Blade Runner 2049

Well, I dislike the original so 2049 could have either been great because of my lowered expectations or shit because it pays homage too much. It lands somewhere in the middle, with a tendency to edge towards the latter. It is simply too long, and too boring. Nothing really happens that could not be featured in a one-hour-forty-five or [at max] a two-hour movie. Instead, it drags on for 2 hours and 43 minutes! The cinematography and score are utterly sublime. Just beautiful, and top tier stuff from Deakins, Jóhannsson and Zimmer. Ryan Gosling is cool even though he doesn't really need to do much, and Ana de Armas is just too sexy for words (the best scene in the film is her, completely starkers, as a huge hologram), but the film is simply too much style over substance. It goes on forever. It's tediously slow, has a needlessly convoluted plot, and it doesn't really add much value to this already ugly, and cold, and flavour-less world. It expands a little but still firmly places its style into the Blade Runner nostalgia mould. It even reminded me of the recent Ghost in the Shell - the similarities are uncanny. Having said that, even now I really want to like it because it's visually stunning, I love Gosling and want to support his films, and because the marketing was fucking awesome, but I just can't like it. Overall, I didn't enjoy my time watching it.

The score is powerful and the experience of certain sequences makes it positively memorable. But Denis was trying too hard to make the perfect Blade Runner sequel that he forgot to make it enjoyable. It takes about two hours before we see Harrison Ford, and when he arrives it gets a little more interesting, but the film just never tries to make it on its own. It relies too much on Blade Runner conventions. I mean, there is merit there. The fact that they've made a film that, stylistically, is so accurate in emulating the original is a marvel in itself. It's as if they made it a year after the original. But I would've liked a film made for modern audiences, not a wank job for the original.

I believe because 2049 is beautiful to look at and sounds lovely, and has Gosling, and has brilliant reviews, that it will fool a lot of people into thinking it is a masterpiece, and they're entitled to do just that, but I can't hold it in high regard when I could not wait for the bore-fest to end. But there's no hard feelings. I hope it gets nominated and wins for cinematography (if Dunkirk doesn't) and I hope it gets some other tech noms (not editing or screenplay) such as make-up, score, and art direction. And it is a much better film than the overrated Blade Runner, so there's that.

C+

It would feature around 456 on my best sequels list.

stuffp, told you Magnus would think it is the best film ever made.

In true BladeRunner form, this is not a sequel, so everyone should stop that. It has so little to do with the first film. It simply takes place in the universe and revisits some characters.

For what it is, it is a extremely competently made film. I found the two best scenes (Now with Covenant why the fuck is Ridley removing his best scenes and making them short films before the film comes out, I have no doubt we will have a Director's cut with them back in. Dave's one scene would have been much better, I don't need the most awkward sex scene of all time to last 10 minutes)

But it does negate the first in such a way. Deckard takes the first films message about life, and chooses to not be in existence, I don't get why they need to go into hiding. Is it the wall thing????

Ford once again (Who is quite great here) is put in a position where the sequel is written around him, yet everything in between would have been so much more interesting. The cast is fantastic all around, and it is a marvel (that will overshadow it's simplistic plot) There is so much beautiful moments in there you have to just like (As many professors had told me to the first) but like the first, it's going to take years and theories to understand it. Like the first it's not a great film, but it's a conversation film.

I wasn't bored though, it actually did its runtime justice. It's the most beautiful shot film I've ever seen, yet instantly forgettable due to its simple plot

At the end you say, it took 35 years to make this? But then you remember the first was such a bomb, and all that. I have no idea what I just wrote.

A-

Well, he said "Because of it's technical achievements, Magnus is going to love it", think that's a pretty good call.

Seven movies.

But I wasn't being literal. But I just knew you would rave over this and hold it in such high regard. And I am correct because you even mentioned Nolan in the same sentence. I'm not really going anywhere with this. I just knew you'd pedestal it as some modern masterpiece. That's all.

Blade Runner 2049 has its riches and it can be appreciated for that, but overall it's not gripping and especially for a film of this length it's a glaring problem. It's much so a continuation of the first Blade Runner film, which I found average all together, its bleak world has somewhat of a serene feel to it, but it's difficult to get enjoyment out of it. The film is meticulous in the way it tells the story, but so little really happens each time. Whenever a piece of action sequence starts it decides to almost immediately stop abruptly again to let every move or dialogue sink in. There's a beauty to it, but it puts the emphasis on the surroundings and not the characters, making it hard to invest in them. The film is very emotionless in a way, and it's interesting where I believe to have seen every major character cry (aside from glow-eyed Leto), to care so little for any of them. Thus it's a bit of a mixed bag, there's a lot to see and hear that wonders, but it lacks staying power as Thegun also mentioned. And I would find it hard to credit it for anything technically, if the result is not there. A film I liked watching, but coming from Villeneuve I definitely expected a lot more than a, albeit amped up, fanboy follow-up to the first film.

