Blade Runner 2049 (Post-release)

I rarely see a movie a second time in a theatre, I just wait for the blu-ray. But with BR 2049 I will take in other showing at a theatre.

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

I don't think they really need to make any additional films. I would rather see the Blade Runner story continue as a mini-series or weekly show on Netlix or Amazon. If done right, there is a lot of story there to work with.

Plenty of things they could do in that setting, the possibilities are endless....

spacebob said:

I think most of your points are legitimate @Riv, common movie plot- hole shortcuts leftover from already trimmed scenes, that sort of thing.
But they are the worst parts of a great movie, and that’s ok, still a movie after all (there’s more by the way but I’m not bringing them up).

But I need to check in with this..

K was given her memories as a decoy and put where he could easily be found.

His arc is the movie. Same as Batty’s was blade runner.

Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep.

That’s all we are talking about here.

Deckards fantastic side story is brought to the fore in 2049 by dragging him to where he didn’t want to be. Very emotional.

But K. that’s just magic He is so torn all of the time, Gosling is so good at that, Driver was amazing.

The scene where he finally thinks he is the kid. He explodes. So, so, good.
We are just sacks of protein that can do math, and here is a robot desperate for conformation of anything being real. He’s true A.I. who feels guilty for loving another complex A.I.

He finds a soul as real as mine and then loses it.

Click to expand...

In general, I agree that the plot holes are worth overlooking for a film that has a lot to otherwise offer. Obviously, I have no issues with plot holes- I'm an obsessive BR fan. I've learned to gloss over those

And I would agree that Gosling did a fantastic job with this role- however, maybe because it was so repetitive of Batty I felt the impact less? I almost feel that in some way, this is less of a sequel as a reboot-quel (horrible malaise going about Hollywood these days). As if this was an attempt to revisit the ideas of the original film, but execute on them in a much more refined way. BR as the first draft of a story and now this is the original author's complete overhaul after time and years have given them clarity on what works and what didn't.

At any rate, Blade Runner was a film that only revealed itself on repeat viewings- so I imagine I will return to 2049 to see what else I might absorb from it and see if it changes for me. Intellectually I connected with the film, and emotionally I want to- but perhaps I was too caught up in a critical analysis that I wasn't open to it.

One other thought I had today- aside from being able to have the reunion of Deckard and Stelline, would there be anything in this film that really required Deckard to play a part in it? Would it have been better to really make this completely about K's journey?

The surprise of Rachael made me think how amazing it would have felt if I hadn't known Harrison Ford had been cast or that Deckard would play a role. At a minimum, keeping that under wraps would have made for a much stronger moment of discovery. As it is, a part of the film is simply waiting for the inevitable meeting of the two guys on the movie poster.

I actually enjoyed the parts of the movie up to that point the most, I think. The story felt strongly connected to the characters of Deckard and Rachael, but I never felt like it actually required them.

I loved it that the original blaster was in the movie and used so much

spacebob said:

I think most of your points are legitimate @Riv, common movie plot- hole shortcuts leftover from already trimmed scenes, that sort of thing.
But they are the worst parts of a great movie, and that’s ok, still a movie after all (there’s more by the way but I’m not bringing them up).

But I need to check in with this..

K was given her memories as a decoy and put where he could easily be found.

His arc is the movie. Same as Batty’s was blade runner.

Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep.

That’s all we are talking about here.

Deckards fantastic side story is brought to the fore in 2049 by dragging him to where he didn’t want to be. Very emotional.

But K. that’s just magic He is so torn all of the time, Gosling is so good at that, Driver was amazing.

The scene where he finally thinks he is the kid. He explodes. So, so, good.
We are just sacks of protein that can do math, and here is a robot desperate for conformation of anything being real. He’s true A.I. who feels guilty for loving another complex A.I.

He finds a soul as real as mine and then loses it.

Click to expand...

Dang.....More deep than I could go, but I would not disagree with anything you said. I loved it, perfect sequel.....epic cinematography, burning soundtrack.

MooCriket said:

I don't think they really need to make any additional films. I would rather see the Blade Runner story continue as a mini-series or weekly show on Netlix or Amazon. If done right, there is a lot of story there to work with.

Click to expand...

It does`nt need one but this was done so well that if the same ethic could be reached, it deserves a good old fashioned trilogy. Even just to find out what happened to Deckard`s dog.

TV would only mean green screens and budget cuts, been screaming out for ALL IN anime for years and Black Out 2022 showed the way.

Probably the saddest part of the movie for me was K's realisation that he wasn't the kid. Same way I felt for Roy in his end lines in the original after saving Deckard. For me that gave K all the reason he needed to sacrifice himself to bring Deckard to his daughter. And Deckard saying "who am I to you". Just classic. But their just AI right? Right.


Ben

Hello, well I went and saw it on Saturday and I am only now ready to talk about it.
First, 10 out of 10.

This film feels like it is set in the same universe, a few years from the original. I like that Villeneuve did not use “artistic license” and change a ton of things in this world. There is still Pan Am buildings etc…Nothing here looks or feels out of place.

