Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters
View Poll Results: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread
25.58%
38.37%
18.60%
8.14%
3.49%
2.33%
3.49%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
What are you high?
0
0%
Voters: 86. You may not vote on this poll

Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Old 10-09-17, 10:17 AM
  #126  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 38,110
Received 1,172 Likes on 902 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Lt Ripley
We learned as K learned. Well done.


This isn't Prometheus and whatever the hell the other one was level.


It's the middle part of a trilogy that we will never see finished.
Old 10-09-17, 10:20 AM
  #127  
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Llama School
Posts: 6,538
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Yawn. You want a trilogy. None is needed. Your big revolution movie would end up as nothing more than a cliche, as others have put it.

Blade Runner left things to the wonder, so does 49.
Old 10-09-17, 10:43 AM
  #128  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 38,110
Received 1,172 Likes on 902 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Look, I liked it enough, but that was my gripe. I'm still going to get the music score on vinyl and whatever "Art of" book they decide to release along with the BD. That was just my peeve. You loved it and that's great.
Old 10-09-17, 10:44 AM
  #129  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Why So Blu?
It's the middle part of a trilogy that we will never see finished.
You want a trilogy, doesn’t mean this was meant to be part of a trilogy (although if it did gangbusters I’m sure the studios would have been happy to make another, but that doesn’t mean it was intended as part of a trilogy).
Old 10-09-17, 10:47 AM
  #130  
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Llama School
Posts: 6,538
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Why So Blu?
Look, I liked it enough, but that was my gripe. I'm still going to get the music score on vinyl and whatever "Art of" book they decide to release along with the BD. That was just my peeve. You loved it and that's great.
I only gave it four. That may change in time.
Old 10-09-17, 11:23 AM
  #131  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

I dunno, I found the Joi side-story to be pretty important. What makes things human? That was the point of the original Blade Runner and Joi - by shedding even the physical - can the human experience be replicated? Really when it comes down to it, the physical replicants and the virtual ones are the same. Except one has a body. The Joi that is stuck naked on the big screen can never learn, but one that interacts with a human (well I guess a replicant) may have the capability to discover humanity. Thats the irony Joi was learning humanity from a replicant. The rooftop rain scene with Joi - man what a callback to Blade Runner - was really her birth while Roy's rooftop scene was his death. Loved it.


I could see why virtual partners are better than replicants. Cheaper, doesn't require any physical parts at all. No maintence.

It seemed to me that the world was slowly dying. Raw materials may not have been available on Earth to continue making replicants. We see the trash kids scavenging parts (LOL - I kept waiting for Rey to make a guest appearance here). By having replicants that could reproduce, the need for raw materials would be eliminated. That was the point. Wallace needed raw materials to continue his exploration into deep space or whatever, and he simply did not have the raw materials to do so. Replicants that could reproduce - while remaining loyal - would be unbelievably valuable in that world.

Last edited by chanster; 10-09-17 at 11:29 AM.
Old 10-09-17, 11:29 AM
  #132  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 38,110
Received 1,172 Likes on 902 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Supermallet
You want a trilogy, doesn’t mean this was meant to be part of a trilogy (although if it did gangbusters I’m sure the studios would have been happy to make another, but that doesn’t mean it was intended as part of a trilogy).

I don't know -- Ridley is the boss man on this project. Just cuz Denis directed it doesn't mean he has final say. Scott also contributed to the screenplay (uncredited), so I wouldn't be surprised if he told Denis to insert things that could be taken further in a future installment. Doesn't necessarily have to be a 3rd film, but it can be a future short film, animated series, etc.
Old 10-09-17, 11:49 AM
  #133  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Save Ferris
I couldn't get past the thought that she was just a pawn linked to the big corporation. They gave the few subtle warning signs. I never cared for her as a character and I kept waiting for her betrayal.

The 'wonder in her eyes' was fine but she had no skin. I couldn't believe she was anything more than faking her whole existence. A replicant by design is more susceptible to the human condition and independent thought (rebellion) because it is so much closer to human: Skin, eyes, heartbeat, genitals.

The theme from the original Blade Runner is that when you make something so human, you get the added results of surprising human behavior.

The virtual girlfriend in BR 2049 is so much further removed from the human experince. Shes more computer than human because of her limited input and lack of 'fleshy' hardware.
I think you are correct that Joi is just acting as she is programmed and is not akin to a Replicant. However, I think you’re also missing something in the story.

