Blade Runner 2049

EightImmortals on 07/10/2017 - 19:16
Last edited 07/10/2017 - 19:36 by 1 other user

Just thought I'd throw this quick review out there for anyone who's sitting on the fence. Go see it. ​
:)​

Speaking as someone who is very cynical about modern movies I came out of the theatre feeling very happy I chose to see this movie on the big screen. While the story itself did not 'need' to be told I was very happy with it, it added on nicely to the original without taking anything away from the first film. The visuals were fantastic and the world was well realised. No spoilers, but do not judge this movie by the trailers it is not a mindless Hollywood shoot 'em up action film made for the mindless masses with no attention span. Running time came in at just under 3 hours but I was never bored or fidgity. The narrative was well paced and held my interest for the whole time. In fact the Mrs and our son enjoyed it as well and it's rare that we all agree on a movies worth. Even Ryan Gosling did a good job and I usually find him a bit annoying for some reason.​

Entertainment

Comments

  • [Deactivated] on 07/10/2017 - 19:16
    +1

    But I didn't like the original blade runner, and I hate Ryan Gosling.

    • [Deactivated] on 07/10/2017 - 20:23
      +2

      I had high expectations for the original. it just felt pointless and all over the place.

  • EightImmortals on 07/10/2017 - 19:23
    +1

    duplicate

  • PJC on 07/10/2017 - 19:42

    Was the music good? Vangelis impressed me with the original.

    • EightImmortals on 07/10/2017 - 20:00
      +3

      Not quite as good as Vangelis (who is though? :) ) but it was very similar and worked well with the movie. FWIW one of the most empty periods of my life was waiting the 15 years or so for the original Vangelis soundtrack to be released. :)

  • the cheeky dropbear on 07/10/2017 - 19:42

    Dennis Villenueve's films are pretty solid; Sicario, Prisoners, Enemy etc

    • AlienC on 07/10/2017 - 21:36

      Sicario was really awesome. I got Colombiana vibes.

  • havebeerbelywillsumo on 07/10/2017 - 19:51

    Thanks eightimmortals.

    Your review pushed me into looking at the movie on the Criticker site where overall views could be summed up as this surprised that it was so good, not without faults but overall stands up very well when put next to the original Blade Runner, very few "hated it" mentions.

    I was going to skip this as "pointless remake" - without looking into it, mea culpa.

    • EightImmortals on 07/10/2017 - 20:03
      +3

      Yeah I had my fears as well. I first saw Blade Runner when it was released in the cinemas back in the 80's and have bought the VHS, DVD and blu-ray since so I am a pretty big fan of the original. Those fears were totally unjustified which was a huge surprise given most movies these days.

      • rompastompa on 07/10/2017 - 21:47

        Why are they called blade runners? I only saw Ford running while holding a gun..?

        • pegaxs on 08/10/2017 - 08:39
          +4

          Don’t know if serious question (and I doubt it is, so this is for the other people who will be curious after your comment.), but basically, they (director/producers) wanted a cool job title for Deckard and what he did and “detective” didn’t really fit what he did, ie: culling replicants. Someone threw out the name of a novella he had seen called “Blade Runners” and Ridley Scott said “awesome name” and that’s why it’s called Blade Runner.

          Nothing to do with blades. Nothing to do with running. I read the book years ago that the movie is based off, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and at no time can I recall them using the term “Blade Runner” to describe Deckard or his job in it.

          The name “Blade Runner” was taken from a book by William Burroughs called Blade Runner: A Movie that has nothing to do with the movie plot other than sharing its name.

        • bluesky on 09/10/2017 - 19:03
          +1

          @pegaxs:

          …the movie is based off, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep

          I only just recently found out some of my favourite movies, including this, and Minority Report, to be based on the works of Philip K. Dick. Fans of this genre will definitely find Electric Dreams, the new series based on his short stories, interesting.

  • [Deactivated] on 07/10/2017 - 20:29
    -4

    This site should change the name.

  • pegaxs on 08/10/2017 - 08:03

    But, but but… Ryan Gosling. Ewww. It’s like putting Justin Timberlake in the main roll of a horror, thriller, serial killer slasher movie. I was so excited for this movie when it was first speculated about years ago. And then as it came to life and Ryan Gosling was said to be in it, I was hoping he was going to be a replicant that got blown up.

    I don’t care how good the movie is, but 3 hours of watching him in a movie would be unbearable.

