AudioCircle
Music and Media => The Cinema => Topic started by: WGH on 8 Oct 2017, 03:23 am
-
Blade Runner 2049 is a pretty good sequel to the original. The first Blade Runner was ground breaking with the mixture of cultures, technology and the dystopian look of 2019 L.A. The new Blade Runner takes all those elements and kicks it up by a factor of 10 and is even more dark and moody than the first. Ryan Gosling does a fine job as the next generation of blade runners tasked to hunt down the remaining Nexus 6 androids that do not have an expiration date.
The visuals and sound are excellent, this film deserves to be seen in the biggest state-of-the-art digital theater. The deep soundtrack will tax even the best sound system and the dense visuals are an homage to the original. The visuals are always clear but very dark with lots of shadows, this is a dystopian future after all.
Early reviewers were advised not to reveal any of the plot because this is one film best viewed fresh without any preconceptions. It's a lot of fun.
Plan ahead. The first Blade Runner came out in 1982 and we were a lot younger, now 35 years have passed and our plumbing has aged. I mention this because Blade Runner 2049 is 2-3/4 hours long and you don't want to leave to pee during the last hour when Deckard appears and the action ramps up.
:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
Wayne
-
Blade Runner 2049 is a pretty good sequel to the original. The first Blade Runner was ground breaking with the mixture of cultures, technology and the dystopian look of 2019 L.A. The new Blade Runner takes all those elements and kicks it up by a factor of 10 and is even more dark and moody than the first. Ryan Gosling does a fine job as the next generation of blade runners tasked to hunt down the remaining Nexus 6 androids that do not have an expiration date.
The visuals and sound are excellent, this film deserves to be seen in the biggest state-of-the-art digital theater. The deep soundtrack will tax even the best sound system and the dense visuals are an homage to the original. The visuals are always clear but very dark with lots of shadows, this is a dystopian future after all.
Early reviewers were advised not to reveal any of the plot because this is one film best viewed fresh without any preconceptions. It's a lot of fun.
Plan ahead. The first Blade Runner came out in 1982 and we were a lot younger, now 35 years have passed and our plumbing has aged. I mention this because Blade Runner 2049 is 2-3/4 hours long and you don't want to leave to pee during the last hour when Deckard appears and the action ramps up.
:thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
Wayne
So we watched it last night and the power flickered right at the beach fight scene with just a few minutes to go. Unfortunately, the theater folks couldn't restart the projection equipment, so we were sent home without seeing the ending! Very enjoyable up to that point, so I guess we'll just have to go see it again to find out how it ends 8)
-
The original Blade Runner is one of my favorite movies in any genre. I used Roy Blatty's incredibly moving final speech - - "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die." - - to open my own memoirs. So I am both interested in and worried about the new version. I appreciate the advice to approach it without preconceptions.
-
Wired magazine has an excellent behind the scenes article about Blade Runner 2049. The article follows the directors request and does not have any description of the plot or contain any spoilers, enjoy.
(http://wghwoodworking.com/av/blade_runner.jpg)
https://www.wired.com/2017/09/behind-the-scenes-blade-runner-2049-sequel/?mbid=BottomRelatedStories (https://www.wired.com/2017/09/behind-the-scenes-blade-runner-2049-sequel/?mbid=BottomRelatedStories)
"...the plot of Blade Runner 2049 is guarded with the kind of intensity usually reserved for Star Wars reshoots. (Even negotiating to get onto the set required more back-and-forth than a Voight-Kampff test. I’m told I’m the only US journalist who passed.) Still, there are a few confirmed details: Thirty years after audiences left Deckard bruised and battered in 2019 Los Angeles, he has disappeared, and Gosling’s LAPD officer is on the hunt (possibly at the behest of his boss, played by Robin Wright, though no one involved with the movie will say for sure). Meanwhile, there’s a new breed of replicants—the series’ term for androids—being built by a mysterious inventor named Wallace (Jared Leto), who’s aided by a devoted employee, Luv (Sylvia Hoeks). That’s pretty much all the 2049 team will tell me, no matter how politely I ask. “I’m not even sure I’m allowed to say I had a good time making it,” Gosling jokes."
-
Fantastic article!! :thumb: :thumb:
thanks for posting.
Can't wait to see this on the big screen, and again on Blu-ray in my home theater.
-
This movie was f***in amazing. I can't even process how Villeneuve gets those shots. This movie out Ridley Scott's Ridley Scott. One of the most visually accomplished films in recent memory.
It is long though. True to the original pacing and then some. really should have a intermission. In fact I think it would be better film for it because there's so much to process. Not a film really for American audiences imo.
-
The Hans Zimmer soundtrack is as important as the visuals. The original 1982 Blade Runner score was composed by Vangelis and for the sequel the Hans Zimmer - Benjamin Wallfisch team want to go with the same feel, but darker.
I just picked up the soundtrack and uploaded a sample (2049.flac) to give you all a hint of what you are in for. To get the full theater effect download the file and play on your main system at about 90dB, but don't blow anything up! 99% of members systems won't be able to handle this cut at reference Dolby levels which is why you need to hear it in a state-of-the-art theater.
Blade Runner 2049 Sample (http://wghwoodworking.com/av/2049.flac)
Wayne
-
Gotta say the millenial responses I've read to this movie are... disappointing. Ironic, considering the original film was also considered a disappointment and not well understood. They don't seem to be putting two and two together. More and more it seems this type of epic visual storytelling just goes over their heads. Everything has to be obvious and preferably viewable on a laptop or phone.
Luckily the Top Critics at RottenTomatoes have unanimous praise. I had to read some of those to remind myself there are people who still know how to watch movies. Christ.
-
The Hans Zimmer soundtrack is as important as the visuals. The original 1982 Blade Runner score was composed by Vangelis and for the sequel the Hans Zimmer - Benjamin Wallfisch team want to go with the same feel, but darker.
I just picked up the soundtrack and uploaded a sample (2049.flac) to give you all a hint of what you are in for. To get the full theater effect download the file and play on your main system at about 90dB, but don't blow anything up! 99% of members systems won't be able to handle this cut at reference Dolby levels which is why you need to hear it in a state-of-the-art theater.
Blade Runner 2049 Sample (http://wghwoodworking.com/av/2049.flac)
Wayne
Hans Zimmer has actually becoming a GREAT composer over the years instead of an influential hack. I credit working with Nolan for that. The BR2049 score is awesome.
-
Listened to the sample through my head phones and wow, just incredible.
Would like to see the movie but since my wife's vision has gone, I haven't been
to a movie since.
Don
-
Ticket sales were disappointing I guess, in the low 30's and they were expecting 40 million.
