BLADE RUNNER 2049 - Ryan Gosling & Harrison Ford

[bruceleegreyhulk]

I like the movie but I don't feel it's the greatest movie ever made or the best movie of 2017 . the big thing that stood out most about the movie to me was a found it to be bizarre, but not in bad way. overall I say this movie was B+ for me.

[TomServofan]

I like the movie but I don't feel it's the greatest movie ever made or the best movie of 2017 . the big thing that stood out most about the movie to me was a found it to be bizarre, but not in bad way. overall I say this movie was B+ for me.

Bizarre? no different than the original first movie?

[Iron_Legion87]

I made the mistake of going to see this with WITHOUT having seen the original movie. I did so because I read an article with the director of 2049 saying the movie was still accessible to newcomers to the Blade Runner franchise and the glowing reviews peaked my interest. I did read the Wiki page that gave me a brief run down of the plot of the original film before watching 2049. Unfortunately, I thought this movie was extremely slow paced and entirely too long. There were people in the theater that fell asleep and some that just simply walked out on this. I couldn't really blame them as I thought the film was pretty boring too. At least 30 minutes of this film could have been cut. I understand Blade Runner has never been an action movie, but this movie really could have used compelling action scenes to go along with it's philosophical story. If you were like me and hadn't seen the original film it was hard to really care about anything that was going on in this film. It doesn't help that you are stuck watching Ryan Gosling play a bland emotionless character for a large majority of the nearly 3 hour run time. The only things I enjoyed about this movie was the look and feel of the world, the cinematography, and score. Honestly, this movie has kind of turned me off from watching the original as I heard it's more of the same as this.

Besides the look and feel of the universe the film takes place in, I don't see why Blade Runner is considered this great cinematic masterpiece in the sci- fi genre. The story isn't very deep with dealing with things like " should we treat people differently because of their background or where they came? The human vs replicant stuff is just an allegory for slavery and prejudice. The common sense answer to those questions is no we shouldn't treat anyone differently lol. I don't know maybe I will give both the original and this sequel another chance sometime down the line, but right now I am just not a fan of this franchise. If I had to rate Blade Runner 2049 I would give it 2.5 out of 5 stars.

[Panic]

I really enjoyed it. Despite the run-time I was never bored and I was left at the end with things to think about. Considering how long it took me to appreciate the original film I think I need to see this one a few more times before I hail it as a classic, but overall I feel glad I saw this at the cinema rather than waiting for the Blu-ray release.

I've got to say it was a pleasure to see such a big budget movie take its time and let the characters breathe. I hope the Blu does well.

[Mia]

Part of that might be a couple of non-related factors.

Going to the movies is expensive, and cerebral films tend to translate well to the home theatre system. For the price of 2 tickets, a soda and popcorn, I can buy the Blu-Ray, a 2 liter of soda and a box of microwave popcorn, allowing me to watch the film more than once for the same price. Plus, I'll have 2-5 more bags of popcorn for later viewings.

Long films are often unpopular because there is no pause button in the theater - if you have to leave to use the bathroom, you'll miss something and it might actually be important - which for some people ruins the whole thing. I don't like the thought of spending $20 to leave angry (or deal with my wife leaving angry because she missed something important - like the dramatic payoff).

If I want to see something in the theatre I prefer something with visual spectacle where the experience is enhanced by being there - but without 3D because I personally hate wearing glasses over glasses, and my wife has a lazy-eye which was misdiagnosed as a child and left untreated. This renders her 100% unable to see a 3D film without getting a sharp headache.

I'm not going to laugh and wag my finger at you since I too suffer from impatience. I agree that movies are expensive (although most of the films I see are the cheaper mantinee's) but in addition to that most of what passes for storytelling are derivative paint-by number plots which you can pretty much figure out the plot half an hour in. The last two films I saw were Wonderwoman and Dunkirk, while admittedly pretty to look at were pretty much just okay but nothing I'd re-watch. I prefer to watch made for Cable mini series either from Netflix or the BBC, and don't go the the movies that much anymore. Unless it's something I really want to see or an SFX extraviganza which won't look good on tv, I just wait and borrow the DVD from the library.

But I like a good stories. But bottom line it, if the subject of the film is not to your taste and you didn't really like the first film at all you won't want to sit through it. When I saw it the 2nd time I did notice that many of the viewers seemed to men in their 50's,

What could have been cut from the film were the scenes with the holographic girlfriend. She's clearly supposed to be a way for K to bounce his thoughts against. But it could have been cut down to one or two scenes. The purpose of the call girl scene could have been done another way, and the scene with Deckard could easily have been cut down my 10 minutes.

[Mia]

If you were like me and hadn't seen the original film it was hard to really care about anything that was going on in this film. It doesn't help that you are stuck watching Ryan Gosling play a bland emotionless character for a large majority of the nearly 3 hour run time. The only things I enjoyed about this movie was the look and feel of the world, the cinematography, and score. Honestly, this movie has kind of turned me off from watching the original as I heard it's more of the same as this.

Besides the look and feel of the universe the film takes place in, I don't see why Blade Runner is considered this great cinematic masterpiece in the sci- fi genre. The story isn't very deep with dealing with things like " should we treat people differently because of their background or where they came? The human vs replicant stuff is just an allegory for slavery and prejudice. The common sense answer to those questions is no we shouldn't treat anyone differently lol. I don't know maybe I will give both the original and this sequel another chance sometime down the line, but right now I am just not a fan of this franchise. If I had to rate Blade Runner 2049 I would give it 2.5 out of 5 stars.

I was never a fan of the first film and frankly was underwhelmed when I originally saw it. I had not emotional attachment to any of the characters from the first film either. And I loved this film.

My main draw to this film was due to my interest in the HBO Westworld (which took inspiration from BR) and what makes us human and the human spirit and when does consciousness begin.

While the slavery allegory is blatant. That is far from the theme of the film. The link I provided above actually gives a comprehensive essay in what the film is really about.

[CentralPower]

What could have been cut from the film were the scenes with the holographic girlfriend. She's clearly supposed to be a way for K to bounce his thoughts against. But it could have been cut down to one or two scenes. The purpose of the call girl scene could have been done another way, and the scene with Deckard could easily have been cut down my 10 minutes.

Thoughts on the hologirl?

spoilers:

Her job in the movie was to add to the question of who/what is human or real. The first scenes with her accent her being unreal. She is a comforting, and adaptable image. Note her changing wardrobe, an attempt to match what K wants at that point. The holographic food she serves over-laps imperfectly with the less appealing real food that K is eating. The rooftop scene highlights that she is transparent in the right lighting. Later scenes are designed to make her more sympathetic, and to make the audience more inclined to see her as alive or real. Consider her insistence on going with K, and her apparent devotion to him. At that point, the prostitute's comment about there not being much to the holographic wife seems unduly harsh, especially from a robot hooker. (The exact phrasing escapes me. But, this is the scene when the hooker leaves K's apartment.) But, after she is destroyed (killed?), the idea of her being truly alive is again undermined. The billboard girl is clearly using the same template as the holographic wife. And, there are enough similarities to make it impossible to discount that the holographic wife was simply following a program.

end of spoilers

[WhichDrWhowins]

liked this a lot, not sure if its as good as the original classic