- Posts: 12707
- Thank you received: 8343
Bugs: Recent Topics Paging, Uploading Images & Preview (11 Dec 2020)
Recent Topics paging, uploading images and preview bugs require a patch which has not yet been released.
Blade runner 2049...some thoughts...
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Michael Barnes
- Offline
- Mountebank
- HYPOCRITE
- Posts: 16929
- Thank you received: 10375
You know something that people often forget? Blade Runner is, by proxy, a SHAW BROTHERS film. They co-produced it, it is the same Sir Run Run Shaw that gave us 36 Chambers of Shaolin and Five Deadly Venoms.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Posts: 1700
- Thank you received: 786
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- hotseatgames
- Away
- D12
- Posts: 7162
- Thank you received: 6270
I loved it. I felt like it was an appropriate follow-up to Blade Runner, and was gorgeous to look at, and the world was fully realized. I had previously thought Deckard was a replicant, but this movie certainly shoots that theory in the head.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Black Barney
- Offline
- D20
- 10k Club
- Posts: 10045
- Thank you received: 3553
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Anyway, like I said I'm still processing it. One detail that I like is that the sequel does not definitively answer the "is Deckard a replicant" question! Certainly Wallace claims that Deckard is, but that's during a scene where he's trying to manipulate Deckard, so it's unreliable. Ultimately this reinforces what I think is one of the main themes of both films: IT DOESN'T MATTER. I think my favorite bit of dialogue in the first movie is when Rachel is at the piano and explains to Deckard that she remembers taking piano lessons, but that those are no doubt implanted memories. Deckard replies perfectly, "You play beautifully." Are we real? Are we the perceiver, or the one who perceives the perceiver? Do we have free will?
We play beautifully.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
What was similar about the two movies was the ability to capture the essence of the writing of Philip K. Dick. He had a dark view of life, and a near obsession with epistemology. Both movies are deliberate meditations on the meaning of life, sentience, and death, punctuated by stunning visuals and moments of grave brutality. Where another sequel might arise from a compulsive deconstruction of the original, this one instead went back to the same deep well of Dick's writing for inspiration.
The one jarring element in my viewing was the special Dolby format that I experienced. The local stadium seating theater only offered one normal viewing today, at a time that didn't suit my schedule. Most of the other showings were either IMAX or 3D, and I am not a fan of either. So I saw it in Dolby HD or somesuch, which meant that the colors were rendered beautifully and the black was deeper than normal black in a theater. And that was all great, but the experience also called for an overpowered sound system with many speakers cranked to 11. Sometimes, the sound was amazing. That scene with Joi in the rain sounded like I was outside in actual rain. Other times, the theater was literally shaking like an earthquake from the overblown bass of the speakers.
After the movie, the transition back to reality was a bit surreal, because the theater was fairly new, and many of the design touches would have fit seamlessly into the nicer parts of the Blade Runner setting. I reflected upon this while turning back on my iPhone and watching somebody else fiddling with their device.
Like Barnes, I experienced some tears during this movie. Apparently I was triggered by subtle cues and deep nostalgia, because the only time I was consciously aware that the movie was prodding me for an emotional reaction like that was at the very end.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- hotseatgames
- Away
- D12
- Posts: 7162
- Thank you received: 6270
Michael Barnes wrote: You know what one of the most awesome pieces of minutiae is in this movie? There was a PAN AM building. I love how that teeny little detail sets the film in the timeline of the 1982 original.
Let alone that Atari had a gigantic sign.
My girlfriend and I loved that they had a "future" bottle of Johnny Walker Black. They should absolutely sell that shit.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Posts: 1700
- Thank you received: 786
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Black Barney
- Offline
- D20
- 10k Club
- Posts: 10045
- Thank you received: 3553
hotseatgames wrote:
Michael Barnes wrote: You know what one of the most awesome pieces of minutiae is in this movie? There was a PAN AM building. I love how that teeny little detail sets the film in the timeline of the 1982 original.
Let alone that Atari had a gigantic sign.
My girlfriend and I loved that they had a "future" bottle of Johnny Walker Black. They should absolutely sell that shit.
Agreed. And every time somebody complains it's not that good, you remind that idiot you're not supposed to drink it until 2049
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Which took us to the sex scene, which is very dreamy to me. It brought to life the fantasy of having your fantasy girlfiend to life. That the sync wasn't perfect, is feel weird, romantic, and arousing at the some time. May be it's just me, but it feels so close to me. It's like the most awesome masturbation ever.
The end conflict scene. All black, lots of water, on a concrete beach. Somehow that feels very sci-fi to me. But, again, back to "feeling".
I could say a lot of it, but really, it's a bit too much to digest in one go.
My only complaint is that there's way too much replicants. That diminishes the movie a bit to me.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.