Blade Runner 2049 - Part 4

Rate the Movie

  • 10

  • 9

  • 8

  • 7

  • 6

  • 5

  • 4

  • 3

  • 2

  • 1

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah I think your right, I was probably expecting something akin to Aliens, Die Hard or Terminator in terms of action set pieces as I would have seen them all around about the same time and of course it is really nothing like those films at all. Maybe it was an age thing and as I understood films a bit more and realised films can have depths to them other than just things blowing up every five minutes it can make for just as good if not more rewarding experience.
 
Yep, same dude. Again, I think the movie gets unfairly perceived as a Harrison Ford action thriller and that does not properly characterize the film. There's definitely some thrills, especially in the climax but its by no means an action thriller. You go in expecting that and your gonna leave disappointed which I suspect is what happened when the movie was originally released in '82. The trailers probably painted it just like that and people felt misled.
 
kguillou said:
Yep, same dude. Again, I think the movie gets unfairly perceived as a Harrison Ford action thriller and that does not properly characterize the film. There's definitely some thrills, especially in the climax but its by no means an action thriller. You go in expecting that and your gonna leave disappointed which I suspect is what happened when the movie was originally released in '82. The trailers probably painted it just like that and people felt misled.
Click to expand...

The trailer for the original is actually reeeeaaallly slow and very reflective of the film itself in how it presents itself.

Very similar to trailers of old where they would practically give you the entire film, frame by frame in a 3-4 minute trailer package.
 
I don't think it's that easy to compare the original with 2049... despite them being set in the same universe and them having similar themes.

I don't think 2049 is a better film than the original. I think they are both bonafide masterpieces, but they have different approaches and goals.

Blade Runner is a more intimate film I'd say. It's small scale. It's a hard boiled detective story in a cyberpunk setting. Yea 2049 is also a hard boiled detective story, but it seems more sprawling and big, with much greater stakes. It brilliantly expands on the world of the original, but that doesn't make it inherently better.

And at the end of the day if the original didn't set that rock solid foundation, if it didn't create this interesting world with huge story telling potential... 2049 wouldn't exist at all. But credit where credit is due, Villeneuve and co nailed it. They organically expanded on the original and proved that a sequel to a 30 year old film can have real artistic merit.
 
Yeah they both compliment each other nicely, one doenst have to be viewed as better or worse than the other as they are both different enough to stand alone yet also compliment each other nicely.

The second even for me makes the original better in some small ways, like how Tyrell tells Deckard that Rachel is "special" and we see how that is so in 2049 when at the time that really could have meant anything.
 
Unfortunately I wasn't able to get the 4K steelbook that I wanted. It's now only available through store pick-up, and since the nearest BestBuy is 300 miles away that's not an option. Guess I'm stuck with the standard blu-ray steelbook (whose cover is less cool).
 
BR2049/Cowboy Bebop endings parallel. Spoilers if you haven't seen both...

SN0pThr.jpg
So that's why they got Shinichiro Watanabe to do that short. :o
 
Man in the Suit said:
BR2049/Cowboy Bebop endings parallel. Spoilers if you haven't seen both...

SN0pThr.jpg
So that's why they got Shinichiro Watanabe to do that short. :o
Click to expand...

As a big fan of that show I'm surprised I didn't catch that.
 
I couldn't get into Bebop for some reason. Too much style, not enough substance; the half hour format not conducive for good stories... Is the film more substantive?
 
BR 2049 is a great sequel, it is a good movie on its own even if you didn't saw the first one but what makes it great is the original which is just unmatchable.
This is not a fact but my point of view.
 
Anyone know if the BD release will have the Imax aspect ratio?
 
If they do the switching aspect ratio for that formatting gimmick on blu-ray then that might be the case.
 
TheVileOne said:
Interesting, but I don't find them that similar.
Click to expand...

Ok...I'm glad I wasn't the only one to think this. People tend to find parallels between things they like that aren't really there. I'm super guilty of it myself.
 
guitarsingerguy said:
Ok...I'm glad I wasn't the only one to think this. People tend to find parallels between things they like that aren't really there. I'm super guilty of it myself.
Click to expand...

I can see some parallels in like the loner enigmatic hero dying on steps, but I they were directed and put together in very different fashion.

Spike dies after a big shootout and fight with his nemesis out of revenge for his lover's death. His collapse is this big, emotional, dramatic event. It's pretty drawn out. Spike has been suffering from this sort of dream like state. Is what happened since his near-death experience a dream or is it real? The show plays around with a lot of those ideas.

Meanwhile in Blade Runner 2049, K has just saved Deckard and reunited him with his daughter. He faked Deckard's death as well. Rather than serve the Replicant resistance, K opted to help Deckard reunite with his daughter. He sacrificed himself in the service of a noble, unselfish act. And after that's done he lays back on the steps and dies, but at least he dies knowing that whatever he is, he did a very good, noble and utterly compassionate human thing to do.

Yeah some slight parallels and similar thematic elements and settings, but I just see them as very different endings.
 
There's also the fact that:
Watanabe hasn't even made up his mind as to whether Spike is really dead or not (or at least he hadn't the last time that I checked), whereas K is clearly dead.
 
Loki882 said:
There's also the fact that:
Watanabe hasn't even made up his mind as to whether Spike is really dead or not (or at least he hadn't the last time that I checked), whereas K is clearly dead.
Click to expand...
Right, the ending is a little ambiguous. Even the script doesn't officially say that Spike dies, just that he "falls." And then you can argue Spike has been dead the whole series, and the show is sort of just like this purgatory, dream-like state he's been in the whole time. A part of you does sort of want to believe that Spike lives and does survive though :) .
 
He also wanted LA built as models to give the city the texture and "realism" that the city has in Blade Runner 2019.
 
Proving once more that models still look better than CGI. There is a weight to the city shots that is not there with contemporary Hollywood pictures that us CGI.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
Armitage III and Blade Runner 2049
Replies
4
Views
2K
Hordakfan
H
T
  • Locked
Blade Runner 2049 - Part 3
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
95K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Locked
Blade Runner 2049 - Part 2
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
115K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Locked
Blade Runner 2049 - Part 1
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
111K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Poll Poll
Scream 4!!!!! - Part 4
16 17 18
Replies
442
Views
38K
John Locke
John Locke

Staff online

Members online

Total: 4,495 (members: 24, guests: 4,471)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,388
Messages
22,095,719
Members
45,891
Latest member
Purplehazesus

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"