Blade Runner 2

[Krakajac]

Also saw it a second time in the past few days.  As the previous poster said - incredible.  You almost cry when Transformer-style movies make big money at the box office - and 2049 is struggling.

Been working on Deckard's blaster in the past few days.  This one started as a water pistol (of all things).  Very happy with the result.

[TordelBack]

Well I thought it was pretty damn excellent, its images, ideas and puzzles have been bubbling around in my head since seeing it a fortnight ago. In fact I only really feel ready to comment on it now. 

Obviously it both looked and sounded incredible  - although the similarity of some of the soundtrack to Arrival was occasionally distracting (there are worse things).

I have to agree that some sequences were too drawn-out, not in themselves necessarily, but in the context of a long running time. The Las Vegas scenes, the second furnace-room scene, the punch-up in the water: these could all have been trimmed down with no real impact. But overall, it didn't feel overlong.

There were some particular treasures in there: Joi was superb, both as concept and in Ana de Armas' execution,[spoiler] her final moment the emotional heart of the movie[/spoiler];  Bautista's Sapper was brilliant, an apparent throwaway character that he somehow rendered memorable so that every time the plot drew us back to his role and location, he was instantly present in my head: that shot with him fumbling his glasses, wow. Rapidly becoming one of my favourite actors.

My only real niggle with the experience (apart from the small bladders of many of our co-patrons) was my inability to shake the idea that it was [spoiler]an android re-run of Children of Men[/spoiler], something not really helped by the final scene.

Greatly looking forward to seeing it again, at my own pace.

[IndigoPrime]

I agree that the film is rather sad

For what it's worth, I wasn't referring to any particular moment in the film, but essentially to all of it. The whole thing feels like an ongoing emotional gut-punch, looking at a toxic society in which nothing is 'real', in which the Earth itself is essentially dead, and where those few people who do scrabble about in the neon-and-dust ruins are subject to a kind of end-game capitalism combined with a totally dominant patriarchy. It's in model for the universe (even if said universe is very clearly 100 per cent male gaze), hence probably why my wife found the film fine too (again, unlike Skyfall), but it all felt rather icky to us nonetheless.

So I'd say the original was a great but (in hindsight) flawed sci-fi classic; this one's a good but flawed worthy follow-up. I can't imagine I'll watch it a second time, but I'm glad I saw it at the cinema.

[TordelBack]

Can't disagree with most of that, IP.  It was one of the very few evenings out alone together for the missus and I (the previous one was July 2016 to see Tarzan!) and we were in high spirits going in, distinctly subdued coming out.  Despite being explicitly the future of Bladerunner, rather than the future of 2017, it felt disturbingly like the inevitable husk of our world, and utterly without hope: nothing had changed, time had just run out. Joi's story even subverted the idea that while humanity had shat the global bed, the replicants' world was only beginning - since the very same issues appeared to be duplicated in her kind's situation.   

None of this is to say that I didn't enjoy it, just that the thoughts provoked were far from positive ones.

[IndigoPrime]

Sound familiar. The last film we saw together was even longer ago than that. Something with the X-Men. Mini-IP at that point wasn't actually here yet, but made her presence known by going super-punchy when the movie's bass kicked in. So: it was a cinema trip! Oh my! 10:10 in the morning, but still.

We emerged into a drab Saturday lunchtime kind of going: well, then. Certainly a lot to think and talk about; not remotely uplifting. (Not that we were necessarily expecting it to be jolly, obviously. But Blade Runner was a noir with a bit more range, not least in terms of performances and conclusions.)

As I've said, 'enjoy' is a very loaded word. I think in hindsight I appreciated the film more than I actively enjoyed watching it.

[Richard]

I thought it was brilliant. There's still plenty more they could do with that franchise. Can't understand why it hasn't done better at the box office.

[JOE SOAP]

Can't understand why it hasn't done better at the box office.

Like the original, it doesn't appeal to most people and it's niche, so it won't earn its money in one or 2 weeks. A box-office of $200 million –so far– doesn't sound like a disappointment or wrong estimate for such a slow-paced, internalised drama, even if it does have flying cars.

It's earned more than other sci-fi films like Looper and will soon surpass District 9 at the box-office. Problem is BR2049 cost a lot more to make than those films; if it didn't, its box-office wouldn't be an issue.

Again, it goes back to the first film: they can't expect a film like this to make all its money in a few weeks. Like the original, it'll make its money over a longer period.

[JOE SOAP]

Bautista's Sapper was brilliant...that shot with him fumbling his glasses, wow.

It's the one thing that keeps playing in my head when I think of that character. So 'human'.

[Mardroid]

Yes, a great character. I particularly liked the prequel short based around him.

[Eric Plumrose]

they intended the role for Bowie so you can see what they were thinking of.

"Let's cast a moderately adequate actor simply because he's David Bowie and hope his otherwordliness does the trick like it didn't do in LABYRINTH and THE PRESTIGE."

[JOE SOAP]

"Let's cast a moderately adequate actor simply because he's David Bowie and hope his otherwordliness does the trick like it didn't do in LABYRINTH and THE PRESTIGE."

I've never been impressed by Bowie's film performances, but I would've been intrigued to see an older – albeit dying – Bowie in the world of BR. The idea seems to fit; even if he was just playing himself. Certainly be more interested in that than watching Leto's attempts to chew the sets.

[Mardroid]

He had a very interesting turn in Fire Walk With me.... One of the most surreal things I've seen in a film, I think.

[Eric Plumrose]

I've never been impressed by Bowie's film performances, but I would've been intrigued to see an older – albeit dying – Bowie in the world of BR. The idea seems to fit; even if he was just playing himself. Certainly be more interested in that than watching Leto's attempts to chew the sets.

I think the only time I was impressed by Bowie the actor was in DREAM ON ("I . . . don't. Care!").

I agree Bowie's being terminally ill would have been plaintive and therefore effective but is that why he was even considered for the role?

[Eric Plumrose]

Bautista's Sapper was brilliant...that shot with him fumbling his glasses, wow.

It's the one thing that keeps playing in my head when I think of that character. So 'human'.

Before I get sidetracked, HELL, yes.

[JOE SOAP]

I agree Bowie's being terminally ill would have been plaintive and therefore effective but is that why he was even considered for the role?

They didn't even know he was sick when he refused the offer. It was only when he died they found out the reason for his refusal. Same with Twin Peaks.