• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Blade Runner 2049 Review Thread

Big_Al

Unconfirmed Member
I'll definitely be going to see this with a mate of mine but I'll be interested in seeing what I think of it. I really admire Blade Runner as a film and as an experience but I also don't like the film that much. Over the years I've watched it loads of time and I even bought the big fancy Final Cut boxset at the time it came out.....but I still don't care for it. It actually annoys me, it's something that should be right up my street too.
 

CloudWolf

Member
Better than the original? Jesus, talk about creating expectations.

Get dennis working on a Memento sequel stat.

Don't be silly, why the hell would that movie need a sequel? What could you even do with a Memento sequel that's not already done in the original?
 
At a movie theatre screening at your local art house cinema. A lot of them are showing the Final Cut of the original before 2049 comes out.

Doesn't even need to be art house. My AMC is doing it in Dolby, and mine doesn't have the awful red lights all over the screen.
 
It's more about some of these professionals calling it a masterpiece and an instant classic after a single viewing (and then they award it 3/4...mmk).
The classic label I’d agree with you, time is needed to determine if something is a classic, but masterpiece? You don’t need time to label a work as that. Sometimes you play/read/watch something and such a status becomes very apparent as you experience it.
 
I hope the Tarkovsky vibes are more than just a few visual allusions

The Variety review made me really happy on that regard.

As it happens, in both tone and style, the new film owes more to slow-cinema maestro Andrei Tarkovsky than it does to Scott’s revolutionary cyberpunk sensibility. In fact, at 2 hours and 44 minutes, “Blade Runner 2049” clocks in at three minutes longer than the austere Russian auteur’s “Stalker.” But Villeneuve earns every second of that running time, delivering a visually breathtaking, long-fuse action movie whose unconventional thrills could be described as many things — from tantalizing to tedious — but never “artificially intelligent.”

I should warn folks though that the Variety review does contain a lot of spoilers. Doesn't bother me much at all, but if you don't want to know anything about the story, definitely avoid the full review there.
 
I think Denis is the kind of film maker who doesn't give a shit. He just makes the movies he wants to make, he doesn't go to studios and pitch a movie from a business perspective unlike Nolan does. I get the feeling Nolan wants to please his investors, and simultaneously wants to get artistic praise. After a few successful projects Nolan felt dat thirst for artistic recognition, so he made Dunkirk, ticking all the boxes,in his mind. The crazy thing is that 2049 will potentially have much larger artistic ramifications.

Have you seen the reviews for his filmography?

He is consistently a critical darling and whatever his motives for making Dunkirk, I seriously doubt they are rooted in his desire for recognition.

Also, I’m not entirely certain what boxes you think that film checked given that it is one of the most original and auteur war movies ever made.
 

Kayhan

Member
The Variety review made me really happy on that regard.



I should warn folks though that the Variety review does contain a lot of spoilers. Doesn't bother me much at all, but if you don't want to know anything about the story, definitely avoid the full review there.
This is too good to be true.
 
Sounds great. Awesome to see belated sequels to old films come back in substance as well as style.

I was actually talking to someone about the film yesterday and he said next week he would let me borrow his copy of one of the versions of the original film next week. (Think he said it was the Final Cut?) Gonna be interesting to see how that goes.
 

Razorback

Member
Oh boy... I just can't help but be wary of disappointment.

Can it really be that this sequel to one of my all-time favorite movies is a masterpiece? That sounds highly unlikely, but Fury Road has proven that miracles do happen.

I don't know... wait and see I guess.
 

SexyFish

Banned
Denis Villeneuve is ridiculous. How is he so fucking consistent? I love every film he’s made and that’s not something I can say about really any other director.

Did he make a deal with Satan, like fuck this is insane.
 

Bandini

Member
Only negative review on RT so far is from someone that didn't like the original.

8.9/10 average is really damn good.

Here's a few of the movies Scott Mendelson, the negative reviewer, gave higher scores to this year:

mother!
Cars 3
Despicable Me 3
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales
Smurfs: The Lost Village

v1.YzsyNDc1O2c7MTc0NjA7MTIwMDszODs0Mg
 

Kazuhira

Member
The golden 'Villeneuve' seal of quality,someone needs to make a pic of that so we can use it evertime he directs a movie.
 
