420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread

Now Playing on /mtv/tube -

Blade Runner 2049 by C-Higgy !lfsExjBfzE - Fri, 06 Oct 2017 13:08:40 EST ID:J2nxIdks No.389237 Ignore Report Quick Reply
File: 1507309720624.png -(153207B / 149.62KB, 220x339) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 153207
The sequel to Blade Runner, which was 25 years in the making, is finally out. Who's hyped for it and if you've seen it, what did you think?
C-Higgy !lfsExjBfzE - Fri, 06 Oct 2017 13:15:46 EST ID:J2nxIdks No.389238 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Also here's the three short films set between the two films if you haven't seen them:

>Blade Runner Black Out 2022 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrZk9sSgRyQ
>2036: Nexus Dawn - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgsS3nhRRzQ
>2048: Nowhere to Run - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ9Os8cP_gg
Dr. David Bowman - Fri, 06 Oct 2017 14:22:36 EST ID:8soux3Rt No.389240 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I'm gonna see it tuesday.

PSA: AMC Theaters is doing a deal all this month that if you sign up with their free rewards program that you get some deals on drinks and popcorn and you can get tickets to any movie (including recently released) any tuesday this month for $5.

Me and a couple buddies are gonna catch it for super cheap next tuesday.
Dr. David Bowman - Fri, 06 Oct 2017 14:23:22 EST ID:8soux3Rt No.389241 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Forgot to include link

Steven Speilberg - Fri, 06 Oct 2017 14:59:33 EST ID:F4rOOYqt No.389242 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Saw it last night its fantastic.
For real go see it.
It's gonna justify the next ten years of shitty sequels.
Wes Anderson - Fri, 06 Oct 2017 16:30:38 EST ID:cpQu1mMj No.389243 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>It's gonna justify the next ten years of shitty sequels.

Whoa...whoa...whoa...check yourself before you wreck yourself. That is a bold claim. They can make some shitty sequels in Hollywood...
Charlie Murphy - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 01:41:53 EST ID:F4rOOYqt No.389272 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yeah I know but its like the empire strikes back effect. One really awesome sequel makes hollywood think the market wants more. Then terminator 2 comes out and they go see it doesn't even have to be at that level then they crap more shit.
Nichelle Nichols - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 04:00:41 EST ID:r74SBzfI No.389282 Ignore Report Quick Reply
does is have a really awkward rape scene with ryan and harrison?
Chandler Bing - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 05:47:32 EST ID:Vna6N7+a No.389289 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I've yet to see a Denis Villeneuve movie that wasn't brilliant, so I'm really looking forward to this. Especially after hearing how well it's being received. This could've been one of those movies that went horribly wrong, but it sounds like he did everything right.
Russel Crowe - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 13:40:16 EST ID:OJrCsll8 No.389310 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Saw this last night.
10/10 would watch again. This is probably my favorite movie that came out in 2017.
It's fantastic that they didn't run into any of the issues I thought a modern Hollywood sequel would run into:
  • They didn't fill the movie with explosions and action
  • They resisted the urge to use CG for every scene
  • I thought they were going to have a straightforward plot, but it's actually pretty interesting and thought-provoking
  • They also didn't mess up the ending (like the original theatrical Blade Runner did)
The one "complaint" that I had is that the music wasn't as good as the original for me, but otherwise I'd say that this Blade Runner was actually better than the first one!
Russel Crowe - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 13:41:08 EST ID:OJrCsll8 No.389311 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Oh and also it's a three hour long movie, so they did not hold back on the breathtaking long scene-establishing shots or thoughtfully paced dialogue.
Jeffrey Sinclair - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 15:06:23 EST ID:kZ2PjT+d No.389315 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Oh and also it's a three hour long movie,

Yeah and they can go fuck themselves for that. As someone that works in a theater, now I gotta stay there till 11PM when I usually get out around 9:30. Fuck that. Oh well, you want your movie to be an unnecessary 3 hours? Then fuck you, you get your showtimes cut. We are only giving Blade Runner 2 shows instead of 4.
Sean Combs - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 15:25:30 EST ID:IBJAbzvX No.389316 Ignore Report Quick Reply
hahaha boo fucking hoo
Kenneth Parcell - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 16:01:21 EST ID:Ph/J7MiA No.389318 Ignore Report Quick Reply
What kind of a punk ass theatre has its last showing at 8 pm?
Michael Shannon - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 16:39:54 EST ID:8soux3Rt No.389319 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Lol nobody gives a fuck about your feelings and you don't deserve to get off early because you're such a faggot.
Huey Freeman - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 17:14:35 EST ID:vAA7SLoW No.389322 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Uh, I worked in a theater when I was in college and that's not how theater shifts work at all. You don't work shifts based off a single movie's run time, you basically work for as long as theaters are open, and if you're not working at a podunk theater then you likely have movies starting as late as 11pm on non-premiere nights, so if you're working closing shift you're working into the middle of the night to clean and do closing duties regardless.

tl;dr you're a bitch nigga that needs to find another job that lets you be even lazier than a theater worker since apparently that job is too demanding for you.
Al Pacino - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 17:20:10 EST ID:1LUlzS1I No.389324 Ignore Report Quick Reply
lol look at this fucking loser
Danny Trejo - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 17:53:07 EST ID:KfsRhk7F No.389325 Ignore Report Quick Reply
So this unnecessary blade runner sequel is.... good? and doesn't suffer from typical modern hollywood problems? and is smart(!)? this is hard to believe. releasing a three hour movie takes some balls though, that has me believe a little more, but I'm still worried it's gonna be three hours of alternating between poorly done drawn out action scenes and hokey quasi-philosophical dialogue.
Sean Combs - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 18:18:01 EST ID:IBJAbzvX No.389327 Report Quick Reply
never seen Bladerunner, what's the fan-agreed version best to watch. No I will not do some complicated thing of downloading three versions and switching between them at certain timepoints, just pick one, preferably that has a torrent
Al Pacino - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 18:35:39 EST ID:1LUlzS1I No.389328 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The Final Cut is the generally agreed upon best version
Huey Freeman - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 19:25:55 EST ID:vAA7SLoW No.389331 Ignore Report Quick Reply

>So this unnecessary blade runner sequel is.... good?