Big budget movie, maybe too long for the kids, they don't have the attention span :wink:
Will try to see it soon.
-
Hi Guys:
I'll put this on my go to list.
Has any body seen "Wonder Woman"? I rented it Saturday from Redbox. great flick!!! Just kick back and ENJOY!!!
Make sure you have lot's of popcorn and a schnapps or two.
Cheers
Charlie
-
Finally, we found a film that was worthy of a theater screening. A story well told with very good performances. There was not a Sophia Coppola or Nicholas Cage in the bunch. We did not find it long. Perhaps the solution to the puzzle was given away a little early, that may depend on the viewer. I do wonder how it would play to a person not familiar with the original.
-
Wow !! :thumb: :thumb: just saw this in IMAX. Stunning cinematography, sound track is mind boggling , great screenplay and special effects!!
9.5 out of 10 stars.
-
Gotta say the millenial responses I've read to this movie are... disappointing. Ironic, considering the original film was also considered a disappointment and not well understood. They don't seem to be putting two and two together. More and more it seems this type of epic visual storytelling just goes over their heads. Everything has to be obvious and preferably viewable on a laptop or phone.
Luckily the Top Critics at RottenTomatoes have unanimous praise. I had to read some of those to remind myself there are people who still know how to watch movies. Christ.
Well, remember that Millenials are still kids (I consider anyone under 30 to be a kid, essentially). And kids are dumb. So it's no surprise that a difficult and non-obvious movie is not gonna have huge box office appeal.
I haven't seen this movie yet, I was hesitant because my experience with the Alien and Terminator franchises have been so bad. Plus I love the original Blade Runner unreasonably. So I figured I am just set up for disappointment. But I have to admit that the raves from the critics and the more thoughtful moviegoers has been swaying me over.
-
There are a lot of things I do not like about Millennials. Entitled and practically unteachable with a shitty work ethic. I would not classify them as dumb however.
-
There are a lot of things I do not like about Millennials. Entitled and practically unteachable with a shitty work ethic. I would not classify them as dumb however.
I think he meant dumb as in we were all 'dumb' at that age.
-
I think he meant dumb as in we were all 'dumb' at that age.
Yes, precisely.
-
I saw the original movie when it was first released and liked it, somewhat, though not strongly. I appreciated it as art more than I enjoyed it as a film - it did not draw me in. I think it was because Harrison Ford's character was completely uninteresting to me. Plus IMO he's a lousy actor and doesn't have "IT" so that didn't help.
But now you all have got me re-interested in the film and the Final Cut version was on TV the other day so I watched that. Not sure why, but I REALLY liked it this time around. Too long between viewings to compare the original version with the Final Cut so not sure if that was the reason. Both HF and his character remain completely uninteresting to me, thus still didn't draw me in. None of the characters did, except for Rutger Hauer's final scene. Perhaps I am in a different place and more open to appreciate and just enjoy the film.
So now I'm all excited to see 2049 this weekend. Thanks for posting! :thumb:
-
I saw the original movie when it was first released and liked it, somewhat, though not strongly. I appreciated it as art more than I enjoyed it as a film - it did not draw me in. I think it was because Harrison Ford's character was completely uninteresting to me. Plus IMO he's a lousy actor and doesn't have "IT" so that didn't help.
But now you all have got me re-interested in the film and the Final Cut version was on TV the other day so I watched that. Not sure why, but I REALLY liked it this time around. Too long between viewings to compare the original version with the Final Cut so not sure if that was the reason. Both HF and his character remain completely uninteresting to me, thus still didn't draw me in. None of the characters did, except for Rutger Hauer's final scene. Perhaps I am in a different place and more open to appreciate and just enjoy the film.
So now I'm all excited to see 2049 this weekend. Thanks for posting! :thumb:
Maybe you like the original more now because our future has been catching up to its future :wink:
In all honesty, although I like the original and have seen a dozen times, I think it's a so-so film. I love it mainly for the cinematography and production design. I think the acting is a little clunky and the plot and pacing something you really have to be in the mood for.
I think 2049 is a better film than the original. Villeneuve has all of Ridley Scott's strengths but none of his weaknesses.
-
I saw the original movie when it was first released and liked it, somewhat, though not strongly. I appreciated it as art more than I enjoyed it as a film - it did not draw me in. I think it was because Harrison Ford's character was completely uninteresting to me. Plus IMO he's a lousy actor and doesn't have "IT" so that didn't help.
But now you all have got me re-interested in the film and the Final Cut version was on TV the other day so I watched that. Not sure why, but I REALLY liked it this time around. Too long between viewings to compare the original version with the Final Cut so not sure if that was the reason. Both HF and his character remain completely uninteresting to me, thus still didn't draw me in. None of the characters did, except for Rutger Hauer's final scene. Perhaps I am in a different place and more open to appreciate and just enjoy the film.
So now I'm all excited to see 2049 this weekend. Thanks for posting! :thumb:
It should also be noted that, importantly, the boob count is higher in this new one.
-
There is also in the original, Harrison Ford's narration which was put in because the suits thought without it, the movie dragged on, so it doesn't come across very well.
-
There is also in the original, Harrison Ford's narration which was put in because the suits thought without it, the movie dragged on, so it doesn't come across very well.
I've always associated BladeRunner with Brazil since they are fom the same time period, and considered Brazil the better film. I think that's why I am less enampored of it. Hard to separate those two in my mentions mind.
-
Blade Runner:The Final Cut, is the directors version and eliminates the narration. Harrison Ford never wanted to add voice over to the movie. The movie is much better without it.
https://www.amazon.com/Blade-Runner-Final-Cut-Blu-ray/dp/B004FQX5CK/ref=tmm_mfc_title_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
Here is a behind the scene look at the making of Blade Runner.
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/09/the-battle-for-blade-runner-harrison-ford-ridley-scott
Scotty
-
I am going to see this movie tomorrow! :thumb:
-
It should also be noted that, importantly, the boob count is higher in this new one.
Thanks, good to know, on the must see list now.
-
The NY Times has more Blade Runner articles, once again no spoilers but always out of this world visuals.
Denis Villeneuve Narrates a Scene From ‘Blade Runner 2049’
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/movies/denis-villeneuve-interview-blade-runner-2049.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/movies/denis-villeneuve-interview-blade-runner-2049.html)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=169814&size=huge)
The ‘Blade Runner 2049’ Look
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/28/movies/the-blade-runner-2049-look-sci-fi-brought-back-down-to-earth.html?_r=0
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=169815&size=huge)
Wayne
-
Just a stunning film. Plan on rewatching the original and then going back to see it on imax again.
-
Just a stunning film. Plan on rewatching the original and then going back to see it on imax again.
