CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › BLADE RUNNER 2049 - POST Release
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

BLADE RUNNER 2049 - POST Release - Page 20

post #951 of 1044

Alien 3 is godawful.

post #952 of 1044

God that narration is so fucking serious it's too funny.

 

I'm in awe of Alien 3, but I want that guy to rethink his approach to talking about it. 

 

The way Alien 3 uses its setting to place us back into the archaic Industrial Age as if it's the Medieval Times, still retaining its space and futuristic aesthetic. The wooden planet is an interesting one, but much more fantasy than this series was ever allowed to be. One of these days I'd like to see a movie explore that, but not Alien. 


Edited by Carnotaur3 - 10/20/17 at 1:05pm
post #953 of 1044

I find Scout Tafoya's voice soothing! 

 

He still does The Unloved. Last one was on Survival of the Dead a few months ago. 

post #954 of 1044

Alien 3 Assembly Cut? 

 

Real good. 

post #955 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 
We cool, Schwartz?

 

Of course.  I wanted to know what you saw in it, and you answered - you can jam out with some good subtext even if the text is not all the way there.  Wasn't trying to give offense; I thought you liked talking about your more oddball tastes.

post #956 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post

Of course.  I wanted to know what you saw in it, and you answered - you can jam out with some good subtext even if the text is not all the way there.  Wasn't trying to give offense; I thought you liked talking about your more oddball tastes.

I was joking about our Civil War bickering the other day! I was like, uh oh, here goes Schwartz again.

I do talk a lot.
post #957 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

I don't know if this was mentioned, but that whole opening scene is a nod to the original opening of the first Blade Runner in one of the early scripts.

Yeah, I'd just watched the making of doc a couple of days before seeing Blade Runner 2049, so seeing that pot on the stove was a pretty sweet moment of realization.
post #958 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucho View Post

Yeah, I'd just watched the making of doc a couple of days before seeing Blade Runner 2049, so seeing that pot on the stove was a pretty sweet moment of realization.

The sound design for that boiling pot was exquisite. I swore I could smell rice when K leans over it at the end.
post #959 of 1044

Some of ya'all may need to seek immediate medical help, cause it's been way more than four hours since you heard the sound of that boiling pot in Blade Runner 2049 and the ... swelling ... has not subsided.  

post #960 of 1044
Alien 3?

It was pretty good.
post #961 of 1044
Lifeling Alien 3 fan over here.

The WWZ-verse as established is PG-13 nonsense with black blood dribbling, fast running/swarming/climbing "zombies". I don't know how the hell Fincher is going to make anything watchable out of that unless they scrap it all and start with a clean slate.

In a recent interview, Fincher says he and the writer are "trying to find a reason to make the movie, not an excuse." Not exactly a mindblowing pitch...
post #962 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Reese View Post

The WWZ-verse as established is PG-13 nonsense with black blood dribbling, fast running/swarming/climbing "zombies". I don't know how the hell Fincher is going to make anything watchable out of that unless they scrap it all and start with a clean slate.

 

It's a wholly limited setup I can't get excited about, Fincher or not.

post #963 of 1044

That's certainly fair.

 

Kind of sounds like not even Fincher knows if he can make it something worth his time, lol!

post #964 of 1044
post #965 of 1044

there's one of Ford looking like he's in an alternate universe in which he starred in UNBREAKABLE!

post #966 of 1044

This really had no chance at the box office. A nearly 3 hour adult science fiction movie? Oof.

 

I'll definitely watch this when it hits VOD.

post #967 of 1044

Why not now? Enjoy the large screen effect.

post #968 of 1044

The showtimes for this now don't work for me and it looks like it's out of theaters by Friday.

post #969 of 1044

The most realistic thing about this movie is that it takes a corporation eight product lines of malfunctioning, murderous robot people before they think "we should come up with an unobtrusive but undeniable identification mark for Replicants."

post #970 of 1044

Yeah, I need to catch up and see this soon. It's leaving theaters in a hurry now. 

post #971 of 1044
One of the dumb-as-rocks aspects of the original is the fact that there are pictures of replicants’ faces on file, yet Holden still tried to Voight-Kampff Leon.