    • Ughhh on 09/10/2017 - 17:31

      Looked like someone's jealous ;)

      • pegaxs on 09/10/2017 - 19:40
        +1

        I am a little jealous of the director and producers. Because if I was in their position, I would have “lost” Ryan Gosling’s CV and filed in it the “yeah, nah” pile…

        I’m jealous that they had the chance to say “No F#%king way!” and didn’t exercise it while casting actors. Colin Firth would have been a better choice than Ryan Gosling.

        The roll suits a hard edge, grumpy, nasty looking down on his luck type of actor, not some women’s wet dream human drama pretty poster boy.

        I would have liked an actor that look like he had actually killed people, than a guy that looks like he spent more time manscaping and lotioning himself before leaving the house,

        • Ughhh on 09/10/2017 - 21:53

          Colin Firth is a bit too old for that role, they would have to say ( Possible SPOILER ALERT) the mysterious baby was born 60 years ago. Imo it wouldn't have the same feel, the intimate scene wouldn't be the same. No one wants to see a 60yo man getting it on with a girl who can be his daughter/grand daughters age.

          Have you seen "Only God Forgives" and "Drive"? Ryan Gosling is great at playing as a Playboy or as a psycho killer. His eyes says so much, which helps in character development.

        • bluesky on 09/10/2017 - 22:18

          @Ughhh: He is very good in Lars and the Real Girl too, for which he was nominated for many awards (including Golden Globe, Screen Actors Guild Award), playing a delusional young man wanting a deep meaningful relationship with a doll. Very funny movie.

        • pegaxs on 09/10/2017 - 22:26

          @Ughhh:

          For my apology, you are going to have to read below. In my waking stupor after doing night shift, my mind thought Colin Farrell but my fingers typed Colin Firth. Don’t ask, it’s a less than 6 hours of sleep thing I do. Oh, that, and getting old.

          And for the record, almost any actor in the world would have been a better choice than Ryan Gosling.

          Yes, I saw Drive, well some of it before I turned it off. Ever feel bad after you pirate a movie, watch it and instantly feel regret for the bandwidth you wasted on it and not for ripping off the movie studio that made it? That was Drive for me.

        • Ughhh on 09/10/2017 - 23:03

          @pegaxs:

          With respect, I still disagree. Collin Farrell is a good actor, no doubt about that, but his "look" is different. Imo, he has a rebellious look, one who doesn't take orders nor can sit still for hours, which a replicant cop is supposed to do.

          Ryan Gosling won all those awards for a reason and are very much deserved. He's talented and attractive af.

        • pegaxs on 10/10/2017 - 17:58

          @Ughhh:

          No problem if you disagree. I can see that he appeals to some and not to others. He would not have been my first pick, let alone even on my list.

          I have only seen the trailers, as I am on night shift until the weekend when I will get time to see the movie, but so far from the trailers, I have been less than impressed with the portions I have seem him in. I just hope that in seeing the movie, his casting in this roll will reaveal itself to be more suitable, but I have my doubts.

          I’m not saying he is a bad actor, I’m just saying he is not who I would ever have pictured in this roll. But then again I thought the same thing of Keanu Reeves when The Matrix came out and all I could think of was “Bill and Teds”. Now it’s one of my favourite film series to watch.

          I hope to be proved wrong about Gosling and would happily eat humble pie if he turns out to be awesome in this movie.

    • bluesky on 09/10/2017 - 19:38
      +1

      Typecasting is natural, I used to think the same way you do. But found out I was wrong on a number of occasions. In fact, many actors, when given the opportunity, can do much more than what their current works demonstrate.

      One example I can think of is Matthew McConoughey. Because he was in a few lightweight rom-coms, it was hard to take his acting seriously. Then, he appeared in Mud 2012, and True Detective, providing rather compelling performances. He later said in an interview, that as an actor, he risked such typecasting, taking on projects to pay the bills, knowing full well it was not doing that much for his bio.

      • pegaxs on 09/10/2017 - 19:50

        I have to give you that. Matthew McConoughey was great and an unexpected surprise just how good he was in True Detectives. It was hard to believe it was him. I’ve watched that series 3 times already and started it again recently. Also add Dallas Buyers Club to that list. It was a role I found hard to think of any one else playing that roll.

        But! Vince Vaugh in the second one. Absolute trash. Colin Firth, Spot on for what I expected his character to be. Vince has done too many Dodgeball style movies and in season two was cringeworthy at times.

        The difference is that McConoughey looks nothing like his usual self in the first one and pulled it off. Vaughn looks like his usual goofy Wedding Crashers self.

