I think the original is more than pretty, is obsessed with a couple of questions... but not much more than that. New one was pretty and way too much more than that. That Villenueve replaces voigt-kampf with lines from Pale Fire feels like a good summation of this.
The original is possibly my favorite movie depending on what day of the week you ask. The second one.... I can't fault the quality of filmmaking but I find myself wishing they hadn't gone so BIG. One of the neat things about the original Bladerunner is while it evokes big questions it's basically just a detective movie in the future. This one for some reason had to be an EPIC.
The original is a wonderful and original rendition of Dick's philosophical take on SF. This one really adds nothing to the original. The problem is that it's nearly impossible to add anything to a masterpiece. Maybe they should have tried to make something entertaining, trading some of the philosophy for more fun and action. But they went the opposite way, making it slower and longer but still not deeper.
I basically agree with the AV Club, but he's a bit more forgiving than I am: avclub.com - Blade Runner 2049 creates gorgeously languid spectacle from our memories of a classic Too many things that seem important are left out. Like replicant racism, which is introduced then immediately dropped, and the new replicants having to obey humans, which is barely shown except with Robin Wright's chief saying, "You better solve this case!" which is a detective movie cliche.
And after re-watching the original this weekend, 70% of the emotional resonance is Sean Young looking sad, and 30% is Roy's speech at the end. Ryan Gosling looking sad doesn't do it for me I guess. Joi was the most interesting character to me, but she got fridged.
The dream-maker was an interesting character, but a very minor one as far as screen time. The computer AI was almost an interesting character - which seems fitting (the 'almost' part). I felt like Gosling's character was interesting as a vehicle for revelation. A bit like Oedipus Rex. (In fact, I thought that's where the movie wanted us to think it was going, fratricide. So I think that parallel was intentional. The slow reveal of a self-damning truth. But in this case with a twist.)
I now get a small coffee when I go to the theater. No more bladder-buster sodas. I got tired of picking my scene for a restroom run. It's amazing how you can go for hours and hours at work without peeing, but something about a movie theater...
I thought it was pretty great. It could have been a 90 minute action movie. I'm glad it wasn't, but I think there's a happy medium. They did the original justice I think.
Where did it all go wrong, Casey? I can’t pinpoint it, but it was already too late when they remade 3:10 to Yuma and took a movie that was mostly two men talking about morality in a hotel room and put in a Gatling gun.
This is my gaming circle minus my ACKS players. I am such an asshole. Since they're in the big city now, the players really wanted to know if there were any magic weapons for sale. ACKS ain't 3e or 4e though. There is exactly one magic weapon for sale. I rolled randomly to see what it was and... ...it's a cursed -2 sword. So I told the players there's a weapons dealer/fence who's looking to get rid of a magic sword he's gotten ahold of...cheap. Only 6,000gp when usually a +1 item would be 10,000gp. So far they are not suspicious. They're going to be so pissed at me. I can barely contain my excitement.
I liked it. The last third of it was a mess.
ReplyDeleteI'm not a fanboy of the original, but I like it despite the story being a mess. It's all about the visuals anyway.
ReplyDeleteRutger is great. I read the book. It's a trip, for sure.
ReplyDeleteI DON'T AGREE WITH YOU ON THE INTERNET
ReplyDeleteI loved it. But I get that it won't hit everyone the same way. It reminded me how much I missed watching "thinky" science fiction.
ReplyDeleteI think the original is more than pretty, is obsessed with a couple of questions... but not much more than that. New one was pretty and way too much more than that. That Villenueve replaces voigt-kampf with lines from Pale Fire feels like a good summation of this.
ReplyDeleteAgreed Casey, saw it today too.
ReplyDeleteBoooooo. Go kill some other buzz. :P
ReplyDeleteThe original is possibly my favorite movie depending on what day of the week you ask. The second one.... I can't fault the quality of filmmaking but I find myself wishing they hadn't gone so BIG. One of the neat things about the original Bladerunner is while it evokes big questions it's basically just a detective movie in the future. This one for some reason had to be an EPIC.
ReplyDeleteThe original is a wonderful and original rendition of Dick's philosophical take on SF. This one really adds nothing to the original. The problem is that it's nearly impossible to add anything to a masterpiece. Maybe they should have tried to make something entertaining, trading some of the philosophy for more fun and action. But they went the opposite way, making it slower and longer but still not deeper.
ReplyDeleteI liked the extended universe that it portrayed.
ReplyDeleteI didn't mind Jared Leto!
Needs editing though.
Good story to it.
Spinners are awesome.
On second thought, maybe an interesting and Dickian idea is the love story with Joi the AI. Things that might actually happen in 2049.
ReplyDeleteI basically agree with the AV Club, but he's a bit more forgiving than I am:
ReplyDeleteavclub.com - Blade Runner 2049 creates gorgeously languid spectacle from our memories of a classic
Too many things that seem important are left out. Like replicant racism, which is introduced then immediately dropped, and the new replicants having to obey humans, which is barely shown except with Robin Wright's chief saying, "You better solve this case!" which is a detective movie cliche.
Surprisingly, though I'm a huge fan of Robin Wright, I thought she was one of the weaker performances in 2049.
ReplyDeleteAnd after re-watching the original this weekend, 70% of the emotional resonance is Sean Young looking sad, and 30% is Roy's speech at the end.
ReplyDeleteRyan Gosling looking sad doesn't do it for me I guess. Joi was the most interesting character to me, but she got fridged.
The dream-maker was an interesting character, but a very minor one as far as screen time. The computer AI was almost an interesting character - which seems fitting (the 'almost' part). I felt like Gosling's character was interesting as a vehicle for revelation. A bit like Oedipus Rex. (In fact, I thought that's where the movie wanted us to think it was going, fratricide. So I think that parallel was intentional. The slow reveal of a self-damning truth. But in this case with a twist.)
ReplyDeleteFull disclosure, because it was 3 fucking hours long I went to the bathroom and missed the first half of the dream-maker.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I would have forgiven a lot for a Deckard's OG spinner vs. new spinner chase through the ruins of Las Vegas.
Yeah it could have used some time in the editing booth.
ReplyDeleteI don't mind long movies, just bring back the intermission! Have mercy on my bladder like Tarantino did.
ReplyDeleteI now just check how long movies are so I know if I have to regulate my liquid intake. I wish that was a joke.
ReplyDeleteI tried and failed to do the same.
ReplyDeleteI now get a small coffee when I go to the theater. No more bladder-buster sodas. I got tired of picking my scene for a restroom run. It's amazing how you can go for hours and hours at work without peeing, but something about a movie theater...
ReplyDeleteOne of the main things that sticks with me from this movie is that Denis Villeneuve was probably a very good choice for the new Dune film.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was pretty great. It could have been a 90 minute action movie. I'm glad it wasn't, but I think there's a happy medium. They did the original justice I think.
ReplyDelete