Yes, very. It's pretty much the shining example of an unnecessary sequel being made by a director that actually grew up a fan of the source material and thus treated it with respect, wanted to actually honor the original director's vision, and also wanted to expand on it with his own take that he hops fellow fans would appreciate. We'll still get cynical cash-grab sequels because that's the world we live in, but at least we now have a very recent example of how to make a genuinely good sequel that no one ever thought they wanted.

This post was edited by C_Higgy on 08-10-2017 02:32:35
Grace Kelly - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 22:50:09 EST ID:Ph/J7MiA No.389334 Ignore Report Quick Reply
hopefully this opens the door for more good sequels at least, hollywood is firmly stuck in a trench of creative bankruptcy because of how expensive the movie business is nowadays, they'd rather ship actual garbage that people have heard of than take a single risk on a new IP, so maybe this'll show them that at least when recycling old concepts they can get people who care about them, take some creative risks and create an actually good movie.
Jon Arryn - Sat, 07 Oct 2017 23:30:10 EST ID:cpQu1mMj No.389335 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>never seen Bladerunner,

Then your life is empty and meaningless.
Cybernetic Ghost of Christmas Past from the Future - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 01:00:35 EST ID:vAA7SLoW No.389337 Ignore Report Quick Reply

>This post was edited by C_Higgy on 07-10-2017 23:31:55

C-Higgy !lfsExjBfzE - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 02:34:00 EST ID:J2nxIdks No.389339 Report Quick Reply
You accidentally replied to wrong post initially so I corrected it.
Cybernetic Ghost of Christmas Past from the Future - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 02:43:39 EST ID:vAA7SLoW No.389342 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Well, I'll be...
Curtis Donovan - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 03:06:19 EST ID:Vna6N7+a No.389348 Ignore Report Quick Reply
But has he seen The Wire?
Buzz Lightyear - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 12:32:56 EST ID:yaY1VRtw No.389363 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The thread C-Higgy will make when he's finally watching The Wire will no doubt last years on this board, simply out of the sick sense of satisfaction it'll bring us after all this time. Hell, it better get fucking stickied
The Waitress - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 14:18:45 EST ID:Z/KtTrlM No.389369 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I thought it was boring.
Porco Rosso - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 15:35:28 EST ID:kZ2PjT+d No.389373 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Cybernetic Ghost of Christmas Past from the Future - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 18:01:40 EST ID:vAA7SLoW No.389381 Ignore Report Quick Reply

You sure showed them! High five!
Slab Bulkhead - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 20:14:55 EST ID:OJrCsll8 No.389387 Ignore Report Quick Reply
+1. Grab the "Final Cut" version. If you're desperate you can go watch the Director's Cut, but please, whatever you do, *do not* watch the original theatrical cut of the movie - it's the worst one!
Christopher Lambert - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 20:33:40 EST ID:cpQu1mMj No.389388 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Dude....EVERYTHING has been bombing. This has been the worst last year for movie theaters in a long time. People just don't go to the movies anymore. Probably because of the expense and who knows if some asshole is gonna shoot up the theater...
Alex Cox - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 21:25:47 EST ID:8soux3Rt No.389390 Ignore Report Quick Reply

So many big studios are starting to crap out. A lot of them are pretty much on the edge of going bankrupt. It only takes a couple bombs to gut a company. Paramount is on the edge of bankruptcy after the last few Transformers movies. That's why we're seeing so many production companies just simply sticking the formula or doing remakes with no balls to try and do something original.
They're scared of bombing and they know that there is basically no margin of error anymore.
Moaning Myrtle - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 21:56:38 EST ID:vAA7SLoW No.389391 Ignore Report Quick Reply

That $9.99 MoviePass thing is a seismic shift in the industry. It's going to change everything like how Netflix completely killed Blockbuster and the like because it completely changed how consumers view movies at home. Now consumers have a dirt cheap method to see movies in theaters and never have to pay full price (or even student/military/senior/matinee price) again.

That being said, you also can't discount how media is consumed these days and how that affects the movie-going experience. Sitting in a theater from start to finish is a lot to ask the current generation of consumer because they don't like limiting themselves to just one activity at a time anymore. They want to be able to use their phone, they want to be able to talk to friends, they want to do basically whatever they can think of doing and don't like being told "You have to turn your phone off, stop talking, and sit here for 90-150 minutes". You can luxuriate the experience by offering comfy chairs, reclining chairs, alcohol, and/or high(er) quality food but that still doesn't negate the fact that the current consumer hates restrictions.

Compounding that problem is the fact that piracy has never gone away and only gets easier and easier as years go by. The ease of access of piracy combined with the gradual increase in camera/phone/tablet filming quality and the shrinking of device size means that you're only to get better and better, and more and more, pirated theater recordings of movies in quasi-HD quality that people that don't want to pay for will just watch at home or on their phone/tablet.

I think the ultimate end point that we're heading to is the virtual collapse of the entire movie theater business because someone will come up with a lucrative outlet for movie studios to digitally distribute their movies to people's phones/smart devices. MoviePass is expediting this by letting people see 30 movies in 30 days for $10 if they want to, but Netflix is also burning the candle at the other end by luring away movie stars and filmmakers to make movies for their digital platform in lieu of making a theatrical release.

