Blade Runner 2049/Blade Runner 2099 Live-Action Sequel Series Discussion

1272830323336

Comments

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    No need for those spoiler tags I think. 100 per cent agree.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    Wow, BR2049 hasn't crossed my mind for weeks... seeing this thread again made me realize that no matter how beautiful it is to look at, no matter how cleverly written and directed it was, it's essentially (for ME) an expensive fan film, and will never occupy my head in the way the original does...
  • Posts: 5,767
    The film came back to me, so I watched it a third time. Despite the film luring me into the cinema three times, with each viewing my perception got less positive. Ryan Gosling felt as if he had swallowed horse tranquilizer. Why should I watch such things? I sat in the cinema and just couldn´t avoid a comparison to Sicario, which is so much more alive and colorful, despite dealing with a very bleak topic.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    Listening to the 2049 soundtrack divorced from the film is a painful experience

    Just an 80 minute dirge that changes little throughout it's running time. It livens up a little with 'Sea Wall' but not much.

    It works fine with the film I suppose but so did the original Blade Runner score, which also works as an incredible piece of music to listen to on it's own.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    Listening to the 2049 soundtrack divorced from the film is a painful experience

    Just an 80 minute dirge that changes little throughout it's running time. It livens up a little with 'Sea Wall' but not much.

    It works fine with the film I suppose but so did the original Blade Runner score, which also works as an incredible piece of music to listen to on it's own.

    Much like Dunkirk it has two or three nice cues but I agree, a lot of it is monotonous rubbish. Needed more of the old themes. Imagine how cool it would have been to hear the main title cue as K approached LAPD HQ.

    The new version of Tears In Rain is nice though.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    edited December 2017 Posts: 3,985
    Listening to the 2049 soundtrack divorced from the film is a painful experience

    Just an 80 minute dirge that changes little throughout it's running time. It livens up a little with 'Sea Wall' but not much.

    It works fine with the film I suppose but so did the original Blade Runner score, which also works as an incredible piece of music to listen to on it's own.

    Much like Dunkirk it has two or three nice cues but I agree, a lot of it is monotonous rubbish. Needed more of the old themes. Imagine how cool it would have been to hear the main title cue as K approached LAPD HQ.

    The new version of Tears In Rain is nice though.

    Well the Vangelis score actually had music with an identity, such as 'Blade Runner blues', 'The love theme' and the haunting main titles. This new score has no actual 'themes' but tries to sound like Vangelis. Ultimately just coming across as a poor imitation rather than an extension of what Vangelis achieved.
  • Posts: 3,333
    Listening to the 2049 soundtrack divorced from the film is a painful experience

    Just an 80 minute dirge that changes little throughout it's running time. It livens up a little with 'Sea Wall' but not much.

    It works fine with the film I suppose but so did the original Blade Runner score, which also works as an incredible piece of music to listen to on it's own.
    I agree. I thought the movie score was bland and uninspiring. I read somewhere that the reason why Vangelis wasn't invited back was down to some previous heavy dispute between Vangelis and Ridley Scott that delayed the original movie's release date. Maybe Scott was looking for a scapegoat at the time on why his movie didn't do well at the BO? Ironic really, when it was Vangelis' musical score that was critically acclaimed and highly praised (it was nominated for Golden Globe as best score) and the movie that was savaged by the critics. Maybe Scott prefers dirge to great music, because there's no other explanation as to why he allowed this "white noise" to be used above the genius of Vangelis?
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,539
    To be fair, they were going to go with Jóhann Jóhannsson originally, and when he dropped out, a mere few weeks before the film's release, Zimmer was called to quickly write a score. Had he been involved since day one, the music might have been "fuller" in terms of melody, but now Zimmer had to rely on what he seems to know best these days: sound effects and monotone.
  • Posts: 5,767
    bondsum wrote: »
    Listening to the 2049 soundtrack divorced from the film is a painful experience

    Just an 80 minute dirge that changes little throughout it's running time. It livens up a little with 'Sea Wall' but not much.

