this is probably without any doubt the greatest sci-fi sequel ever made
>back to 1982
>Blade Runner is released
>not that good in Box Office
>considered masterpiece years later
>movie still not that perfect
>even in Final Cut
>Blade Runner 2049 is released 35 years later
>failure in Box Office
>way better than original
>will be considered a masterpiece in the years to come
this is probably one of the best movies i've watched, almost perfection.
Other urls found in this thread:
putlocker.io
twitter.com
A E S T H E T I C
my only complaint is that this is such as shit poster, looks like some gotg shit
It was really good but I feel like the resistance sub plot could have been cut completely.
That wasn't even a subplot desu
They ran over their budget probably.
Fan posters are better
You kind of need it in there though, or else K's decision has less weight.
He basically said "fuck you" to every faction that wanted to use him, he made his own choice and in the end found his soul
I'll just post more
I honestly feel like we didn't need to see Wallace. Why not have Luv do all the dirty work and have him in the shadows?
I can’t wait to see it again this weekend.
...
James Jean
I don't even know what it was. Why introduce all that shit 3/4s into the movie and have it go nowhere?
...
fucking retard alert
I rewatched the Final Cut after seeing 2049.
2049 is good but lacks some of the charm that the original had. The villains were not at all sympathetic while in the original Roy and company were both entertaining and sympathetic as antagonists. 2049 was also a bit too long and lacked some of the lighthearted moments that the original had.
If Wallace was better, and certain scenes were cut to make the overall run time closer to 2 hours and maybe 20 minutes, I think 2049 would have been near flawless, instead of just great.
...
What's the red circle?
I'm going to see this alone tomorrow. I've heard good things and that it's one of those movies better watched without a woman complaining right beside you that it's boring
Resistance was simply there as an exposition device to tell him he wasn't special.
A real kick in the balls from no where
i like the sex robots.
the movie was racist with an all white cast as villans or heros. jared leto was pretentious. should have been some old dude like christopher lee or young fat chow or richard gere.
the sound was awful too, the music was too loud. should have gotten nine inch nails frontman to do it.
...
in the original i had sympathy with the "villain"
in 2049 i had sympathy for the hero.
that being said, both movies have pros and cons but 2049 for me is less convoluted than the original Blade Runner.
Why was Vegas so orange?
I know there was a dirty bomb that must have kicked up a ton of dust, but that happened over 30 years ago.
...
That was the final push he needed to go over the edge to real humanity. In losing everything that made him "special", he knew that being special wasn't about how he was made but the experiences that he has. The payoff at the end where he dies in real snow vs the real special one experiencing fake snow would have been pointless if K was the special one all along.
It's just a wasteland desert turn off your brain desu, it's about as orange as fury roads wasteland
Vegas is in a the middle of a desert. Not hard to image the desert swallowing the city up.
Probably for the same reason that it was snowing in Los Angeles. The environment is completely fucked. Vegas is probably just sitting in a stagnant cloud of dust or w/e. It's also a bit less about the specifics of how the weather is fucked up and more of very strong visuals conveying that to the user. No one is going to look at a desolate Vegas surrounded by cheeto smog and think: "Oh well this future isn't so bad, this seems like a nice place"
Yeah I get that. Roy and K were both the hearts of each film. And ironically both were clearly defined as replicants.
But I would argue that Wallace is a worst villain than Deckard is a protagonist.
And really? 2049 was far more convoluted than the original Blade Runner, which had a pretty basic story.
I actually liked Wallace as a foil to Tyrell. If Tyrell was meant to be a sort of Edwin Land or Henry Ford, a simple genius who humbly brought amazing things into the world and changed it forever in the process, then Wallace was reflective of today's megalomaniacal tech billionaires like Jobs, Bezos, or Musk, and his superficial image-driven obsessions, his raging god complex, and his complete inability to match the intellectual might of the greater industrialist who came before him worked perfectly in terms of what he was probably meant to be.
...
That looks like the cover for a 90s PC game... in a bad way.
fuck man that poster is actually better lmao
Wallace was a tyrellaboo
>best waifu in her final form
best poster yet
2049 was far more easy to follow (at least for me)
i liked Wallace too, he wanted to be god but he wasnt even near, Deckard was God.
>But I would argue that Wallace is a worst villain than Deckard is a protagonist.
Luv is the villain, Wallace is just a plot device like Tyrell.