        Ryan is Blade Runner’s Vince Vaughn. Not their McConoughey

        • bluesky on 09/10/2017 - 20:16
          +1

          … Colin Firth, Spot on for what I expected his character to be

          Think you mean Colin Farrell …

          But funnily, Colin Firth, whose role as Mr Darcy, in BBC's Pride And Prejudice elevated him to stardom, (and to date, still the definitive Mr Darcy), was so afraid of such typecasting, that he expressed his wish not to be associated with Pride and Prejudice forever :-)

        • pegaxs on 09/10/2017 - 20:46
          +1

          @bluesky:

          Hahah… yes. That’s who I meant.

          Night shift does that to me sometimes. Thanks for correcting me. :)

  • [Deactivated] on 08/10/2017 - 08:17
    +3

    It was a really good film but too long. The dialogue was slow and unnecessarily drawn out in some scenes.
    There was also a significant story line that was part developed but did not lead anywhere (the resistance).
    It did however open the door for the next chapter.
    Sylvia Hoeks was awesome.

  • pm88 on 08/10/2017 - 09:19

    Was really looking forward to seeing it and felt like leaving a few times. (I know I wasn't the only one, I counted at least 5 others who didn't return). The story although good was a bit too slow paced for me, and I felt the director tried to examine human emotions much the same way as the first film but fell short of creating any depth or feeling for the characters who were so memorable from the previous film. Perhaps you will have more patience with this one and enjoy it as I have read many positive reviews online, maybe I was a victim of setting high expectations and cursed myself, or maybe I wasn't in an analytical mood and wanted a story that was easy to follow with clear dialogue.

    My bigger gripe is the forced recliner seats at hoyts pushing the price up of my optus rewards tickets! There is no option for standard seats anymore in many cinemas, I think this will put me off watching movies I'm not completely set on.

  • [Deactivated] on 08/10/2017 - 10:34
    -1

    Hiding behind anonymous +/-?
    "Not very sporting to fire on an unarmed opponent. Show me what you're made of".
    Roy Batty, The Blade Runner

  • MITM on 08/10/2017 - 11:13

    Thanks OP, got my MasterCard $8 tix for this afternoon - VMAX.

    • [Deactivated] on 08/10/2017 - 11:15

      :)

    • PissLUR on 09/10/2017 - 18:54

      i thought you need to upgrade the $8 ticket for a Vmax?

      Catch the new releases now at the super low price of $8 (normally $20!) per person. You can even upgrade to Vmax and 3D by just shelling out a bit more.

      • MITM on 09/10/2017 - 22:25

        +$4. Printed out the evoucher so no booking fee.

  • motion2082 on 08/10/2017 - 13:21
    +2

    As a huge fan of the original movie I was excited to see they were finally making a sequel. Had no idea this was a 163 min movie until about 2 hours in when I thought I might need to go to the bathroom ;)
    The cinematography was amazing and the story line kept you engaged throughout the whole movie. It did jump around a little and take a long time to get to the point but the amazing soundtrack and visuals keep your senses interested.
    I would highly recommend seeing this movie. 8.5/10 for me

  • StingyBritches on 08/10/2017 - 23:17
    +1

    Just got home from seeing Blade Runner 2049. It was one of the few times a sequel was as good as the original. However, I hope they don't make another one - as someone else here mentioned they seemed to be setting up for a sequel with the 'Resistance' folk.

  • bluesky on 09/10/2017 - 17:16

    I loved the original, so will be going to see this anyway. Yesterday, before reading your post, I just happened to rewatch the original (final cut version), in case there are tie-ins to the new movie which I have forgotten.

    The final cut (2007) is the one really intended by Ridley Scott. I believe I watched other versions in the past. This version quite strongly hinted at the fact that Rick Deckard himself is a replicant.

    So for me, the most interesting thing about the sequel would be - which is it? He may or may not be a replicant, since the director for this new version is not Scott, and can take the story whichever way.

    I don't really mind if someone reveals the spoiler; although there could be others who do mind, so perhaps we can find out for ourselves. Though I thought I'd mention this rather intriguing facet hinted by the final cut version.

    • EightImmortals on 09/10/2017 - 17:26

      I always took the original to say that he was a replicant based on the whole unicorn thing. The subject isn't even broached in the sequel and it not an issue one way or the other. :)

      • bluesky on 09/10/2017 - 17:27
        +1

        Oh ok. That's good too :-)

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join