Last time a big-budget sci-fi had "Tarkovsky" vibes (Tarantino on Interstellar), I was disappointed. Not getting my hopes up BUT at the same time, I peed a little. Denis' style is far more suited to that sort of comparison vs Nolan.
 

jett

D-Member
The classic label I'd agree with you, time is needed to determine if something is a classic, but masterpiece? You don't need time to label a work as that. Sometimes you play/read/watch something and such a status becomes very apparent as you experience it.

Agree to disagree, I feel like you need to experience something at least more than once to really make that assertion. At least I'm not going to take those comments all that seriously (until I see the movie myself and I reserve the right to be in fact blown away :p).


I'm not actually reading reviews in case I'm hit with the ol' spoilerinnos, but if I had to guess Villenueve made a more traditional movie that doesn't quite jive with the arthouse-ish, poetic-like sensibility of the first movie.
 
I'm not actually reading reviews in case I'm hit with the ol' spoilerinnos, but if I had to guess Villenueve made a more traditional movie that doesn't quite jive with the arthouse-ish, poetic-like sensibility of the first movie. I see people describing it as a "blockbuster" and BR was very far away from that.

The Variety reviewer finds it be more arthouse/poetic than the original. Says it felt closer to a Tarkovsky film.
 
Who's going to watch Blade Runner 1982 final cut before watching this movie?

I just got a new TV, I'm firing that shit up tonight!

What did everyone expect??

Denis himself said in an interview.


"When I heard of BR sequel, I called myself the studio and ensure I was going to direct it. Because anyone else will f#ck it up"
I was in peace with that quote.

Holy shit. This guy knew! Alright Denis, gimme that Dune adaptation you've been dreaming about. Especially since each movie you make is better than the last. Note: I haven't seen Enemy yet.
 

Timeaisis

Member
BR is my favorite movie of all time, and Villeneuveis probably my favorite director right now, but can we tone down the hyperbole a little? No one here has seen the thing yet. I got burned as all hell with Arrival.

I'm going in with no expectations and hoping for the best.
 

Donos

Member
The classic label I’d agree with you, time is needed to determine if something is a classic, but masterpiece? You don’t need time to label a work as that. Sometimes you play/read/watch something and such a status becomes very apparent as you experience it.

That was Mad Max Fury Road for me. As someone who watches almost anything and a lot of movies it becomes more rare to get really thrilled by one. Even good ones.

But after Mad Max i really had that "that was awesome" feel and i watched it in the cinema again after a couple days (with my gf).
 
BR is my favorite movie of all time, and Villeneuveis probably my favorite director right now, but can we tone down the hyperbole a little? No one here has seen the thing yet. I got burned as all hell with Arrival.

I'm going in with no expectations and hoping for the best.

How?
 
The wait for this movie is going to be insane.


I have seen a lot of people say Arrival was disappointing in the lead up to 2049 despite it being one of the most well received movies of last year (it topped GAF's best of 2016 list)

I haven't really heard any reasons why they thought it was disappointing.
 
BR is my favorite movie of all time, and Villeneuveis probably my favorite director right now, but can we tone down the hyperbole a little? No one here has seen the thing yet. I got burned as all hell with Arrival.

I'm going in with no expectations and hoping for the best.


That's too bad. I thought Arrival was the first film of his that I'd consider actually great. Sicario was close and has some incredible sequences, but the in-between parts weren't up to par with the. He's talented as can be though, if he has a good script he will deliver.


Heh, I don't want to make this thread about Arrival. But
I thought it was just OK.
I blame all the buzz, "best sci fi movie of all time", etc.

It probably helped that I went in with modest expectations. I figured I would like it and nothing more similar to how I felt with Prisoners and Sicario. It really shocked me how much it resonated.
 

Grakl

Member
Here's a few of the movies Scott Mendelson, the negative reviewer, gave higher scores to this year:

mother!
Cars 3
Despicable Me 3
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales
Smurfs: The Lost Village

v1.YzsyNDc1O2c7MTc0NjA7MTIwMDszODs0Mg
He liked The Orville, too, lol
 
I felt Arrival really didn't hold up on rewatch, but I thought it was great in theaters. Still a good movie, but unlike Sicario or Prisoners, no desire to watch it again.
 