It's a battle of attrition at this point: Netflix needs to keep spending the money to make this work, and they're going to fund some real stinkers of movies in the meantime, but they have the enormous capital to keep trying. Eventually they'll get their megahit, the movie they can market everywhere as the reason to pay for Netflix, the thing they can use to lure away more Hollywood luminaries from making theatrical releases instead, and the thing they can use to target those people that still aren't paying for Netflix despite their inroads in original television distribution.
Alice Murphy - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 23:40:36 EST ID:HoAi3D2g No.389394 Ignore Report Quick Reply
What's so funny?
Trunk Slamchest - Sun, 08 Oct 2017 23:44:52 EST ID:8NE6H3YK No.389395 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The girl that played the Joi hologram in this was legitimately one of the most beautiful women I've ever seen. I actually thought she might be a CGI character (beyond the hologram effects) because her face almost looked TOO perfect, like what someone would actually design in a computer if you were making a "perfect virtual girlfriend" model. Even her nipples in the nude scene looked like how you'd expect a computer model woman's to look, all round and smooth.
Jean-luc Godard - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 01:30:24 EST ID:PPBdRS2a No.389398 Ignore Report Quick Reply

She can't even close her mouth all the way, it's repulsive honestly. Nothing else matters, she ugly.
andrew - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 02:19:32 EST ID:/Yj6i5tf No.389400 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Youse a bitch. I work at a theater as a manager/projectionist and we get out at 1:25am because of a 10:30 imax showing
Penny Priddy - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 02:47:39 EST ID:ONQBFuJu No.389401 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Actual faggot detected.
Jean-luc Godard - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 04:07:14 EST ID:PPBdRS2a No.389402 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1507536434667.png -(1173878B / 1.12MB, 717x1117) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Mouth breather detected. Why can't she close her mouth? Enjoy your tooth decay, bad breath, gum disease, etc. That's what happens when you don't close your goddamn mouth.
Morgan Le Fey - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 04:25:51 EST ID:nN/AIXPP No.389403 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Don't forget that you're also limited to exactly how the movie plays it. Too loud? Fuck you we want to see how loud our half broken sub woofer can go. Plus the chance of assholes and the way higher quality of home TV sets (think of 1080p films now compared to crappy VHS players in the 80s and 90s). There's very little draw to go to the movies unless it's for an opening night atmosphere or event.
otherkevin - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 04:54:27 EST ID:NsDcSWqS No.389404 Ignore Report Quick Reply
bless my human bones, i enjoyed the feeling of the bass in my face. 9/10 soundtrack

the violence was really special.

all of the characters are synthetic
otherkevin - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 04:56:10 EST ID:NsDcSWqS No.389405 Ignore Report Quick Reply
except one
Spongebob Squarepants - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 06:23:23 EST ID:RDMvrhhS No.389409 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Literal psychopath detected.
Hoshi Sato - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 06:45:20 EST ID:p7skP1Cp No.389412 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1507545920018.jpg -(85749B / 83.74KB, 622x617) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
She really was
Peter Bishop - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 06:58:24 EST ID:7MJAX2Qy No.389413 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1507546704859.jpg -(26037B / 25.43KB, 600x300) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
I'm not the fag autist ITT, but I don't get why yall are worshiping her. Looks like every other 20-something young, white actress these days. I mean goddamn, maybe its cuz im 30 and have seen many like her before: boring ass bitch dorky-ass dudes fucking fawn over.
Will Turner - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 07:44:39 EST ID:xFP429WF No.389414 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Shut your fucking mouth.
Jean-luc Godard - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 08:14:58 EST ID:PPBdRS2a No.389415 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1507551298667.png -(369443B / 360.78KB, 644x635) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

They can't. They're half-rodent abominations like their lame ass waifu. Also why her eyes the same color of baby shit? Her eyes look like used diapers.
Steve Smith - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 09:58:52 EST ID:TBx+T/YQ No.389418 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Gee aren't you special.
Spongebob Squarepants - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 09:59:57 EST ID:RDMvrhhS No.389419 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Is this someone a person who has good taste in films or are they some idiot you trust in general but has absolutely shit film taste and ADD?
Peter Bishop - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 11:11:30 EST ID:7MJAX2Qy No.389421 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I mean don't get me wrong; if she met me and was dtf I would jump all over that, but IMO there are more interesting looking women in showbiz than her. She's just so run-of-the-mill knomsayin?
Alex Cox - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 13:25:49 EST ID:8soux3Rt No.389424 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Don't go see it. The amount of enjoyment that goes on in the world is limited, and you don't deserve it. I do.
Alex Cox - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 13:26:43 EST ID:8soux3Rt No.389425 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Also, extremely riveting sentiment. I'm very glad that I read like 3 times that you think she's ordinary looking.
Very compelling argument. Would read again.
Gendo Ikari - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 13:47:49 EST ID:Zh/sUEXx No.389427 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Just got back from seeing Blade Runner 2049. I was afraid that this movie would betray its predecessor by trying to appeal to the masses, but it doesn't. It's a shame that this movie is flopping at the box office, it's definitely Oscar worthy.
Lumpy Space Princess - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 20:23:37 EST ID:OJrCsll8 No.389438 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I agree, she's somewhat average-looking.
Monster Carrot - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 21:21:12 EST ID:Zh/sUEXx No.389441 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Is anyone here familiar with that 12 Angry Men parody from Amy Schumer's show?

It's not the full skit, but here they debate on whether or not Amy Schumer is fuckable. You guys constantly derail threads over bullshit like this. Just shut the fuck up about this broad and discuss the movie. I don't even try to police threads, but I hate when ya'll talk about women like a bunch of virgins.
Carl Grimes - Mon, 09 Oct 2017 21:49:50 EST ID:W+gh24/o No.389442 Ignore Report Quick Reply
nigga wtf are you talking about
why are you trying to derail the thread with unrelated shit
fuck off
Lucy Brown - Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:06:24 EST ID:+OhYKgQE No.389461 Ignore Report Quick Reply

