Blade Runner 2

[Magnetica]

I really wasn't bothered* but having read the review in the Evening Standard last night which said it was as good as the original, and the feature on Harrison Ford in today's Telegraph, it now sounds like a must see.

*Generally the only films I feel are compulsory to see in the cinema these days are Star Wars and Star Trek ones (and GoTG, but number 2 was a big disappointment).

[DrJomster]

I might actually have to go and see this now. And there was me thinking I wouldn't be going to the cinema till Star Wars came out...

[Keef Monkey]

Just saw a Facebook ad with the review scores on it and flipping heck, this has been raking in the 5 stars! As in, literally every single publication have been giving it full marks and I'm seeing a lot of variations on 'may be/is better than the original' flying around.

I'm not saying I put a ton of weight in review scores because they don't always reflect my own tastes, but for something that I was really unsure about on announcement and didn't expect could ever live up to the original, this is really surprising and a very good sign.

Tickets booked for Saturday and I've now gone from 'will probably be a bit meh but I'm curious to see it anyway' to 'can't bloody wait'.

[SuperSurfer]

I'm not saying I put a ton of weight in review scores because they don't always reflect my own tastes...

I've seen some real duds at the cinema after reading positive reviews (thanks Guardian) but having read a review of Blade Runner 2 in the Evening Standard, which gave it five out of five stars, I'll definitely be booking tickets to see it.

[radiator]

I'm torn about seeing it, because I love everything this director (Villeneuve) has done, but I find the original Blade Runner, despite being very impressive on a technical level, a total snoozefest to actually watch.

[von Boom]

Not me. Tickets booked for Friday afternoon.

[SIP]

Saw it tonight and it was excellent.  Won't say any more as don't want to spoil it for others.

[dweezil2]

It's better than a sequel to, what I consider a classic, has any right to be, but it's far from perfect.
Roger Deakins should rack up the awards for his director of photography role though if there's any justice in the world.
And spot the Dredd actor for extra brownie points! 

[Apestrife]

Saw it last night. Brilliant film in every way. Loved how it managed to expand on smaller details in the first one. For example the replicants thing for eyes, with the bar codes in theirs. I also liked how the narrative felt fitting K's personality. For example [spoiler]the on going replicant revolution not being important to K,
or when he speaks about the child whom he believes himself to be.[/spoiler].

Can't wait to see it again this Sunday. Will probably watch the first one right before it

[SIP]

It's better than a sequel to, what I consider a classic, has any right to be, but it's far from perfect.
Roger Deakins should rack up the awards for his director of photography role though if there's any justice in the world.
And spot the Dredd actor for extra brownie points! 

Yeah, going to have to completely disagree. I think it was pretty damned near perfect to be fair. Blade runner was a triumph of groundbreaking visuals, mood and futurism but as a narrative is fairly thin and emotionally disconnected. This was a better film.

The visuals are amongst the best I've ever seen, the sound was fantastic, the cast all brought their A game, it has some incredible scenes (in fact a LOT of incredible scenes) and the characters were more complex and interesting.  It was a better film than blade runner.

[dweezil2]

It's better than a sequel to, what I consider a classic, has any right to be, but it's far from perfect.
Roger Deakins should rack up the awards for his director of photography role though if there's any justice in the world.
And spot the Dredd actor for extra brownie points! 

Yeah, going to have to completely disagree. I think it was pretty damned near perfect to be fair. Blade runner was a triumph of groundbreaking visuals, mood and futurism but as a narrative is fairly thin and emotionally disconnected. This was a better film.

The visuals are amongst the best I've ever seen, the sound was fantastic, the cast all brought their A game, it has some incredible scenes (in fact a LOT of incredible scenes) and the characters were more complex and interesting.  It was a better film than blade runner.

More complex than Roy Batty?
I think not.
That was the one thing the film really lacked-a compelling antagonist.
The pacing was inconsistent for me and Jared Leto was no Joe Turkel.
The visual and sound design was indeed remarkable and there were some fantastic scenes in isolation-just not sure it all hung together as a whole as well as the original film did, also no Vangelis was a serious blow.
That's not to say the film was bad-it's one of the best this year.

[SIP]

No, I don't particularly see Roy Batty as a complex character  to be honest. K in this was infinitely more so I thought.

[JOE SOAP]

no Vangelis was a serious blow.

It's remarkable that in this day and age most of the scenes in such a gargantuan budgeted film have no muzak soundtrack at all and that it really works. The 'big' music is kept for the more panoramic passages/montages and for punctuating revelatory moments. The general theme stuff, especially the end-title music, does feel uninspired and in need of the Vangelis treatment but for the most part the film has a superior sense of sound design. It says these are people who know what they're doing and had enough confidence in the work to use silence and ambience rather than leaning on the ubiquitous mood music – no saxaphone themes this time.

It's a different film than the original and whereas the first feels more an evocation of a future scenario with dense music and tableaus, the second has a stripped-down aesthetic, but with more meat in terms of portraying the implication of that scenario. In many ways the sequel has a lot the original lacked and a more active, noirish investigation.

As a drama, BR2049 is better written and directed than the first and apart from a prolonged end-fight and the inclusion of a certain element in the final sequences that might've been better served as something purely hinted at than seen [spoiler]– underground replicant army for another film –[/spoiler] I think it works brilliantly as a reflection on and conclusion to the Rick Deckard story.

[SIP]

Yup, can agree with all the Joe. The sound throughout the whole film I found quite brilliant. Going to see it again next week.

[von Boom]

Agreed. Blade Runner 2049 is a brilliant film. It did something that doesn't happen very often with a sequel. It built upon the foundations of the first film without being a clone.

The visuals were stunning and the sound was ear bleedingly good. There are parallel themes between the two films, but that's to be expected. It probably helped immensely that Hampton Fancher, who co-wrote the screenplay for Blade Runner, co-wrote this screenplay.

This story is worthy of being written by Dick himself. I'll be seeing it again next week, and I'm really looking forward to it.