2049 sands this down by having Sapper and Freysa 30 years older than their pictures, allowing for a need to definitively identify them.

But man, as much as I love the original it’s like Scott didn’t read the script and consequently included visuals that contradict the narrative...
post #972 of 1044

A colleague of mine complained about having to watch the first film.

 

"But its so old! It can't be good. I tried watching Star Wars 4 to 6 (The Original Trilogy) recently and hated it. All the characters just spent the time talking."

 

Sigh.

post #973 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post
 

A colleague of mine complained about having to watch the first film.

 

"But its so old! It can't be good. I tried watching Star Wars 4 to 6 (The Original Trilogy) recently and hated it. All the characters just spent the time talking."

 

Sigh.


I'll join you in that sigh.

 

 

Sigh

post #974 of 1044

Boy is she really going to hate BR 2049.

 

Is this really what youngsters are like these days?

post #975 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

One of the dumb-as-rocks aspects of the original is the fact that there are pictures of replicants’ faces on file, yet Holden still tried to Voight-Kampff Leon.

 

IIRC that was a late addition because test audiences were finding the plot hard to follow. But yes it didn't make a whole lot of sense.

post #976 of 1044


yeah, but maybe the Voight-Kampff is the way to make sure. just because a human looks like a certain replicant doesn't mean you should retire him on the spot, you know.

 

human until Voight-Kampffed skin-job!

post #977 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post
 

 

IIRC that was a late addition because test audiences were finding the plot hard to follow. But yes it didn't make a whole lot of sense.

 

Also it's never explained how Leon escaped the Tyrell building after he ended the test.

post #978 of 1044

It's also never explained why there's light streaming into the testing room when it's dark outside.

post #979 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post
 

A colleague of mine complained about having to watch the first film.

 

"But its so old! It can't be good. I tried watching Star Wars 4 to 6 (The Original Trilogy) recently and hated it. All the characters just spent the time talking."

 

Do you need help burying the body? I assume you did the humane thing and relieved the earth of the burden of someone so stodgy they can't enjoy the OT.

post #980 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill View Post
 

 

Also it's never explained how Leon escaped the Tyrell building after he ended the test.


ugh. You guys are the fucking wooooorst.

post #981 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

One of the dumb-as-rocks aspects of the original is the fact that there are pictures of replicants’ faces on file, yet Holden still tried to Voight-Kampff Leon.

2049 sands this down by having Sapper and Freysa 30 years older than their pictures, allowing for a need to definitively identify them.

But man, as much as I love the original it’s like Scott didn’t read the script and consequently included visuals that contradict the narrative...

Or maybe each model has multiple copies in 2049. Like Cylons. Don't want to accidentally retire a Good Bautista instead of a Bautista on the lam, so better check that eyeball SN.
post #982 of 1044
They're all good Bautistas, Brent.
post #983 of 1044

I just pictured a nice little café where all the baristas are Bautistas.

 

The espresso cups look like little thumb caps in their giant hands.

post #984 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by wasp View Post

I just pictured a nice little café where all the baristas are Bautistas.

The espresso cups look like little thumb caps in their giant hands.

A
Bautista
Barista
How
Bonita
Bon
Appétit

- AO, 2017



* I may have had a beer with my haircut.
post #985 of 1044

Few things I've been thinking about how this movie affects the age old 'Is Deckard A Replicant' question.

 

A lot of people have rightly pointed out that they've come up with a story here that makes equal amount of sense whatever your personal answer to that question is. I actually think it's kind of genius how they came up with a story that does that, that is also a pretty good story on its own while also being a natural extension on what went before. Nice job on that, chaps.

 

But... there's a trope out there that I'm going to cutesily coin 'The Shrodinger'. This is when a film teases you with a mysterious either/or question, but one designed in such a way that both answers are equally true at the same time.

 

These can be fun, but IMO the really enduring movie mysteries are the ones that make you feel like there's a puzzle to be solved, a definitive answer forever tantalisingly out of reach. When a Schrodinger shows its hand it undercuts the intrigue because you know there isn't an answer, the ambiguity has been put there quite deliberately for its own sake.

