- 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
The slow burn movie, the art of, by Blade Runner 2049
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:01 am
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:01 am
This is how you make a quality slow burn movie.
I could nitpick a couple of things but overall, very well done.
YouTube - the evaluation of humanity review
I could nitpick a couple of things but overall, very well done.
YouTube - the evaluation of humanity review
4
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:31 am to StickD
The film was fricking brilliant. One of the best sequels of all time.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:54 am to OMLandshark
Is the original a prerequisite to seeing this? It’s been so long I don’t really remember it.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:55 am to meeple
Not really. It stands on it's own. It helps if you know about Deckard and Rachel though, but even that they largely bring you up to speed.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:22 am to StickD
A technical marvel and visual spectacle, but it was way too long and the payoff wasn't worth the buildup. the only memorable scene was K's visit to Stelline's lab. weak villain and script really hurt it. i didn't think it was half as good as the first.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:47 am to Carson123987
I haven’t seen the original in a long while, but I think 2049 lays out the story better. Here we aren’t guessing if the ai is robot or human, but if the ai can become human-like.
ETA. I’d prefer if some of the settings were more gritty, dank, and in a city. Like when K went to the cgi junkyard with all those people, or his apt, or on the streets. A lot of clean, posh sets.
The score was good but conservative. Minor preferences. I need to watch it again. Still a 4.5 star movie.
ETA. I’d prefer if some of the settings were more gritty, dank, and in a city. Like when K went to the cgi junkyard with all those people, or his apt, or on the streets. A lot of clean, posh sets.
The score was good but conservative. Minor preferences. I need to watch it again. Still a 4.5 star movie.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 12:02 pm to meeple
I saw 2049 the other day without seeing the original and thought it was incredible.
you don't need to see the original to enjoy this one.
spectacular movie.
you don't need to see the original to enjoy this one.
spectacular movie.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 1:09 pm to StickD
Just rewatched on a long flight and, while I loved it the first time, having the iPad and my headphones I picked up many things I missed in the theater. I liked it much better the second time.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:17 pm to Carson123987
quote:
Carson123987
I have to say Carson, I don’t get why you don’t love this movie as I do. It’s a wonderful subversion of everything we’ve been taught about a character arc and really expands on all the themes beautifully of the original and doesn’t retread it. When he sees Joi after she’s been killed and realizes what she is and what he is. That’s beautiful.
K has one of the most wonderful arcs in Sci Fi (if not cinematic) history. I was absolutely blown away the first time I saw it. It is the perfect sequel. I think it is superior to the original since Deckard’s arc I didn’t believe was totally believable. But this film makes it so.
Save for Empire or The Godfather Part II there is not a better sequel as far as I have seen. It’s pretty much perfect.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:43 pm to OMLandshark
Loved it as well.
Had me hooked from the opening scene to the very end.
The ending was what I was worried about and I thought it ended better than I could have imagined. No huge out of this world ending, no crazy reunion, simple and settled the story. Just as I thought the first did.
Had me hooked from the opening scene to the very end.
The ending was what I was worried about and I thought it ended better than I could have imagined. No huge out of this world ending, no crazy reunion, simple and settled the story. Just as I thought the first did.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:55 am to OMLandshark
quote:
The film was fricking brilliant.
One of the few times I disagree with OML.
This movie was overrated. It used its slowness as a pretentious conceit to being "deep". It did little to further Deckard, and in the end, both Deckard and Ryanbot revealed the subversive mastermind to those that were looking for her.
The angry lady-bot character, whose name I forget, was a farce and made numerous poor decisions that should have had more reaching consequences. Additionally, her motivation was poorly defined. Speaking of which, what was the motivation at all for Jared Leto's character?
It could have been interesting, but instead was left too the imagination, again, probably as an effort too seem like a more complicated movie than it was.
Finally, the sound was generally bad -- too bass, too loud, too noticeable.
I'm not saying this movie was terrible, as there were a lot of good elements there, but I disagree that it was great/brilliant.