This movie was frustratingly good. Unlike Fury Road which was an insanely well made movie but had enough kinetic action and lightning fast edits to keep you propelled along BR2049 makes you sit and stare at it for these long ass shots while characters slowly and methodically emote. And it's just fucking beautiful and masterfully handled. Going from that to watching the trailer for Pacific Rim 2 was like being splashed in the face with a bucket of piss.
I love the effect on this one dont know what you call it
Wallace as a foil to Tyrell is fine, but Tyrell was not a major antagonistic force in the original but an important side character.
Wallace on the other hand is meant to be the main baddie, which just doesn't work as well as the original Nexus 6 crew.
Lol it was stupid and you know it
I would argue that Wallace wasn't the real danger in this movie. Luv was. And she was a very interesting character. Wallace is the Gaff to Luv's Deckard.
>Robots can have waifus
what the shit?
I absolutely loved it. Just made a reservation at my country's largest cinema to watch it again in English next week (I'm a mainlander europoor). This is the kind of kino that you won't see again for at least half a decade, better to enjoy it thoroughly.
I hated how open they left it for a sequel that probably won't happen now.
Luv is the main antagonist? How? Shes nothing but a boring pawn for Wallace.
The original was very easy to follow, bringing a cop back out of retirement to hunt down some escaped criminals kind of trope.
Roy seems so overrated his topless running around seemed so out of place and he didnt do much apart from give Leto tier lines and the tears in the rain
WOW SO DEEP
She has more screen time
>Shes nothing but a boring pawn for Wallace.
Well she was if you ignore all her intricacy, her obsession with being the best angel, her fondness of K when he said she must be special cause all the special ones get names etc etc etc
This, the last movie that approached this levels of GOAT was Oblivion and even that had its share of flaws
>WOW SO DEEP
It is not. A hero losing everything before he learns what is important to him isn't some unique story that hasn't been told before.
Keep in mind I haven't seen the first BR, but I know a little about it.
I was really disappointed with the new movie. It's far too long and it takes forever for stuff to happen. Establishing shots a-plenty! The characters were forgettable, and their motivations weren't explained well. What's up with gray-eye's dude. What about his lady friend? Why did he gut that naked chick? What were the little floaty drone things? What were the chips she stuck on his neck? How did K get the memories of the other chick? If K didn't "run" like the Nexus 8 models then why did he end up running? Why did K bang the prostitute? Why have his waifu mimic her movements? (I really didn't care when she died either. Her character wasn't interesting. Plus her death is foreshadowed hardcore. The idea of holographic companions is really interesting and something I would absolutely expect in the world, but that's not neither here nor there)
Beyond little stuff like that it's hard to hear most of the dialogue, especially sense it's flowery AF.
Just left with feeling like it was mediocre.
Anyone else just can't picture the first guy as anyone other than Drax? I didn't recognize him at first because he wasn't blue and screaming.
It owed too much, too flagrantly to the original. Disappointed the premise wasn't more independent.
No shit I was being sarcastic
>its a capeshitter can't appreciate kino epsiode
Idk how you can watch this movie and think Luv is a boring character
You say that but there are people who say that scene with the ad Joi was K accepting his entire life is fake.
>Keep in mind I haven't seen the first BR
opinion discarded
Is this a subtle troll or are you just ignorant? Not sure why you would even go to see a sequel if you haven't seen the first one. No offense but you sound like a complete pleb.
Eh, I have a hard time finding a better villain to choose than Wallace since this was clearly another classic noir throwback to the classic "a small case that turns big" trope.
Two nights later, 2049 reminds me a ton of Chinatown, with Wallace/Corp as the Noah Cross character, a simple rich weirdo who gets more and more sinister as the film. progresses. The more think about it, the less I hate it.
>Why did he gut that naked chick?
That question alone shows me how fucking plebtastic you are.
Why would a creator with a god complex destroy a tool that has no use?
It had gode rotentomato score so I liek this KINO movie
>its not easy to understand so its a bad movie
biggest complaint is that it clearly tried to follow the story structure of the original/noir in general, but they made the mistake of bringing minor characters back to drive the plot. Consider the original blade runner, where the only character Deckard runs into more than once in Rachel and that is driven by her character. In Luv and the prositute are returned for the sole purpose of driving the plot forward which is an anti-pattern of the noir genre.
Why though?
A lot of my problems would likely still remain even If I had watched the first one.
I didn't expect it to rely so heavily on the first and why would I? Sequels should still be good independent of their predecessor.
Only one in the theater. What scene should I ejaculate during?
