Blade Runner 2049

[The Driver]

Also Ryan Gosling’s “slow walk/blank face” move is overused and he’s basically his character from Drive except now in a dystopian future.

.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. you want a toothpick?

[redzero]

This movie is better in every way than the original, from the plot to the performances. Sure, it could have been a few minutes shorter, but the movie's length added to the immersion.

The scene where K finds the toy horse went on forever, but it got more and more intense as it went on, even though the audience knew what was about to happen after a point. The Joi sex scene (threeway?) was surreal and blew Her out of the water with its execution. The final encounter between K and Luv was ing brutally simplistic. Not since Inglorious Basterds have I seen a director attempt to depict strangulation as such a drawn out form of execution.

Bladerunner 2049 is a great movie. It takes the setting and premise from the original and actually tells an interesting story with them. Gosling's performance was perfect. He was more human in this movie than Ford was in the original. Hopefully, the movie does well internationally. This is what the original Bladerunner should have been, because that movie's plot was boring.

[SnakeBoy]

Bladerunner 2049 is a great movie. It takes the setting and premise from the original and actually tells an interesting story with them. Gosling's performance was perfect. He was more human in this movie than Ford was in the original. Hopefully, the movie does well internationally. This is what the original Bladerunner should have been, because that movie's plot was boring.

Special effects were certainly better, of course, but I don't know if I would say it's a better story than the original. The biggest problem with the original was that it needed less Harrison Ford and more Rutger Hauer. The biggest problem with the sequel was there was no "Rutger Hauer" at all. I guess Leto or his pet replicant chick was supposed fill that role but it was a poor subs ute.

Still it was very good.

[redzero]

Special effects were certainly better, of course, but I don't know if I would say it's a better story than the original. The biggest problem with the original was that it needed less Harrison Ford and more Rutger Hauer. The biggest problem with the sequel was there was no "Rutger Hauer" at all. I guess Leto or his pet replicant chick was supposed fill that role but it was a poor subs ute. Still it was very good.

K was the Roy Batty stand-in of this movie, and he was more empathetic than Batty ever was. Luv was also a pretty good stand-in, from an villain stand-point, and interesting in her own right. Also, Roy Batty's final scene was the only one that interested me in the slightest. He shows mercy and compassion for the first time, and he is supposed to be the antagonist. Before that, he was just a run-of-the-mill villain. That final scene with Batty alone doesn't excuse the mediocre plot of the original Blade Runner. Rick Deckard hunts replicants poorly, gets his ass bailed out a few times, encounters Batty and almost dies, but Batty saves him in the end. The movie has a great premise but no real mystery or intrigue. The main character is boring. I don't care if Deckard is a replicant or not. Why would he be a replicant anyway? To make a human-like replicant? He acts less human than the replicants. Blade Runner 2049 is a better executed version of the original. The main character is interesting and actually has an arc; the plot is filled with mystery and isn't just 80's action movie filler; themes are explored in-depth (I never felt that the original Blade Runner came close to examining what it means to be a human); and the action is better. I just don't understand the reverence for the original Blade Runner. The movie just did not live up to its potential. It's not one of the better sci-fi films ever made--it's not even the best sci-fi film by Ridley Scott. It's a dull movie wrapped in a pretty package.

[monosylab1k]

This movie is better in every way than the original, from the plot to the performances. Sure, it could have been a few minutes shorter, but the movie's length added to the immersion.

The scene where K finds the toy horse went on forever, but it got more and more intense as it went on, even though the audience knew what was about to happen after a point. The Joi sex scene (threeway?) was surreal and blew Her out of the water with its execution. The final encounter between K and Luv was ing brutally simplistic. Not since Inglorious Basterds have I seen a director attempt to depict strangulation as such a drawn out form of execution.

Bladerunner 2049 is a great movie. It takes the setting and premise from the original and actually tells an interesting story with them. Gosling's performance was perfect. He was more human in this movie than Ford was in the original. Hopefully, the movie does well internationally. This is what the original Bladerunner should have been, because that movie's plot was boring.

I still think the plot is stupid. I was ready to anoint this as better than the original until I realized it was another cliche “we must protect the chosen one” story. Although I do like how, depending on whether you think Deckard is a replicant or not, the implications of the movie and the decisions K makes have a drastically different meaning.

If Ridley Scott directed this movie it would have been terrible. Villeneuve is what makes this film great.

[redzero]

I still think the plot is stupid. I was ready to anoint this as better than the original until I realized it was another cliche “we must protect the chosen one” story. Although I do like how, depending on whether you think Deckard is a replicant or not, the implications of the movie and the decisions K makes have a drastically different meaning.

If Ridley Scott directed this movie it would have been terrible. Villeneuve is what makes this film great.

What is stupid about the plot? The "we must protect the chosen one" story was only there to give K extra motivation. Why would it detract from the story? K was tasked with killing Deckard to protect the child. Instead, he saved Deckard and reunited him with his child, giving himself a purpose. All that extra stuff is not a sequel hook; it's world building. K went against what he was "programmed" or told do, both from the LAPD and The Resistance, and gave his life meaning.

[monosylab1k]

What is stupid about the plot? The "we must protect the chosen one" story was only there to give K extra motivation. Why would it detract from the story? K was tasked with killing Deckard to protect the child. Instead, he saved Deckard and reunited him with his child, giving himself a purpose. All that extra stuff is not a sequel hook; it's world building. K went against what he was "programmed" or told do, both from the LAPD and The Resistance, and gave his life meaning.

The last thing sci-fi needed was another “This baby will change the world/The Chosen One” story.

[hater]

If theres no android psychological testing in this one its a failure

Havent seen it. So is there any android psychological testing?

[JMarkJohns]

Yes. Some pretty intense scenes of psychological baseline testing.

[Spurminator]

I still think the plot is stupid. I was ready to anoint this as better than the original until I realized it was another cliche “we must protect the chosen one” story. Although I do like how, depending on whether you think Deckard is a replicant or not, the implications of the movie and the decisions K makes have a drastically different meaning.

If Ridley Scott directed this movie it would have been terrible. Villeneuve is what makes this film great.

Yeah I did find myself thinking during the movie, "Isn't this basically Star Wars?" But I still liked it, and the fact that K isn't Deggart's kid gave it some element of surprise and differentiation.

I actually was not a fan of the original but thought this one was solid and would definitely watch more (unfortunately chances for another sequel aren't looking good.)

[hater]

Yes. Some pretty intense scenes of psychological baseline testing.

Thanks bro

Do u recommend going to the theatre?

[JMarkJohns]

Thanks bro

Do u recommend going to the theatre?

Visuals are an A++
Story is a competent B/B+
Acting was solid A-

It’s well worth a theater viewing

[hater]

Thanks

[Pavlov]

Watch it in a theater with recliners. It's a long show but pretty immersive.

[LaMarcus Bryant]

Finally saw it...Great great movie. Was definitely long but the story, pacing, musical score all kept you on the edge of your seat. Woulda liked more of Leto's character. That female bad replicant was a scary LOL. Frightening. Tight storyline.
Would recommend.