Watching the original with my 16yr old son tonight and seeing the new movie tomorrow.
I think he is going to really like the original...just like I do.
George
-
Watching the original with my 16yr old son tonight and seeing the new movie tomorrow.
The new Blade Runner is definitely an R rating but probably nothing he hasn't seen already. The film has has plenty of images for a 16 year old to think about.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=169895&size=huge)
-
Incredible. Stunning. Delicious.
-
An incredible movie. Visually stunning and thought provoking. 9.5 out of 10. In some ways vastly superior to the original
Rich
-
Check out Spotify for the Blade Runner 2049 Motion picture soundtrack[size=27px !important] :thumb: [/size][/color]
-
I finally got a chance to see it tonight and I concur- it's wonderful! :thumb: The film has it all; stunning visuals, great writing and superb acting. It's a wonderful meditation on what it is to be alive and human.
-
An incredible movie. Visually stunning and thought provoking. 9.5 out of 10. In some ways vastly superior to the original
Rich
My son and I really enjoyed this movie. Certainly nothing in here from my perspective that made me think twice about a 16 year old seeing it (of course that is simply my opinion and others can differ)
Visually, it was certainly superior to the original.
I really loved the story and it definitely gives you a lot to think about. Would love to talk about plot details, but don't want to ruin it for those who haven't seen it yet.
It could have been that I was tired...but it felt that tiniest but slow at times.
Highly recommended.
George
-
The only real sour note for me was the inclusion of a poor CGI clone of a character from the original film.
-
The only real sour note for me was the inclusion of a poor CGI clone of a character from the original film.
Really? I thought that was great. And didn't feel forced. The appearance fit right into the story. I think the real life person was involved with it as well (they were definitely on the set at some point). Probably with the voice work and motion capture movement. I think it only seemed poor if you are a fan of the original and are really familiar with the features. If you never saw the original you wouldn't know it was CGI...
-
I felt the 'Uncanny Valley' affect pretty badly. It was the eyes; when duping living people they just never have gotten the eyes right yet. There's a weird dead fish look to them. I didn't feel was forced or inappropriate, I just don't think the technology is quite there yet.
-
I saw the original movie when it was first released and liked it, somewhat, though not strongly. I appreciated it as art more than I enjoyed it as a film - it did not draw me in. I think it was because Harrison Ford's character was completely uninteresting to me. Plus IMO he's a lousy actor and doesn't have "IT" so that didn't help.
I know what you mean but you may change your mind about Harrison Ford once you see Blade Runner 2049. He was surprisingly very good in this one.
-
I know what you mean but you may change your mind about Harrison Ford once you see Blade Runner 2049. He was surprisingly very good in this one.
Agree Stercom. He was very good in his role in 2049. He seemed human, even.
-
I really enjoyed 2049. I am in awe of it. Visually stunning and moving. Perfect sound track, very well integrated into the film. Atmospherically captivating. (A must see on the big screen, for sure.) Deliciously slow-paced. I even enjoyed the story as it delectably unfolded and ended so wonderfully. IMO this is far more than just a good/great sci-fi flick - it transcends the genre. It is one of the best films I've ever seen.
-
And for anyone who has NOT seen the director's previous films, Sicario, and Arrival, I suggest you do so...
-
for sure a movie for the Male sex..during the scene below which WGH captured the field of female erotic giants young teens of high school age made sounds of dislike upon seeing those two gals statues
-
for sure a movie for the Male sex..during the scene below which WGH captured the field of female erotic giants young teens of high school age made sounds of dislike upon seeing those two gals statues
That's because the film is making a pretty strong commentary on gender, but it's a little too subtle for these times. Again, like the original, it will take time before 2049 gets the same level of appreciation. And the statues are straight up Kubrick/Clockwork Orange - itself a dystopian future classic dealing with some interesting questions.
-
And for anyone who has NOT seen the director's previous films, Sicario, and Arrival, I suggest you do so...
I agree, just watched Incendies directed by Denis Villeneuve. The film is totally captivating with excellent character development and a simple but oh so complex story. There is no graphic violence which make the emotional scenes even more devastating. The only reason this film doesn't get mentioned more is because it is in French with English subtitles. :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/incendies (https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/incendies)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=170042)
Next on my list: Enemy starring Jake Gyllenhaal with Isabella Rossellini
-
Wow WGH the "Blade Runner 2049 Sample" was a bit over powering and I have yet to play it loudly
-
Just saw Blade Runner 2049 in IMAX...But I made the mistake of going to one of the smaller "30 feet high and 64 feet wide" IMAX theater in NYC. So I may see it again on the Largest "80 feet high and 100 feet wide" IMAX theater. But the sound was very loud and very quiet.
-
I'm happy that some people enjoyed it; I did not. What made the first BR so memorable for me was the humanity, of which I saw precious little in this overblown version. I was not able to get interested in 2049's characters or the plot. Too much CGI; not enough heart. Plus, it was an hour too long. Did it or I suffer from sequel-itis? I don't know. All I know is that 2049 did not move me and the original BR did.
-
I saw Blade runner 2049 in Digital IMAX.
Did anyone see Blade Runner 2049 in 70mm IMAX?
Did anyone see Blade Runner 2049 in dual 4K laser IMAX?
Did anyone see Blade Runner 2049 in Regal RPX (Regal Premier eXperience) 40ft-60ft
"AMC Loews Lincoln Square IMAX at AMC Loews Lincoln Square 13 features IMAX’s laser projection, cutting-edge 12-channel IMAX sound and plush rocker seating. Dual 4K laser projection system is equipped with a new optical engine and suite of proprietary IMAX technologies capable of projecting an image with up to a 1.43:1 aspect ratio with maximum resolution and sharpness, unparalleled 2D and 3D brightness, industry-leading contrast and an expanded color gamut that will allow filmmakers to present more vivid and exotic colors than ever before. The new system also includes IMAX's next-generation sound technology that delivers even greater power and precision for ultimate audio immersion. It has been upgraded to 12 discrete channels plus sub-bass, and includes additional side channels as well as new overhead channels that will improve the system's ability to position sounds around the audience and further ensure every seat is the best in the house."
So afer reading the above I really want to see the 4K/12 channel Blade Runner 2049 as any member of this Audio forum should desire as well though the experience it seems costs $2 more than other IMAX theates in the area.
So is hard drive digit IMAX better than 70 MM Film IMAX?
