I just saw blade runner 2049

I just saw blade runner 2049.

Hell has frozen over because the sequel is actually better than the original.

You're right.
>inb4 razorfirst tier autists

Ok,I'll bite. What do you prefer in 20049 that makes it better than the original?

It fucking sucked. Fuck off.

The expanded set pieces, the pov of a replicant, the amount of waifus, the gun play, the implications of humanities future, the relatively new and maturing take on romance, the revelation of who the child was not, the gooses emotional aloofness, the list goes on.

So much to love in one movie.

nothing happens in the original and the story was kinda meh

I wonder how much this feeds into my theory and how much is confirmation bias, but it does seem to me that people like 2049 for some very opposite reason why the original was loved.

Original was fresh, groundbreaking and envelope-pushing - even if so much of it was only accidental in retrospect. 2049 is consensual and working within safe, already defined and accepted boundaries. It's entertainment for people that want to feel smart about themselves.

this could be the same argument as super mario bros is the best game of all time

My argument isn't "Blade Runner is the best movie of all time and 2049 is bad" though.
I'm saying some of the reasons people like one more than the other are linked to how both films are actually doing pretty different things.
I have no issue with people liking 2049 more than I did. I'm pondering why the difference in te critical reception ( the " for people that want to feel smart about themselves" is probably a bit mean sounding, but after all the "if you don't like 2049 you're stupid and killing cinema" noise, I don't think it is unwarranted).

I think my intuition from yesterday is still the best way to frame where I'm coming from on this. Using Roland Barthe's terminology, Villeneuve is a transitive film-maker trying to mimic intransitive film-making, and it just doesn't work.

>the gooses emotional aloofness
I think it's more than just aloofness, it's a learned stoicism, he's been taught to repress any emotion for possibly his whole life as he likely went straight from the factory to the police dept
Those baseline tests are a constant reminder that they will kill him if he starts showing some humanity

Wasn't even close to the original.

It was good but flawed.

Why do you like it so much? I honestly didn't but I curious why you did.

Tied themes and story more coherently and in a more focused manner (e.g. no Rutger Hauer getting stigmatad for allusive purposes that aren't really justified). Narrative had a sense of mystery and intrigue. The central character was actually interesting as well-acted.

A house is only as good as its foundation.

Yeah it was smart to incorporate his autism into the role. There's probably a reason they chose him.

underratted post

I still don't know if that's 100% true. Part of Blade Runner the first's appeal is its staying power. How it still feels fresh a full 30 years after its original release.

It's still too early to tell if the new one will have that.

That said, my gut is telling me yes, and purely from a storytelling perspective, yes, the new one is leagues better than the original, which is nothing short of miraculous.

>There's probably a reason they chose him
Part was written specifically for him and was the only choice

It's a little unfair to say that 2049 is superior to the original. The original was like forty years ago, and a lot more than just the technology has advanced in that time. I think it's more accurate to say that 2049 improves upon the original in the ways that any great sequel should. The world is expanded while still feeling every bit like the same world, we go to a wider variety of locations whereas the original takes place entirely in the same cityscape. I think Ford is actually better in the second, has more emotional weight to his scenes. And the relationship between him and Rachel is more believable whereas it always seemed a bit forced to me in the first. There's a few cringeworthy parts in the original - the infamous enhance scene, which 2049 mirrors but does WAY better, and the bizarre choice for Ford to speak in that strange voice to a character who's never met his character prior, which I think was just a fuck you to Scott from Ford that somehow made it into the movie. There's nothing that strange or out of place in the new film. It's pitch-perfect.

tl;dr the original is an undisputed classic and the sequel tries to not only do it service but improve upon it like any sequel should

Agreed.. I am 42 and have seen a lot of films.. this movie really may be my all time favorite

Say what you will about this movie and how it compares to the original

I think the fact that we can mention this and the original movie in the same breath is, by itself, pretty damned amazing. The fact that we can have spirited arguments about which is better, and the fact that there's valid points in either's favor, that's pretty special.

I mean, who even remembers that there was a Robocop remake?

Interesting. One reason I have so mush resistance to 2049 is that it feels so much like conventional storytelling. It feels like a manufactured product.
I don't really see BR foregoing the usual narrative structures as a bad thing, quite the contrary. It's part of the appeal.

Which is why I'm probably more on the other side, I don't think it will have the same staying power (though it may have, for other reasons). It defines nothing. It contradicts nothing. It signifies nothing that isn't already prominent in the shared pool of public discourse.

This.