 

Now, I think part of why the original Deckard mystery took off is that it wasn't one of these, it evolved quite organically. In the theatrical cut, any hints that he might be a Replicant were very subtle, and then less so in the later cuts. You got strident, contradicting opinions on it from the creative team. In some ways the hints that he is are too direct to ignore, on the other hand it didn't make a whole lot of plot sense at all and kind of felt like an afterthought. It's something that you could have proper arguments about.

 

The funny thing about what 2049 did is, by so meticulously designing a scenario where both answers can be true - bringing the question up in the text of the film, giving you reasons to think it isn't true while at the same time going out of their way to leave a clear space in the narrative where it could be true, and even retconning a motivation for Tyrell to do it - by doing all that, in a way it does definitively answer the question: Deckard is a Shrodinger. He both is and isn't a replicant, and I guess that's the end of it.

post #986 of 1044
I was listening to the empire podcast interview with wiggly scott and it's funny that he maintains that his intention of Deckard as replicant is the only way the 2049 makes sense

"you'll see!!!"

WIGGLY
post #987 of 1044

Ooh I meant to listen to that! I always enjoy how much Scott genuinely doesn't give a shit whether anyone agrees with him or not. He was on there a year or two back and started bigging up "A Good Year" in passing.

post #988 of 1044
The thing is, the mystery of Deckard being a replicant isn’t a particularly intriguing one.
post #989 of 1044

Why didn't Gandalf and Frodo just ask the Eagles to fly him and the ring to Mordor?

post #990 of 1044

What if destiny was never meant to be?

post #991 of 1044

Are we human or are we Dancer?**

 

 

**referring of course to Santa's reindeer.  

post #992 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlord View Post
 

Why didn't Gandalf and Frodo just ask the Eagles to fly him and the ring to Mordor?

 

Because the deus ex machina don't get down like that!

post #993 of 1044

"Does it matter whether my story is true?"

 

http://strangehorizons.com/non-fiction/articles/it-will-prove-invincible-blade-runner-2049-and-the-dreams-of-philip-k-dick/

 

Interesting analysis of Blade Runner 2049.

post #994 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCA View Post
 

"Does it matter whether my story is true?"

 

http://strangehorizons.com/non-fiction/articles/it-will-prove-invincible-blade-runner-2049-and-the-dreams-of-philip-k-dick/

 

Interesting analysis of Blade Runner 2049.

 

What an opening paragraph ...

post #995 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlord View Post
 

Why didn't Gandalf and Frodo just ask the Eagles to fly him and the ring to Mordor?

Because Sauron would have blasted them out of the sky before they got close?

 

 

 

 

Er, unicorn!

post #996 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post
 

The funny thing about what 2049 did is, by so meticulously designing a scenario where both answers can be true - bringing the question up in the text of the film, giving you reasons to think it isn't true while at the same time going out of their way to leave a clear space in the narrative where it could be true, and even retconning a motivation for Tyrell to do it - by doing all that, in a way it does definitively answer the question: Deckard is a Shrodinger. He both is and isn't a replicant, and I guess that's the end of it.

 

With both films arguing that there is no significant difference between humans and Replicants, it's only natural that the question becomes moot. The ambiguity surrounding Deckard's biological origins reinforces the movies' central thesis: humans are Replicants and Replicants are humans. The two possible Deckards are not Shrodingers (Shrodingii?), they're both alive, and in either case the exact same person. And so ambiguity becomes subtext. Whatever you'd find out about Deckard under a microscope is a triviality.

post #997 of 1044

Especially as we see instances like Wallace having cybernetic implants in order to see. If a replicant has a serial number on their bones or eyes, but a human has cybernetic implants, really what's the difference? 

post #998 of 1044
The difference is cybernetics are cooler.
post #999 of 1044
"Born pure" nonsense, I expect.
post #1000 of 1044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

Especially as we see instances like Wallace having cybernetic implants in order to see. If a replicant has a serial number on their bones or eyes, but a human has cybernetic implants, really what's the difference? 

Shininess.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › BLADE RUNNER 2049 - POST Release