the appeal of that formula when it expanded the scope of the plot, skipping the procedural stuff in favor of a more grand narrative dealing directly with a savior type and the future of humanity (the well worn cliches of modern sci-fi).

The replicants also stuck out in this movie in such a way that I don't think I'd need a Voight Kampff to pick them out of a crowd. I was not sure if Ryan Gosling was doing his take on a robot , or if his character was supposed to be the strong silent type like Deckard, but he didn't say a whole lot and as a result I was left thinking he was either a cold machine, or perhaps not so bright. His pleasingly dumb holo-girlfriend was the same. What was Jared letto's purpose other than delivering pretentious monologues? He made replicants, and also wanted to make them with wombs? Then why was he working against the rogue replicants? Either way it seems like a bad business model.

The 100 foot tall neon naked women, and the giant sex-doll statues in Vegas. The naked replicant that jared Letto slices open for no obvious reason, the Rachael clone he shoots, the manic pixie hologram girlfriend, the pris-like prostitute, and Jared Letto's assasin, none of the women in this movie have much agency, save for the Madam. It may have been deliberate in relation to the themes about reproduction as power, and I know the first movie wasn't kind to women, but it stuck out in a film made in 2017.
 
Last edited:
Blade Runner is my favorite movie. I was in the camp that thought a direct sequel was a bad idea.

I have to agree with Sir Ridley, the movie could have been edited down under two hours with no consequence. There were so many shots that went on for several beats too long that I found myself rolling my eyes. The slow pacing is one of the great things about the original. This movie didn't have the substance that the first one did to inhabit those moments, and it came off more like hollow imitation, cinematography porn.

Among the many things that made the original great was that it was a fairly straight forward film-noir detective movie, set in a dystopian future(sprinkled with some heady philosophical ideas). This one missed the appeal of that formula when it expanded the scope of the plot, skipping the procedural stuff in favor of a more grand narrative dealing directly with a savior type and the future of humanity (the well worn cliches of modern sci-fi).

The replicants also stuck out in this movie in such a way that I don't think I'd need a Voight Kampff to pick them out of a crowd. I was not sure if Ryan Gosling was doing his take on a robot , or if his character was supposed to be the strong silent type like Deckard, but he didn't say a whole lot and as a result I was left thinking he was either a cold machine, or perhaps not so bright. His pleasingly dumb holo-girlfriend was the same. What was Jared letto's purpose other than delivering pretentious monologues? He made replicants, and also wanted to make them with wombs? Then why was he working against the rogue replicants? Either way it seems like a bad business model.

The 100 foot tall neon naked women, and the giant sex-doll statues in Vegas. The naked replicant that jared Letto slices open for no obvious reason, the Rachael clone he shoots, the manic pixie hologram girlfriend, the pris-like prostitute, and Jared Letto's assasin, none of the women in this movie have much agency, save for the Madam. It may have been deliberate in relation to the themes about reproduction as power, and I know the first movie wasn't kind to women, but it stuck out in a film made in 2017.
Try some of this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bladerunne...ler_master_faq_list_for_2049_have_a_question/

Thst said, what I love about BR2049 is it doesn't try to answer all the questions and leaves a lot of mystery up to interpretation. The film is several layers deep in a lot of places. The more I learn, the more I think BR2049 is the best sequel of all time. Better even than ESB was to Star Wars.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
Well, I saw that if you preorder the disc through VUDU, you have instant access to the digital, so I did it today.

I'm so bummed I wasn't able to catch this thing in IMAX. I only got to see it in a standard theater, but I sat through it twice today.

Just to share my fresh thoughts- I've always been in the camp of Deckard being a replicant being a thing that's open to interpretation, but a couple of things I caught today have pushed me over the edge to thinking the answer was hiding in plain sight here.

First, K's conversation with Gaff-
Gaff laid everything out, IMO.

K asks what he can tell him about Deckard. Gaff says "He wasn't long for this world.". When K asks how so, Gaff responds, "Something in his eyes.", with eyes being the way to identify a replicant, who Gaff would've thought had a limited life span.

K then asks what happened to Deckard, Gaff replies that he retired,a specific word used for ending the life of a replicant. He also shares that he thinks Deckard finally got what he wanted, which was to be alone. Now, Gaff wouldn't have necessarily known Rachel's inception date, but could've assumed that she'd have died before Deckard.

The last thing that struck me today, was at the end of the fight between K & Deckard. The hologram of Elvis appears, singing I Can't Help Falling In Love. Deckard then stops fighting & says, "I like this song.". I think it's a direct reference to the theory that Deckard was programmed to fall in love with Rachel, & therefore asking the question if it was programming or love that facilitated the conception.

Only a couple of things I caught today. I'm sure they'll be more tomorrow. This film is beyond rich & layered.
 
Apparently Ridley continued to press for the Deckard as replicant angle during the initial development and treatment of 2049, 2049 being a sequel to the Final Cut version specifically. Villeneuve (and Green & Fancher) was very wise to tackle it the way he did. There are a ton of suggestions and thematic implications, but nothing is actually confirmed or denied in either direction. Add in Wallace's attempted mindf*** of Deckard and it gets a bit meta. I loved Gaff's phrasing too for the specifics you mentioned, but haven't seen it really alluded anywhere else in discussions.

I think they tackled that particular issue/question perfectly; You can literally decide for yourself and the movie's merits remain the same, and it's respectful to both camps.
 
This thread is more than 5 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top