AMC Empire 25 IMAX digital theater, with its 28 x 58-foot (8.5 x 18 meter)
1,250 square feet (120 square-meters) 1.9 aspect ratios a digital one
AMC Lincoln Square IMAX 15/70 theater 76 x 98 feet (23 x 30 meters)
4,800 square-foot (450 square-meter) 15/70 film screen
-
I am a sci-fi addict. When the Science Fiction cable channel changed their name to SyFy I wrote a letter of protest. In the 9th grade we were each allowed to order one book for the school library and I ordered a Heinlein piece. I am 70 years old and am currently involved in reading an interesting cyber-punk type story. I have seen the original Blade Runner a jillion times on TV. Those are my simple bona Fides so you'll understand I don't comment lightly about this new movie. New movie - Fantastic visual and sound. I thought both Gosling and Ford were excellent. BUT... I fell asleep at one point. Really. The volume on some of the female vocals as they whispered their lines was so low I couldn't understand what they were saying. This happened several times. I felt there was too much effort to have a slow pace, even when unnecessary. They could have eliminated 30 minutes of long pauses and had a better movie in my opinion.
-
I fell asleep at one point.
I was tempted to leave half way through.
The volume on some of the female vocals as they whispered their lines was so low I couldn't understand what they were saying. This happened several times.
Not to mention the excessively loud volume for sound effects, which also happen several times.
I felt there was too much effort to have a slow pace, even when unnecessary. They could have eliminated 30 minutes of long pauses and had a better movie in my opinion.
They could have eliminated 90 minutes, but as sequels usually go, this one is inferior to the the first.
Apart from some visuals, there wasn't much about this film that I particularly enjoyed.
-
I was tempted to leave half way through.
Not to mention the excessively loud volume for sound effects, which also happen several times.
They could have eliminated 90 minutes, but as sequels usually go, this one is inferior to the the first.
Apart from some visuals, there wasn't much about this film that I particularly enjoyed.
Excellent :D That’s my queue to watch this movie!
Thanks!
Anand.
-
I hope you enjoy more than I did. :wink:
-
Love the pervasive use of vacuum tubes. Bladerunner is my single favorite film, ever (at least the Director's cut). So, I am excited that this sequel seems to be faithful to the original. All I can say about Bladerunner is: "THE UNICORN!!!! IT'S THE UNICORN!!!!!" :icon_lol:
-
The negative feedback is so interesting to me because to me they sound like what was said about the original. I've always considered the original a little slow, that the visuals and production design were the best thing about it, etc etc.
2049 can absolutely lose 30 minutes and have the same impact. In fact I think the original run time was supposed to be 30min shorter. Not sure why the director decided to go all in. But that additional 30 minutes is what takes the film to Kubrick level. There's a meditative pace to it and emphasis on landscapes that reminds me of 2001. Sicario had similar moments, but much shorter. Definite influence.
-
The negative feedback is so interesting to me because to me they sound like what was said about the original. I've always considered the original a little slow, that the visuals and production design were the best thing about it, etc etc.
I haven't see the original since 1982, but I remember seeing it at least twice. I agree with what you said about the original above and I would also add that I think the story telling was more coherent.
2049 can absolutely lose 30 minutes and have the same impact. In fact I think the original run time was supposed to be 30min shorter. Not sure why the director decided to go all in. But that additional 30 minutes is what takes the film to Kubrick level. There's a meditative pace to it and emphasis on landscapes that reminds me of 2001. Sicario had similar moments, but much shorter. Definite influence.
Apart from 2001, which I don't consider to be Kubrick's best work, I don't see the Kubrick connection.
-
Bet 30 minutes will be added on the DVD when it comes out..the cutting room floor stuff...
-
I live in a small town, so I missed it.
But I'm rather curious, since only guys have commented - what did your female friends and partners think about it? There seems to be a big gender gap about this movie - maybe?
-
I purposely watched it without my wife. she's not into the genre at all.
-
I live in a small town, so I missed it.
But I'm rather curious, since only guys have commented - what did your female friends and partners think about it? There seems to be a big gender gap about this movie - maybe?
My gf loved it, but she is also a serious film lover. In fact she liked it more than I did. That said a more casual viewer might might not see the overt misogyny and objectification for the subtle commentary it is. Especially as it's a hot button issue these days.
-
My wife loved it , just as I did. I suppose 30 minutes could have been cut, they could have dressed everyone in silly spandex hero costumes and filled the dialogue with fart jokes and two syllable words. Like the rest of the dreck they are putting out.
-
My female friend was the first one to suggest we go see it - two weeks before it opened. I had to wait a week before the theater started selling tickets online.
She loved it.
I thought the length was perfect, not many movies take the time to tell a story anymore. Anyone familiar with Denis Villeneuve's films will know he likes to tell a story:
Arrival - 116 minutes
Sicario - 121 minutes
Incendies - 130 minutes
Prisoners - 153 minutes
Blade Runner 2049 - 164 minutes
-
I agree! I never looked at my watch; the story was simply allowed to unfold organically, in it's own time. The characters were lovingly drawn with patience IMO.
-
I never saw the original Blade Runner, but I was entertained by this one. I wouldn't consider it to be a great film, but it was worth seeing. I rarely go to movies anymore because there just isn't much produced by the film industry that is worth anything. The last movie I saw in a theater was Alice in Wonderland with Johnny Depp and I think that was about 6 years ago. I feel the golden age of quality film making is gone and I don't believe contemporary film makers will ever approach the creativity and quality of days gone by even though they have enhanced film making techniques with modern technology.
-
I never saw the original Blade Runner, but I was entertained by this one. I wouldn't consider it to be a great film, but it was worth seeing. I rarely go to movies anymore because there just isn't much produced by the film industry that is worth anything.
I couldn't agree with you more. Maybe my expectations/hopes and standards are just a lot higher than they should be, because I'm rarely impressed by anything I see anymore.
-
I never saw the original Blade Runner, but I was entertained by this one. I wouldn't consider it to be a great film, but it was worth seeing. I rarely go to movies anymore because there just isn't much produced by the film industry that is worth anything. The last movie I saw in a theater was Alice in Wonderland with Johnny Depp and I think that was about 6 years ago. I feel the golden age of quality film making is gone and I don't believe contemporary film makers will ever approach the creativity and quality of days gone by even though they have enhanced film making techniques with modern technology.
I agree with your sentiment but, not knowing your tastes, you might try watching Sicario. It reminded me of the good films of the 70's and early 80's. Before moralizing became the trend.
-
I feel the golden age of quality film making is gone and I don't believe contemporary film makers will ever approach the creativity and quality of days gone by even though they have enhanced film making techniques with modern technology.
I don't often watch blockbusters or just go watch films in general but I think films are so much better now. (Though you don't say what the golden age of films is.) The realism of how people act now is much better than before the 70's.
