I love how the film doesn't pander to the audience, it respects us enough to take its time to tell us the story, it doesn't need big epic scenes, it takes its time to tell us and im worried this is the last film which will do this.
In a way he was the one - not the born one, but the born again one, for in the end he realized he had everything necessary to truly be human and he achieved it, not by flesh, but by faith, in that he chose to do what nobody had programmed or expected him to do - an act of love. I agree it is a masterpiece in so many ways, and has a life-changing effect. Of all the movies I have seen, this movie was a pure work of art, and in a question of art, financial success has no bearing.
Well done. And well said... especially about how BR 2049 may fare in the future. Just like the original, its influence may well massively exceed its (initial) receipts from the box office (especially in the US, where it was singularly poorly attended for some reason...) I myself never saw it in a cinema and mainly got to know it (and the original) as preparation for Villeneuve's Dune - along with Villeneuve's other works. If Villeneuve's star continues to rise for a while yet, we can certainly expect that many more will come to know BR 2049 (and, like me, shell out good money to own it and related merchandise) - and that many among future generations of filmmakers will be influenced by it too.
@@MrChickenMovies by 2017 I became pretty jaded by modern Hollywood, and assumed that a new Blade Runner meant just a hollow remake to cash in on the legacy of the original film. Oh how I was wrong, and I wish I saw it in theatre when it came out. I think I will stay more alert as to what movies are currently coming out so that I don't miss opportunities like that again to see movies like 2049 in the theatre.
@@zonefreakman It's one of those films that just grabs you. I'm really glad I got to see it in cinemas - you could just feel the anticipation in the audience. I already knew of Denis Villeneuve's films, so I was already sold on it. As Hollywood becomes more cynical, I try to figure out how good the crew behind a film is, before watching another sequel; to say the least I liked what I saw from 2049. From then on, I realised that what you choose to watch is the most important thing in cinema
It's one of the best sequels ever made honouring the orginal. It could have been a pop corn 🍿 action flick. The music 🎶 the visuals It's what I call a proper movie 🎥 I saw it at the cinema so glad I did. Luv stole the movie. Amazing achievement in film making Denis Villeneuve is a master so I'm excited for Dune !
Best film in the last decade and master peice? ROTFL. This film is ambient art garbage and the acting can go into the can as well. It's bland and boring and so very uninteresting. This film was nowhere near as good as the original looks-wise and acting-wise. The CGI was terrible and the pace was mind-numbing and painfully slow. This film is getting a 4/10 for me and that's me being generous. And please, stop putting rock stars who can't act in films it's so painful to watch.
NO. Not a "masterpiece." In addition to obviously being produced for the most cynical of reasons, Blade Runner 2049 continually fails to grasp its potential in favor of placating audience good will for its predecessor, and is clearly far too preoccupied with showcasing Roger Deakins' phenomenal talents in lieu of attempting to expand on anything that Blade Runner itself didn't address more eloquently forty years ago. Original Blade Runner screenwriter Hampton Fancher seems to have labored under the impression that we as a society haven't been engaging in this pop cultural conversation about "what it means to be human" since 1982, but that simply isn't so. Battlestar Galactica, for example, managed to grapple with this theme in such a way as to make Blade Runner 2049 look and feel dated by comparison. Dramatically inert and paced like molasses on a cold day, the film just slowly carts the audience around from scene to scene, practically begging us to be awestruck by the admittedly spectacular visuals and nothing else. And the distractingly grating performance by Jared Leto, chewing on scenery like a teething puppy and forced to relay laughably ponderous quasi-philosophical dialogue by Fancher like some sort of sci-fi Bond villain, didn't exactly help much either.
Awful sequel. Joi? There are fan edits out there that cut out Joi entirely. The movie is better for it. Threesomes? Please, the original was never about joy, sex, carnality. Its a film noir, for pete's sake.