    It works fine with the film I suppose but so did the original Blade Runner score, which also works as an incredible piece of music to listen to on it's own.
    I agree. I thought the movie score was bland and uninspiring. I read somewhere that the reason why Vangelis wasn't invited back was down to some previous heavy dispute between Vangelis and Ridley Scott that delayed the original movie's release date. Maybe Scott was looking for a scapegoat at the time on why his movie didn't do well at the BO? Ironic really, when it was Vangelis' musical score that was critically acclaimed and highly praised (it was nominated for Golden Globe as best score) and the movie that was savaged by the critics. Maybe Scott prefers dirge to great music, because there's no other explanation as to why he allowed this "white noise" to be used above the genius of Vangelis?
    If I'm not mistaken, Vangelis was pissed off back then because his music was used in ways not intended by him, whatever that means. Furthermore, I believe he said something to the effect that the success of his score was impossible to plan ahead, hence he wasn' t interested in scoring a sequel.


    @DarthDimi, I seriously doubt that Zimmer and Wallfisch would have done much more than sound effects with more time. I am a hack myself, yet I have no doubt I could have come up with a few decent and fitting sequencer lines for the film, so time is not an excuse.

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,539
    @boldfinger, I stand corrected, sir. ;-)
  • Posts: 4,600
    One of the benefits of the sequel for me is that it has re-sparked my appreciation of Vangelis. Just stunning work and still perhaps not given full credit as a great composer. As with Barry, his work is strong enough to stand on it's own and (also as with Barry) IMHO, BR2049 found it impossible to replace him. Caught this on the digi radio over the weekend, stunning (sorry for slight drift)

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I just realized that the blu ray is only being released after Christmas. How silly is that? Given the low box office, it would have made more sense to get it out there for the holiday season in my view.
  • Yes, that is silly. Is there an official release date yet? Or just January?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Yes, that is silly. Is there an official release date yet? Or just January?
    It's January 18th. Pity, because I would have liked to have watched it over the holidays.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    Yes, that is silly. Is there an official release date yet? Or just January?
    It's January 18th. Pity, because I would have liked to have watched it over the holidays.

    Me too, and I find the Blade Runner cinematic experience pairs best with an autumn/winter backdrop and a warming glass of whiskey. At least there's always the original to enjoy in the meantime.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,465
    bondjames wrote: »
    Yes, that is silly. Is there an official release date yet? Or just January?
    It's January 18th. Pity, because I would have liked to have watched it over the holidays.

    Well it did come out in October, so January was expected given the typical three-month turnaround. But yes, if December was feasible, it would've been a much better time for them to release it. I'll be getting it either way, got my 4K steelbook of this one pre-ordered.
  • Posts: 12,265
    January actually isn't so bad for the home release. I can wait that long to see it again, even though I loved it. Definitely a must-own for me as its one of my favorite sequels ever.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Kicking: Impossible
    Posts: 6,721
    boldfinger wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    Listening to the 2049 soundtrack divorced from the film is a painful experience

    Just an 80 minute dirge that changes little throughout it's running time. It livens up a little with 'Sea Wall' but not much.

    It works fine with the film I suppose but so did the original Blade Runner score, which also works as an incredible piece of music to listen to on it's own.
    I agree. I thought the movie score was bland and uninspiring. I read somewhere that the reason why Vangelis wasn't invited back was down to some previous heavy dispute between Vangelis and Ridley Scott that delayed the original movie's release date. Maybe Scott was looking for a scapegoat at the time on why his movie didn't do well at the BO? Ironic really, when it was Vangelis' musical score that was critically acclaimed and highly praised (it was nominated for Golden Globe as best score) and the movie that was savaged by the critics. Maybe Scott prefers dirge to great music, because there's no other explanation as to why he allowed this "white noise" to be used above the genius of Vangelis?
    If I'm not mistaken, Vangelis was pissed off back then because his music was used in ways not intended by him, whatever that means. Furthermore, I believe he said something to the effect that the success of his score was impossible to plan ahead, hence he wasn' t interested in scoring a sequel.


    I seriously doubt that Zimmer and Wallfisch would have done much more than sound effects with more time. I am a hack myself, yet I have no doubt I could have come up with a few decent and fitting sequencer lines for the film, so time is not an excuse.

    I believe what Vangelis means is that Ridley Scott used the music in scenes and moments for which it wasn't intended by the composer. I think the same happened with Jerry Goldsmith's score for Alien. Some composers don't care about that, but others do. Whatever the reasons, it's a shame Vangelis didn't come back.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I bet Brian Eno could have done an amazing BR soundtrack.
  • edited December 2017 Posts: 3,333
    And yet, if these rumours are indeed true, which I have my doubts, then why did Vangelis return for Ridley Scott's 1492: Conquest of Paradise in 1992? Surely, if he'd still been pissed with Scott over Bladerunner then he would've declined a further collaboration in 1992? It probably has more to do with Vangelis just retiring and refusing to come out of retirement than anything else. Let's not forget Vangelis is pretty old and probably thought the extra pressure so late in life might have had a detrimental effect on his health. I'm sure there are other reasons, unless someone has an exclusive interview with the man that sets the record straight?