I wonder what Joi stands for? Its probably Jerk Off Instruction
David Chase - Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:11:12 EST ID:8NE6H3YK No.389462 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Where exactly do you live?
Lumpy Space Princess - Tue, 10 Oct 2017 13:30:26 EST ID:OJrCsll8 No.389464 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Near Hollywood.
Major Motoko Kusanagi - Tue, 10 Oct 2017 13:32:27 EST ID:cuLO5LKc No.389465 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The movie rocked, and what's more it was a proper sequel and not some kind of nostalgia fest that's totally beholden to the original. Like say Jurassic World that banks 100% on being nostalgic for Jurassic Park 1 and being reverent towards it.
This didn't do any of that, it did its own thing, just being faithful to the world of the original film.
Willow Rosenberg - Tue, 10 Oct 2017 14:06:27 EST ID:mNvWnc/B No.389466 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Yeah, I also thought of Jurrassic World. I was afraid that 2049 was going to get brutally fucked by movie studio meddling, but it doesn't.
El Barto - Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:27:25 EST ID:3ftMvKiS No.389467 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1507663645847.jpg -(177534B / 173.37KB, 1300x1029) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Grace Kelly - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 07:15:54 EST ID:XgsH7nii No.389543 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1507806954632.jpg -(92753B / 90.58KB, 1200x675) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

For a half day I didn't think about it being a hologram named Joi, forgot JOI were a thing. Then I remembered and didn't want to post about it because shame of knowledge and shame of ignorance. And shame of curiousity if that thing is really gonna tell me to jack it in the theater Peewee Herman style.

Rainer Werner Fassbinder - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 14:27:15 EST ID:RDifK1Th No.389552 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Probably the best movie I have seen in theaters, the best movie I have seen this year, and maybe even the best movie I have seen in the last 5 years.

This movie is so god damn good. Since the moment I have left the theater last night I can't stop thinking about it. It is the solution to every single problem in Hollywood today. This is not a cash grab sequel, it's not a CGI ADD fest, it's a beautifully directed and faithful sequel to Blade Runner
This movie will be remembered for a long, long time, which is something I can't say for most Hollywood movies coming out today
Happy Time Harry - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 18:31:05 EST ID:W+gh24/o No.389565 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I'm so happy to hear this.
I'm gonna try to catch a matinee next week.
Huey Freeman - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 22:21:14 EST ID:t8Bt0m6E No.389575 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I think you'll be disappointed like I was.
If you want to go, do it and go 3D since you probably don't have it at home and you'll dl this in two months when a HD release is out and watch it without 3D like 4 times in a week. Might as well get the 3D in.
If you don't really want to go, don't, it's way better than Prometheus and Covenant, there's some actual film-making going on here but it's nothing special substance wise, in fact, rather lacking and hollow imo. (I get this might be to give you the perspective of the main character, but it doesn't make for good film.)

First off Hollywood can't make movies like they did in the 80's so I wasn't even expecting that. I wasn't really expecting anything.

It's pretty shit imo.
Long and slow, not an action film at all, the original wasn't either. This was more like a drama with a little bit of whatever Apocalypse Now is, odyssey?
Yea, it's a bit trippy and the visuals and film technicals are cool, but nothing mindblowing. It has kind of an elegant air to it. With long stretches of calm and minimalism suddenly erupting in short brutal violence.
It's got that minimalist futurist style we've seen a million times since just after the Matrix. Covenant does it too but not nearly as good.
I watched it in 3D and I think people should if they see it in cinemas, some scenes definitely felt like they were made for it, and I think it only adds to the film since it lacks in pretty much everything else.

I mean it's not an embarrassingly offensive terrible waste of time like Prometheus and Covenant are, but it's not much more than an ok somewhat good movie.

I was watching it stoned too so I think the 3D worked better some friends didn't think it was all that great but my eyes got used to it and it was pretty cool and worked better than I though.

Other than the visuals and a few things they get right here and there (not the straight up samples from the original though) it was very slow and almost boring.
It's a small focused story mostly on Ryan Gosling, not many characters at all and the environment that literally denotes Blade Runner, the futuristic city, well there was very little of that, no big street scenes like you'd expect.
Instead we get very barren places like a whiteish desert, oddly lighted hallways (a bit cool, but meh,) and a broken down metal factory.
Some car scenes over the CGI city kinda cool, but still meh.

Ok so visuals over, story? Character developments? Acting?
Not much to tell really, the film seemed to focus on the visuals rather than any kind of heartfelt or intelligent substance.
Yea there's some meta and the idea that the synthetics have become so human that they cry and have emotional lives is cool, there's a kind of line of humanity bleeding into the machines and of course the main thing about them being able to reproduce like humans somehow, cool, but left very unexplored for such a long movie, mostly just mentioned.
I didn't care about the characters at all and nothing really was there for us to get a hold of either.

I made faces at a lot of sour notes in the style and art choices such as the billboard choices. Obviously Sony and Coca Cola were on in this film lowered the costs for Ridley Scott and Co, but it just felt lame.
When I saw the Coke logo, I just thought, no, too casual, too first choice, should have been Kodak. Don't know why but it would look a lot better.

And a major grievance I have. The over-explanation of the plot.
There are more than a few times when the plot has been advanced and the audience has learned something, done very tastefully. Where you're like nice I get it, well transmitted, I'm not 100% sure, it leaves that 1-2 % of vagueness where it still slips into your mind on an intellectual level, where you guess the message a tiny tiny 1-2% but it's pretty clear what has been revealed.
Good right? I usuallly prefer more obscurity than that but it felt nice going into my brain.
But here's the problem. The film will literally just after this, give you another tell of what just happened. So now the elegant way to give it to you is ruined instantly because you are immediately assured that yes that IS what happened. So now you know.
Just to make sure everyone, even the simple minded, are fully caught up.
Major sour note.
But get this. There are actually 1 or 2 times where this is done an additional time after that! Literally just after the hadicapped plot assistance! Literally right after it there will be a scene where someone says it out loud. the police woman in the office saying out lound, synthetic births!?" Juuuust to make sure even the family dog knows what's going on. Felt very amateur, like in cheesy action movies where the characters will make a stop in the momentum to explain to other characters what has happened and what they are about to do. Completely contrary to the minimalist, moody raw style the film is tuned to.

Another gripe is the overselling of sex. We get, it the future is a sleazy place there's hologram bikinigirls. Do we need to see that 9 different times? With vulgar ass and naked tit shots? What happened to the elegant Geisha from the original?
This was more like a pornhub plugin rather than an enticing pink holographic hint or tease.
And this can be used to summize the difference between this move and the original.
The original was made by a mature mind and it's an adult noir film. This is more like a millenial raised on bangbros and post Y2K hollywood futurism.