The entire film, K moves away from his baseline (which keeps him docile/subservient) because he is being fed false information. He has memories but he knows they are implants. He has a girlfriend that he knows is a simulation. He has a level of distance from the world due to what he is but also due to how he perceives things to be, and that appears to be intentional on the part of the Wallace Corporation to help keep their Replicants in line.

K’s actions hinge on a pair of assumptions: That the childhood memory is his and that Joi, despite not being “real”, has real feelings. He goes off his baseline because he believes he is the born child, and this feeling is reinforced by Joi, who even gives him a human name. However, the memory is an illegal implant and Joi is doing what she is programmed to do, please her user. As a result, K is manipulated throughout the film, believing he is acting with his own agency, when in fact he’s merely responding to stimuli.

At the end of the film, he receives a revelation. He is not the born Replicant. He is acting off of a false assumption. He is then tasked with killing Deckard to save the real child. As he is on his way to do this, he receives a second revelation, that Joi never had nor was capable of actual feeling, and that even her name for him, Joe, was the result of her being programmed as a sex bot. This is the first time in the film that K actually has all the information and truth, and can act fully of his own free will. Again, K is tasked with killing Deckard, but chooses to save him so he can be reunited with his daughter. Deckard even asks K why he would do that, and K declines to answer.

Earlier in the film, K hesitates when tasked with killing the child, saying he’s never killed something that has been born before, and speculates that being born gives a being a soul. The police chief says K has been getting along just fine without a soul. By saving Deckard and reuniting him with his daughter, K reveals that he does have a soul. He is not giving the middle finger to the resistance by sparing Deckard, because as he says people will assume that Deckard drowned in the attack. He makes a conscious choice, at great personal risk, to prioritize a real relationship, because he now recognizes how fake his own relationships had been. He also recognizes how Deckard, living alone for 25+ years, is as alone as K has been despite the fact that K had been living among other people.

K makes a selfless decision to aid a man (and whether Deckard is a real human or a unique Replicant is immaterial to the story being told here, thankfully) that he identifies with, based on K’s real circumstances, devoid of illusions. That is evidence of his soul, and the capability for the soul in all Replicants.

The fight with Luv is small in scope but large in implication. It is materially a battle for Deckard but it is fundamentally a battle for K’s soul.

I’m not sure if I’d call 2049 a masterpiece but it is not as paper thin as it’s detractors are claiming. It has depth and the story works in service to the themes, which I think AO Scott misses in his review that was posted a few posts back. The narrative twist in the film isn't a Sixth Sense sort of “look at how clever we are” twist that makes the movie meaningless after two viewings, the revelation of K’s identity is an essential moment in his development as a character, and knowing it in advance changes how you view the film, which allows for endless repeat viewings.
Old 10-09-17, 11:56 AM
  #134  
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Llama School
Posts: 6,538
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Ahh, "Joe" flew right past me.
Old 10-09-17, 12:02 PM
  #135  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 13,798
Likes: 0
Received 157 Likes on 119 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Supermallet
I’m not sure if I’d call 2049 a masterpiece but it is not as paper thin as it’s detractors are claiming.
This is why I wanted to get my thoughts out before being swayed by reading here. However the more I read from the detractors and the fans of the movie push me more and more towards really liking this movie. To me the relationship with Joi is central to my enjoyment, him figuring out that she was just doing what she was programmed to do thus leading him to go against his programming in my opinion led him to being more than just K.
Old 10-09-17, 12:56 PM
  #136  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
JeremyM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 1,635
Received 89 Likes on 63 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

What's interesting about Joi being programmed to "love" K is that we also have Wallace taunting Deckard, saying that Rachael was programmed to love him (and he to love her).

The choice of Deckard to reject the new model is something someone smarter than me can drill down on (looking at you Supermallet). Obviously it was more than her eyes, and he doesn't have the shared experiences with this Rachael as he did with the original--the same reason K freaks out about losing Joi. He could buy a new model or "product", but it wouldn't have the experiences they had (apparently lots of eating fake food and listening to Sinatra).
Old 10-09-17, 01:12 PM
  #137  
Moderator
 
wendersfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: America!
Posts: 33,922
Received 164 Likes on 120 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by johnnysd
Maybe I am just not a sophisticated enough viewer or just nor mainstream enough or something but this movie was a complete miss for me. I really did not like it all.

