Blade Runner 2049 - Part 3

[InvisibleWoman]

Amazing. Very cool described. Glad that and others people like love story Key and Joi too. For me their story is probably most interesting and emotional in movie.

Yeah it was really touching. I found Racheal and Deckard in the first movie to be somewhat rushed and their love scene to be a tad uncomfortable... for obvious reasons. However I found K and Joi to be really sweet and almost innocent. She - ironically - made him "human".

There was so much depth to this movie. You could literally be picking at its layers forever.

 

[Iceman]

Thanks! I loved it (THANK GOD - imagine if I'd hated it after all that?!)

Excellent!

I did have a different perspective...

Spoiler

...in regards to the bit towards the end when K saw the giant Joi hologram. A lot of people interpreted this as K's realisation that Joi was just telling him what he wanted to hear etc and it was his realisation that it wasn't real. I actually thought it was to mirror the earlier scene where Deckard was presented with version two of Rachael. She was to all intensive purposes the same Rachael... but not to Deckard. I think the same thing happened with K. He was presented with Joi. He could have had her back. However it wouldn't have been HIS Joi. I took it as his confirmation that what he had with her and felt for her and how she felt for him in return WAS real. But then I'm a hopeless romantic

I think your own Rachael and Joi which have the same shared experiences and memories from real encounters with you (rather than programming) are definitely personal to you and that makes it real to an extent.

 

[dark_b]

[YT]ZTj83HN8m3M[/YT]

 

[TheVileOne]

The only thing I really agree with Mark Kermode there is that this sort of proves that critic reviews or Rotten Tomato score doesn't determine a film's box office success. So you can't blame Rotten Tomatoes for "ruining the industry."

His point about gender politics with how it relates to this movie, not sure that makes any sense. I've hardly seen widespread criticism about this movie's failure to represent gender in a science fiction story set in a fictional future.

The R-rating thing? Um two letters, IT. I think it was the running time that hurt it more than anything, especially considering it's a sequel to a movie that was considered a little slow at under two hours. But even films with long running times have proven to be very successful in the past.

I think the best point that he could've drawn out more is that the original wasn't that popular. The original, which is a cult classic, flopped at the box office. And while it took on new life after, it was never a huge success in theaters. I think in many degrees, the widespread popularity of Blade Runner was overestimated. The movie probably should've been made for half the budget.

I don't think it will have the longevity of the original, but I do see it enduring as a decent companion piece.

 

[InvisibleWoman]

The only thing I really agree with Mark Kermode there is that this sort of proves that critic reviews or Rotten Tomato score doesn't determine a film's box office success. So you can't blame Rotten Tomatoes for "ruining the industry."

His point about gender politics with how it relates to this movie, not sure that makes any sense. I've hardly seen widespread criticism about this movie's failure to represent gender in a science fiction story set in a fictional future.

The R-rating thing? Um two letters, IT. I think it was the running time that hurt it more than anything, especially considering it's a sequel to a movie that was considered a little slow at under two hours. But even films with long running times have proven to be very successful in the past.

I think the best point that he could've drawn out more is that the original wasn't that popular. The original, which is a cult classic, flopped at the box office. And while it took on new life after, it was never a huge success in theaters. I think in many degrees, the widespread popularity of Blade Runner was overestimated. The movie probably should've been made for half the budget.

I don't think it will have the longevity of the original, but I do see it enduring as a decent companion piece.

I do wonder if the marketing had something to do with it. When I saw it yesterday, I was in a packed cinema and yet I'm pretty sure I was only one of three women there. This one just hasn't been pulling in the women. I know growing up I always thought of the first one as a "boy" movie and it didn't appeal to me. I finally watched it a few years ago and loved it.

I think over here in the UK, the movie has legs. Like I said, I was in a packed cinema yesterday so it is pulling people in. I think it'll be a slow burner.

 

[Faora]

Yeah it was really touching. I found Racheal and Deckard in the first movie to be somewhat rushed and their love scene to be a tad uncomfortable... for obvious reasons. However I found K and Joi to be really sweet and almost innocent. She - ironically - made him "human".

There was so much depth to this movie. You could literally be picking at its layers forever.

In love scene I was really hoping that Joi finally

Spoiler

materialized.

Wow.

 

[BlackFox]

The ladies of Bladerunner

 

[TheVileOne]

I do wonder if the marketing had something to do with it. When I saw it yesterday, I was in a packed cinema and yet I'm pretty sure I was only one of three women there. This one just hasn't been pulling in the women. I know growing up I always thought of the first one as a "boy" movie and it didn't appeal to me. I finally watched it a few years ago and loved it.

I think over here in the UK, the movie has legs. Like I said, I was in a packed cinema yesterday so it is pulling people in. I think it'll be a slow burner.

Seems to be doing OK overseas, but not all that big.

Not sure you can pin this on marketing either. The word was definitely out on this one. The trailers didn't really give the plot twists away, though they did show some footage from key scenes in the third act.