HoJu

Member
Village Voice
For better and for worse, Blade Runner 2049 is a movie made for these indulgent, 280-character cinematic times, when plot points have to be spelled out and themes stated over and over again, with little room left for ambiguity. Villeneuve broods and luxuriates, whereas the original Blade Runner had a fractured poetry to it, born probably of Scott's own indifference to typical story mechanics. The earlier film delicately balanced terse, noirish metaphor with New Age dreaminess. All that has been replaced by something far more aggressive and familiar — a chase/quest narrative that feels not unlike any number of sci-fi/fantasy blockbusters from the past couple of decades. Meanwhile, little echoes of Vangelis's unforgettable 1982 soundtrack are drowned out by the BRRAAAAAAHHHM of Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch's score. It's everything, and more, and too much, and somehow not enough.

I realize I'm invoking the first movie way too much here. And yes, sequels and reboots deserve to stand on their own. But it's hard to leave the original behind when 2049 itself insists on referencing it at every turn, choosing to replay entire subplots from its legendary forebear as mysteries to be unearthed. That feels like a miscalculation. Part of the magic of Blade Runner was what was missing: It was like an earworm, insinuating itself into your brain thanks in part to the fact that it felt strangely incomplete. You wanted to see it again because you needed to see it again; its mysteries began when the end credits rolled. Careful, dutiful, and beautiful, Blade Runner 2049 cannot achieve the sublime slipperiness of Scott's masterpiece. Whether it even needs to is up to you.

More negative than the others. He still liked it though. Jett has the right idea to go into this not expecting something amazing or better thane the first. Which is also the right idea to go into things for most movies, games, television...
 

Timeaisis

Member
Prisoners > Sicario > Enemy > Arrival, if we're ranking his filmography. Prisoners holds up so well on repeated viewings, but I can't quite say the same for Arrival.

Someone mentioned something earlier in this thread that resonated with me. Critics calling a movie a "classic" after seeing it once really grates on me. Seems like every great film today is hailed as a classic. Annoying.
 

KodaRuss

Member
Damn this is looking good. Only 1 mixed review out of 35.

I am not sure if I can handle this type of excitement, I cannot wait to see the movie and I likely wont be able to see it for about a week after it comes out!!!
 

Ether_Snake

安安安安安安安安安安安安安安安
That review makes me think they fucked yp exactly as I expected it to. It will make the original plot something that was actually a whole new plot. Batty's real purpose! The Replicants' real purpose! Rachel was actually human! That kind if crap.
 
Village Voice


More negative than the others. He still liked it though. Jett has the right idea to go into this not expecting something amazing or better thane the first. Which is also the right idea to go into things for most movies, games, television...

Eh, I disagree in the sense that I think it's also wrong to go in with the idea that the original film is flawless and can't possibly be topped. Stagnation does no favors for anyone.

They're both films. And clearly the reviews indicate that 2049 is a film that's pretty damn special- much like the original. I'm sure that plenty of people will still prefer the original and I think that's A-okay. But let's not act like the task of potentially making a better film than the first is impossible either.
 

KodaRuss

Member
Prisoners > Sicario > Enemy > Arrival, if we're ranking his filmography. Prisoners holds up so well on repeated viewings, but I can't quite say the same for Arrival.

Someone mentioned something earlier in this thread that resonated with me. Critics calling a movie a "classic" after seeing it once really grates on me. Seems like every great film today is hailed as a classic. Annoying.

I still have not seen Enemy but it is on my list to watch.

Prisoners was just an excellent movie and after seeing it for the first time I said to my wife "why cant there be more movies like this"

I am not sure that I could rank them but honestly I think Arrival is my favorite, that film had more emotional impact on me than any film I have ever seen. Maybe that doesnt mean it is a better movie overall but I think about it all the time.

The only reason I have not watched Arrival again is that I know I will be a fucking mess for a least an hour after the movie is over.
 
Top Bottom