IMDB does stars out of 10 right?
I'd give it a 5.6 (Prometheus and Covenant are both 1s.)
Decent try but lacks any authentic momentum to keep you interested and following along. Instead abrupt violence is used to jolt you back to focus.
Slow development is boring and simple.

It really is a mold of its time now where movies are geared much more toward being an experience than a relaxing immersive kind of film-making that the original (and Apocalypse Now) is. Today you are supposed to leave the theater exhausted after strong imagery or brutal violence and decadent nudity there to provide discomfort and illness.
The synth Jared Leto sees born female naked and oily and then disembowels.
Or to crudely tug at sexual reactions, ironically just like the advertisements parodied / referred to. The film does it clumsily and fails in the same way with that.

The main villain is super hero-tier dimensional.

But yea the action is good, well done, but let down of course by no substance being there for us so we care about the outcomes.
Franklin Bluth - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 22:28:35 EST ID:W+gh24/o No.389576 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Nah I'm sure I'll enjoy it. If it's getting good reviews from fans of the original I imagine most would enjoy it unless they're just cynical and kill everything they ever watch with preconceived notions.
Huey Freeman - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 22:30:50 EST ID:t8Bt0m6E No.389577 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Oh yea and it certainly feels like another cash grab sequel just like Scott's other ventures with Prometheus and Covenant.
Like I said about those movies, feels like he's stacking away cash for his grandkids or whatever. Which I think is fine, it's your right to do that, but the movies are at best, like with Blade Runner here, meh-ok.

I saw the imdb rating was very high, sign of desperation praising mediocrity and visuals because, "hey at least it isn't another superhero movie". Only I think it did have a small flavor of just that with Jared Leto.
Not being a superhero movie and visually nice far from makes a good movie.
Huey Freeman - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 23:13:01 EST ID:t8Bt0m6E No.389578 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>the breathtaking long scene-establishing shots
Sadly some of the best of Gosling looking grim and haggard w a nice backdrop like a panel taken out of a tasteful comic were so short I didn't even have time to enjoy it. Oh wow, that's a nice shot, like an illustratio-
Lando Calrissian - Fri, 13 Oct 2017 01:15:15 EST ID:OJrCsll8 No.389582 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I wanted to call out this being an awesomely written post. First and foremostly, I saw the movie myself last week and thought that it was really well done overall. However, the few flaws that I did find with the movie (over-explaining of some of the plot points, character dialogue that was too direct and obvious, the overacting of Jared Leto's godlike character, and the lack of crowded living cityscapes like in the original) you pointed out, so kudos to you. One that wasn't brought up is that I thought the music in the original Blade Runner was more profound and stunning when it forced its way into the foreground compared to in the sequel where most of the music is subdued and in the background.

Yes the movie does have these flaws, and to some people they might be glaring marks against the movie. However for me, I personally had imagined significantly greater possible harm being done to the Blade Runner IP with this movie if Hollywood had pushed for more audience accessibility and meddled with the film some more and to me BR2049 turned out to be a wonderfully thoughtful, reflective, impactful, stunning (in its own right), and wonderful movie for me to see.

I would suggest to people to go see it (not necessarily now, maybe it's better to wait for it to come out on DVD/Blu-Ray) and form their own opinions.
Drusilla - Fri, 13 Oct 2017 11:31:43 EST ID:juZRUyNj No.389600 Ignore Report Quick Reply
> the environment that literally denotes Blade Runner, the futuristic city, well there was very little of that, no big street scenes like you'd expect.
wow, that one detail was actually enough to deflate my interest in this movie. I was gonna see it in 3d, now I'm just gonna wait till there's a good hd non-camrip release I can watch.
Huey Freeman - Fri, 13 Oct 2017 12:38:16 EST ID:t8Bt0m6E No.389605 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I wrote that post, I still think you should see the 3D for the novelty. It's pretty cool. And you will torrent the HD release that comes out, usually 2-3 months these days after cinema release and watch it standard a bunch of times anyway.

Go if you're looking for an experience, don't if you expect a great meaningful movie.
I'd say it's worth it if you kinda feel like it, just to get an insight into 3D immersion in a not totally shit movie.
It's still pretty primitive tech but definitely a neat thing.
I'm glad I went and got the experience but as a movie it's pretty hollow and fails at feeling like a genuine addition to the original.
Bernie Mac - Fri, 13 Oct 2017 18:15:12 EST ID:dZYSP2qk No.389626 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Oh yea and it certainly feels like another cash grab sequel just like Scott's other ventures with Prometheus and Covenant.
No it doesn't.

Nice job trying to make shitty excuses for why others like the film, too. We're supposed to take you seriously after that?
Beetlejuice - Fri, 13 Oct 2017 21:50:51 EST ID:emoiXPS9 No.389632 Ignore Report Quick Reply
With anything that has hype there are gonna be tons of non confornists and contrarians just because they feel like they need to. they are trolling and they don't even know it.
Matthew Goode - Sat, 14 Oct 2017 06:55:03 EST ID:t8Bt0m6E No.389649 Ignore Report Quick Reply
It clearly is imo. They know Blade Runner has a different audience than super hero movies so they tried to make it in the same vein as the original, and there is nice film-making, but it lacks a lot too. Like a soul and charm.
George Takei - Sat, 14 Oct 2017 17:05:24 EST ID:Y56iC8R9 No.389672 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1508015124398.jpg -(14435B / 14.10KB, 502x417) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>Blade Runner 2049
Lump Beefbroth - Sat, 14 Oct 2017 20:42:27 EST ID:LblVs4/c No.389677 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Pretty much every single fan of Blade Runner disagrees.
>They know Blade Runner has a different audience than super hero movies so they tried to make it in the same vein as the original
You mean to tell me that these people decided to make a sequel to Blade Runner and tried to trick people into seeing it by...making a film that's a worthy successor to the original that had the same style and themes??? The BASTARDS!

