Topic: Blade Runner

[greenman]

I can take the sequel by itself personally in terms of messing around with the original, the main issues I'd say are that it ends up rather more a standard sci fi action thriller(still not nearly to Nolan levels of plot heavy blandness though) and that it feels a bit like two scripts merged together which as I understand things it pretty much is with the Deckard section being based on much older sequel ideas.

Agreed on the Director's Cut being the best version.  I'd say to go for the Final Cut because it sorts out a few dodgy shots/effects from the Director's Cut but unfortunately it also adds a teal and orange colour grade which just ruins it.

For me its less teal and orange and more just an excess of teal in some scenes turning them away from blue and overpowering characters faces, the UHD is actually quite an improvement on the bluray of the Finale Cut dialing that back and allowing more blue. Its the same with Fellowship of the Ring or the Matrix, a lot of excess colour filtering added rather clumsily in the 00's can be done much more selectively now.

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=1&x=497&y=202&d1=12213&d2=12215&s1=120974&s2=121007&l=0&i=7&go=1

[crankshaft]

Unpopular opinions ahoy:

I watched Blade Runner for the first time about 8 years ago, and I felt - and still feel - that it just doesn't quite work. I can understand all the reasons it inspires such devotion; the performances are brilliant, the production design is phenomenal, the effects haven't aged at all and the music is perfect. The script just lets it down. My overriding feeling is that it simply elides too much; there's a thin line between being mysterious and being incoherent, and Blade Runner spends most of its running time on the wrong side of that line.

Blade Runner 2049, on the other hand, is a masterpiece, and easily one of my favourite films of recent times. It gets everything right that the first film did, but succeeds combining a stunning audio/visual experience with an expansive, emotional story.

[madhair60]

Anyone who likes this film needs to get laid runner.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

Nice wordplay, Blade Punner.

Also, the sequel was poor.

[BlodwynPig]

Unpopular opinions ahoy:

I watched Blade Runner for the first time about 8 years ago, and I felt - and still feel - that it just doesn't quite work. I can understand all the reasons it inspires such devotion; the performances are brilliant, the production design is phenomenal, the effects haven't aged at all and the music is perfect. The script just lets it down. My overriding feeling is that it simply elides too much; there's a thin line between being mysterious and being incoherent, and Blade Runner spends most of its running time on the wrong side of that line.

Blade Runner 2049, on the other hand, is a masterpiece, and easily one of my favourite films of recent times. It gets everything right that the first film did, but succeeds combining a stunning audio/visual experience with an expansive, emotional story.

Strip away the sci-fi and the sequel was a US daytime soap storyline.

[greenman]

By its own standards I liked the sequel, I think definitely a level up from something like Inception but again I do think its a clear shift towards that kind of film, a more plot heavy action mystery with baddies. The K/Joi aspect of it and the formers life generally I did think marked it out as more substantive than Nolan and the performances generally rather more subtle then you'd expect from him.

It does really come down to your expectations for the films I spose, I wouldnt say the original is especially obtuse but its not the typical sci fi action thriller many viewers probably expect.

[The Mollusk]

I'm not a cinema goer at all really but by happenstance I got to see the sequel in the fuckin IMAX on the Hollywood Boulevard when I was on holiday in California and it was an immense experience. Visually gorgeous and the sound design was stunning. The film was a load of old gubbins though.

[The Culture Bunker]

I did think the sequel started out well - Dave Bautista was very good in those opening scenes, but it was all downhill from there. The "bad" replicant was a very poor nemesis for hero, and you could have cut out all of Jared Leto's scenes and barely (if at all) affected the progression of the story.

I've not seen Ryan Gosling in much else bar this and 'Drive' and it did strike me both characters seemed to have similar arcs that he played almost exactly the same way.

[amputeeporn]

The seven hour documentary about the making of the film is terrific - and just makes me love Ridley Scott even more. The man is a machine (maybe why he nailed the replicants so perfectly).

[Blumf]

I've not seen Ryan Gosling in much else bar this and 'Drive' and it did strike me both characters seemed to have similar arcs that he played almost exactly the same way.

Give The Nice Guys (2016) a try, he surprisingly good a physical comedy.

[The Culture Bunker]

The seven hour documentary about the making of the film is terrific - and just makes me love Ridley Scott even more. The man is a machine (maybe why he nailed the replicants so perfectly).