I was so concerned that this was going to be a forgettable, derivative cash grab. The fact that it can even hold a candle to the original, much less be considered perhaps even better, fills me with hope that good movies can still be made even with the industry being in such an atrocious state.

Do they pay shills to come to every thread about this movie and spew drivel like this?

>2049 is consensual and working within safe, already defined and accepted boundaries.

Fuck, this. All 2049 did was expand upon the idea of what it means to be human, and it did literally nothing else. There were some nice shots, but the cinematography was totally lack-luster compared to the first one. I watched the original a few weeks ago before this one, and I remember sitting there with my fucking mouth hanging open because the set pieces and visuals were so astoundingly good. Like good for modern movies, and it came out in the 80s.

too bad it bombed
>MAKE MORE CAPESHIT

Rutgers doesn't jam his head through a wall like he's a fucking looney tunes character for no reason

Oh shit, someone's saying something nice about a movie that isn't a shitpost or ego stroke!
Clearly he's a shill!

So you're saying they chose him?

>this movie really may be my all time favorite
>good cinematography
>lacking in every other category
WHY? I don't get it. HALP MEH!

Notice also how you shills all fucking type the same, in a manner not befitting of the site. Bet you won't even fucking say nigger you dick sucking faggot.

But most people here saw the original blade runner years after its release and had already been copied to death
To most people it wasn't "ground breaking"

Both films definitely have a somewhat throwbacky almost conventional touch to them as homage to noir and the gumshoe detective thing. But I think in some ways they draw influence from different aspects of noir. They both have the dark and rainy visuals obviously, but the first has the love story right out of a pulp novel (albeit with the added significance of the human-replicant romance). The second has a much more intricate and complicated story with multiple twists, which is totally a noir thing. I'd say 2049 has a totally classic noir detective story ending, too: the main character bleeding to death on the snowy steps while staring up at the sky totally made me think of something by Dashiell Hammett or Raymond Chandler.

quick post the video for the 100th time

t. HappyDeathDayShill

I disagree completely. It very clearly commentates on modern consumer culture in a way that's far more relevant and mimetic than the speculative sci-fi intentions of the original. The original didn't really say anything at all, while the new Blade Runner is cynical and satirical in ways the original never was. It re-purposes the "synthetic human" concept in a way that holds up a mirror to itself as a blockbuster consumer product with its own synthetic, "fictional" humans, epitomized by the CG return of Rachael.

Do you need a safe space?

Sup Forums is probably your speed.

It's just the typical reddit tier emotional numales that plague society. Has there been an "i cried" response yet?

>Terrible movie bombed because they spent over 150 million dollars making this trash

Feels fucking great.

>Sup Forums

I'm not racist, nigger.

It's funny because anytime there is any actual discussion about themes in this they all are just arguments of emotions and how people FEEL shit should be too, throwing any objectivity out the window.

Well obviously yes but there's a huge difference of connotation from 'they chose him' to the 'part was written for him' that I thought could be said. 'they chose him' could mean out of a number of actors

I don't appreciate your making fun of the left by using safe space as if it's a bad thing, asshole. All you're doing is invalidating the arguments the left has built with blood, sweat and tears.

>ENTHUSIASM IS FOR REDDITORS, YOU SHOULD HATE EVERYTHING LIKE ME

Staying power has nothing to do with box office returns, my friend. I wonder if you'll be just as butthurt when people are still talking about 2049 in the decades to come?

I do think this film was good, like actually a well put together cinematic work that presents and explores it's themes intelligently, but I worry that I am a bit biased because I've clearly latched onto it in an emotional and not objective way.
It really resonates with me and I've found myself going back to see it and on my own at that (two things I really doubted I'd ever do, especially for a big Hollywood release) and am thinking of going a third time.

I'm not arguing that's it's better than the original as a piece of art or even particularly impressive on it's own to most people.
It just happens to be almost perfect for me, it's like someone looked through my internet history.
/comfy/ threads, a desire for companionship, pretty faces, and despair about how unimportant I am

haha this!
anyone supporting this kike racemixing movie should be hanged like the niggers they are

There are plenty of discussions about the themes in the film when retards like you aren't shitting up the thread with your nonsense.

Then you're arguing with yourself. They're also very easy to call out.

>I wonder if you'll be just as butthurt when people are still talking about 2049 in the decades to come?


Ahahaha I bet you think people will remember the new Star Wars too.

What the fuck are you even trying to say at this point? Alt-rights, neo-nazis, and conservitards are the most sensitive and easily triggered people on the planet. They put the trannies they hate to total shame in that regard, and there is no better example of this than Sup Forums.

