Blade Runner 2049 - Part 4

[Web-Head]

This might be the first 4K film I buy. Don't have the set-up yet, but I'm planning ahead and don't want to re-buy it later (it's nice that a regular blu-ray is included, too).

Funny enough the only 4K TV I have in the house is the smallest one and one I rarely watch TV on.

It'll also be my first 4K blu-ray

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I started buying 4K blu rays earlier this year. I have e no TV or 4K player, but while a blu ray comes with them I thought I would try and get ahead of the curve.

 

[Spider-Fan]

For new releases, I am doing that now. Unless the Blu Ray is significantly cheaper. Like, $30 4k vs $10 Blu Ray, I am going Blu Ray

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

For new releases, I am doing that now. Unless the Blu Ray is significantly cheaper. Like, $30 4k vs $10 Blu Ray, I am going Blu Ray

Ah, here in the U.K there is usually no more than a £5 difference. So not much, meaning lately it’s all been 4K for me.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Ah, here in the U.K there is usually no more than a £5 difference. So not much, meaning lately it’s all been 4K for me.

That's how it is here too, this mainly applies to movies getting a 4K release now, but had an existing Blu Ray release. Like Ghostbusters 1 and 2 for example. Here, I got the Blu Ray 2 pack for like $10, but the 4K release would have cost me $30. On that, going Blu Ray. I don't have 4K TV or player or anything, so Blu Ray works for me.

 

[Elayis]

Yeah, there were a couple films recently that I wanted to get the 4K copy, but the price difference was too much. With 2049, it's only $5 more so I can swing that.

 

[:eek:]

“Blade Runner” Had A Bunch Of CG Gosling

http://www.darkhorizons.com/blade-runner-had-a-bunch-of-cg-gosling/

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

That's how it is here too, this mainly applies to movies getting a 4K release now, but had an existing Blu Ray release. Like Ghostbusters 1 and 2 for example. Here, I got the Blu Ray 2 pack for like $10, but the 4K release would have cost me $30. On that, going Blu Ray. I don't have 4K TV or player or anything, so Blu Ray works for me.

Yeah I am with you on that

 

[Hurm...]

http://www.indiewire.com/2017/12/ridley-scott-blade-runner-2049-box-office-bomb-1201910964/

Scott speaking about why Blade Runner 2049 bombed:

“It’s slow. It’s slow. Long. Too long. I would have taken out half an hour,” Scott told Al Arabiya. The length is something Villeneuve also mentioned during an interview with Yahoo! Entertainment.

“I’m still digesting it,” Villeneuve said. “It had the best [reviews] of my life. I never had a movie welcomed like that. At the same time, the box office in the United States was a disappointment, that’s the truth, because those movies are expensive. It will still make tons of money but not enough. The thing I think is that, it was maybe because people were not familiar enough with the universe. And the fact the movie’s long. I don’t know, it’s still a mystery to me.”

I'm so happy Scott didn't direct this. Villeneuve's understanding of the first film and what made it such an amazing cinematic experience (such as the confidence in its slow pace) is what benefitted this movie. The Scott of 2017 is not the Scott of 1982 (although I love some of his new films -- like All the Money in the World). He would not have released a product on par with Villeneuve's work here.

 

[Elayis]

http://www.indiewire.com/2017/12/ridley-scott-blade-runner-2049-box-office-bomb-1201910964/

Scott speaking about why Blade Runner 2049 bombed:


I'm so happy Scott didn't direct this. Villeneuve's understanding of the first film and what made it such an amazing cinematic experience (such as the confidence in its slow pace) is what benefitted this movie. The Scott of 2017 is not the Scott of 1982 (although I love some of his new films -- like All the Money in the World). He would not have released a product on par with Villeneuve's work here.

Yep. Scott has taken a more workmanlike approach in the last decade or so. It's almost like he forgot what making movies is all about. He's more interested in having a quick shoot and coming in under budget than saying anything meaningful.

And with Covenant it's clear he doesn't understand what people didn't like about Prometheus, and instead attempted to guess (badly) what the audience wanted. I've always admired his craft and attention to detail, but he was only ever as good as the script, and these days it's almost as if he actively works to undermine the writing.

 

[Mandon Knight]

When it's regarded as 'bombing' at the box office, I am not entirely sure what people were expecting to bring in, by way of numbers. This was never going to be a 'big return' on the production costs.

It's a deep, evolving story that takes strands from an equally thought provoking film, it's not a summer blockbuster vehicle.

As is stands it's...

Worldwide $258,245,550, that's not bad at all given the themes and so called 'inaccessibility' of the film.

 

[Schlosser85]

2049 isn’t any slower than the first movie, IMO, so Scott criticizing it for that is a little confusing.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Ridley Scott, the man who typically can’t make a movie under 3 hours, is complaining about a movie’s length.

 

[Hurm...]