Is it really seven hours? I got the x5 DVD set with all the versions years back, which also had the documentary. You're right that it's fab, but in my head I remember watching it in one sitting...

Give The Nice Guys (2016) a try, he surprisingly good a physical comedy.

I think it's on Netflix, so I'll try to give it a try sometime. I was thinking where else I've seen Gosling, and remember he had a small part in 'Remember the Titans', where he was on the few actors involved even slightly close to being the high school age of the characters (fellow BR2049 cast member Wood Harris is in it, and he was over 30!).

[greenman]

You could argue Drive has typecast Gosling a bit, basically playing the same character in BR 2049, Place Beyond the Pines and Only God Forgives, I think he's good enough in the sequel but Ana de Armas is clearly rhe best performer and again I would like liked it more had the film stayed a smaller scale drama around those two. As it was her character ends up essentially being fridged to build up a confrontation with the villian at the end.

[MojoJojo]

Unpopular opinions ahoy:

I watched Blade Runner for the first time about 8 years ago, and I felt - and still feel - that it just doesn't quite work. I can understand all the reasons it inspires such devotion; the performances are brilliant, the production design is phenomenal, the effects haven't aged at all and the music is perfect. The script just lets it down. My overriding feeling is that it simply elides too much; there's a thin line between being mysterious and being incoherent, and Blade Runner spends most of its running time on the wrong side of that line.

I agree with a lot of this. For all the stick the commentary in the original cut gets, I suspect that the film would be ... not exactly confusing, but the setting would be distracting, and you'd be spending a lot of time trying to work out the rules of the world it's presenting. The director's cut is superior, but only once the original cut* has established the world.

I don't know if it's an answerable question now, the directors cut wasn't released first and now everyone who sees it has some idea of what it's about.

*or nowadays just being aware of it through the internet and stuff.

[The Culture Bunker]

I don't know if it's an answerable question now, the directors cut wasn't released first and now everyone who sees it has some idea of what it's about.

I'm not sure about that. I saw the Director's Cut first with no idea about the film: I just happened to be watching TV one night and it was on. The text at the start gives you the basic gist of the existence of replicants, that they were banned on Earth and Blade Runners hunted them down. Early on, the scene with his boss at the station fills in the background about Roy Batty and his crew.

[The Mollusk]

Give The Nice Guys (2016) a try, he surprisingly good a physical comedy.

Deffo. I was really surprised at how funny both he and Crowe could be, it's a great film.

[colacentral]

By its own standards I liked the sequel, I think definitely a level up from something like Inception but again I do think its a clear shift towards that kind of film, a more plot heavy action mystery with baddies. The K/Joi aspect of it and the formers life generally I did think marked it out as more substantive than Nolan and the performances generally rather more subtle then you'd expect from him.

It does really come down to your expectations for the films I spose, I wouldnt say the original is especially obtuse but its not the typical sci fi action thriller many viewers probably expect.

This is how I feel too, it's a different thing. It's like comparing Rocky 1 with Rocky 4.

[Mr Trumpet]

Unpopular opinions ahoy:

I watched Blade Runner for the first time about 8 years ago, and I felt - and still feel - that it just doesn't quite work. I can understand all the reasons it inspires such devotion; the performances are brilliant, the production design is phenomenal, the effects haven't aged at all and the music is perfect. The script just lets it down. My overriding feeling is that it simply elides too much; there's a thin line between being mysterious and being incoherent, and Blade Runner spends most of its running time on the wrong side of that line.

Blade Runner 2049, on the other hand, is a masterpiece, and easily one of my favourite films of recent times. It gets everything right that the first film did, but succeeds combining a stunning audio/visual experience with an expansive, emotional story.

Yeah I think the original is packed with great ideas, performances, visuals, music etc but somehow amounts to less than the sum of its parts. A Ridley Scott work, through and through. The sequel works better for me as a film. I'd have loved to have heard Johan Johansson's score for the project though.

[Cuellar]

Never seen it any good?

[BlodwynPig]

By its own standards I liked the sequel, I think definitely a level up from something like Inception but again I do think its a clear shift towards that kind of film, a more plot heavy action mystery with baddies. The K/Joi aspect of it and the formers life generally I did think marked it out as more substantive than Nolan and the performances generally rather more subtle then you'd expect from him.