    I think Brian Eno would have done an interesting score for BR2. However, it would still not have sounded anything like a Vangelis score. So therefore, it would not have helped retain the audio fabric of the original movie. This for me, was one of the main reasons (but not the only reason) why BR2 felt like a flat, empty echo of the original movie. There were other things I didn't particularly care for about BR2, but I won't go into them as of now.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Kicking: Impossible
    Posts: 6,721
    https://i-d.vice.com/en_uk/article/evpwga/blade-runner-2049-sexist-misogynistic-mess
    Hey Girl. Ryan Gosling may have taught us about some of the greatest feminist thinkers of all time (ok, Danielle Henderson did), but he now stars in Blade Runner 1949, sorry, 2049 -- a misogynistic mess, and the most overrated movie of the year. The fact it has drawn near universal glowing reviews tells you more about the paucity of women film critics than it does about the successes of the film, which I will list for you now: it looks fucking cool, because the cinematography is amazing; and Ryan Gosling's character K has a nice coat.

    The original Blade Runner is not without issue in the misogyny stakes -- even in 1982 they should have steered clear of including a rape scene -- but in 2017 we should expect more of our directors than Denis Villeneuve offers here. Armed with a colossal budget and an experienced cast, Villeneuve has proceeded to make a completely flat, emotionless, nonsensical, and eye-gougingly sexist film.

    Women are either literally prostitutes (including Mackenzie Davis as Mariette), holographic housewives like Joi (Ana de Armas) -- a product that is marketed with the lines "Experience Joi," "Everything you want to hear. Everything you want to see." -- or some slightly meaner, more violent boss women (Robin Wright as Lieutenant Joshi, and Sylvia Hoeks as Luv, also a 'companion' but one who can kick ass) who nevertheless meet gruesome deaths that we watch in horrifying detail. Men also get killed, of course, but we don't watch their eyes bulge for tens of gratuitous seconds -- they are blunt, noble deaths, not desperate fetishistic ones.

    At the risk of a spoiler alert, there is one woman (Carla Juri's Dr Ana Stelline) who is held to be more precious than the others, but she is holed up in a literal glass cage and infantilised to fuck, living in fantasy worlds of her own making. Not to mention that the ultimate dividing line between human women and the hyper-human replicant women is that real women can give birth. Did you get that? If you don't give birth, then sorry, you're not a real woman.

    It is arguable that in Ridley Scott's original the misogyny was part of the dystopia, and this sequel is just following on from that. But if 2049 is making a point about how adaptable patriarchy is to technological advance, then the problem is that it just doesn't make it. Instead of implying in any way the problematic nature of K having a holographic fantasy girlfriend/housewife, for example, the film instead humanises her role to the extent that we are supposed to believe this is a legitimate loving relationship, rather than titillation and affection slavery. It is the only real relationship in the entire film, and implies that through her sensitive subserviency and domesticated care, she is actually more human than the human women, who have become hardened 'man-like' warriors, or cynical, bedraggled whores.

    The massive and completely inexplicable stone statues of slim but busty naked women left strewn around a desert scene are really the perfect metaphor for this film: undoubtedly huge, but truly a dusty relic, long out of time.

    Well... I don't agree. Especially with the bolded part. The "problematic nature of K having a holographic fantasy girlfriend/housewife" was addressed in the film, most noticeably when K sees the big Joi hologram on the bridge, which puts his relationship with the other Joi into perspective. I didn't get the feeling either that Joi was presented as more human than the actual human women. Instead, I think the point the film was trying to make was that it was hard for people, male or female, to form meaningful connections, which led to the proliferation of holograms as a means of quenching loneliness. The fact the actual most women in the film were not presented in a more in-depth, human way doesn't mean the film was saying they lack that humanity. (And I say 'most women' because I felt Joshi was a well fleshed-out, perfectly reasonable female character.) Yes, the world of the film is potentially misogynistic, but that's just part of the apocalyptic, dystopian vision it presents, and I see no evidence to say the film supports that misogyny.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,465
    These feminist types looking for outrage in every film in existence. You can be damn sure if the slate isn't dominated by strong, powerful, I-don't-need-no-man females, then they deem it a misogynistic mess and the director must hate women.
  • This reads like somebody on an agenda looking to shape a narrative/work of art—any narrative/work of art—to serve as a whipping boy to suit their agenda. In other words, they are not critiquing what is actually in the film but whatever it is their agenda targets.

