It's a movie which cannot stand on its own merits. It is required that you must watch the original Blade Runner movie in order to understand this sequel. I find such movies frustrating and unenjoyable. You must be a Blade Runner fanatic to get any enjoyment out of this followup.
It is a waste of money. Just like all sequel movies are a waste of time and money.

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:

Don't take this the wrong way - this is not a comment on your ability to summarize. But What???? I don't get the storyline / theme at all.

Well, I was more answering the OP’s questions than trying to summarize the movie. To summarize it, I would say.....

A Replicant member of the LAPD’s Blade Runner squad inadvertently discovers a secret that could destroy the tenuous relationship between Mankind and Replicant. Ordered to destroy all evidence of this secret by his human superior officer, he finds himself targeted by an enigmatic entity wanting the secret for its own purposes. Along the way, the officer must also come to grips with his own past.

And while I think Arlen’s “review” is a bit overly harsh, he has a point. This movie is for fans of the original. I can easily see how someone without interest or knowledge of the first film would find 2049 tedious and confusing. Heck, I watch the original 3-4 times a year and I felt like I was missing bits until DanH pointed out the three shorts on YouTube.

LOL

I'm getting too old for this. I read the words but it's all Greek to me.

Actually, I understand the short summary - got the gist of the story. Sounds like a common theme(s) told in a very complicated manner

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
The soundtrack was SUPPOSED to be channeling Vangellis, but fell way short. It was as if they just didn't give a shit and gave some meth and acid to Skrillix and DeadMau5 and let them beat each other to death with saw wave Moogs.

I thought it was excellent. And I was in that business for 20 years, you know playing with Moogs and stuff. The clown with his ears or the mash up king have got nothing on this soundtrack.
It was done by Hans Zimmer. What the fuck does he know?

To give some leeway on the score, this was a replacement score at the last minute. Jóhann Jóhannsson was the original composer for the movie and did most of Denis Villeneuve's movies up to this point. With 2 months at the most, he was replaced because what he came up with didn't have that Vangelis style. Hans Zimmer and the Remote Control team was brought in at the last minute and we got the score we got.

Occasionally, when you do that at the last minute, you get a score like Jerry Goldsmith's Chinatown, but when you need to write 2 hours with very little time, you'll get something that works OK, but not much better.

Always enjoy this guys take on things:

Razorfist

quote:

Originally posted by JohnCourage:
Always enjoy this guys take on things:

Razorfist

Wow! I don't agree with his opinions, but his delivery and comments were hilarious and he did raise some good points.

Thanks to all who contributed. I'm wiser and have a better understanding of the movie.

I found this discussion

https://substratewars.com/2017...-is-bondage-immoral/

That explained a bit.

I also enjoyed this review as well.
http://locusmag.com/2017/10/a-...f-blade-runner-2049/

Jake

quote:

Originally posted by arlen:
Just like all sequel movies are a waste of time and money.

Huh?

The Empire Strikes Back is the sequel to Star Wars: A New Hope and it was BETTER that ANH.

Same with Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan. A MUCH better movie than Star Trek: The Motion Picture

Most sequels are crap, yes. Not all of them.

My biggest issue with Blade Runner: 2049 is that it didn't really feel that much like a sequel to the original and more like a standalone movie to me. Didn't have the same "feel" for me. the original was a futuristic version of an old 1940's hard boiled detective noir film, 2049 felt more like a regular (and too long)sci-fi/action movie.

The basic theme of the movie is the same as the first one: "Are replicants real people?".

Deckard pretty much sums it up when K asks if his dog is real and Deckard replies "Why don't you ask him?".

That says to me that the theme is essentially "If you can't tell this person from a "real" person without checking their eye for a serial number, and if they believe that they're "human" then maybe it doesn't matter if they were "manufactured"."

But then they double down on that whole theme with the computer girlfriend.

I really loved the movie.

I saw this mentioned on a Facebook discussion: did anyone notice how there was ZERO smoking in Blade Runner 2049? I mean the first one had everyone in clouds of cigarette smoke but in the sequel there was none?

My guess would be either they are not allowed to portray smoking in this brave new PC world of 2017 or there is no more tobacco in 2049 to smoke, it appears that the ecosystem is basically dead.

quote:

Originally posted by imadat:
Thanks to all who contributed. I'm wiser and have a better understanding of the movie.

I found this discussion

https://substratewars.com/2017...-is-bondage-immoral/

That explained a bit.

I also enjoyed this review as well.
http://locusmag.com/2017/10/a-...f-blade-runner-2049/

Jake

good articles,

thanks for those

Saw it two weeks ago with my 26yo son, who has never seen the original. He thought it was great. I thought it was OK, but a bit on the long side. Certainly not worth waiting three decades for...


nero

quote:

Originally posted by Prefontaine:

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
The soundtrack was SUPPOSED to be channeling Vangellis, but fell way short. It was as if they just didn't give a shit and gave some meth and acid to Skrillix and DeadMau5 and let them beat each other to death with saw wave Moogs.

I thought it was excellent. And I was in that business for 20 years, you know playing with Moogs and stuff. The clown with his ears or the mash up king have got nothing on this soundtrack.
It was done by Hans Zimmer. What the fuck does he know?

I like Vangellis, but there's nothing wrong with saw waves, moogs, or the rest.

The original was interesting in part because it was one of the first sci-fi films to have a dirty, dystopia look. The world in it was grubby and thing weren't going well. Before Blade Runner, sci-fi looked like 2001 A Space Odyssey.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
The original was interesting in part because it was one of the first sci-fi films to have a dirty, dystopia look. The world in it was grubby and thing weren't going well. Before Blade Runner, sci-fi looked like 2001 A Space Odyssey.

You can say the same about Star Wars Ep IV: ANH. Before SW: ANH, galactic adventure movies and serials looked like Star Trek and Flash Gordon. Lucas purposely introduced a galactic setting that looked lived-in.

Blade Runner set the standard for cyberpunk and is still the future urban dystopia that all others are measured against.

It was overall a good movie and had incredible cinematography but I came away a little disappointed, not sure if it's because it didn't *feel* that Blade Runnerish to me or what. Maybe it's the same issue I had with the last Indiana Jones movie where I felt a little sad for old man Indy with this one having an old man Deckard.

Maybe it should have been made in the mid-late 90's and more noir and it would have been a good sequel.

Sadly it bombed here for their projections. But it’s already in profit status thanks to overseas.
Just means we’ll get more Transformers type sci-fi instead of intelligent dramas. I wait for Blu-Ray and the 4k/1080p combo.

quote:

Originally posted by maladat:
Ridley Scott is on record as saying he considers Deckard to be a replicant.

He's wrong. I know better. As a human he almost died multiple times trying to off the ones from the original. If he was a replicant then where is his super strength?

Have not seen the new one, and probably will one day on Direct TV..(I Know).. but I will say again, I saw the first one on my birthday back in the early 80's and was so blown away by the movie I could not get up and sat through it a second time. Ford is 'ok' in it.. but the death scene at the end with Rutger Hauer in the rain has got to be one of the most emotional scenes in a movie. This is where 'you' realize the replicants are actually human.