It does really come down to your expectations for the films I spose, I wouldnt say the original is especially obtuse but its not the typical sci fi action thriller many viewers probably expect.

It's sci-fi noir, the only good sci-fi as you get older.

[touchingcloth]

Can anyone recommend any good apps for learning Cityspeak?

[St_Eddie]

Can anyone recommend any good apps for learning Cityspeak?

Press ALT+F4 to enable Cityspeak mode.

[thugler]

I did think the sequel started out well - Dave Bautista was very good in those opening scenes, but it was all downhill from there. The "bad" replicant was a very poor nemesis for hero, and you could have cut out all of Jared Leto's scenes and barely (if at all) affected the progression of the story.

I've not seen Ryan Gosling in much else bar this and 'Drive' and it did strike me both characters seemed to have similar arcs that he played almost exactly the same way.

I've seen it a few times now and I've pinpointed exactly where it goes downhill now. Pretty much once Harrison Ford comes into it, the stuff with Leto and the bad replicant gets more fleshed out and there is more of a focus on explosions and violence. It's also where the plot starts to get silly. The ending is just so dumb. The female replicant Luv we've previously observed to be a pretty ruthless killer, but of course Gosling is able to just strangle her to death because he's a MAN. As if we did not have enough scenes of women being strangled to death in films. The movie as a whole treats all it's female characters are bit weirdly actually. It's also a long fucking movie. The original Blade Runner still feels so breezy and flies by, it leaves you wanting more.

[buzby]

I thought they were quite deft in sidestepping that altogether. The sequel retained the ambiguity of the original film in that regard.

I'd agree with this - the sequel's narrative was constructed so that whichever side of the fence you came down on regarding the status of Deckard in the original it didn't matter.

I think I said all I wanted to say about the original and sequel in the sequel thread.

Regarding the version of the original I prefer (and I have watched them all, far too many times to remember), it would have to be The Final Cut over The Director's Cut. I'm not bothered about colour grading, but I prefer to see Joanna Cassidy acting Zhora's death rather than a stuntman.

[druss]

I watched Blade Runner for the first time about 8 years ago, and I felt - and still feel - that it just doesn't quite work. I can understand all the reasons it inspires such devotion; the performances are brilliant, the production design is phenomenal, the effects haven't aged at all and the music is perfect. The script just lets it down. My overriding feeling is that it simply elides too much; there's a thin line between being mysterious and being incoherent, and Blade Runner spends most of its running time on the wrong side of that line.

Which parts are incoherent? I would say if anything the script is a bit simplistic in terms of the basic narrative but there's so much else going on that for me it doesn't harm the film.

[Jerzy Bondov]

I think Ryan Gosling is brilliant in Blade Runner Part II. It might be his best performance. He builds so much tension playing up his emotionless persona in the first part of the film, and then at pretty much exactly the halfway mark (when he becomes convinced he's human) all that tension breaks. What's going on with his character in that scene is so complicated and he manages to express it all in his eyes, which is pretty apt for a Blade Runner film. I love the first film and while the second one is a different beast I think it's also a masterpiece. Both have their flaws of course but I don't care.

[greenman]

I think if you accept it as more of a plot heavy thriller and main issue with the sequel for me is that I don't think the K/Joi and Deckard plots entirely come together. I think it builds up a very interesting relationship between the former two were your not quite sure of the depth and power dynamics of it but then rather dismisses it in favour of the latter plot.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

I think Ryan Gosling is brilliant in Blade Runner Part II. It might be his best performance.

Bleh. I'm not convinced he's actually a particularly good dramatic actor. I think the reason he's so funny in The Nice Guys is that he can't play heightened emotion without sounding ridiculous. The rest of the time, he's just a blank canvas.

It is heartening to see that other people in this thread were as underwhelmed by BR2049 as I was.

[Jerzy Bondov]

Fair enough but you are sadly quite wrong. I'm sorry.

[El Unicornio, mang]

It is heartening to see that other people in this thread were as underwhelmed by BR2049 as I was.

What a strange thing to say!

They're both great, and that's the matter closed.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

You're a strange thing to say!

What happens to replicant cops when they're one week from retirement?

Is Deckard a replicant, or a replican?