-
I agree with your sentiment but, not knowing your tastes, you might try watching Sicario. It reminded me of the good films of the 70's and early 80's. Before moralizing became the trend.
Funny. I consider the 70s the peak of moral cinema, culminating in the great film Being There.
-
Funny. I consider the 70s the peak of moral cinema, culminating in the great film Being There.
I love that film. I t didn't disappoint me at all in how it handled Kosinski's material. I feel that as the 80's progressed there developed a trend in films to identify the villain- without moral ambiguity, or relativism. A Sicario in that era would have treated the principal characters differently, imo. They may have even received their comeuppance.
-
I too think we're in the midst of a golden age of film. Maybe half of my favorites of all time were made in the last ten or fifteen years. True, there are plenty of bad films but there was never any lack of those. Now there's a strong independent cinema and lots of smaller studios cranking out great stuff. As example was the Amazon film, "Manchester by the Sea." So many channels outside of the main studio system doing amazing stuff.
-
I don't often watch blockbusters or just go watch films in general but I think films are so much better now. (Though you don't say what the golden age of films is.) The realism of how people act now is much better than before the 70's.
O.K., I'm not a film historian so I don't really know what might be considered the golden age, but I was thinking the 30's through the early 60's when I made that reference. A silent film called Birth of a Nation that was made in the early 20th century is really outstanding. It's over 3 hours long and used actual civil war veterans as consultants for the battle scenes. I didn't think I could sit through a 3 hour silent film, but I was thoroughly entertained from start to finish.
-
I agree, now it is real easy to see excellent foreign films anytime you want. The independent film choices are expanding too, one example is the amazing Tangerine (http://www.magpictures.com/tangerine/) which was filmed using three iPhone 5s smartphones.
The success of Tangerine gave Sean Baker the opportunity to make the highly anticipated Florida Project staring Willem Defoe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwQ-NH1rRT4
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b2/The_Florida_Project.jpg)
-
I agree, now it is real easy to see excellent foreign films anytime you want. The independent film choices are expanding too, one example is the amazing Tangerine (http://www.magpictures.com/tangerine/) which was filmed using three iPhone 5s smartphones.
The success of Tangerine gave Sean Baker the opportunity to make the highly anticipated Florida Project staring Willem Defoe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwQ-NH1rRT4
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b2/The_Florida_Project.jpg)
Tangerine looks interesting and I know it's acclaimed. I'll have to give it a watch.
-
I too think we're in the midst of a golden age of film. Maybe half of my favorites of all time were made in the last ten or fifteen years. True, there are plenty of bad films but there was never any lack of those. Now there's a strong independent cinema and lots of smaller studios cranking out great stuff. As example was the Amazon film, "Manchester by the Sea." So many channels outside of the main studio system doing amazing stuff.
We're in a golden age of television. Film? No way. All you have to do is compare Oscars from 1970 through say 1985 with 2000 through 2015. No contest. And indie cinema is the weakest its ever been. That, I think is not up for debate. Small studios? What small studios? Amazon is not a small studio plus they are hemorrhaging money in their movie and tv division because they are not hits. Netflix is spending over 6 billion, yes billion, on original content. That ain't no small studio. Meanwhile Soderberg can barely secure financing for his movies and he's got an Oscar and multiple hits under his belt.
-
We're in a golden age of television. Film? No way. All you have to do is compare Oscars from 1970 through say 1985 with 2000 through 2015. No contest.
That seems to be more a result of the Oscars actually picking the best films of the year back then! I mean, I just watched LA LA Land and I'm at loss to figure out why it got such raves, outside of the amazing cinematography of the opening shot and Hollywood's tribute to itself. It was watchable but most of the storyline was just pretty bad. It changed from a musical to a story about jazz and living out your dreams. Then, it just seemed highly implausible why the two couldn't stay in touch via social media and cheap airplane flights.
There's always been good and bad films throughout its history. I just feel that today there are far more realistic movies than there were in the past. As an example, Casablanca to me was unrealistic because all the lines were too concise and pat. As soon as one person finished their line, the next person started right into their lines. No pauses or breaths, their speaking styles were too precise and concise. People don't speak like that all the time.
-
We're in a golden age of television. Film? No way. All you have to do is compare Oscars from 1970 through say 1985 with 2000 through 2015.
I think this is officially known as golden age-ism. Next thing you know, you'll be telling us how music was so much better in the past, and how society in general has been in decline :lol:
I do agree that the Academy Awards seems to have been usurped by politics and money, so you can't really look to them like you could in the past. On the other hand, there's been some amazing films over the past 10 years:
Zero Dark Thirty
Looper
Ex Machina
Blade Runner 2049 (although I haven't seen this one yet)
Nightcrawler
Gone Girl
Nocturnal Animals
Whiplash
Tree of Life
Mad Max: Fury Road
John Wick
Black Swan
Arrival
Antichrist
Skyfall
Clouds of Sils Maria
Into the Abyss
All within the past 10 years, and there's a ton of stuff I haven't even seen because I've been so busy watching older films these past 10 years (to catch up on my film history). Don't get me wrong, there are some great, great films in the past. And there's also a lot of crap in the past. In fact I'd say the ratio of great movies to mediocre and crap movies out about 1 in 10. Which adheres to Sturgeon's Law pretty well :thumb:
-
More and more I have deep diving into a directors back catalog. Denis Villeneuve is the latest, when I looked him up I discovered he directed Arrival, Sicario and Prisoners, three films I liked but never remembered who directed them (who does?). I recently watched his earlier films Incendies (excellent) and Enemy (intense with an obscure ending). Both are worth your time.
Bong Joon-ho is another director to explore, he is recently known for Okja (2017) and Snowpiercer (2013) but I enjoyed his earlier films as much if not more: Mother (Madeo) (2009), The Host (horror, comedy, satire) (2006), and Memories of Murder (2003). The last three are 100% South Korean and subtitled but well worth tracking down and can easily fit into the current golden age of film.
Mother
(https://opionator.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/mother_5.jpg)
The Host
(http://www.indiewire.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/image-w1280.jpg)
Memories of Murder
(http://www.manic-expression.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/memories-of-murder-salinui-chueok-dvd-cover.jpg)
-
I care very little for the Oscars nor do I need a cabal of ninety year old white men to validate my film choices. :thumb: Going back to 1950 I'd wager that my favorite film of the year won Best Picture perhaps once or twice, maybe never. TV is probably great but I see virtually nothing on TV, just a couple of programs on Netflix and a couple on HBO. That's not a refutation, I simply don't have a lot of free time nor a lot of interest in TV although there are some good things out there. I guess it's that it's hard enough to maintain quality and focus in a two hour movie and nearly impossible to keep a high quality TV show going for years without dropping the ball.