The world is such a bleak place right now, maybe people weren't in the mood for some bleak sci-fi. Besides that I just think there's never a single reason for why a movie like this doesn't do well. You could probably think of a million different little reasons.

 

[BlackFox]

The only thing I really agree with Mark Kermode there is that this sort of proves that critic reviews or Rotten Tomato score doesn't determine a film's box office success. So you can't blame Rotten Tomatoes for "ruining the industry."

His point about gender politics with how it relates to this movie, not sure that makes any sense. I've hardly seen widespread criticism about this movie's failure to represent gender in a science fiction story set in a fictional future.

The R-rating thing? Um two letters, IT. I think it was the running time that hurt it more than anything, especially considering it's a sequel to a movie that was considered a little slow at under two hours. But even films with long running times have proven to be very successful in the past.

I think the best point that he could've drawn out more is that the original wasn't that popular. The original, which is a cult classic, flopped at the box office. And while it took on new life after, it was never a huge success in theaters. I think in many degrees, the widespread popularity of Blade Runner was overestimated. The movie probably should've been made for half the budget.

I don't think it will have the longevity of the original, but I do see it enduring as a decent companion piece.

I did read one article saying that Bladerunner 2049 was sexist, granted it was only one, but they argued that the women were portrayed as a male fantasy, submissive and often under the control of males in the film. Now I think a lot of the issues revolved around Joi being that type the most but I think they sort of missed the point about her character completely, I'm not going to bash anyones view if they feel the film was like that, but to me [BLACKOUT]Joi was deliberately a male fantasy because ultimately she wasnt real and represented a "fantasy" that didnt actually exist, that was the whole point to me. [/BLACKOUT]Plus I feel they glossed over certain facts that went against this view, such as K being under the direct control of Robin Wrights character for example but in this day and age people see all sorts of issues in things, sometimes they may be there, sometimes not, its the modern world we live in I guess.

 

[Luigi]

 

[TheVileOne]

I did read one article saying that Bladerunner 2049 was sexist, granted it was only one, but they argued that the women were portrayed as a male fantasy, submissive and often under the control of males in the film. Now I think a lot of the issues revolved around Joi being that type the most but I think they sort of missed the point about her character completely, I'm not going to bash anyones view if they feel the film was like that, but to me [BLACKOUT]Joi was deliberately a male fantasy because ultimately she wasnt real and represented a "fantasy" that didnt actually exist, that was the whole point to me. [/BLACKOUT]Plus I feel they glossed over certain facts that went against this view, such as K being under the direct control of Robin Wrights character for example but in this day and age people see all sorts of issues in things, sometimes they may be there, sometimes not, its the modern world we live in I guess.

Yeah one article. And I'm still not sure if that's a cause for rejoicing as he expresses either. To me it's hardly a reason you can pin down for the film's lack of success, especially when you have a star like Ryan Gosling, who is a sex symbol/heart throb to female audiences. It wasn't something other critics were really saying or pointing either. I've not really seen evidence that audiences felt that way.

The Robin Wright character, Toshi, is a good example. She's more than just K's boss, she basically controls if he lives or dies or gets "retired." He's basically an attack dog for her.

Also Dr. Ana Stelline and Freysa.

This is still a fictional story at the end of the day. I do not believe artists have an obligation to conform to others' beliefs if they do not wish to. Especially when there's proof of how erroneous these claims are.

Also, are you really going to label Denis Villeneuve, the director of Arrival, as sexist? Really? I get people are very sensitive about identity politics these days, but just because the lead in Blade Runner 2049 isn't female doesn't mean it should be branded as sexist.

To me it's like saying the original is chauvinist and misogynistic because of what Deckard does to Zora and Pris without regarding as to why those moments are in the film and how they affect Deckard and the story.

 

[OfficerK]

Yeah one article. And I'm still not sure if that's a cause for rejoicing as he expresses either. To me it's hardly a reason you can pin down for the film's lack of success, especially when you have a star like Ryan Gosling, who is a sex symbol/heart throb to female audiences. It wasn't something other critics were really saying or pointing either. I've not really seen evidence that audiences felt that way.

The Robin Wright character, Toshi, is a good example. She's more than just K's boss, she basically controls if he lives or dies or gets "retired." He's basically an attack dog for her.

Also Dr. Ana Stelline and Freysa.

This is still a fictional story at the end of the day. I do not believe artists have an obligation to conform to others' beliefs if they do not wish to. Especially when there's proof of how erroneous these claims are.

Also, are you really going to label Denis Villeneuve, the director of Arrival, as sexist? Really? I get people are very sensitive about identity politics these days, but just because the lead in Blade Runner 2049 isn't female doesn't mean it should be branded as sexist.

To me it's like saying the original is chauvinist and misogynistic because of what Deckard does to Zora and Pris without regarding as to why those moments are in the film and how they affect Deckard and the story.

Agree with all your points. It seems like in this day and age no matter what you do or what a film contains someone out there will get upset. I don't think a fictional artistic vision should have to conform to some kind of expected social values or have to hold back on certain ideas. But i'm voting with my money, i'm not paying for any more movies until TLJ and Annihilation. And there's a good chance i'm not gonna like TLJ as well...if it's anything like the past two star wars movies.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Seems to be doing OK overseas, but not all that big.