>villain lets hero get away
>TWICE
The second time made a bit more sense, had to get out of there and Ford was about to drown, I get it. BUT WHY THE FUCK DID LUV SPARE K IN THE RADIATION ZONE? WHY WHY WHY THERE WAS NO FUCKING REASON FOR THAT THE REST OF THE MOVIE LITERALLY SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED
OH IM A COL BLOODED KILLER, I SNAP SPINES AND STAB POLICE CHIEFS BUT NO NO NO I WONT TOUCH THE PROTAGONIST WHEN HE'S DOWN
FUCK YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Didn't say it was bad. Just mediocre. I left disappointed.
when hologram waifu shows her perky titties
you just didn't understand the movie, get over it.
Okay thanks user I'll start edging now
Like empire strikes back or back to future II, right?
Also, if you go to see the sequel of a movie that is considered an influential masterpiece of sci-fi, and you post here, you go and watch it.
Unless, as I think, you are bing intentionally disingenuous.
The drowning sequence.
she had a hard on for him, pay more attention
for the 736527357234nth time.
She had a thing, or at last a conflicted attraction for him. Think about what happens when they met.
The artist drew this on his iPad with an Apple pen and procreate. Pretty fucking impressive imo.
You only needed a basic knowledge of the plot, though.
Not a codex of characters and corporations.
>way better than original
god... gtfo reddit fag
>real state of america
dude, in Brazil, Blade Runner 2049 session was packed af
I know mate, i know. BR and mother! saved this year.
>Why did K bang the prostitute? Why have his waifu mimic her movements?
Okay I can't believe anyone is this stupid. You must not watch much beyond Marvel movies right? And you clearly have trouble understanding basic character interactions.
>Nu/tv/ would rather read plot summaries online than actually watch a film
I just don't understand why you would intentionally ruin your experience by not watching the first one. It's a 2 hour movie, there's no excuse for being this stubborn.
For the first half of the movie I was deeply interested in her. But towards the end she just became a bad guy, with little depth. I feel like she needed a bit more in the end to fully flesh out her motivations.
>this is probably one of the best movies i've watched, almost perfection.
Jesus Christ.
Maybe because his waifu was a boring character that I had no attachment to?
Because I lack access to most outlets? And, as i said before, I didn't expect it to draw so heavily on source material?
And these only answer problems I had with the plot and not the characters.
I wish there was a version of this poster that featured Officer K prominently as much as it did Joi.
This particular poster matched the original 1982 Blade Runner poster in terms of how the poster conveys the respective characters importance to the movie
>I didn't expect it to draw so heavily on source material
You are everything fucking wrong with modern cinema. I think Kingsmen is still showing. Go watch that instead.
>Because I lack access to most outlets?
5 second google search
putlocker.io
now you literally have no excuse
You don't need attachment to something in order to follow basic character motivations. Not unless you actually have some sort of emotional/complex neurological disorder such as autism or something.
>why have his waifu mimic her movements
How brain dead can you be? TO SIMULATE PHYSICAL SEX. How clearly can they state such basic details? And if you had trouble comprehending that brain buster, I'm sure the whole movie made your head hurt something awful.
Tyrell had a God complex as big as Wallace's, he just appeared more benevolent, when he really wasn't. He made Rachel- then discarded her (he won't answer my calls). Why? Just to make a replicant that could fool the Voight Comp test to stroke his ego. When Roy revealed himself he called him the "Prodigal Son". Tyrell was just as bad as Wallace. The scene where Wallace killed his newest replicant was pointless other than to establish his sadistic God complex- which isn't necessary. Wallace could have been written better.
lmao. You sure it's not the rabid fanboyism that praises movies as "da best ever made?" Didn't watch kingsman 2, got bad ratings. Wasn't wroth my 10 bucks.
I am not saying it is the da best ever made. I am saying you are a fucking imbecile going into a sequel and then saying shit like "I didn't expect it to draw so heavily on source material".
You are the type of faggot to order fish and complain why does your fish taste like fish.
You aren't but OP sure is.
I think it was necessary to make his motivations clear so that he doesn't come off as a cartoon villain, and also showing his personality as this genius with a god complex informed both Luv's personality and motivations, and a lot of what's changed about the world of BR in general. His domineering personality goes hand in hand with the way the world seems deader
Doesn't make you any less of a turbo pleb.
It would have been Bowie if he hadn't died/turned it down due his declining health.
Yeah and a dude who thinks the last movie he saw is the best movie ever is still less of a retard than the guy who goes to see a sequel without seeing the first one then whines that they don't get it.
Maybe not. Maybe not.
And what about the criticism that can't be explained by simply "watching the first one?"