Everything pretty much. This movie was almost an hour longer than the original yet it went by quick; I found the original boring

You can't fucking read can you? I said WHEN there is discussion, not that there isn't.

>let me conflate this thing into something extreme
You have a lot of hate in you, buddy.

Nope. Hopefully while they're at it they'll forget about the original films too.

Sup shill

Yes and all you're doing is retroactively making fun of the left when you spew garbage like this.

>BR2K49 flops in America but does great everywhere else in the world

Americans are brainlets, what a shocker

>ahah you're actually secretly making fun of the other side by making fun of me

Not even a little bit. Step up your game.

I disagree.
In retrospect the original had a much much worse story, if only for the fact that the most interesting thing in it was the replicants, specially Roy. And we barely got what we wanted. The romance part very very weak, Deckard barely does his job and, in the end, his role is completely superfluous if you believe he's a replicant (I don't, fuck Scott), but I can forgive that for multiple reasons.

2049 is good for different reasons. The main story is more direct (is K the child) but there are tons of subtle stories going around and you just have to find them if you want. All the clues are there with barely any plot holes (unlike the original) so much to think about too. You leave the theater and think you have to see it again right away.

Loved both for diferent reasons, but 2049 just checked all the right boxes for me.

This film is just breathtakingly beautiful, as well as achingly bleak. I was just in awe throughout.

Hauer gets stigmatad because in killing Tyrell, he has killed God/ his Father, and in so doing has become God. That's why there's the Nietzschean and Freudian symbolism.

I think it does a better job of showcasing a much headier philosophical idea.

That idea being whether or not Replicants would be a better successor to humanity than humanity itself.

Now I know this wasn't really in the first one, but it handles it better imo.

Good point. I'll take what feels like a cop ut for know and say those knew the through the prism of its accomplishments - few people go into it blind.
But it does feel like a cop out. Food for thought.

Definitely, but then the noir/cyberpunk mix that was once new is now derivative. (Hell, even the music is coming out of current trend of repurposed old production aesthetics through modern tools). And, as I said, BR works in no small part because of its failures. It's accidental. If you look at the intent it probably wanted to be closer to 2049 than what it luckily ended being.

>It very clearly commentates on modern consumer culture in a way that's far more relevant and mimetic than the speculative sci-fi intentions of the original

Which doesn't' contradict my point. If anything, we're kinda saying something similar. This is a movie that is very much of its present.

boring shit

>harp on that people don't understand BR2049, hence why they some viewers disliked it
>also mention that they like it's more direct and less open to interpretation

Hmmmm

It's like how they've re-reappropriated the word "triggered" as an insult. It's weird to see.

"Boring" is not a valid argument, it only says what your mood was while watching the film.
Same as saying "it was fun", that does not indicate anything about the actual quality of the film whatsoever.

>Which doesn't' contradict my point. If anything, we're kinda saying something similar. This is a movie that is very much of its present.
That's where the movie is genius: it points out the fact that this isn't just "the present" through the use of Racheal's return and the Las Vegas holograms. Mass-entertainment culture has always circled the drain that the Blade Runner world has arrived at.

Better than the theatrical cut of the original? Yes

Better than the final cut..... very close. Hard to say.

The fact that it comments on the past doesn't mean the comment itself is not of its time.

But that's just as applicable to the original, except the original doesn't really say anything as tangible or interesting.

i like the enhance scene a lot, its something about the sound of the machine and the atmosphere

Wut?

I can understand why one (cinematographer I think) of the people involved in creating this movie advised against seeing this in 3d.

>mfw Sup Forums is the most Kantian board

That would, but then the original was deeply rejected. It *wasn't* of its time, or only in so much at it was marginal, as counterculture will be until absorbed by the greater body.
And the original doesn't *say* much, really. That's part of the appeal. It evokes. It shows. But it says very little. It lets the audience do the projection work
2049 implies. It may say subtly, but it definitely has something to say.

The original was dogshit in the first place

No the film made me bored when I watched it because of bad acting and a terrible lack of drama.

It's the opposite for me. The original Blade Runner doesn't say anything. It's baby's first cyberpunk and people like to write essays about all these ideas barely touched on in the movie itself. 2049 actually treats itself like a movie that wants to impart something to the audience that isn't just the literal plot it shows.

Yup, sequel is better in nearly every aspect

The new 'Fight Club'

The reason that I believe that 2049 is so kino around these parts is that K is used as illustration of the normal millienial wage cuck.
K is literally a second class citizen slave that is shit upon by his fellow co workers, his human neighbors and even his fellow replicants for being a blade runner. He goes to work everyday taking orders from feminazi careerist Hillary Clinton type boss doing a disgusting job that is akin to being a Jew finding other Jews during WW2 for the Nazis.