That statement makes it painfully obvious that you'd have talked shit on this movie no matter what. You decided to hate it before production even began.
Lucio Fulci - Sun, 15 Oct 2017 03:30:39 EST ID:t8Bt0m6E No.389696 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I didn't even know it existed until last week, then I saw it last thursday.

If a person genuinely thinks this mediocre cash-grab is even remotely in the same ballpark as the original or "a worthy successor" they have no taste at all.

It's like comparing Linkin Park to an opera. The soundscape and lighting in the original is masterful. The work and DETAIL and ambition that went into that movie is amazing. Looks like they spent at most 1/50th the effort and time working on 2049. Watch them, compare and think about it. Where were the busy streets? we got like 1 public street scene and it was painfully obviously a very small set. Shameful. In the original you had large crowds of people, crowded streets, street kitchens, a vibrant club scene, even dwarves. Minimalism, no crowds and CGI is lazy.

>Pretty much every single fan of Blade Runner disagrees.
lol no.
Go read some reviews.
Even people who say they like BR2049 more than the original (half in the bag review from redletter media) have the same complaints I outlined in the long review itt.

>"a worthy successor"
Not at all, at best some spin-off branching of the universe. A soulles cashgrab but at least it wasn't offensively bad like Prometheus and Covenant.

I don't hate it, it's ok, but nothing more. The acting is stale and lacks charm just like all movies post 1980's.
In the 70's and 80's American actors had the ability to seem human on screen, not just stale stern line readers.
Harrison Ford is a good example. And the original Star Wars trilogy too. SWars is cheesy yes, much cheesier than original BR, but there's charm, humanity and character.
Compare Ford's, Hauer's or Hanna's acting in the original with anyone in 2049.
And according to Ridley Scott, Ford is a replicant in the original as well as the other 2 actors I mentioned so "robotic replicant acting" is no excuse. It's boring and uninteresting, unrelatable. (Ironically considering the story and the original) No human idiosyncrasies to make me like or believe anyone on screen. I don't believe the characters, I don't care about them therefore the action scenes don't grab me because I don't care about the results.
Compare that to the Hauer fight and roof scene in the original.

It's a very cool concept to have replicants assume emotions and very human traits as an acting dynamic and it's done brilliantly in the original where the concept is introduced and explored mostly in Hauer's character as he struggles with mortality. In 2049 for some reason we get stale robots, even though Gosling tries his best to break through I think shitty directing kept him down, same with the others (except Leto who is an awful actor). Imagine more relaxed, human acting, where you didn't know every single second that Jared Leto's right hand madame was a replicant. Some guesswork and audience mindfucking could have been very cool and interesting, also driving home the point of what is human? and the very cool idea of the bleeding together of human and machine.
And instead of focusing on the universal concept of mortality in 1 or 2 characters (Hauer and Ford's lady friend) set in a sprawling detailed immersive future world, what we get is a bigger picture slave uprising concept without really showing any of it and 1 guy finding out he's a replicant without making it interesting, deep, beautiful, spiritual or intellectual at all. Then just throw in some future stuff like hologram gf and some sex so we can sell this thing.
Make it not a shitty superhero movie, and for god's sake let's get a half-decent (I liked Sicario a lot) director (the gylenhall movie sucked though imo) so people with no real movie knowledge will be impressed. Voila.

As I'm watching the original right now it's interesting to note that the billboards in 2049 are exactly the same brands. Atari and cola.

It just illustrates the fault here.
It's not about the brand on the billboard, it's the set and setting. They either didn't even try (my theory considering Prometh and Covenant, i.e lazy cashgrab) or are just completely dumb.

Lucas failed in a similar way (worse) with the Star Wars prequels. What was done in the 80's cannot be done by hollywood any more. Those skills are gone, that industry is over.

It just proves all they want to do is emulate what they think the fans like, without any substance. Without genuine interest or ambition. Ah, the billboards, right guys, remember those, huh? Yea we got em for you! ok? we're too lazy to do any more city shots so that's enough.
It's tragic to hear people praise this fake bs. Oh they got the billboards in guys, exactly the same brands, I'm sold, that's me done, bravo.

Hollywood peaked in the 80's in almost all ways.

I wasn't expecting someting close to the original but BR2049 is not a good movie. It's just ok. 5.6/10.
Commander John J Adams - Sun, 15 Oct 2017 06:29:11 EST ID:RoJKB15f No.389699 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>The acting is stale and lacks charm just like all movies post 1980's.

You almost had me.
Afro Samurai - Sun, 15 Oct 2017 09:40:36 EST ID:Zh/sUEXx No.389703 Ignore Report Quick Reply

I decided against responding to him when he wrote in his previous post:

>but it lacks a lot too. Like a soul and charm.

>Blade Runner 2049
>Lacks soul

So yeah, he's shitposting.
William Shakespeare - Sun, 15 Oct 2017 11:31:34 EST ID:E7qZsm6m No.389705 Ignore Report Quick Reply
That comment was totally sincere and you both know it, grow up and learn to deal with conflicting opinions.

Other than visually, not even the original Blade Runner was very good. Fight me
John Connor - Sun, 15 Oct 2017 12:19:35 EST ID:tAY+RTmQ No.389707 Ignore Report Quick Reply

>Fight me

Damn, son. You really seem on edge this morning.
William Shakespeare - Sun, 15 Oct 2017 12:43:15 EST ID:E7qZsm6m No.389709 Ignore Report Quick Reply
it's a meme bud
John Connor - Sun, 15 Oct 2017 15:50:39 EST ID:tAY+RTmQ No.389713 Ignore Report Quick Reply

No need to be so defensive.
William Shakespeare - Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:15:27 EST ID:E7qZsm6m No.389714 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yeah look I know you're trying to make it look like you're trolling me but we both know what this is, you're mad because of what I said about Blade Runner.
John Connor - Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:49:52 EST ID:tAY+RTmQ No.389715 Ignore Report Quick Reply

There isn’t a hint of frustration in any of my posts. Go take a bath, William.
Keanu Reeves - Sun, 15 Oct 2017 20:03:58 EST ID:Q+XIvuK9 No.389720 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The way I see it is, there is an odyssey genre. Some of the best films ever made.
Apocalypse Now
2001: A Space Odyssey
Blade Runner
The Godfather 1/2

They're not really action, not really drama. Excellent filmmaking.