At any rate, this is about Blade Runner 2049 which to me circles right back to our being in a golden age of film. This to me was a stunning film, not flawless but ambitious and fascinating. I think of the masterpieces of recent years and it just confirms my opinion: Boyhood, Lost in Translation, Her, Once, Manchester on the Sea, Hell or High Water, Brokeback Mountain, Drive, Sicario, No Country for Old Men, La La Land, Still Alice, The Arrival, A Serious Man, Sin City, A History of Violence, Apaloosa, Hard Candy, There Will Be Blood, The Fighter, Melancholia, Million Dollar Baby, Ex Machina, Interstellar, The Grand Budapest Hotel, 12 Years a Slave, Zero Dark Thirty, In the Heart of the Sea, Whiplash, The Dallas Buyer's Club, The Hurt Locker, Blue Valentine, Nebraska, American Hustle, The Big Short, The Hateful Eight, Baby Driver, Wind River, Little Miss Sunshine, The Nice Guys, Gladiator...so many new classics in the last decade and a half! And that doesn't even touch on the great trash/guilty pleasures of which there are so many!
-
OK, guys. Here's a flick that is on no one's best list but mine. Not SciFi - - so, off topic - - but just a warm human comedy that will relax your toes. Some of the scenes are LOL funny; others bring only a been-there chuckle of recognition. You've seen the "underdog triumphs against overwhelming odds" plot before. But something about the film brings me back time and time again. Ready: "the Best of Times," starring Robin Williams, Kurt Russell, Pam Reed and Jack Palance's daughter, Holly. Try it: you'll like it.
-
I am one of those who felt the new BladeRunner 2049 was too slow paced. Out of respect for other's opinions, I followed a suggestion and last night I watched Sicario. A fine movie, but again in a few places it was too slow paced for me. Now stay with me here - this all reminds me of a girlfriend I lived with over 40 years ago. She was quite bright, getting her BA in 2 1/2 years. But she was a strong analytical, needing to look at all sides of any situation. I am close to the opposite. One evening we were playing some board game and I placed her in a position that required her to make just 1 move - she had no other choices by the rules of the game. After she looked at the board for what felt like 24 hours, I reached out and moved her piece. This resulted in our biggest fight ever. This is probably why some of us loved the pacing of 2049 and others felt it dragged. These thoughts occurred to me while watching Sicario. Not so much a matter of right vs wrong but the conflict of different personalities.
-
One evening we were playing some board game and I placed her in a position that required her to make just 1 move - she had no other choices by the rules of the game. After she looked at the board for what felt like 24 hours, I reached out and moved her piece.
I've been in that situation too... :lol:
-
I think this is officially known as golden age-ism. Next thing you know, you'll be telling us how music was so much better in the past, and how society in general has been in decline :lol:
I do agree that the Academy Awards seems to have been usurped by politics and money, so you can't really look to them like you could in the past. On the other hand, there's been some amazing films over the past 10 years:
Zero Dark Thirty
Looper
Ex Machina
Blade Runner 2049 (although I haven't seen this one yet)
Nightcrawler
Gone Girl
Nocturnal Animals
Whiplash
Tree of Life
Mad Max: Fury Road
John Wick
Black Swan
Arrival
Antichrist
Skyfall
Clouds of Sils Maria
Into the Abyss
All within the past 10 years, and there's a ton of stuff I haven't even seen because I've been so busy watching older films these past 10 years (to catch up on my film history). Don't get me wrong, there are some great, great films in the past. And there's also a lot of crap in the past. In fact I'd say the ratio of great movies to mediocre and crap movies out about 1 in 10. Which adheres to Sturgeon's Law pretty well :thumb:
Lol wow. That list though. I mean ofcourse it is subjective but that is variant the last of the worst movies if the last ten years.
-
Lol wow. That list though. I mean ofcourse it is subjective but that is variant the last of the worst movies if the last ten years.
Well then you have to provide your list of best movies in the last 10 years. Which will then give me the opportunity to call your choices the worst movies of the past 10 years. See how that works? Of course it's all subjective.
But my broader point still stands - if you sit down and write out your best/favorite movies of the past 10 years, you're forced to conclude that the past 10 years have been pretty good, and we're not in a general decline in movie quality.
-
Well then you have to provide your list of best movies in the last 10 years. Which will then give me the opportunity to call your choices the worst movies of the past 10 years. See how that works? Of course it's all subjective.
But my broader point still stands - if you sit down and write out your best/favorite movies of the past 10 years, you're forced to conclude that the past 10 years have been pretty good, and we're not in a general decline in movie quality.
I can't make a list now but "in bruge" would be on my list and might crawler would be to of the worst next to antichrist and mad max. It doesn't really get worse than mad Max. Unless your count bollywood
-
I can't make a list now but "in bruge" would be on my list and might crawler would be to of the worst next to antichrist and mad max. It doesn't really get worse than mad Max. Unless your count bollywood
See, and any movie staring Colin Farrell is automatically disqualified because I find his eyebrows so distracting. I keep watching him in otherwise-good movies (like In Bruges or The New World) and keep hoping that I won't feel like "Colin Farrell's Eyebrows" are the real stars of the movie. But I just can't.
But arguing about the merit of any particular movie is besides the main point. The main point is that there HAVE been great movies during the past 10 years, even if we don't all agree on what they were :thumb:
-
See, and any movie staring Colin Farrell is automatically disqualified because I find his eyebrows so distracting. I keep watching him in otherwise-good movies (like In Bruges or The New World) and keep hoping that I won't feel like "Colin Farrell's Eyebrows" are the real stars of the movie. But I just can't.
But arguing about the merit of any particular movie is besides the main point. The main point is that there HAVE been great movies during the past 10 years, even if we don't all agree on what they were :thumb:
Tyson, c'mon man. Eyebrows?? How can you not like "Crazy Heart"?
Movies are soooo subjective. Some adore every thing Terrence Malick does. Some can't stand the guy. Mad Max.. wife loved it. It bored me. :dunno:
-
Tyson, c'mon man. Eyebrows?? How can you not like "Crazy Heart"?
Movies are soooo subjective. Some adore every thing Terrence Malick does. Some can't stand the guy. Mad Max.. wife loved it. It bored me. :dunno:
Seriously! Malick is my 2nd favorite director after Kubrick and I can't even watch The New World because of stupid Colin Farrell :duh:
-
Tyson, c'mon man. Eyebrows?? How can you not like "Crazy Heart"?
I forgot that one! Honestly an instant classic IMO, truly brilliant. I'm not a country music fan but the music was superb as well.