    I’m sure this author could make Wonder Woman out to be the most criminally mysogynistic film the world has ever seen if they wanted to.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,465
    This reads like somebody on an agenda looking to shape a narrative/work of art—any narrative/work of art—to serve as a whipping boy to suit their agenda. In other words, they are not critiquing what is actually in the film but whatever it is their agenda targets.

    I’m sure this author could make Wonder Woman out to be the most criminally mysogynistic film the world has ever seen if they wanted to.

    Spot on. That's exactly what it is.

    They don't even discuss the film, it's just a diatribe about the lack of "proper female representation." Yawn.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Well she can relax. Oceans 8 trailer drops tomorrow. Lots of female empowerment on its way.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    Well she can relax. Oceans 8 trailer drops tomorrow. Lots of female empowerment on its way.

    Oh she’ll find a way to be outraged by it. Where there’s a will...

    Sorry! A wilhelmina. Please don’t crucify me.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Speaking of that, Sophia, who is now a Saudi citizen, has started advocating for women s rights.
  • Posts: 5,767
    mattjoes wrote: »
    https://i-d.vice.com/en_uk/article/evpwga/blade-runner-2049-sexist-misogynistic-mess

    Well... I don't agree. Especially with the bolded part. The "problematic nature of K having a holographic fantasy girlfriend/housewife" was addressed in the film, most noticeably when K sees the big Joi hologram on the bridge, which puts his relationship with the other Joi into perspective. I didn't get the feeling either that Joi was presented as more human than the actual human women. Instead, I think the point the film was trying to make was that it was hard for people, male or female, to form meaningful connections, which led to the proliferation of holograms as a means of quenching loneliness. The fact the actual most women in the film were not presented in a more in-depth, human way doesn't mean the film was saying they lack that humanity. (And I say 'most women' because I felt Joshi was a well fleshed-out, perfectly reasonable female character.) Yes, the world of the film is potentially misogynistic, but that's just part of the apocalyptic, dystopian vision it presents, and I see no evidence to say the film supports that misogyny.
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    These feminist types looking for outrage in every film in existence. You can be damn sure if the slate isn't dominated by strong, powerful, I-don't-need-no-man females, then they deem it a misogynistic mess and the director must hate women.
    This reads like somebody on an agenda looking to shape a narrative/work of art—any narrative/work of art—to serve as a whipping boy to suit their agenda. In other words, they are not critiquing what is actually in the film but whatever it is their agenda targets.

    I’m sure this author could make Wonder Woman out to be the most criminally mysogynistic film the world has ever seen if they wanted to.
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    This reads like somebody on an agenda looking to shape a narrative/work of art—any narrative/work of art—to serve as a whipping boy to suit their agenda. In other words, they are not critiquing what is actually in the film but whatever it is their agenda targets.

    I’m sure this author could make Wonder Woman out to be the most criminally mysogynistic film the world has ever seen if they wanted to.

    Spot on. That's exactly what it is.

    They don't even discuss the film, it's just a diatribe about the lack of "proper female representation." Yawn.
    This, and then some. I don´t even want to quote that article, because it´s not worth it.
    What´s with all that mysoginist bs?
    As if any of the men were protrayed as bright heros.
    As if the world that´s portrayed were a meadow with flowers.
    As if getting pregnant only required females.
    I´m not sure if I will ever like the film much, but that article couldn´t be more beside the points.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,465
    Watching the original on 4K for the very first time, and the level of detail and new little tidbits I'm catching thanks to the upgrade is absolutely astounding - like seeing the film for the first time.

    Those opening shots were breathtaking, I can only assume I'm in for a real treat with the rest of the film (particularly the first test between Deckard and Rachel, or the finale).
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited December 2017 Posts: 17,691
    Basically, I guess BR 2049 is like SF for me- looked fantastic, was well acted, very epic... but it just lacked a simplicity at the basic level. Even the most complicated & convoluted tales have a simplicity as the foundation. Roots if you will. When you build in the air there is no foundation.... and when the grav-stabilizers fail (as they nearly always do), the project settles down onto uneven ground.
Sign In or Register to comment.