First of all, it is boring. The long long shots and slow movements, just seemed to be screaming "look at me, this is profound, this is important" But none of it was. This was a story that could have easily been told in 50 minutes but is over 3 times that.

The plot is dull, uber-derivative and cliched and just not really all that interesting. And the climax is just ludicrous crap stolen from a zillion B grade movies.

The score was terrible. It added nothing to the movie, was uber loud and unintersting, Seemed like it consisted of like 4 very loud slightly discordant distorted notes, and rumbling.Seriously, rumbling was the main component of the soundtrack.

More than all that it really had nothing to say. The main them was essentially exposition 30 minutes into the movie.

I did like Joi and her arc, it was the only interesting thing in the entire movie.

And Ford's role may have been the least interesting role he has ever had. I mean he has a ludicrous and completely extraneous battle in front of Vegas holograms that I guess ended on what was supposed to be a funny note, and then he gets tied into a shuttle and sits there for 10 minutes playing with his handcuffs, And then they end with a forced Han Solo smirk.

Jared Leto was awful and boring.

I have not seen this mentioned elsewhere but to me, a guy, it seemed amazingly misogynistic. The only woman actually treated with respect in this movie is a hologram, and it just seemed to view women as objects, bitches and kind of disposable.

The whole movie would have been better with Rachel in hiding and Deckard dead.

I don't hate the movie, I am just sort of indifferent to it. It is boring, cliched, overlong and has nothing to say. A mere shadow of the original.

2.5 stars for some decent cinematography and the Joi subplot. Production value was high, visuals were redundant and not all that interesting for the most art.
I agree with all of this. I have no issue with long, slow movies, but this one was long, slow, and pointless, and really quite stupid. It was the cinematic equivalent of bad prog-rock, loud and boring, and with delusions of some deep message that's in reality shallow and trite.

Not to mention the misogyny.
Old 10-09-17, 01:16 PM
  #138  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by JeremyM
What's interesting about Joi being programmed to "love" K is that we also have Wallace taunting Deckard, saying that Rachael was programmed to love him (and he to love her).

The choice of Deckard to reject the new model is something someone smarter than me can drill down on (looking at you Supermallet). Obviously it was more than her eyes, and he doesn't have the shared experiences with this Rachael as he did with the original--the same reason K freaks out about losing Joi. He could buy a new model or "product", but it wouldn't have the experiences they had (apparently lots of eating fake food and listening to Sinatra).
I think that’s exactly what it was, a taunt. The characters in the film make several references to how little data survived the blackout, and there’s no evidence that he has the data of how Rachael (and if he were a Replicant, Deckard) was actually designed, because if he did have that data he’d have the information on how to make Replicants that can breed. It’s a ploy and it fails precisely because Deckard and Rachael shared a real emotional connection. Further, Deckard’s arc in the original leads to him seeing Replicants as real people, so the idea of a copy of Rachael would ultimately be offensive to him, even if he is tempted and surprised by her initial appearance.
Old 10-09-17, 01:30 PM
  #139  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by wendersfan
Not to mention the misogyny.
This is something I’ve been wrangling with. On the surface the film does appear to treat women pretty terribly. The most prominent female characters are a sex bot, a vicious killer, a prostitute, a woman stuck in a glass cage, and a police chief. The only seemingly positive portrayal is Robin Wright, who is dimensional and in a position of power.

However, Villeneuve just made two films with strong, well developed female leads. He doesn’t strike me as a misogynistic filmmaker. So I wonder if there’s something more going on here. In the world of Blade Runner, people are commodities. Replicants are slave laborers with no agency of their own. But we don’t see regular people living good lives either. There’s the disconnected ultra rich who think they are gods, there is the exploited underclass of the Replicants, and the few regular people we encounter seem to be just trudging along (the street vendors in the original film and the other residents of K’s apartment in the new movie). Others are actively fighting to survive, like the scavengers in the garbage dumps. The industrialists believe they are improving society with their products, but everyone outside of their walls is exploited and suffering.

The women in the film, as their own form of underclass (as they are in real life), are even more exploited. A female Replicant is eviscerated for her inability to have children (how poignant given that there are sections of our society who seem to only value women for their ability to procreate and raise children). Luv has to minimize her emotions to survive in a man’s world (and how often are women told they’re too emotional?), and be even more ruthless than those around her to succeed (a tactic many working women will recognize). The presence of digital companions push men and women away from each other, something we’re seeing happening in Japan and people who form online relationships and forgo in person relationships.