Blade Runner 2049 is about as much about sex as Game of Thrones is. It just uses sex as a way of telling it's story. I understand the critique of it's use here, but it's hardly the focus. The focus is more on whether K and Joi's love is real, which is hugely important to K's arc in the film. Most of his motivations come from what he hears from Joi and in the end his decision to save Deckard is motivated by the realisation that their love isn't real. Cut this arc out, and K's motivations aren't as clear and the film isn't as strong as a whole.
@@MrChickenMovies All good points. I thought the film started to lag as soon as Joi was on the scene. The film was too long. Better to save the Joi/Joe love affair for another sequel. And explore it more there, with all its nuisances. The film was too unfocused, and should of stayed with the singular evil Wallace/ specimen angle etc. Tell one story at a time. I think that turned off moviegoers cause it was too long, and unfocused. Yes, the joi angle may have been the impetus for seeking Deckard, but this could of have been excised from the script and told in a different way to make the film more succinct and engrossing, Deckard would of appeared earlier in the film then, to move the story along in a quicker fashion. Just my thoughts.
I suppose that's fair enough. I personally liked the pace and the Joi storyline, but I can understand if they turned you off from the movie. I guess at least you have those fancuts to watch instead.
@@MrChickenMovies Yes , i understand 2049 purists will defend the languid pace of the film, hey, I enjoy a longer film too, I just feel there needs to be a relevant payoff for the time spent. The fan edit excises the joi story line and threesome entirely from the film, but still manages to complete the story intact with some clever cuts and effects and overdubs of the dialogue. The fan edit is trimmed down to 2 hrs 3 min. for a quicker pace.
I completely disagree. The continuous theme of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and Blade Runner has been expanding the circle of empathy by stripping down the requirements to see one's self in another being. Joi takes this theme beyond the source material by asking if physical form is a necessary condition for extending that empathy. Unlike OP, I contend that Joi achieved transcendence of her base programming. In this interpretation, the hologram is introduced as a new bottom stratum of society, but K's Joi achieves individuality through experiential adaptation, and ultimately sacrifices her "life" for K. The purpose of the threesome scene is to ask questions about how we find meaning in connections- in a parallel with the way I think the more violent "love" scene of the original is meant for us to question the role that abstraction plays in our physical choices. It's all a matter of opinion, but mine is that if you want a fast moving action film, it's not Blade Runner that you're looking for. Every installment of art around the franchise has been about long openings of unanswerable questions.
@@MrChickenMovies They compliment each other well. One is the story of an individual that speaks to all humanity, the other is the story of humanity's salvation, grounded by individuals.
A lot of good takes here, but I have disputes. I didn't take Joe's encounter with giant Joi as a realization that Joi's love wasn't real. Instead I take the moment as a musing on the nature of humanity. We are "programmed" ourselves with language, and yet our use of the same words can convey so much individual personality. We see that in the way that K's Joi used the word "Joe" in such a different way than Giant Joi does. We see K's Joi rising above its base limitations as it emulates rain onto her skin, effectively creating a new sensation and response. This is experiential learning, raising the question of whether she may be living a rich life. We also see her reject K's pleas to ensure her survival through a back up copy. I believe that there we see her choose not to be part of the infinitely copied form. Basically, if K is thinking his Joi was a manipulative distraction at the end, then we should all consider whether our loved ones are the same, because Joi makes the "human" choice for abstract principle over survival even before K does.