Not sure you can pin this on marketing either. The word was definitely out on this one. The trailers didn't really give the plot twists away, though they did show some footage from key scenes in the third act.

The world is such a bleak place right now, maybe people weren't in the mood for some bleak sci-fi. Besides that I just think there's never a single reason for why a movie like this doesn't do well. You could probably think of a million different little reasons.

As much as I loved those first three trailers, if you look at it from average Joe movie goer, could you tell me what this movie would be about? Detach yourself from your knowledge and fandom of the first film.

From those two trailers, it looks like a guy has to find another guy because of something. I get it's a mystery and you don't want to give everything away, but I thought they withheld a little too much. I just don't think the audience could tell what it was. Audiences seek out what interests them and it's hard to be interested in something when that thing isn't really known.

 

[OfficerK]

I'd say a sci fi mystery, but maybe they figured the inclusion of Harrison, Gosling, Leto etc somewhat well known dudes would carry it as far as box office performance? I mean Gosling is generally known for doing pretty damn good movies consistently for years, and that hasn't changed. But maybe they overestimated his box office draw.

I did appreciate them respecting the viewer and not spoiling the hell out of it though. I mean look at Alien Covenant, they spoiled the **** out of that before it came out. And it hurt the experience for me. As I was watching all these things unfold in BR2049 it really felt exciting and fresh. I had a couple issues with foreshadowing here and there but those things kind of amped up the anxiety cause you knew bad stuff would happen eventually.

I'm not sure stating

Spoiler

K is a replicant, in the trailers would have helped. Cause those general moviegoers still wouldn't know what that even means. It wouldn't have helped anything. And there are still unanswered questions in this movie. But thats part of what makes it good, it keeps you thinking and using your imagination. Apparently that is far too much to ask from an average joe american viewer though.

 

[Doctor Jones]

They should have revealed

Spoiler

K being a replicant. It was always very obvious to me. It's the status quo and put up front of the movie.

. They shouldn't have focused too much on Ford either. This isn't TFA where it's Han Solo and it's an iconic character. I bet they were trying to capitalize on that. It made it seem like this would be a buddy cop movie where there's some conspiracy going on.

 

[TheVileOne]

Besides the K thing, realistically what else would've really been OK for them to show in the trailers? I mean the central thing they are looking for, the secret implied by the trailers, is also revealed in the first act.

 

[Doctor Jones]

That's the thing, I was wondering if they should reveal that, but... why not? That's the premise. What and how the rest happens can be kept a mystery. You can sell people on the idea that

Spoiler

replicants and humans can breed

That's an intriguing idea people can latch and want to find out. The movie means so much more than that, that the more important things wouldn't be given away.

It wouldn't have been bad for them to give away

Spoiler

Joe being a hologram either.

I feel like K

Spoiler

and his journey and Rick's daughter should have been the things to be kept secret. Those mattered more to the story and the meaning behind the film.

So you sell this movie on

Spoiler

A replicant discovering something new about his own kind with the focus on having to find the mystery behind that and then you tease Harrison Ford in a mysterious way for his involvement. You get the full scope of what Wallace wants to and the stakes of that.

 

[TheVileOne]

Yeah I'm not sure because then people probably would've been able to piece a lot of the plot together and Ford's role in it.

I'm also not sure you can pinpoint the box office disappointment based on lack of information from the trailers alone. No one was really complaining about the trailers several months ago.

 

[weezerspider]

Yeah if they revealed what the plot was, my first guess at Ford's role and Gosling's role would have been pretty damn accurate aside from the twist near the end.

 

[Mandon Knight]

It's got over the $160 million World Wide figure....

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=bladerunnersequel.htm

 

[Faora]

In this weekend I must see this amazing movie again).

 

[Brother Jack]

I'm gonna try and see it again this weekend. Unfortunately I think I missed my window to see it in IMAX. Those screens are shifting over to that Geostorm nonsense.

 

[I Am The Knight]

I'm gonna try and see it again this weekend. Unfortunately I think I missed my window to see it in IMAX. Those screens are shifting over to that Geostorm nonsense.

That's a travesty.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

That's a travesty.

Most big Hollywood movies usually gets a 2 week window to keep most of their IMAX/PLF screens before the next big budget release takes those away. It's par for the course. Unless it's a Nolan film or a special event type film aided by good circumstances (Gravity, Life of Pi, The Force Awakens), movies really don't get a big window for IMAX viewing. Plus BR2049's OW IMAX share was close to 16% and that's lower than percentage share of bigger Sci-Fi pics like (Gravity, Interstellar or The Martian). So there's really no extra incentive for the theater owners to keep BR2049 in IMAX screens in it's 3rd weekend.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I take it that you haven't seen this yet https://www.instagram.com/p/BZF-fooDCIv/?hl=en&taken-by=ana_d_armas