It is possible I’m reading too much into it, and the script is just shitty to women. However, I think the treatment of the women in the film is a conscious attempt to reflect how we treat women in the here and now, something good sci-fi strives for.

Last edited by Supermallet; 10-09-17 at 02:50 PM.
Old 10-09-17, 01:42 PM
  #140  
Dan
DVD Talk Hero
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: In the straps of boots
Posts: 27,980
Received 1,178 Likes on 833 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Supermallet
This is something I’ve been wrangling with. On the surface the film does appear to treat women pretty terribly. The most prominent female characters are a sex bot, a vicious killer, a prostitute, a woman stuck in a glass cage, and a police chief. The only seemingly positive portrayal is Robin Wright, who is dimensional and in a position of power.

However, Villeneuve just made two films with strong, well developed female leads. He doesn’t strike me as a misogynistic filmmaker. So I wonder if there’s something more going on here. In the world of Blade Runner, people are commodities. Replicants are slave laborers with no agency of their own. But we don’t see regular people living good lives either. There’s the disconnected ultra rich who think they are gods, there is the exploited underclass of the Replicants, and the few regular people we encounter seem to be just trudging along (the street vendors in the original film and the other residents of K’s apartment in the new movie). Others are actively fighting to survive, like the scavengers in the garbage dumps. The industrialists believe they are improving society with their products, but everyone outside of their walls is exploited and suffering.

The women in the film, as their own form of underclass (as they are in real life), are even more exploited. A female Replicant is eviscerated for her inability to have children (how poignant given that there are sections of our society who seem to only value women for their ability to procreate and raise children). Luv has to minimize her emotions to survive in a man’s world (and how often are women told they’re too emotional?), and be even more ruthless than those around her to succeed (a tactic many working women will recognize). The presence of digital companions push men and women away from each other, something we’re seeing happening in Japan and people who form online relationships and forgo in person relationships.

It is possible I’m reading too much into it, and the script is just shorty to women. However, I think the treatment of the women in the film is a conscious attempt to reflect how we treat women in the here and now, something good sci-fi strives for.
This is an excellent analysis of all these themes, and I think you're right on the money. But I also think it's okay that so much of this is not immediately obvious, and people are right to question it and talk about it.
Old 10-09-17, 02:58 PM
  #141  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 36,265
Received 1,236 Likes on 823 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

I seriously doubt that Villeneuve directed "Polytechnique" in order to glorify the wacko misogynist who shot a bunch of female engineering students in Montreal.
Old 10-09-17, 05:56 PM
  #142  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 11,298
Received 284 Likes on 208 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Question:

Spoiler:
How in the hell did they do the scene with Rachel at the end? Was that a look-a-like actress? Or was it Sean Young with CGI? Like Michael Douglas in "Ant-Man" and Kurt Russell in "Guardians 2". Regardless, it was flawless.

Edit: Never mind, found out! In case you didn't know, here you go: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/ho.../1100-6453912/
Old 10-09-17, 06:19 PM
  #143  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Troy Stiffler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Under an I-10 Overpass
Posts: 25,775
Received 359 Likes on 260 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

I figured it was a look-alike, mixed with CG (mapping the face from Blade Runner). That kind of stuff has gotten pretty good. And I'm sure it helped that the scene was darkly lit.
Old 10-09-17, 06:25 PM
  #144  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 11,298
Received 284 Likes on 208 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Troy Stiffler
I figured it was a look-alike, mixed with CG (mapping the face from Blade Runner). That kind of stuff has gotten pretty good. And I'm sure it helped that the scene was darkly lit.
The best I've ever seen it so far were the examples I used. And even those looked a bit odd. The CGI characters in "Rogue One" were abysmal. Villeneuve hit a grand slam with this. And set the bar really high. The close up scene wasn't all that darkly lit.
Old 10-09-17, 06:35 PM
  #145  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
JeremyM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 1,635
Received 89 Likes on 63 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

It was flawless.

Edit: The CGI Rachael I mean. The movie I thought was very good.

Last edited by JeremyM; 10-09-17 at 06:42 PM.
Old 10-09-17, 06:59 PM
  #146  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,018
Received 99 Likes on 79 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Supermallet
I think you are correct that Joi is just acting as she is programmed and is not akin to a Replicant. However, I think you’re also missing something in the story.