Hence down the best thing of 2049 is Joe. I like Joe’s investigation and his inner journey throughout the film. I think that was perfect. His lovestory with Joi to me has become the “Is Deckard a replicant” of now. I still wonder whether it was actual love or not and I like debating this with my self. The film was a good continuation of the Blade Runner world. The visuals were beautiful, ofcourse. The things that bothers me aren’t really that big of a deal, but imo it didn’t have the “vibe” of the first film. Probably because there were more scenes in the sky rather than the crowded cities. Honestly, that’s just a me thing. It doesn’t make the film bad or anything. Over all I think a lot of directors can learn from 2049, especially when it comes to making a sequel. Denis Villeneuve wanted to expand the Blade Runner world while telling an original story that makes you think. 8.5/10
I have an overall preference for the original, but I thought 2049 captured the vibe just fine. It expanded the world outside LA, and contrasted the settings. To me, the expansive nature of the surroundings of LA capture the loneliness of individuality, which is the cost of free will. Like it or don't, but I thought it was a good and logical expansion
Do you think it is a coincidence that the silhouette of Joi kissing K’s cheek, after presenting him with his hologram dinner, is similar to the silhouettes of the enormous statues in the Las Vegas wasteland? And, if not, what does it mean? And, why were there Bees, and an entire hive, in Las Vegas when there was no apparent vegetation? Great analysis. Thanks, and keep it going.
Symmetry in Vilenneuves films I think are important to think about because it probably means something. As to the bees, I'm guessing the Deckard was feeding them. He gets food somehow, I guess it's just not important to the plot.
Godfather2 practically didn't have a break in filming from the original. I admit it's awesome on first viewing, especially immediately following the first. But after that wears off, it's just the one where the crime family goes on more adventures in different places. Not actually an incredibly strong follow-up of family loyalty corrupting the one honorable light of an otherwise vicious family. We'll see how 2049 holds up when we reach the titular year, but while it continues the story it does so as it's own thing with new characters, new layers of meaning, and fresh audio-visual experiences. And it does all this 25 years after the original. I'm pretty sure that 10 years from now I won't see it as just "the one where Deckard finds his daughter". Mileage may vary, but I'd put 2049 as greatest sequel of all time. Godfather 2 is a decent sequel, but I'd easily take T2, any of the Mad Max movies, Aliens, or Empire Strikes Back as better examples of sequels that work well.
When I heard that there was going to be a new Blade Runner I had assumed that it was going to be just another cheap Hollywood remake like they've been doing so much. I didn't watch it when it came out, and I completely forgot about it for a few years. Back last October I decided to watch a few Ryan Gossling movies and thought, yeah I'll give this one a go. I didn't even know that Ryan Gossling was in it, or that Villeneuve was the director. When I finally decided to watch Blade Runner 2049 with no expectations or hopes, I was completely blown back and amazed with how good it is. I watched it for a week straight every day, sometimes two times a day. I still rewatch it months after my first viewing. To say this is one of the best films I have ever seen is an understatement and it doesn't describe how I feel about the movie.
So let me get this right, Joi can not really love K because she is only a hologram but you have no problem with K having a conscience and feelings because he is a replicant....I think you are missing the point of the movie completely, although you are not the only one...half of the people reviewing this movie fell into the same trap as you did...
I think it was a solid sequel. It used the soup scene at the start that was in the original Blade Runnet script, so it was well researched and paid respect to the first.
I was a bit upset Villeneuve thought he had to apologize for 2049 before the release of Dune. The film did poorly in terms of box office because Blade Runner's cult status is still just that- a cult. Its fans are big fans, but there aren't as many as the studio was banking on. I didn't see any real blowback from the Fandom.
This film is ambient art garbage and the acting can go into the can as well. It's bland and boring and so very uninteresting. This film was nowhere near as good as the original looks-wise and acting-wise. The CGI was terrible and the pace was mind-numbing and painfully slow. This film is getting a 4/10 for me and that's me being generous. And please, stop putting rock stars who can't act in films it's so painful to watch.
I love how the film doesn't pander to the audience, it respects us enough to take its time to tell us the story, it doesn't need big epic scenes, it takes its time to tell us and im worried this is the last film which will do this.
The Batman (2022) I think hits this caliber of film. But as far as most movies go today, yeah they are junk movies.
In a way he was the one - not the born one, but the born again one, for in the end he realized he had everything necessary to truly be human and he achieved it, not by flesh, but by faith, in that he chose to do what nobody had programmed or expected him to do - an act of love. I agree it is a masterpiece in so many ways, and has a life-changing effect. Of all the movies I have seen, this movie was a pure work of art, and in a question of art, financial success has no bearing.