The Shining is there too.
Friday the 13th 10 2017 - Tue, 17 Oct 2017 08:21:31 EST ID:YIhBd0Q2 No.389770 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1508242891846.jpg -(182625B / 178.34KB, 892x1219) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Is the new Blade Runner any good?
Charlie Murphy - Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:36:53 EST ID:Q2Y/GSR0 No.389773 Ignore Report Quick Reply

It is if you enjoyed the original. Although there’s one person ITT who doesn’t like it, so there’s that.
Johnny Caspar - Wed, 18 Oct 2017 16:54:11 EST ID:Wxhkk7b+ No.389810 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Happy Death Day beats Blade Runner at the box office

my fucking sides. Well it looks like Blade Runner is a huge flop. Maybe this will finally make studios learn that big budget, 3 hour, CGI fests are not the way to go.
Starburns - Wed, 18 Oct 2017 19:22:53 EST ID:Zh/sUEXx No.389818 Ignore Report Quick Reply

>Maybe this will finally make studios learn that big budget, 3 hour, CGI fests are not the way to go.

Judging from this sentence, I can tell the original Blade Runner was before your time. I can also tell you're... shitposting, but you still got me to respond anyway.

The original movie flopped as well, and the masses are even dumber than they used to be. So of course the producers knew what they were getting themselves into with 2049. Look man, either you make a movie people will remember down the line, or you make some Michael Bay/Marvel bullshit that people will forget within a week of watching it.
Bella Swan - Wed, 18 Oct 2017 19:34:33 EST ID:gvOzKuJ3 No.389820 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The best movies in the long run are beautiful and slightly boring.

If a movie's gonna be thought-provoking it's gotta give you time to think. Michael Bay knows this, knows his movies aren't thought-provoking and to make up for this never gives you even the slightest moment to think. Cause you might get mad.
Vic Mackey - Wed, 18 Oct 2017 20:01:17 EST ID:Wxhkk7b+ No.389821 Ignore Report Quick Reply
> or you make some Michael Bay/Marvel bullshit that people will forget within a week of watching it.

You know what the difference is between Blade Runner and Michael Bay/Marvel bullshit? The Michael Bay / Marvel bullshit actually makes money and thats what the studios care about.
Rachael - Wed, 18 Oct 2017 21:33:39 EST ID:eHcrAOLK No.389823 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Do you care?
Hermione Granger - Wed, 18 Oct 2017 21:55:42 EST ID:gvOzKuJ3 No.389824 Ignore Report Quick Reply

And its cultural capital evaporates within a couple of years. There is more than one currency which sustains this industry.
Ricky Ravine - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 00:25:19 EST ID:no491XO4 No.389833 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I would not call this new movie a "CGI-fest", the director went on and on about how he did most everything with practical effects and only fell back to CGI when it was absolutely necessary.
George Carlin - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 00:44:29 EST ID:W+gh24/o No.389834 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1508388269349.jpg -(4447518B / 4.24MB, 5000x3600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Nice shitposts bruh
Hermione Granger - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 00:59:17 EST ID:gvOzKuJ3 No.389836 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1508389157058.jpg -(107795B / 105.27KB, 1600x900) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
CGI is just a straight up better way of doing the Bladerunner cityscapes than a computer-controlled camera rig and multi-exposure compositing.

Bladerunner is going to be one of the most gorgeous movies forever. Just like Metropolis and Cabinet of Dr. Caligari.

If you make a true classic that thing will be trickling in revenue until copyright laws crumble and wash into the sea.
Jack Deth - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 05:34:42 EST ID:oa2mmJAW No.389841 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>CGI is just a straight up better way
Is it though? I haven't seen the new one yet but I just watched both Tron films back to back and the newer one feels less gritty because of the way it's filmed. GitS had that same weird feel to it. Shitty stock that's a shade too dark and at least real model plus CGI effects to bring it to life composition sounds like a good compromise.
Peter Baelish - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 10:28:57 EST ID:LHUlQ5bN No.389846 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Is that not what the new tron was?


compare the lightcycle scenes. the original tron does not hold up well in those scenes.

It's alaso possible I just don't follow what you're saying. some examples or scene comparisons would help.
Jack Deth - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 12:35:17 EST ID:oa2mmJAW No.389848 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The new tron was mostly special effects but so was the old one
I think I just find it jarring to see high definition film of cyberpunk things. I'm used to cyberpunk being shitty 80s and 90s film so when everything's ultra high resolution it's weird
Tetsuo Shima - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 19:19:20 EST ID:7JFcGASG No.389871 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1508455160861.jpg -(746673B / 729.17KB, 3360x2100) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>Is it though?

For compositing? Absolutely. 110% and then some. Anybody can do the level of intricate layering that the original Bladerunner did now, practically or otherwise.

The problem arises in what you're compositing and how much detail each element can bear before it looks bad. Consider Terminator 2, on VHS it looks great and terrifying. On Bluray it looks cheap and old.
If you stress weak CGI too hard the final image falls apart like the Star Wars prequels or Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.

Here's a shot from the Warcraft movie. The heroes are largely CG(the nonhuman ones at least) and they look great because of all the work put into them, but what really sells it is all of the practical stuff in front of the greenscreen. That stuff has such an effect. The actors play off it in subtle unconscious ways and it can be vital to the overall product.

Even if the characters and the backgrounds are total CGI, just having that layer of real stuff immensely adds to the piece.
If the background doesn't bear scrutiny, foreground props can decrease that burden much like the VHS' low resolution did for T2.

Fantastic Beasts and The Star Wars prequels just shot on greenscreens and you can feel it in the actors as much as you can see it in the effects themselves.