The entire film, K moves away from his baseline (which keeps him docile/subservient) because he is being fed false information. He has memories but he knows they are implants. He has a girlfriend that he knows is a simulation. He has a level of distance from the world due to what he is but also due to how he perceives things to be, and that appears to be intentional on the part of the Wallace Corporation to help keep their Replicants in line.

K’s actions hinge on a pair of assumptions: That the childhood memory is his and that Joi, despite not being “real”, has real feelings. He goes off his baseline because he believes he is the born child, and this feeling is reinforced by Joi, who even gives him a human name. However, the memory is an illegal implant and Joi is doing what she is programmed to do, please her user. As a result, K is manipulated throughout the film, believing he is acting with his own agency, when in fact he’s merely responding to stimuli.

At the end of the film, he receives a revelation. He is not the born Replicant. He is acting off of a false assumption. He is then tasked with killing Deckard to save the real child. As he is on his way to do this, he receives a second revelation, that Joi never had nor was capable of actual feeling, and that even her name for him, Joe, was the result of her being programmed as a sex bot. This is the first time in the film that K actually has all the information and truth, and can act fully of his own free will. Again, K is tasked with killing Deckard, but chooses to save him so he can be reunited with his daughter. Deckard even asks K why he would do that, and K declines to answer.

Earlier in the film, K hesitates when tasked with killing the child, saying he’s never killed something that has been born before, and speculates that being born gives a being a soul. The police chief says K has been getting along just fine without a soul. By saving Deckard and reuniting him with his daughter, K reveals that he does have a soul. He is not giving the middle finger to the resistance by sparing Deckard, because as he says people will assume that Deckard drowned in the attack. He makes a conscious choice, at great personal risk, to prioritize a real relationship, because he now recognizes how fake his own relationships had been. He also recognizes how Deckard, living alone for 25+ years, is as alone as K has been despite the fact that K had been living among other people.

K makes a selfless decision to aid a man (and whether Deckard is a real human or a unique Replicant is immaterial to the story being told here, thankfully) that he identifies with, based on K’s real circumstances, devoid of illusions. That is evidence of his soul, and the capability for the soul in all Replicants.

The fight with Luv is small in scope but large in implication. It is materially a battle for Deckard but it is fundamentally a battle for K’s soul.

I’m not sure if I’d call 2049 a masterpiece but it is not as paper thin as it’s detractors are claiming. It has depth and the story works in service to the themes, which I think AO Scott misses in his review that was posted a few posts back. The narrative twist in the film isn't a Sixth Sense sort of “look at how clever we are” twist that makes the movie meaningless after two viewings, the revelation of K’s identity is an essential moment in his development as a character, and knowing it in advance changes how you view the film, which allows for endless repeat viewings.
That's very thin. And I actually got all that. He never thought the memory was real until he realized the date on the tree was same as the horse so I think you got that a little wrong. But that arc has been told a zillion times, and better, and that is not enough for almost a 3 hour film. And the battle with Luv does not play that way. You can think of it that way, but it is a real stretch. Like I said, WAY too artsy and esoteric for me, while also being really simplistic and boring. And the score was painful to listen to. Those themes could be played in a different movie much better and tighter.
Old 10-09-17, 07:44 PM
  #147  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 38,110
Received 1,172 Likes on 902 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Daytripper
Question:

Spoiler:
How in the hell did they do the scene with Rachel at the end? Was that a look-a-like actress? Or was it Sean Young with CGI? Like Michael Douglas in "Ant-Man" and Kurt Russell in "Guardians 2". Regardless, it was flawless.

Edit: Never mind, found out! In case you didn't know, here you go: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/ho.../1100-6453912/


All of the above Sean Young participated as well.
Old 10-09-17, 08:16 PM
  #148  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Rex Power Colt-Robot Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,033
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Im still conflicted on Joi being "programmed". After the syncing session with K out of the room Joi gets pissy with the prostitute and tells her that shes done with her. Catty could be used to describe her attitude. It struck me as something human and vulnerable from something that was "programmed". She apparently felt jealous and incomplete that a fleshy human could be closer to K than she ever could.