-
I am one of those who felt the new BladeRunner 2049 was too slow paced. Out of respect for other's opinions, I followed a suggestion and last night I watched Sicario. A fine movie, but again in a few places it was too slow paced for me. Now stay with me here - this all reminds me of a girlfriend I lived with over 40 years ago. She was quite bright, getting her BA in 2 1/2 years. But she was a strong analytical, needing to look at all sides of any situation. I am close to the opposite. One evening we were playing some board game and I placed her in a position that required her to make just 1 move - she had no other choices by the rules of the game. After she looked at the board for what felt like 24 hours, I reached out and moved her piece. This resulted in our biggest fight ever. This is probably why some of us loved the pacing of 2049 and others felt it dragged. These thoughts occurred to me while watching Sicario. Not so much a matter of right vs wrong but the conflict of different personalities.
Yeah, very true. I think a film should be the length it needs to be to tell the story it needs to tell. As the scene in Amadeus where Mozart was criticized for using "too many note" it should have the exact amount required. But I can readily acknowledge that pacing is subjective. Mood comes into play as well. Sometimes you're in the mood for prime rib while sometimes you just want a quick bite from the drive thru at McDs.
-
Seriously! Malick is my 2nd favorite director after Kubrick and I can't even watch The New World because of stupid Colin Farrell :duh:
I know. That's why I specifically mentioned him. I don't like his stuff... at all. To be more clear, I'll never waste another minute of my life watching one of his films, or re-watching trying to find out what I missed that others found so wonderful. Some like California cabs, some like Bordeaux. I like Rioja.
But, we do agree on Kubrick.
-
I know. That's why I specifically mentioned him. I don't like his stuff... at all. To be more clear, I'll never waste another minute of my life watching one of his films, or re-watching trying to find out what I missed that others found so wonderful. Some like California cabs, some like Bordeaux. I like Rioja.
But, we do agree on Kubrick.
Yep, I adore the fact that Malick has more or less done away with plot (and even character) in his latest films and is pretty much making cinematic poems. Others cannot freaking stand that.
To keep the thread tenuously on target, I liked Villeneuve's previous movie, Arrival, for exactly that reason as well - it wasn't just about what happened & who it happened to. It was also about the 'feel' of the experience. Freaking loved that. But for people that don't like that aspect, I can see why they find that movie too long and pretentious.
As I read more and more of this thread, it makes me more and more excited to see BR2049.
-
The wife and I liked B.R.2049. We watched it Saturday night. I don't want to jaw on and on about it. We both felt that it was well done.
-
Enemy by Villeneuve is close to a cinematic poem, a dark moody one at that. Nothing much happens but the tension keeps building, stay away from this film if you want action. I read a bunch of reviews after seeing the film and the only conscientious is that nobody can agree what the film is about. And I never once noticed Jake Gyllenhaal's eyebrows.
-
More and more I'm drawn to films that make me feel something. Not in terms of being maudlin or overly sentimental but having a quality that connects with the human condition. You don't even need humans for that, just humanity.
-
I think this is officially known as golden age-ism. Next thing you know, you'll be telling us how music was so much better in the past, and how society in general has been in decline :lol:
I didn't say the last decade plus sucked, I just disagreed with the term 'golden age'. As in peak creativity, output, originality, and redefining a genre. I don't think it's controversial to call the 70s to early 80s the golden age. Stylistically, just about every film you watch now is built on that foundation, from Coppola to Lucas to Spielberg to Allen to Friedkin to Cassavetes to Altman, etc. And to keep things on topic - Ridley Scott.
I do think the last 15 years have been a golden age for comedy.
-
I'm pretty bored with Malick though. Still think Thin Red Line was a misfire (a gorgoeus one though).
-
I didn't say the last decade plus sucked, I just disagreed with the term 'golden age'. As in peak creativity, output, originality, and redefining a genre. I don't think it's controversial to call the 70s to early 80s the golden age. Stylistically, just about every film you watch now is built on that foundation, from Coppola to Lucas to Spielberg to Allen to Friedkin to Cassavetes to Altman, etc. And to keep things on topic - Ridley Scott.
I do think the last 15 years have been a golden age for comedy.
Interesting. I don't disagree that the level of quality and innovation in the 60's and 70's was astonishing (it was). I don't think movies got worse in modern times. But I do think television got better. Its only a "golden age" of television now because television mostly sucked through most of history. All the top talent back in the day wanted to avoid TV and do movies instead. You'd never have caught someone like Fincher, an a-list hollywood director, coming out with TV series work.
I'm curious what you feel are the best comedies. Do you mean movies, stand up acts, or TV series? I do have some favorite TV comedies - Mozart in the Jungle, House of Lies, The Good Place, The Office, Parks & Rec, Bored to Death, Better Call Saul - all are great. Movies, meh I'm kind of drawing a blank. Keep in mind I really dislike Will Ferrel and Vince Vaughn so that cuts out a pretty big swathe right there. For standup, I really like Bill Burr, Hasan Minaj, Louis CK, Bo Burnham and Iliza Shlesinger.
-
Interesting. I don't disagree that the level of quality and innovation in the 60's and 70's was astonishing (it was). I don't think movies got worse in modern times. But I do think television got better. Its only a "golden age" of television now because television mostly sucked through most of history. All the top talent back in the day wanted to avoid TV and do movies instead. You'd never have caught someone like Fincher, an a-list hollywood director, coming out with TV series work.
I'm curious what you feel are the best comedies. Do you mean movies, stand up acts, or TV series? I do have some favorite TV comedies - Mozart in the Jungle, House of Lies, The Good Place, The Office, Parks & Rec, Bored to Death, Better Call Saul - all are great. Movies, meh I'm kind of drawing a blank. Keep in mind I really dislike Will Ferrel and Vince Vaughn so that cuts out a pretty big swathe right there. For standup, I really like Bill Burr, Hasan Minaj, Louis CK, Bo Burnham and Iliza Shlesinger.
Tyson,
For shows check out Baskets, Better Things and You’re The Worst. Louis CK is writer/producer for the first two. The third is an acquired taste but has gotten better and better and weirder. All character based ‘comedy’ but either dry or tragic.
For stand up check out Ari Schafer. He also had a show called This Is Not Happening that featured other comics telling stories.
And it takes a while but it was fun finding out why people like David Leterman and Jerry Seinfeld think that Norm McDonald is a genius comedian.
I’ll check out Iliza’s special today, maybe Judah’s new release also...
-
I have been wishing to see this movie for sometime. I was 10 when I saw the original in the theater and took me only 20 years to understand it. Interesting how as I evolved I understood more layers of the movie.