Also BTW I found that the worst looking element of Warcraft was the humans, oddly enough. The CGI in that movie is so consistent and well done that the real humans become the uncanny valley IMO.
Bilbo Baggins - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 19:53:00 EST ID:cpQu1mMj No.389877 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>The actors play off it in subtle unconscious ways and it can be vital to the overall product.

I once saw them shoot a film with a "monster" chasing the actors.

The "monster" was a grip holding a big green pole that had a big green circle at the end.

How the fuck do you act against that?
Tetsuo Shima - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 19:55:55 EST ID:7JFcGASG No.389878 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Well it's a lot easier when you have a target to pretend is something else than if it were just nothing, and you had to imagine it.
Tetsuo Shima - Thu, 19 Oct 2017 19:56:55 EST ID:7JFcGASG No.389879 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Like, you literally can't focus your eyes in the right spots without targets to look at.
Dante Hicks - Fri, 20 Oct 2017 08:41:42 EST ID:LHUlQ5bN No.389897 Ignore Report Quick Reply
maybe you can't. this is why actors get paid the big bucks.
James Doakes - Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:00:53 EST ID:oa2mmJAW No.389898 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Hey I was arguing for compositing but against pure-CGI. You're not disagreeing with what I said.

Jon Arryn - Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:47:15 EST ID:cpQu1mMj No.389901 Ignore Report Quick Reply
True. I just found the sight to be surreal.
Jean-Luc Picard - Fri, 20 Oct 2017 15:13:54 EST ID:1VnjbDoP No.389902 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1508526834295.jpg -(30682B / 29.96KB, 584x280) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>The problem arises in what you're compositing and how much detail each element can bear before it looks bad. Consider Terminator 2, on VHS it looks great and terrifying. On Bluray it looks cheap and old.
This explains so much bad CGI that I never noticed as a kid.
Denver, the Last Dinosaur - Fri, 20 Oct 2017 17:37:55 EST ID:AO6Mqnqb No.389906 Ignore Report Quick Reply
True, but CGI is an essential component now for its flexibility.

And I think a lot of bad CGI isn't bad, just a victim of shitty composition.
Like, the guy doing the CG shouldn't also do the composition. If you work on anything like that too long it throws your perspective way off.

Another benefit to practical effects is that they can age hilariously, and CGI hasn't had that since it was a novelty. Hilariously bad is out of reach almost, while mediocrity is everywhere.
C-Higgy !lfsExjBfzE - Sun, 22 Oct 2017 23:51:55 EST ID:OR/Yo4mj No.389997 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I finally saw it on Friday. No doubt a fantastic film but something felt like it was missing from but I think >>389696 filled in the blanks for me. Honestly I thought the twist was going to be that K was Deckard's son that supposedly had died since I thought it wasn't true but I was wrong about that. What I liked about Blade Runner is how it managed to humanize its antagonist in Roy by the end but that wasn't really there in 2049. Maybe if Sapper had been the main antagonist instead of Luv, then it probably would have been better. Kind of a waste of Batista tbh. Same with Jared Leto's character, whom they should have also made a bigger deal and presence. It was nice to see Deckard back though but that ambiguity of whether he's a human or replicant is gone since he's the latter does make me see him and his actions in a different light.
Halloweeeeen2017 - Tue, 31 Oct 2017 05:41:47 EST ID:HwkPiq2M No.390335 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1509442907346.jpg -(72417B / 70.72KB, 1200x1200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
So... worth watching?
Samsara Siddhartha - Tue, 31 Oct 2017 09:39:24 EST ID:Z/aNWD+H No.390343 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1509457164659.jpg -(3138564B / 2.99MB, 3840x2160) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
It's definitely worth seeing on the big screen. I was fortunate enough to avoid all of the trailers and see it with almost no knowledge. Visually it's a stunning film, kudos to the cinematographer, art director, and director. The cgi blends well with the practical effects...those hovercars <3 The music also plays homage to the original without trying to flat out copy it, honestly Hans Zimmer can do no wrong.

For Blade Runner to have defined a genre that has now been vastly explored, 2049 subverts expectations and cliches in extremely inventive ways. The movie is smartly written and it leaves you pondering many aspects of it. I feel that they keep things open enough where the ending of the original remains open to interpretation. The romance aspects showed me something I had never seen before, and as a result it was so damn trippy.

Consider the fuck up that was the live action Ghost in the Shell film, it was visually beautiful but completely lacking in the story, its primary problem. Whereas 2049 works on every level. Considering how many writers, directors, and ultimately films fuck up a project/legacy, it's refreshing to see everything work out so nicely.
Rob Huebel - Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:27:11 EST ID:B0x/WgXV No.390345 Ignore Report Quick Reply
expecting it to be as good as the original is setting yourself up for disappointment. it's probably the best movie out in theaters now (unless you're trying to watch a horror movie for halloween).

All that said, it's still an above average movie on its own merit.
Astro Boy - Sat, 04 Nov 2017 16:11:33 EST ID:WM/jliS5 No.390522 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1509826293883.jpg -(50049B / 48.88KB, 597x440) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Pic says it all.
Same applies to bladerunner 2049
Mouse Fitzgerald - Sat, 04 Nov 2017 18:08:47 EST ID:W+gh24/o No.390528 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Stop posting grandpa. Either takes a skilled artist a lot of time.
Theoden - Sat, 04 Nov 2017 19:01:08 EST ID:BTivjTmt No.390530 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yeah except the models still look good and retain a sense of realism after decades of technological advancement, whereas cgi looks like shit after a few years.
Samsara Siddhartha - Sat, 04 Nov 2017 23:25:03 EST ID:Z/aNWD+H No.390545 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The same does not apply to 2049, quit being a contrarian shitlord.
Kristen Cloke - Sun, 05 Nov 2017 17:05:09 EST ID:no491XO4 No.390579 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yes, having one scene with CG in it does not make the entire film a CG-fest.
Benedict Cumberbatch - Sun, 05 Nov 2017 17:24:04 EST ID:/Y8D3q0C No.390580 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yeah but one of them takes a computer-controlled camera rig an amount of time that can't be parallelized.

Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.