- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Blade Runner 2049 spoilers discussion
Posted on 10/9/17 at 10:18 pm to Othello
Posted on 10/9/17 at 10:18 pm to Othello
Kind of like Lost in Translation, Blade Runner as well as its sequel are great movies that you can understand people not enjoying. My parents were asking my opinion on it, and I told them they wouldn't like it. You've just really got to be in the mood and not mind being immersed in things that don't advance the plot. Awful date movie unless you've got a really, really nerdy girlfriend.
And I didn't care that much for the original save the visuals and last 20 or so minutes, but I loved this. Couldn't get out of the world, story, and aesthetic they were showing us. I've liked the universe of Blade Runner, but I didn't really enjoy it until now.
And I didn't care that much for the original save the visuals and last 20 or so minutes, but I loved this. Couldn't get out of the world, story, and aesthetic they were showing us. I've liked the universe of Blade Runner, but I didn't really enjoy it until now.
2
Posted on 10/9/17 at 10:49 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
Awful date movie unless you've got a really, really nerdy girlfriend.
Yeah. My girlfriend would hate it.
My wife would love it, though.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 8:08 am to OMLandshark
quote:same.
Couldn't get out of the world, story, and aesthetic they were showing us. I've liked the universe of Blade Runner
They built it so well and if nothing else, it sucks you in and you feel surrounded by the setting.
Yea it's slow and deliberate but it serves a purpose so I can forgive it.
I can understand a lot of people not liking it but if you're a fan of the original I can't really understanding not at least enjoying this.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 12:13 pm to Pilot Tiger
Bladerunner 2049 review - a future classic
Blade Runner may have shaped the future, but it’s easy to forget its past. Now universally accepted as a classic, Ridley Scott’s future-noir fantasy (from an android-hunting novel by Philip K Dick) flopped in 1982, widely dismissed as an exercise in ravishing emptiness, as eye-catchingly hollow as Rachael, the glamorous “replicant” played by Sean Young. Late-in-the-day recuts didn’t help, adding an explanatory narration and dopey happy ending following negative test screenings. Indeed, it was only when Blade Runner was reconfigured via a 1992 Director’s Cut, and later Scott’s definitive Final Cut, that its masterpiece status was assured, sitting alongside Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and Kubrick’s 2001 in the pantheon of world-building sci-fi.
No such tribulations await Blade Runner 2049, which has opened to the kind of critical adoration that sorely evaded Scott’s original. Yet Arrival director Denis Villeneuve’s audacious sequel, co-written by original screenwriter Hampton Fancher, really is as good as the hype suggests, spectacular enough to win over new generations of viewers, yet deep enough to reassure diehard fans that their cherished memories haven’t been reduced to tradable synthetic implants.
The first time I saw Blade Runner 2049, I was overwhelmed by its visuals and astonished by its achievements. On second viewing, a sense of elegiac sadness cut through the spectacle, implanting altogether more melancholy memories. Both times, I was reminded that Blade Runner editor Terry Rawlings had described Scott’s original as “a grandiose art movie” and marvelled at how perfectly that phrase fitted Villeneuve’s new dreamy vision. How’s that for a miracle?
i like that last paragraph ... will see it for the 3rd time this weekend ...
Blade Runner may have shaped the future, but it’s easy to forget its past. Now universally accepted as a classic, Ridley Scott’s future-noir fantasy (from an android-hunting novel by Philip K Dick) flopped in 1982, widely dismissed as an exercise in ravishing emptiness, as eye-catchingly hollow as Rachael, the glamorous “replicant” played by Sean Young. Late-in-the-day recuts didn’t help, adding an explanatory narration and dopey happy ending following negative test screenings. Indeed, it was only when Blade Runner was reconfigured via a 1992 Director’s Cut, and later Scott’s definitive Final Cut, that its masterpiece status was assured, sitting alongside Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and Kubrick’s 2001 in the pantheon of world-building sci-fi.
No such tribulations await Blade Runner 2049, which has opened to the kind of critical adoration that sorely evaded Scott’s original. Yet Arrival director Denis Villeneuve’s audacious sequel, co-written by original screenwriter Hampton Fancher, really is as good as the hype suggests, spectacular enough to win over new generations of viewers, yet deep enough to reassure diehard fans that their cherished memories haven’t been reduced to tradable synthetic implants.
The first time I saw Blade Runner 2049, I was overwhelmed by its visuals and astonished by its achievements. On second viewing, a sense of elegiac sadness cut through the spectacle, implanting altogether more melancholy memories. Both times, I was reminded that Blade Runner editor Terry Rawlings had described Scott’s original as “a grandiose art movie” and marvelled at how perfectly that phrase fitted Villeneuve’s new dreamy vision. How’s that for a miracle?
i like that last paragraph ... will see it for the 3rd time this weekend ...
This post was edited on 10/10/17 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 10/10/17 at 1:03 pm to tiderider
The more I think about this movie, the more I think it will be considered a masterpiece over time. Need to go see it again. The director is on pace to be considered one of the greats of film making.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 1:10 pm to Civildawg
I think I may go see it again Sunday. Drag my godchild with me.
Will be nice to catch everything now that I know the twist.
