BR2049

Now that the dust has settled, what went wrong?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ES6jTsZ4NQs
youtube.com/watch?v=jCN9Akc9zbc
youtube.com/watch?v=t-u6cm6FsNA&t=4s
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

nothing, rachel death scene maybe

Nothing, normies didn't like the original blade runner either.

Nothing

Nothing. This movie is pure kino. Get fucked if you think otherwise

Nothing, going to see it again on friday

How do I "get" this movie?

Everything.

youtube.com/watch?v=ES6jTsZ4NQs

there is nothing really to get, its looks good and the ost is good

It's a piece of pleb shit for neo-cinephiles

>OP is Raz0rfist
Not even surprised

Rachael 2.0, and the orphanage guy's overacting. Only things I would change. Fingers crossed for four hour version at some point.

>shilling a fagtuber

Soundtrack, dialogue, pacing, world building, character development.
Deny it all you want but theres a reason why it bombed. Drive fans are very delusional anons

pandering to videogame players

Harrison Ford's K-Mart clothes were really distracting. This is the only flaw I can think of.

agreed
it looks like they set up the greenscreen in his retirement home and just filmed with what he wore that day

Movie was longer than it needed to be.
There were no astounding set-pieces or shots that stood out in this era of film making. There were good ones, but not jaw-dropping ones. An aspect that was entrancing about the original.
The philosophy was drawn out over done by the time the 'revelation' act comes around. We understood the question that was being asked 45 minutes in, yet they don't expand on it until the last hour.
The autistic fight scene between Deckard and K was totally out of place, like Marvel quips tier. It can be forgiven in Marvel because those movies are light, but this was a serious movie and it decided to throw in a stupid scene like that. Deckard saying 'Because I like this song' was cringe-worthy
K's decision to let Deckard live was retarded
JOI's death was so fucking obvious
The fact that it took what is practically a sign from God for K to realize his waifu isn't substantial is just ridiculous, considering how smart he seemed to be
There wasn't any real bad guy. In fact, K seemed like the biggest dumbfuck/villain out of all the characters.
K's death was artificial (lol) and melodramatic.

These are objective facts.

youtube.com/watch?v=jCN9Akc9zbc

Disliked, and unsuscribed.

>There's a reason why it bombed
Yes, Americans

It tried way too hard to capture the atmosphere of the original, but didn't have the same "magic". As a result of trying to recapture said atmosphere it sacrificed its focus and ignored the more important elements like character and story. The film didn't even need to be as long as it was. The plot is so simplistic it could have easily been shortened down to 1.5 hours if they removed all the unnecessarily self-indulgent direction. I have absolutely no idea what even goes on in the "4 hour cut" that warrants that to be so long. But the best example I can bring up to explain why the movie doesn't work is that scene in which Wallace drones on to Deckard at the end. It tried so desperately to mimic the almost poetic monologue of Roy in the original but lacked soul (ironic considering the subject matter of Blade Runner) and everything that made that monologue so great to listen to. That scene alone is better than anything in the new Blade Runner. Even the "climactic" fight between Luv and K at the end was so desultory by comparison. It almost felt like it came straight out of a capeshit movie.

It isn't the worst movie by any metric, and indeed it is visually striking, but had they actually cared about making a truly good movie they would have put more effort into actually fleshing out the characters and the story instead of masturbating over the ambiance.

the marketing,shouldve pulled a bait&switch
also
>muh robo army resistance emerges from the >shadows in sync to leader's speech
>muh flashbacks of events that happened the day before
muh ebin dark knight rises voiceover switcheroo

its a little drawn out but so is the first one

>character and story.
I think some of your points are accurate, but the first was lacking in the above two as well.
Both films are conceptual and atmospheric films, and the relevant questions of sci fi today are more in the virtual, AI word, vs. timeless PKD questions about the fallibility of memory, and what makes a human human.
2049 looks at non-corporeal consciousness (a sort of companion piece to Her, and man's relationship with the unreal, similar to Goose's earlier role in Lars and the Real Girl.
The opening flight over the Solar Farm was so fucking great. It showed how depleted the world was, and The bug farm was okay. There a huge amount of re-tread, but the sea-wall was cool, some comfy brutalist architecture rounded it out.

The Replicant Uprising subplot is turds, but some of the scenes were really great additions to the existing world.

Blade Runner 3 easily has the potential to be Matrix 3 bad.

Does anyone have the link to K's jacket? I can't seem to find it anywhere

>These are emerging as legitimate flaws in the film.

I actually like the slow pace. It's indulgant, no doubt, but it feel like you are on a long ride in a spinner, returning to the precinct for some verbal abuse, sexual harassment, and psychological assessment after you've run some blades.