Well done. And well said... especially about how BR 2049 may fare in the future. Just like the original, its influence may well massively exceed its (initial) receipts from the box office (especially in the US, where it was singularly poorly attended for some reason...)
I myself never saw it in a cinema and mainly got to know it (and the original) as preparation for Villeneuve's Dune - along with Villeneuve's other works.
If Villeneuve's star continues to rise for a while yet, we can certainly expect that many more will come to know BR 2049 (and, like me, shell out good money to own it and related merchandise) - and that many among future generations of filmmakers will be influenced by it too.
It's sad so many people weren't able to see it in cinemas, but I'm certainly glad more eyes are coming to it
@@MrChickenMovies by 2017 I became pretty jaded by modern Hollywood, and assumed that a new Blade Runner meant just a hollow remake to cash in on the legacy of the original film. Oh how I was wrong, and I wish I saw it in theatre when it came out. I think I will stay more alert as to what movies are currently coming out so that I don't miss opportunities like that again to see movies like 2049 in the theatre.
@@zonefreakman It's one of those films that just grabs you. I'm really glad I got to see it in cinemas - you could just feel the anticipation in the audience. I already knew of Denis Villeneuve's films, so I was already sold on it. As Hollywood becomes more cynical, I try to figure out how good the crew behind a film is, before watching another sequel; to say the least I liked what I saw from 2049. From then on, I realised that what you choose to watch is the most important thing in cinema
It's one of the best sequels ever made honouring the orginal. It could have been a pop corn 🍿 action flick. The music 🎶 the visuals It's what I call a proper movie 🎥 I saw it at the cinema so glad I did. Luv stole the movie. Amazing achievement in film making Denis Villeneuve is a master so I'm excited for Dune !
I'm really looking forward to Dune too
great review!
Thanks a lot!
Best film in the last decade and master peice? ROTFL. This film is ambient art garbage and the acting can go into the can as well. It's bland and boring and so very uninteresting. This film was nowhere near as good as the original looks-wise and acting-wise. The CGI was terrible and the pace was mind-numbing and painfully slow. This film is getting a 4/10 for me and that's me being generous. And please, stop putting rock stars who can't act in films it's so painful to watch.
NO. Not a "masterpiece." In addition to obviously being produced for the most cynical of reasons, Blade Runner 2049 continually fails to grasp its potential in favor of placating audience good will for its predecessor, and is clearly far too preoccupied with showcasing Roger Deakins' phenomenal talents in lieu of attempting to expand on anything that Blade Runner itself didn't address more eloquently forty years ago. Original Blade Runner screenwriter Hampton Fancher seems to have labored under the impression that we as a society haven't been engaging in this pop cultural conversation about "what it means to be human" since 1982, but that simply isn't so. Battlestar Galactica, for example, managed to grapple with this theme in such a way as to make Blade Runner 2049 look and feel dated by comparison. Dramatically inert and paced like molasses on a cold day, the film just slowly carts the audience around from scene to scene, practically begging us to be awestruck by the admittedly spectacular visuals and nothing else. And the distractingly grating performance by Jared Leto, chewing on scenery like a teething puppy and forced to relay laughably ponderous quasi-philosophical dialogue by Fancher like some sort of sci-fi Bond villain, didn't exactly help much either.
Good for you bud
@@Larboga - Good for me what? You're more pathetic than Will Smith.
why don't you use some "quasi-philosophical dialogue" to get some bitches bro
What a strange way to say "I didnt get the movie"
@@Jonathan-Pilkington - No, I got it. It's a movie for plebs such as yourself.
Awful sequel. Joi? There are fan edits out there that cut out Joi entirely. The movie is better for it. Threesomes? Please, the original was never about joy, sex, carnality. Its a film noir, for pete's sake.