Nitpick: the drones drove me nuts. Never saw BR as a conduit of what tech would evolve into. It just screams "present day movie!" every time one was on screen as drones are a popular topic of discussion. BR was always, to me, about humanity and society.
Old 10-09-17, 09:12 PM
  #149  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,150
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by johnnysd
That's very thin. And I actually got all that. He never thought the memory was real until he realized the date on the tree was same as the horse so I think you got that a little wrong. But that arc has been told a zillion times, and better, and that is not enough for almost a 3 hour film. And the battle with Luv does not play that way. You can think of it that way, but it is a real stretch. Like I said, WAY too artsy and esoteric for me, while also being really simplistic and boring. And the score was painful to listen to. Those themes could be played in a different movie much better and tighter.
Perhaps it wasn’t clear in my post, but I stated that K thought the memory was an implant, until he thought it was real, only to discover that it is indeed an implant but of a real memory.

And it sounds like the movie just wasn’t for you. I’m going to see it again tomorrow to get a better sense of it. At this moment I don’t think it’s a masterpiece on par with the original but I haven’t been able to stop thinking about it since Thursday and that’s a sign of a great movie to me.

The CGI Rachael was a million times better than Tarkin or Leia in Rogue One but it still looked off to me, especially since they used a clip from the actual film right before revealing her. It didn’t take me out of the flow of the movie the way the Rogue One CGI characters did.
Old 10-09-17, 09:19 PM
  #150  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: St Louis, MO
Posts: 7,942
Received 306 Likes on 209 Posts
Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Villeneuve, 2017) — The Spoiler Filled Reviews Thread

Originally Posted by Supermallet
This is something I’ve been wrangling with. On the surface the film does appear to treat women pretty terribly. The most prominent female characters are a sex bot, a vicious killer, a prostitute, a woman stuck in a glass cage, and a police chief. The only seemingly positive portrayal is Robin Wright, who is dimensional and in a position of power.

However, Villeneuve just made two films with strong, well developed female leads. He doesn’t strike me as a misogynistic filmmaker. So I wonder if there’s something more going on here. In the world of Blade Runner, people are commodities. Replicants are slave laborers with no agency of their own. But we don’t see regular people living good lives either. There’s the disconnected ultra rich who think they are gods, there is the exploited underclass of the Replicants, and the few regular people we encounter seem to be just trudging along (the street vendors in the original film and the other residents of K’s apartment in the new movie). Others are actively fighting to survive, like the scavengers in the garbage dumps. The industrialists believe they are improving society with their products, but everyone outside of their walls is exploited and suffering.

The women in the film, as their own form of underclass (as they are in real life), are even more exploited. A female Replicant is eviscerated for her inability to have children (how poignant given that there are sections of our society who seem to only value women for their ability to procreate and raise children). Luv has to minimize her emotions to survive in a man’s world (and how often are women told they’re too emotional?), and be even more ruthless than those around her to succeed (a tactic many working women will recognize). The presence of digital companions push men and women away from each other, something we’re seeing happening in Japan and people who form online relationships and forgo in person relationships.

It is possible I’m reading too much into it, and the script is just shitty to women. However, I think the treatment of the women in the film is a conscious attempt to reflect how we treat women in the here and now, something good sci-fi strives for.
I'm with you on this analysis. I think it's also pertinent that the only character in the movie who represents a sense of hope is female (Deckard's daughter). Her original savior is also female and currently the leader of the replicant revolutionary army. And despite the fact that some of them meet their demise, pretty much every character in this movie in a real position of power is female, with Wallace being the one exception.

That exception is notable because all of the supposed "misogynistic" violence toward female characters comes at the hands of Wallace (either directly or indirectly via his surrogate, Luv). Luv is the only female character killed by a different man and K destroys her to save Deckard, and more importantly, Deckard's daughter (from also being mistreated/dissected by Wallace). In my opinion, there's a pretty obvious subtext to all of this: Wallace represents the devaluing of women - he sees them merely as reproductive hosts, dispensable sexual manipulators, slaves to do his dirty work, or threats to his power - none of which is glorified in the story. Wallace is the villain. The character of Joi is central to all of this. In many ways, she is a microcosm of Wallace's view of women. It's no coincidence that the Wallace logo shows up every time she clicks off. K ultimately comes to recognize that view for the fallacy that it is and is then motivated to try to save the object of hope for "his kind" - a female with unique and original gifts.

Last edited by kefrank; 10-09-17 at 09:38 PM.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.