Casuals have never cared about Blade Runner or cyberpunk in general. All of the people who like Blade Runner and the elements of sci fi used in the film are still a small niche of -- may God forgive me for uttering this word, 'nerdom', in comparison to other franchises.

this guy gets it

What an autist
I want the link too

>Americans and China didn't watch it
Sounds like kino to me

be at least 30 and male

I'd have thought this when I was 20.

Just came back from the theater, holy shit, that was fucking amazing. The recalling for the theme from the first one at the end had me bawlling

B R A V O
D E N I S

it wasn't long enough

>movies should only be as long as they need to be
>giant buildings, statues, and ads to rival them don't stand out in this era and that's not ironic at all
>philosophical questions can't be reexamined without being over done
>deckard survives a fight with a replicant and that doesn't reopen any question about him being a replicant or anything

and on and on with more idiocy, what are you, 16?

thank you

also screen not big enough

This was fucking boring

Almost 3 hours and for what? To get Deckard to meet his daughter? I could not give two shits about that

And then the interesting shit, replicant rebellion, we only get a minute of.

Replicants giving birth should;ve been revealed like, 2/3 of the way into the movie, not as the setup.

>plot over themes
pls kys

>And then the interesting shit, replicant rebellion, we only get a minute of.
>interesting
>replicant rebellion

>And then the interesting shit, replicant rebellion, we only get a minute of.
kill yourself

>The Replicant Uprising subplot is turds, but some of the scenes were really great additions to the existing world.

Agreed. I kinda like how this was only briefly touched on, because it helps set up the story as just one tiny aspect of a larger world that goes beyond the script and what we see on screen. However, I still thought it was handled poorly by shoehorning it in at the very end and making it feel like just an obvious in-your-face sequel hook or something. If I had made the movie, I would've just had some subtle clues about there being a rebellion stirring peppered throughout the film. Nothing overt. Stuff like reporters on the news saying stuff in the background or whatever.

And under no circumstances do I EVER want to see a follow-up movie where they delve directly into a "replicant resistance" plot. That is so fucking trite and cliche and it's been done a billion times over.

Blade runner 3 is just gonna be Children of men but with flying cars

fuck both of you

It was too long and unfocused.

Too many fights that don't serve any narrative purpose.
It was pretty (when it wasn't too dark), but I'm glad it tanked.
DVN can and has made better efforts. This was a cash-in, and well, he flubbed it.

Jared Leto sucked and did his usual overacting. Overall it was good though.

Thor Ragnarok comes out this weekend

Are you planning on seeing it? based on the few 2017 film threads we've had its the exact type of pleb dogshit plebs that praise movies like 2049 enjoy

>Pleb dogshit plebs
Ahahahah seriously?

It seems more your style

wrong

>When contrarianism goes too far

Step aside, plebs. The master of film critique has spoken

youtube.com/watch?v=t-u6cm6FsNA&t=4s

It fell victim to modern filmmaking convention: a little too much spoonfeeding in the dialogue, Deckard and Rachel had to be involved somehow so there's a whole contrived replicant revolution backstory and Harrison Ford hijacks the last third of the movie. Dialogue, while interesting, was too wordy in general, could've used David Peoples coming in to crystallize it down to its essence. Wallace's god complex was a little overdone. Might've been great if they'd just focused on Goose and the ladies and some kind of mystery as a backdrop for him discovering the value of individualism

Agreed. I really did like the movie, but overall, it felt like a diamond in the rough. There was some stuff I really liked in there, but it was also bundled together with a bunch of other stuff. I get WHY some of the stuff I don't like was there, but that doesn't change it. For example, I don't think this movie needed to be about Deckard/Rachael at all, but it's clear they needed to be shoehorned in because "lol its a bladerunner sequel no one is going to accept it if it doesn't have Harrison Ford!"

Best aspect of the movie was the stuff between Goose and his 2D Waifu. That's something that wasn't already explored in the first film, and it adds multiple layers to the concept because you have the blurry lines between human/replicant as well as 3D/2D. Is Joi just a manufactured doll that tells K what he wants to hear? Is K a manufactured doll that tells the humans what they want to hear? It just got bogged down into too many tie-ins and call-backs

Basically, it should've been Drive 2049.

Question: Is this movie actually saying to me that i'm not special and the best i can is good enough? I felt for K so much at the ending.

Yeah. I liked it a lot too, just see a lot of missed potential. Which was likely inevitable, but they should've known ot wasn't going to make a ton of money anyway and just let Villeneuve and the writers try to make a worthy companion piece to the original rather than a more typical sequel. And they should've gotten David Peoples. Oh well

>replicant rebellion
Not refined enough, should've said something about Wallace and him not being explored enough for a better bait.