Clean up about 30-45 mins and this movie improves a lot.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 1:13 am to McCaigBro69
Blade Runner 2049 is a masterpiece. The idea of taking a work as revered as Blade Runner and giving it to another director to make a sequel this many years later is almost unthinkable. When I heard it was happening I was stunned and very much against it. Fortunately, this franchise knew the right director to pick, one of the best making films today. I love what Denis Villeneuve did with this film. He made his own film his way without sacrificing or cheapening anything from the original. In fact, he made the original even better and deepened and widened the scope of the world created by the original Blade Runner. I can’t really relate to the tonight this was a subpar film or even just marginal. I respect the other opinions as to how it resonated but I just can’t see it as anything other than an amazing achievement by a very talented creative team.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 5:35 am to AustinDawg
quote:
This movie was overrated
Amen! It doesn't hold a candle to the visual masterpiece and amazing score of the original. It could have been ALOT worse, but it was by no means a masterpiece.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 6:13 am to StickD
Meh. It was okay. I get why folks like it. It had impossibly big shoes to fill, as the original is one of the finest movies ever made, of any genre.
The movie got a lot of things right and a handful of things pretty wrong.
The movie got a lot of things right and a handful of things pretty wrong.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 6:59 am to Ace Midnight
i watched it for the first time last night
has a lot of cool/great parts, but they don't really add up to a whole. it's not bad, but it's pretty solid
i think spoon feeding everything in this movie (to contrast leaving so much open in the original) does detract a bit from it
also, to be honest, i thought the point of making the central object of desire a replicant baby was silly. then they make jared leto's motivation to find it way too large for what we're given of him on screen to not be even sillier.
has a lot of cool/great parts, but they don't really add up to a whole. it's not bad, but it's pretty solid
i think spoon feeding everything in this movie (to contrast leaving so much open in the original) does detract a bit from it
also, to be honest, i thought the point of making the central object of desire a replicant baby was silly. then they make jared leto's motivation to find it way too large for what we're given of him on screen to not be even sillier.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 7:10 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:how so?
also, to be honest, i thought the point of making the central object of desire a replicant baby was silly
The running theme of both movies hinges around humanity and what it means to be human.
To be born is to have a soul and to have a soul is to be human. Therefore to find proof that replicants could reproduce would create this whole "proof" that replicants are human.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 7:20 am to Pilot Tiger
The score was brilliant as well
Posted on 1/26/18 at 7:24 am to Pilot Tiger
quote:
The running theme of both movies hinges around humanity and what it means to be human.
i get that
and i get how a baby fits into that theme
but it's a bit...absurd/forced. like i said they tried to spoon feed everything. now the interaction b/w K and Joi? that was a really great, subtle storyline about what is real/existence and what it means to be alive
the "baby" aspect was just going nuclear with that. plus by making it so extreme, there isn't a question because the baby is real (We just don't know who it is). and we really don't get into asking if it's "living" b/c we're more focused on identifying which character it is.
quote:
To be born is to have a soul and to have a soul is to be human.
i think this is an assumption and having the movie actually focus on this issue would have been interesting. it didn't
there was on throwaway exchange about a soul, but once people know there is a baby, everything about this essence is just assumed.
quote:
Therefore to find proof that replicants could reproduce would create this whole "proof" that replicants are human.
again, this is a bigger assumption that is based on another assumption
now, the story could have focused on this as a discussion/analysis, but it doesn't. just like with the soul
like i said above,that actually removes the entire debate/discussion and it becomes so devalued it's basically a mcguffin
you can't make the central "proof" of your theory a mcguffin
it's a very brilliant movie in terms of sensations (visual/audio)
the story is engaging, which is has to be b/c the movie is so long
but it isn't efficient storytelling (it is legit too long) and the simplification erodes any real underlying discussion. like somebody said earlier, they make the movie slow and probing from a presentation aspect and it tricks you into thinking the total product is more pensive than it really is
Posted on 1/26/18 at 7:31 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
To be born is to have a soul and to have a soul is to be human.
i think this is an assumption
of course it's an assumption. it's my interpretation of the film.
However, it doesn't mean it's that far fetched. quote:sure you can. Because in the end it doesnt matter. K still acted "human" even when he realized he wasn't the baby.
you can't make the central "proof" of your theory a mcguffin
This post was edited on 1/26/18 at 7:33 am
Posted on 1/26/18 at 8:16 am to Ace Midnight
quote:We know, grampa. Ain't like it used to be.
Meh.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News