Blade Runner 2049 is about as much about sex as Game of Thrones is. It just uses sex as a way of telling it's story. I understand the critique of it's use here, but it's hardly the focus. The focus is more on whether K and Joi's love is real, which is hugely important to K's arc in the film. Most of his motivations come from what he hears from Joi and in the end his decision to save Deckard is motivated by the realisation that their love isn't real. Cut this arc out, and K's motivations aren't as clear and the film isn't as strong as a whole.
@@MrChickenMovies All good points. I thought the film started to lag as soon as Joi was on the scene. The film was too long. Better to save the Joi/Joe love affair for another sequel. And explore it more there, with all its nuisances. The film was too unfocused, and should of stayed with the singular evil Wallace/ specimen angle etc. Tell one story at a time. I think that turned off moviegoers cause it was too long, and unfocused. Yes, the joi angle may have been the impetus for seeking Deckard, but this could of have been excised from the script and told in a different way to make the film more succinct and engrossing, Deckard would of appeared earlier in the film then, to move the story along in a quicker fashion. Just my thoughts.
I suppose that's fair enough. I personally liked the pace and the Joi storyline, but I can understand if they turned you off from the movie. I guess at least you have those fancuts to watch instead.
@@MrChickenMovies Yes , i understand 2049 purists will defend the languid pace of the film, hey, I enjoy a longer film too, I just feel there needs to be a relevant payoff for the time spent. The fan edit excises the joi story line and threesome entirely from the film, but still manages to complete the story intact with some clever cuts and effects and overdubs of the dialogue. The fan edit is trimmed down to 2 hrs 3 min. for a quicker pace.
I completely disagree. The continuous theme of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and Blade Runner has been expanding the circle of empathy by stripping down the requirements to see one's self in another being. Joi takes this theme beyond the source material by asking if physical form is a necessary condition for extending that empathy. Unlike OP, I contend that Joi achieved transcendence of her base programming. In this interpretation, the hologram is introduced as a new bottom stratum of society, but K's Joi achieves individuality through experiential adaptation, and ultimately sacrifices her "life" for K. The purpose of the threesome scene is to ask questions about how we find meaning in connections- in a parallel with the way I think the more violent "love" scene of the original is meant for us to question the role that abstraction plays in our physical choices.
It's all a matter of opinion, but mine is that if you want a fast moving action film, it's not Blade Runner that you're looking for. Every installment of art around the franchise has been about long openings of unanswerable questions.
This and Interstellar were the two films of the decade that created a world, transported me inside and left me in a daze. Truly one for the ages.
Both were fantastic experiences in the cinemas as well
@@MrChickenMovies They compliment each other well. One is the story of an individual that speaks to all humanity, the other is the story of humanity's salvation, grounded by individuals.
A lot of good takes here, but I have disputes. I didn't take Joe's encounter with giant Joi as a realization that Joi's love wasn't real. Instead I take the moment as a musing on the nature of humanity. We are "programmed" ourselves with language, and yet our use of the same words can convey so much individual personality. We see that in the way that K's Joi used the word "Joe" in such a different way than Giant Joi does. We see K's Joi rising above its base limitations as it emulates rain onto her skin, effectively creating a new sensation and response. This is experiential learning, raising the question of whether she may be living a rich life. We also see her reject K's pleas to ensure her survival through a back up copy. I believe that there we see her choose not to be part of the infinitely copied form. Basically, if K is thinking his Joi was a manipulative distraction at the end, then we should all consider whether our loved ones are the same, because Joi makes the "human" choice for abstract principle over survival even before K does.
Hence down the best thing of 2049 is Joe. I like Joe’s investigation and his inner journey throughout the film. I think that was perfect. His lovestory with Joi to me has become the “Is Deckard a replicant” of now. I still wonder whether it was actual love or not and I like debating this with my self. The film was a good continuation of the Blade Runner world. The visuals were beautiful, ofcourse.