Humbly, albeit subjective, the sequel resonated with me and I found it very cerebral and with its own layers with a completely different perspective that I am sure will have different meanings for me down the road if I re-see it again. It was not drawn out at all but told a story eloquently.
I'd say better than the first and being only two of four people in the theater, unlikely to be showing for long.
-
Watched Blade Runner(1982) Final Cut no voice over a few days ago..This movie had 5 bad guy replicants to retire and 4 good guy cops characters to learn about and 4 creative scientist to learn about and lovely detailed scenes to enjoy, like the cycling scene.
-
I saw Blade Runner 2049 about a week after it was released. Being a huge fan of the original, i wanted to see it right away. I had heard there were some "issues" with it that caused it not to live up to hopes.
Now for a little history for you millenials or non-cult fanatics.
Blade Runner was based on 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep'. Phillip K. Dick was a tremendously influential Sci Fi writer that no one has heard of. It took only 14 years for Blade Runner with all its groundbreaking design and effects to hit the theaters as a dud. After 30 years it became obvious this was more than just a cult movie that was a box-offoce bust.
But back to Philip k Dick for a moment. Just how influential was he? How did he escape the backwaters of science pulp fiction of the 50's to get real recognition in the 60's and 70's science fiction community, and you still did not hear about him? First, science fiction, second he had a troubled life of schizophrenia and drug abuse. If it were not for that he might have had much greater celebrity like a Stephen King.
Still, consider some of the movies (after Blade Runner) he has inspired:
Total Recall
The Adjustment Bureau
A Scanner Darkly
Paycheck
Minority Report
The Man in the High Castle
Radio Free Albemuth
I would say that he also influnced Inception, but I guess he just influenced Christopher Nolan in general.
Ridley Scott undertook a monumental effort with futurist industrial designer Syd Mead to create the Blade Runner film universe which has influenced so many Science Fiction movies since 1982. You need to watch Blade Runner several times and note the date of those Sci Fi films which you didn't realize were borrowing from Blade Runner.
There is a certain anachronistic quality about Blade Runner, set in 2019: very analog skin-job detection equipment, architecture that seems frozen in time, buildings that burn off natural gas. This is a distopian future where the climate and the American Dream have not gone well. L.A. seems to have many more Asians, and they brought their analog bicycles with them.
Deckard's eating habits and Deckard's gun do not seem that progressive. The cars are flying cars, but somehow they do not seem very futuristic. Lots of steam, leather, round glasses give it a kind of Steam Punk vibe. And the genre is a kind of...wait for it...film noire. The original theatrical release had a voice over from the boozing, loner detective.
Live animals a scarce, though. This is effective currency in both films.
I love all of that stuff, so my hopes were that the new director would maintain the vibe. Philip K Dick was very happy with Ridley Scotts film pre-release. Maybe I like it because it is somewhat accidentally faithful to Philip K Dicks style.
The sequel, Blade Runner 2049 is a must see. I do not like everything about the film, but I like a lot of things about the film. I am not a big fan of some things about Jared Leto's character, but he is a necessary addition to the plot.
The movie is too loud, you will lose some of your hearing during the 164 minute movie. I do not agree that you should/can traumatize your audience with decibels to shape the mood. You can traumatize your audience.
I was afraid that there would be no scruffy Deckard in the film. I was relieved to see he was a main character, and that he had in fact run away and lived with the android Rachel. I wish that Sean Young could have been in some scenes, flash-backs from before she dies.
I see so many influences from so many directors. The female figures in Las Vegas look like they were taken out of Clockwork Orange. Except for some shots of large buildings, I do not see much from Blade Runner.
I like the detective work identifying the bones, it is very good and ties in with Blade Runner. I like the acting of the Leto characters androind number one. I wish she was a little more android-like though, instead of like a modern politician. Robin Wright does an excellent job as the Blade Runners police lieutenant.
Over all I really liked it, and will see it many times I am sure (with ear plugs where appropriate).
Most of all I like the fact that Deckard is still not an android, no matter what Ridley Scott wanted.
-
jqp
I appreciate your review even though I did not agree with most of it. But I will not subject you to a point-by-point. I was a huge fan of the original Blade Runner. In fact, the preface to my own memoirs quoted Roy's famous line, "I have seen things . . . "
To me, the yearning for humanity that was so poignant in the androids in the first film was missing in the second. Or maybe it was there but I just didn't see it.
Perhaps, as you suggest, I should see BR 2049 again. In fact, I think I will.
-
Watched 2049 last night on the giant screen with my awesome 4k projector.
Well that was... disappointing.
It was a good movie, actually. But the original Blade Runner was a astonishingly great work of art. Compared to most other big-budget movies coming out today, 2049 was excellent. Compared to the original Blade Runner, it just doesn't match it.
And I really like the director, he directed one of my favorite movies in the last 10 years (Arrival), and seemed like a perfect choice. But alas it was all a bit too shiny and clean looking. 2049 had some amazing visuals, but didn't have the pure cinematic poetry of the original.
-
Which version of the original do you have?
-
Which version of the original do you have?
The Final Cut. Just the Blu Ray though. I'm just about to order the 4k disc, I was reading that it was a substantial improvement, even over the very-good blu ray.
In fact, I see the 4k Blade Runner Final Cut is only $19 on Amazon, and I have $10 in reward points there. So, just ordered the 4k version for $10 out of pocket - not bad!
-
Watched 2049 last night on the giant screen with my awesome 4k projector.
Well that was... disappointing.
OK, I'll bite - how giant is it?
We were younger, more hopeful and had seen far fewer post-apocalyptic films when the first Blade Runner came out. Google the films that came out in 1982 and even though there were futuristic themes Like ET, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan and Tron, there was nothing as apocalyptic.
Perhaps watching Villeneuve's other films before Sicario and Arrival to get a feel for his style and then watching 2049 in 4k will change your mind.
And whatever volume you watched 2049 at - it has to be louder, a lot louder.
-
I agree with Tyson. The original had a poignancy about it that the remake lacks. I found the characters in the original much more appealing. Roy (Rutger Hauer) and Pris (Darrell Hannah), in particular, were special.
Chuck
-
OK, I'll bite - how giant is it?
A bit over 100 inches. Plus I sit about 8 feet from it so it really fills up my field of vision - the effect is pretty marvelous. Love, love, love watching movies on my system.
Chuck,
You should come over and watch the 4k Blade Runner Final Cut when it gets here :thumb:
-
I was 10 with the original BladeRunner and over the decades the movie takes on different meanings. I felt the new version resonated with me and to me was very cerebral with introspection into what is humanity. The sequel was less violent which I appreciated and I did not find it slow at all. Both have their own excellent qualities. Sequels usually suck, with only a handful of exceptions.