B-

I'm glad to read your, or anyone's passion for a film. Everyone's a critic is my favorite thread on this forum, and this was a good read. And what I especially like about this post is that it's remarkably spelling error free

Villeneuve list:

1. Sicario
2. Enemy
3. Prisoners
4. Arrival
5. Blade Runner 2049

My favourite scene:





My favourite shot:



Man, I am thinking too much about a C+.

The Vill List:

1. Sicario
2. Prisoners
3. Enemy
4. Arrival
5. Blade Runner 2049

Yeah. Armas does nude in, like, every film! Felicity Jones seems too prudish. Armas is the modern Sharon Stone or Salma Hayek.

She is Cuban, not Brazilian, and has been living in Spain since 2006.

I've always respected BLADE RUNNER but found it cold and clinical.

BLADE RUNNER 2049 is more to my taste. It's too long and precious about itself - half an hour could come out of this thing without losing any important beats - but I love that it's a film about being alive, and all the good and bad things that entails. There's a real beating heart here, like the Rutger Hauer portions of the original film made the main event of the sequel.

It grows in my estimation the more I think about it.

I did find it a little heartbreaking that even the bare bones (Love that it was nude) advertisement thought he was Joe. Nice touch. But yeah, you knew she was a goner after they mentioned it.

SPOILERS

It is a feeling of such mixed emotions, that it is Bladerunner. Like I can at least say I haven't been scared of a character since Javier Bardem in No Country, the scene with RR was kind of terrifying as was the moment with the Morgue guy. And her demise is the most brutal accurate drowning I've ever seen on film.

I can also right now argue Ford hurts the film because it's so not his film. Yet his scenes following the initial fight are so awesome. The Ford / Leto scene is just so wonderfully annoying in its fades, and Rachel not having the right eyes is just so creepy, which I think puts to rest that he is human.

I never cared for the original all that much, and I'm right there with the sequel. But at least sparks a little debate, and I'm glad I saw it.

I still think that the Batuista and Leto scenes turned into short films were great, and should have been in the movie. The movie is better with them. Ridley did that with Covenant too, I hope it's not the start of a new trend.

Very stately, very solemn, very long - Blade Runner 2049 is probably the best unnecessary sequel to Blade Runner one could hope for. I didn't buy in to the whole baby premise, so I had to survive for the 163 minutes mostly on the style and tone of the whole thing. *C+*

Maybe I am getting cynical, but I found the score was the reason of the extended runtime. I actually laughed a few times, when it went crazy over super subtle scenes. Scenes that would have seriously cut the runtime if they weren't trying to accommodate the score. I found it funny that Gosling found a heat signature, then parked about 50 miles away because now we get to see him slowly walk to the place.

Seriously, add in the two short films, shorten the staring scenes, you seriously have a briskly awesome 2 hour movie. Also the film ended on the biggest whimper. Ford should have said something along the lines of "You have your mother's eyes" You can't out Bladerunner Bladerunner, so just keep it simple and hint at the subtext (RR wanting to bang him is probably the best way the film should have been made, that's what the film needed more of)

Oh and that Hooker. What the hell is that? Worst foreplay scene ever. And then she is somehow a resistance leader. That's 20 minutes right there. The last 45 minutes is all plot trying to catch up to a film that doesn't care.

Same here, I think if I had to pee or deuce it out I'd feel different. But I don't think the film necessarily dragged. Looking back, I just wished they did more with it. Like no general person is going to see the two short films that are amazing and would have made the first 30 minutes beyond great.

The film is not boring. There was not a single moment that I didn't find something great in there. I never tear films apart so early either. This is just so not a 90% film on RT. This film is no Prometheus, but it isn't a masterpiece either

Beautiful to look at but a little too clinical and cold, yet very faithful to the Blade Runner universe. I wanted to love it, but I came out just admiring it.

B+

A step down from Arrival (A+ for me), but I don't think he really could've done that much more without straying too far away from the source material. Let's go back to "original" films

Enjoyed it but

Why does there need to be a resolution? Yes, he could track down Deckard, but as he's gone 30 years without being tracked down, I'm betting he's pretty good at hiding.

This is BY FAR the slowest big budget movie I've seen. Thinking of walking out tbh

..... You posted that during the movie?

lol. He was THAT bored.

Yes.