Will be nice to catch everything now that I know the twist.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 1:50 pm to Civildawg
quote:I've seen all his movies from Incendies on forward and they are each excellent. The guy just doesn't seem to have it in him to make a bad film
The director is on pace to be considered one of the greats of film making.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 11:00 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
for Gosling it was Drive II
He even drowned someone in the surf again
Posted on 10/10/17 at 11:20 pm to Jor Jor The Dinosaur
Saw it tonight. Loved pretty much everything about it. Only negative would be the length, I was never bored but it did drag in a few spots. Roger Deakins and Hans Zimmer 
I won't be surprised if some don't like it, definitely not for everyone which is why I'm not surprised the box office is behind expectations
I won't be surprised if some don't like it, definitely not for everyone which is why I'm not surprised the box office is behind expectations
Posted on 10/11/17 at 8:31 am to jg8623
This film was phenomenal. It will win an Oscar for cinematography.
Posted on 10/11/17 at 9:35 am to boogiewoogie1978
quote:
. It will win an Oscar for cinematography.
You say that...
Posted on 10/11/17 at 2:27 pm to LoveThatMoney
I saw it yesterday.
I'm a huge fan of the first movie, I own the original, the European release, and the Director's cut.
I thought it was fantastic. They did a great job of staying true to the 1st with tone, color pallet, mood, sound, and "world building".
There was a plot hole that removed me from the fiction some though.
At the end, after the fight at the base of the dam, K tells Deckard that he "drowned" and therefore is free to escape in to anonymity again. In a future with the highly advanced technology available, don't you think Wallace is going to want to see a body??? They will find the sky car and Luv's body, but no Deckard.
No way Wallace is going to say "oh well, he certainly drowned, darn, we missed out on discovering this SUPER important information on the "Christ Child Replicant". Anyone want to go out for sushi?"
My head canon for this plot hole is that Wallace was already on the transport ship heading offworld and it didn't wait for Luv to deliver Deckard. Once it took off, it couldn't be turned around. So Wallace is stuck on it for a LONG time. By the time it gets to the Tanhauser Gate or where ever its going, it will be too late for him to come back and look for Deckard.
Oh, and I am now infatuated with Ana de Armas.
I'm a huge fan of the first movie, I own the original, the European release, and the Director's cut.
I thought it was fantastic. They did a great job of staying true to the 1st with tone, color pallet, mood, sound, and "world building".
There was a plot hole that removed me from the fiction some though.
At the end, after the fight at the base of the dam, K tells Deckard that he "drowned" and therefore is free to escape in to anonymity again. In a future with the highly advanced technology available, don't you think Wallace is going to want to see a body??? They will find the sky car and Luv's body, but no Deckard.
No way Wallace is going to say "oh well, he certainly drowned, darn, we missed out on discovering this SUPER important information on the "Christ Child Replicant". Anyone want to go out for sushi?"
My head canon for this plot hole is that Wallace was already on the transport ship heading offworld and it didn't wait for Luv to deliver Deckard. Once it took off, it couldn't be turned around. So Wallace is stuck on it for a LONG time. By the time it gets to the Tanhauser Gate or where ever its going, it will be too late for him to come back and look for Deckard.
Oh, and I am now infatuated with Ana de Armas.
This post was edited on 10/11/17 at 2:39 pm
Posted on 10/11/17 at 6:38 pm to LoveThatMoney
quote:
You say that
Because I believe it.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 2:45 am to boogiewoogie1978
Saw it last week. Just incredible all the way around. I kind of wished it had more action but whatever....fricking loved it anyway...
Posted on 10/12/17 at 7:55 am to TygerTyger
quote:that's not really a plot hole imo
There was a plot hole
Posted on 10/12/17 at 6:14 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Just watched this movie. It was absolutely freaking terrific. As much as I love the first Blade Runner, this one was better IMO. The cinematography, the theme, the soundtrack, the acting, the plot. It was all very very terrific. The movie was a little bit longer than I wanted it to be, but it wasn't that big a deal. Still a fantastic movie, and I highly recommend it to everyone. I also have to say the more time that passes, the more I'm starting to like Ryan Gosling. He is starting to become a very very good actor before our eyes.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 6:33 pm to WicKed WayZ
And yeah the score and the cinematography was the best I've ever seen in a movie. I loved it all.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 7:44 pm to lsusportsman2
regarding the musical score, i don't like the water scene that much, but that's the best sound piece in the film ...
Posted on 10/12/17 at 8:02 pm to tiderider
quote:
i don't like the water scene that much, but that's the best sound piece in the film ...
I can definitely agree with that. The only scene in the movie I thought was a little over the top was the underwater fight scene in the end.
Posted on 10/12/17 at 11:04 pm to lsusportsman2
Just got out and I thought it was fantastic, and I loved the first one
I’ll try and collect my thoughts over night so I can comment more in depth, but what a beautiful movie. Some of the visuals truly blew my mind. I felt like 2049 really captured the spirit of blade runner. Will see again before it leaves theaters.
I’ll try and collect my thoughts over night so I can comment more in depth, but what a beautiful movie. Some of the visuals truly blew my mind. I felt like 2049 really captured the spirit of blade runner. Will see again before it leaves theaters.
Page 5 of 8
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News