Good point! Kingdom of Heaven and Exodus: Gods and Kings suffer greatly from cut material.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Yeah, exactly. I wish the reporter interviewing him would have brought that up. It would have been funny to hear his reaction.

 

[Hurm...]

Not to mention, American Gangster's theatrical release is about the length of 2049.

 

[Mandon Knight]

For me, Scott 'worked' when he was limited by budget and resources, the less he has, the better his films are. Now, as he's established and is working on a larger scale, the more he has, the more he messes up.

He seems to have gotten lost in his own mechanics of the key things he was always good at, detail, overseeing the script, character motivation. All those elements he seems to have 'let go' and made way, replaced, for bombastic style and aimless belief of what 'is' not what 'was' about his previous works.

 

[Kane52630]

 

[David H.]

 

[TheVileOne]

When it's regarded as 'bombing' at the box office, I am not entirely sure what people were expecting to bring in, by way of numbers. This was never going to be a 'big return' on the production costs.

It's a deep, evolving story that takes strands from an equally thought provoking film, it's not a summer blockbuster vehicle.

As is stands it's...

Worldwide $258,245,550, that's not bad at all given the themes and so called 'inaccessibility' of the film.

Hundreds of millions were spent on it, so the studios and financiers were clearly expecting more and probably over-estimated Blade Runner's popularity.

 

[Brother Jack]

I'm just glad this movie turned out as well as it did. I think this is about as good as prospective sequel to Blade Runner could have ever been.

 

[Mandon Knight]

Hundreds of millions were spent on it, so the studios and financiers were clearly expecting more and probably over-estimated Blade Runner's popularity.

This, more than anything I'd reckon, in terms of returning 'fans'. Maybe the fan base figures did not support the thought/view that they would be enough.

 

[Marvolo]

Ridley Scott, the man who typically can’t make a movie under 3 hours, is complaining about a movie’s length.

I think you have Ridley Scott confused with someone else. Only one of Scott's films is 3 hours and that was a home video extended cut and not a theatrical cut. He's never releaased a 160+ minute theatrical cut.

 

[Visceral]

A Meditation on Consciousness:

One of my favorite scenes is the one in which K is analyzing Rachael's genetic code and Joi is hovering over him. And she says something to the extent of "a human beings destiny is decided a code made of 6 different digits while her destiny decided by a code of two digits". Comparing DNA genetic code to her Binary code.

This caused me to think of a few different things. Blade Runner is a meditation on consciousness. So the idea that consciousness spurs from a code interests me.

The first thing it caused me to think about was a quote from Alan Moore who stated something such as: "When he was writing From Hell, One word balloon in From Hell completely hijacked my life ... A character says something like, 'The one place gods in arguably exist is in the human mind'. After I wrote that, I realized I'd accidentally made a true statement, and now I'd have to rearrange my entire life around it. The only thing that seemed to really be appropriate was to become a magician." Moore associates magic very much with writing; "I believe that magic is art, and that art, whether that be music, writing, sculpture, or any other form, is literally magic. Art is, like magic, the science of manipulating symbols, words or images, to achieve changes in consciousness ... Indeed to cast a spell is simply to spell, to manipulate words, to change people's consciousness, and this is why I believe that an artist or writer is the closest thing in the contemporary world to a shaman."

He then said that, "Does anything human control our destinies? No. Does this mean that God does? No, for all I know, God might just be a simple, two-line, iterative equation, with no more awareness of itself than that". "A god is the idea of a god. The idea of a god is a god"

The idea of consciousness arriving from coded information reminded me of a Planet of the apes script that was almost made in the early 90s. It involved a scientist deriving a mathematical equation from the book of Genesis and using that equation as an experiment on apes. Accidentally giving them consciousness. Kabbalahic Jews and even some christian theologians believed the bible did hold many codes an numeric symbols. The book of Genesis is a description of each persons consciousness coming into being as a person is born.

"In the beginning, there is just universe. There is no us. There is just God in His or Her universe. Then we separate God from the universe until we are trapped in it, in the universe we have created."

Being born thus has a lot to do with the creation of consciousness, actual intelligence...and possibly a soul.

 

[Deck Rickard]

I think you have Ridley Scott confused with someone else. Only one of Scott's films is 3 hours and that was a home video extended cut and not a theatrical cut. He's never releaased a 160+ minute theatrical cut.

That’s true but at least in certain cases like Kingdom of Heaven, the theatrical cut is vastly inferior to the director’s cut, and his fans blame the studio for interfering. Instead, perhaps they should consider that Scott occasionally has problems making a complete film that fits into a standard timeframe.

And many of Scott’s films clock in at around 150 minutes, which is only about 13 minutes less than Blade Runner 2049.

I don’t know. It seems to me that Scott is just trying to wash his hands of this, blaming Villanueve for the choices he made rather than accepting that his original film, though regarded as a highly influential classic, isn’t as popular as they all thought it was. He also may be a little bitter about how many people have claimed that 2049 is better than its predecessor.