The cast feels like they belong in this world. Gosling did an amazing job. I think in many ways this film and Gosling’s performance demonstrated the conflict of knowing if you are real or replicant to a greater degree than the original. All of the cast from the original who returned for this film did an amazing job. I did not read a whole lot about the film before I went to see it so that I would not ruin any surprises, so I had no idea that Olmos would be in the film. What a great cameo! I also like how Mackenzie Davis kind of channeled Pris with her character. Sylvia Hoeks was a nice amalgamation of Rachael and Roy Batty.

I have read that some people don’t like the soundtrack, I thought it was brilliant. Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch did an amazing job recalling Vangelis and bringing back the feel of the original.

The story was original and the need to find the characters from the original is clear and there are no needless cameos. I loved that we traveled outside of LA and got to see more of the world. I have read that some people have issues with some of the plot. Things like an immune compromised child being out in an orphanage. I would say, is she really an immune compromised child or is she being isolated so that her true origin is not discovered? Flowers for the bees, just because we did not see them does not mean they don’t exists. The trip wires, ok, I will give you that one, unless the dog is a replicant and is programmed not to go near them.

The technology, nothing was “modernized” beyond the world and setting. In other words, nothing looked more futuristic than should have been in this world. Even a newer model spinner is fitting for the setting and the years between this film and the original.

Overall, I am very pleased with this film and see it as a fitting sequel to the original. Thats my 2 cents

I saw it over the weekend. I was kind of dreading it, but some people from work were going and I need to get out more often. I was surprised that I liked it because I think the originals were so overrated. I say "originals" because the first one was so good there were several versions of it. This one had some problems, but overall I liked it. It seemed like they were a bit gratuitous with the nudity, including a 60 foot tall naked woman. I guess in that universe there aren't any moralists running around screaming about that sort of thing. Nice that Gaff took the time to learn English, maybe that was a requirement of the old age home he moved into. The most annoying was not being able to tell sometimes if something was music or a sound effect.

spacebob said:

K was given her memories as a decoy and put where he could easily be found.

Click to expand...

I disagree. K, like any other replicant, was created for a purpose. He was a cop. That memory, in that it was real and not fabricated, carried much more weight. It served to inspire a sense of right, wrong, and justice in K, which is important to his discharge of duties as a police officer. That it was central to the plot he became embroiled in was coincidental. Remember what the leader of the renegade replicants said. All the replicants apparently were given enough of Deckard's daughter's memory that they could each believe they were that child. K, as it turns out, was just an average Joe among replicants.

Which all makes me wonder, did she "sell" that memory on purpose with the hope that enough replicants would have it that maybe one day one would figure it all out and find her parents? She even said herself it's illegal to use real memories.

Because when it comes down to it, she almost entirely ruined K's life by telling him that memory was real, and by making it available to a replicant at all.

Kylash said:

Wonder what significance there is to the Wallace chime being the opening to Peter and the Wolf...

Click to expand...

I've been trying to puzzle out the significance of Peter and the Wolf as well.

NormanF said:

...Nice that Gaff took the time to learn English....

Click to expand...

He could always speak English:


IMO, Cityspeak was just more convenient on the job...

Maybe I need to take a second look, but I didn't see the "china blue" eye color that he had in the first film. It took me out of the story for minute when I didn't see it.

Maybe his eyes got replaced with newer models later on...

Oh, and this was rated R why?

Tan Djarka said:

I disagree. K, like any other replicant, was created for a purpose. He was a cop. That memory, in that it was real and not fabricated, carried much more weight. It served to inspire a sense of right, wrong, and justice in K, which is important to his discharge of duties as a police officer. That it was central to the plot he became embroiled in was coincidental. Remember what the leader of the renegade replicants said. All the replicants apparently were given enough of Deckard's daughter's memory that they could each believe they were that child. K, as it turns out, was just an average Joe among replicants.

Click to expand...

Pretty sure she just says.... we all wished it was us.

For your version to work, in other words for every replicant to seriously believe they were the child (even if they did have the memory (...they didn't)), they would have to randomly find the tree and/or go to the orphanage and find (and then replace for the next replicant) the horse.

My point about the whole film working, (Him finding a soul as real as mine and then losing it) Is because yes, he is acually an average Joe.

In fact I think that was my only point.
I think i got that right.

Following this guy going mad for a couple of days and feeling his pain is like being with a futuristic Holden Caulfield.
Beautiful.

In Australia this Blade Runner 2049 movie is rated (MA 15+)...Strong Violence.

From Classifications Aussie website:
" MA 15 +.....
The content is strong in impact. MA 15+ classified material contains strong content and is legally restricted to persons 15 years and over. It may contain classifiable elements such as sex scenes and drug use that are strong in impact. A person may be asked to show proof of their age before hiring or purchasing an MA 15+ film or computer game. Cinema staff may also request that the person show proof of their age before allowing them to watch an MA 15+ film. Children under the age of 15 may not legally watch, buy or hire MA 15+ classified material unless they are in the company of a parent or adult guardian. Children under 15 who go to the cinema to see an MA 15+ film must be accompanied by a parent or adult guardian for the duration of the film. The parent or adult guardian must also purchase the movie ticket for the child.
The guardian must be an adult exercising parental control over the person under 15 years of age. The guardian needs to be 18 years or older.

Clutch said:

Oh, and this was rated R why?

Click to expand...

Boobs.