The things that bothers me aren’t really that big of a deal, but imo it didn’t have the “vibe” of the first film. Probably because there were more scenes in the sky rather than the crowded cities. Honestly, that’s just a me thing. It doesn’t make the film bad or anything.
Over all I think a lot of directors can learn from 2049, especially when it comes to making a sequel. Denis Villeneuve wanted to expand the Blade Runner world while telling an original story that makes you think. 8.5/10
Hands* down
I have an overall preference for the original, but I thought 2049 captured the vibe just fine. It expanded the world outside LA, and contrasted the settings. To me, the expansive nature of the surroundings of LA capture the loneliness of individuality, which is the cost of free will. Like it or don't, but I thought it was a good and logical expansion
Do you think it is a coincidence that the silhouette of Joi kissing K’s cheek, after presenting him with his hologram dinner, is similar to the silhouettes of the enormous statues in the Las Vegas wasteland? And, if not, what does it mean? And, why were there Bees, and an entire hive, in Las Vegas when there was no apparent vegetation? Great analysis. Thanks, and keep it going.
Symmetry in Vilenneuves films I think are important to think about because it probably means something. As to the bees, I'm guessing the Deckard was feeding them. He gets food somehow, I guess it's just not important to the plot.
one of my favorite movies of all time, loved original Blade Runner, but liked this one even more.
The second greatest sequel next to Godfather 2.
Amazing movie.
I hope your kidding.
Godfather2 practically didn't have a break in filming from the original. I admit it's awesome on first viewing, especially immediately following the first. But after that wears off, it's just the one where the crime family goes on more adventures in different places. Not actually an incredibly strong follow-up of family loyalty corrupting the one honorable light of an otherwise vicious family.
We'll see how 2049 holds up when we reach the titular year, but while it continues the story it does so as it's own thing with new characters, new layers of meaning, and fresh audio-visual experiences. And it does all this 25 years after the original. I'm pretty sure that 10 years from now I won't see it as just "the one where Deckard finds his daughter".
Mileage may vary, but I'd put 2049 as greatest sequel of all time. Godfather 2 is a decent sequel, but I'd easily take T2, any of the Mad Max movies, Aliens, or Empire Strikes Back as better examples of sequels that work well.
When I heard that there was going to be a new Blade Runner I had assumed that it was going to be just another cheap Hollywood remake like they've been doing so much. I didn't watch it when it came out, and I completely forgot about it for a few years. Back last October I decided to watch a few Ryan Gossling movies and thought, yeah I'll give this one a go. I didn't even know that Ryan Gossling was in it, or that Villeneuve was the director. When I finally decided to watch Blade Runner 2049 with no expectations or hopes, I was completely blown back and amazed with how good it is. I watched it for a week straight every day, sometimes two times a day. I still rewatch it months after my first viewing. To say this is one of the best films I have ever seen is an understatement and it doesn't describe how I feel about the movie.
So let me get this right, Joi can not really love K because she is only a hologram but you have no problem with K having a conscience and feelings because he is a replicant....I think you are missing the point of the movie completely, although you are not the only one...half of the people reviewing this movie fell into the same trap as you did...
I think it was a solid sequel. It used the soup scene at the start that was in the original Blade Runnet script, so it was well researched and paid respect to the first.
I was a bit upset Villeneuve thought he had to apologize for 2049 before the release of Dune. The film did poorly in terms of box office because Blade Runner's cult status is still just that- a cult. Its fans are big fans, but there aren't as many as the studio was banking on. I didn't see any real blowback from the Fandom.
@@maxwellschmidt235 it was amazing to see in theaters so no apologies needed
cyberpunk
This film is ambient art garbage and the acting can go into the can as well. It's bland and boring and so very uninteresting. This film was nowhere near as good as the original looks-wise and acting-wise. The CGI was terrible and the pace was mind-numbing and painfully slow. This film is getting a 4/10 for me and that's me being generous. And please, stop putting rock stars who can't act in films it's so painful to watch.
Bro how the fuck was cgi bad lol
G6h