K's situation makes him withdrawl to a quasi fantasy world using a virtual product (JOI/waifu) to fill the giant hole in his life. He also is an avid reader that escapes through stories (anime for Sup Forums). His ultimate fantasy which JOI feeds is that somehow against all odds and in stark contrast to his reality that he is an extremely special individual.


The rubber meets the road when it he starts this case to track down the child and all the clues lead to the conclusion that he is in fact a one of a kind savior character. That he was born and loved and has a soul which JOI mentions to him during the DNA analysis. He goes to great lengths to try to confirm this by hunting down Deckard.


After Deckard is taken and the Resistance meeting sucker punches him again the gut, this time metaphorically, by shattering his ultimate desire in a split second, K has to make a choice. He has to come to the reality that he is a cog/slave in the machine. That he is a second class citizen that is viewed as pond scum by society.


He has to come to terms that he himself just by existing is not special. This mirror Millienials in that we want to be special simply by existing. The real emotional weight comes when he crosses giant souless eyed JOI confirming to K that everything that JOI was trying him was simply a program. Knowing that this now, K can't go back to the way things were. He knows ultimately that JOI and her actions towards were fake AI.

You can make your overly general excuse of "bad acting" if you want (even though performances were great across the entire cast), but to say that there is a lack of drama is straight up retarded.
There is nothing but "drama", tension and conflict in almost every single scene. Sounds to me like you're just a ADHD ridden manchild

(Continued)

However, he has a choice now. He can do something special. He can transcend his predetermined exist to will to power something greater. He can scarfice himself to the service of something extremely important thus making him special. By rejecting his fantasies and going after Wallace goons and saving Decker to reunite with daughter he provides something extremely real. All his memories and experiences enable to do something great and become a real human bean.

Yeah, that made me chuckle. The door was right there. It must have been one of Goose's brilliant ideas.

>Rutgers doesn't jam his head through a wall like he's a fucking looney tunes character for no reason

How is it no reason when Deckard locks the door and K is chasing after him?

explain?

That's basically what I got from it too. BR:2049 was incredibly reflective of our world, more so than I ever imagined it would be. I went in expecting a few shootouts and cyberpunk cinematography and came out questioning my place in the world.

No the original "says" things, but nothing even remotely as tangible and far-reaching as 2049. It's a neat sci-fi parable with a hokey premise that excels visually and aurally. 2049 suffers from the same hokey premise but at lease capitalises on the basic idea of simulated humanity in order to reflect itself back on the viewer in an intelligent way. I don't believe the original really implies the things 2049 does

>His ultimate fantasy which JOI feeds is that somehow against all odds and in stark contrast to his reality that he is an extremely special individual.
Damn, now that I think about it that does hit incredibly close to home. The idea that I'm unique and special compared to everyone else is what he keeps me going. Some vague half-belief in some Descartes/Matrix-tier shit about being the only one I can ever really know having consciousness. I know it's bullshit but a part of me wants to believe

I guess I didn't pay attention and thought they were running together.

Just goes to show how much of a hack ridley scott is

So yeah, back to my original point: both seem to be liked for different reasons.

Subsumption of self into the group for narrative causes invoking the greater good is one of those things I'm not comfortable to see making a come back.

>the original "says" things

Yes, but quoth myself, it doesn't say *much*. And whatever it says is perfectly asymptomatic to the end result.
2049 *is* about what it has to say.

I saw it twice and really focused on K in relation to the world on the second time.

It's about transcending from a fantasy world where we want to special for simply existing to doing something special to make the world a better place. This is a very millienial condition to have.

All the earmarks are there that mirror many average wage cucks existence in the film. Cunt boss, waifu/porn, sit at home consuming stories, wanting to be special for being born.

>Subsumption of self into the group for narrative causes invoking the greater good is one of those things I'm not comfortable to see making a come back.

Why the fuck not? It's a good message in this hyper narcissistic age.

We are not 'special' for being born unless you are an extremely hot chick. You are special for achieving.

BR 2049 is the anti matrix.

Which is why normies are coming away 'hating' it. It doesn't feed their narcissistic power fantasies.

It's an amazing movie but the contrarian aspect of this board would have you believe otherwise

Not according to pic related.

and here she is

>she
That's not a woman.

>I guess I didn't pay attention and thought X

This is how you can describe 90% of the posts of this stupid board.

I agree. The allies shouldn't have started WWII.