Blade Runner 2049 (film)

[Neil]

I just recently read a lengthy article featuring the head creative minds behind both films and they say that 2049 is based on a question raised in the original film. Supposedly nobody did or will expect it, but once you see this question asked again in 2049, it's a sort of "why didn't I see that coming??" moment? I just watched the final cut today(as well as the phenomenal Dangerous Days doc) and I'm still drawing a blank as to what this core question may be if it's supposed to be unpredictable yet obvious at the same time.... It's not something to do about if Harrison Ford dreams about electric sheep is it?

[shootemindehead]

Why make a robot that looks and acts like a human at all? Well, looking and acting like a human is one thing. We'd be more comfortable around them and replicants are made to perform all sorts of sexual work too. But, making one that ages? To me that's just ridiculous. I'm seriously hoping Ford is human in this, or else it can get stuffed.

[bassman]

I'd bet good money that Deckard is proven to be a human in 2049. Ford is so picky about what films he does, especially sequels, I doubt he'd come back to the world of Blade Runner unless he was getting what he wanted, which is his character being human. Kinda like the only real reason her came back to Star Wars was so that they'd finally kill Solo off like Ford has asked for since Empire.

[shootemindehead]

Maybe he wants Deckard dead too.

[MinionZombie]

Naturally there'll be more action all these years later what with a bigger budget resulting from brand recognition etc. I'm proper looking forward to this.

[Neil]

God I hope it's better tham Scott's more recent stuff...

[EvilNed]

God I hope it's better tham Scott's more recent stuff... He's not the director tho. So while I believe he might have lost his touch (like many old timers) I don't think that will be a problem here.

[JDP]

He's not the director tho. So while I believe he might have lost his touch (like many old timers) Lucas, Romero, Miller... it seems like an epidemic.

[bassman]

Lucas, Romero, Miller... it seems like an epidemic. Miller? George Miller? I thought he killed it with the new Mad Max....

[JDP]

Miller? George Miller? I thought he killed it with the new Mad Max.... Nowhere nearly as good as the first two Mad Max films.

[EvilNed]

Nowhere nearly as good as the first two Mad Max films. I liked it a lot! As for better or worse... Can't really say, they're three great films. But also three very different films. I felt he, unlike many of his peers, managed to update his visual style and handling of a directors chair without compromising on quality. Compare that to Ridley Scott, Romero or Agento... How the mighty have fallen.

[MinionZombie]

Scott's output has been up and down in recent years, but Gladiator, Black Hawk Down, and The Martian have all been excellent, and I was very fond of Prometheus personally (as previously discussed in other threads). Alien Covenant has been getting good reviews, too, so it seems. As for Miller - aye, Fury Road was phenomenal!

[shootemindehead]

Never thought of Miller as being in the league as Carpenter or Scott in their heyday and have to abmit to having a dislike of the first Mad Max film. Never got that one, even though I can appreciate what the producers got out of the tiny budget they had. But, 'Mad Max: Fury Road' I thought was great though, despite the lack of Mel. One of my absolute bugbears with films and TV is an actor switcharoo. I hate that. I'll always love 'Mad Max 2' and 'Max Max: Beyond Thunderdome', but I'd like to see more of Tom Hardy's Mad Max reboot. I'm not sure if that's on the way though and Miller is getting on, so it's now or never, if he's to be involved. But, at present it all seems very on again-off again. But for a reboot, I thought the 2015 film did a bang up job. In fact, I think it's time for another spin.

[JDP]

I liked it a lot! As for better or worse... Can't really say, they're three great films. But also three very different films. I felt he, unlike many of his peers, managed to update his visual style and handling of a directors chair without compromising on quality. Compare that to Ridley Scott, Romero or Agento... How the mighty have fallen. Come on, the Gibson-less film was just too "cartoonish", too unrealistic, too exaggerated. I found it to be very disappointing. The earlier films you could still believe. They presented a gloomy society and future that was still within the boundaries of reality. They were great, well-balanced, sci-fi/fantasy/action/drama films. Miller is now catering to the modern teenagers' thirst for outrageous, unrealistic, outlandish, faster-than-light action but little substance. It's the same reason why the slow-paced, shuffling, moaning zombie has now virtually disappeared from the big screen to be replaced by the sprint-runner, mega-athlete, wrestling-champion zombie.

[EvilNed]

Come on, the Gibson-less film was just too "cartoonish", too unrealistic, too exaggerated. I found it to be very disappointing. The earlier films you could still believe. They presented a gloomy society and future that was still within the boundaries of reality. They were great, well-balanced, sci-fi/fantasy/action/drama films. Miller is now catering to the modern teenagers' thirst for outrageous, unrealistic, outlandish, faster-than-light action but little substance. It's the same reason why the slow-paced, shuffling, moaning zombie has now virtually disappeared from the big screen to be replaced by the sprint-runner, mega-athlete, wrestling-champion zombie. I agree with your comparison but I have to say that Fury Road was crafted with such narrative precision that it was as good as an action movie today could possibly hope to be. I agree that it's over the top, but then again Mad Max has always been over the top in some ways. I mean, both the gangs of the bad guys in 2 and 3 were filled to the brim with characters spooked out in scarecrow outfits. So it's not as if it doesn't fit in. Mad Max 3 I don't really like. It's PG-13 and it shows.