Blade Runner 2049 was awesome!

[DwayneYouDerp]

Watched it, loved it!

Equal to, if not better, than the original.

Soundtrack isn't Vangelis but it's still badass and beautiful courtesy of the Zimmer.

The cast are amazing! Jared Leto is enigmatic, Sylvia Hoek is cold, Ana De Armas is hot, Ryan Gosling is mesmerising and the old cast!

Overall visuals are more varied than the original dark, rainy future LA but still beautiful, dreamy and atmospheric.

Best movie to relive while playing Ruiner.

Also a great cure for anyone traumatised by the live-action Ghost in the Shell movie.


What about you, Reikon?

[nakedsunoo7]

the ghost in the shell live action movie was awesome. alot of fanservice and style capturing from the animated series and movies.

the new bladerunner ill watch in a week in the imaxx theatres

[Konran]

I'm in love with that movie. I guess it was better than the original.

[TomAnyone]

I'd have to disagree. As a massive fan of the original (hell.. my profile photo says enough), I thought 2049 was often convoluted and unnecessarily action-heavy. There were aspects of the film I liked, I thought it was sad, and visually it was an absolute masterpiece. That being said, certain films 'click' for me. No Country for Old Men, The Departed, Blade Runner, Into the Wild. I never got that 'click' from 2049. When watching it, I kept thinking to myself "it's about to get good, any minute now...". Sadly it never hit that spot. In my opinion, it doesn't hold a candle to the first. I loved the gritty noir nature of the first film, the second seemed too 'clean'. I really got lost in the world of the original, I felt like I was there, but with 2049 I was merely a distant observer.

Edit: By all means I WANTED to love the sequel. I really did. I was so ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ excited, I was counting down the days and when sat in the cinema I could feel my adrenaline going. A sequel to one of my favourite films. I'm not one of these people that refuses to enjoy anything new, or modern, or sequels in general. I'm really not. I just didn't rate it as highly as the first. 7.5/10.

[CrumbleCat]

^ I gotta mention that some people have watched the first Bladerunner like 3 times, and it still hasn't clicked with them. Maybe its the same case here with the sequel?

I'm excited to watch it after so many years hmmMmm. I hope harrison doesn't feel out of place with him being a relic these days.

[Yonaga]

Amen

[Wintermute]

I keep getting mixed opinions on it from my friends. And, at this rate, will miss it in cinema myself (

[Cockroach]

Well at least I think better of Peugeot now. ♥♥♥♥ car tho anyways

[Cockroach]

Originally posted by Wintermute:

I keep getting mixed opinions on it from my friends. And, at this rate, will miss it in cinema myself (

I gave it 5/5.
It is worth going to the cinema as the sound in the movie is amazing, comes out really good.
A1

Harrison Ford is not really in it that much, shouldnt be on the poster but that is the way they sell products these days.

[puppet74]

i loved it, it was fantastic, best movie i've seen in years. might not match the orginal, but for me its prity close. The music as well i think i liked even more than the first.

[GRU-Vy]

Yeah the original film was waaaaay better. Music was fantastic, (who ever was working the cinema that night ruined the experience for me. Yhey turned sound to max so when there was action i literally had to cover my ears to stop them from hurting from the loudness).

I thought the story could of been better. The original film was ahead of its time and had a good story, this new one pretty much turns cliche 3 quarters in (with who the good guys are and what they are doing vs who the bad guys are).

[Trolleur_Durden]

For me, 2049 was a real masterpiece, and is an example of what a good sequel should be.

The film manages to develop it's own story without betraying it's predecessor, and it's already something to commend nowadays, when you consider films like The force awakens (it's a great movie too, don't get me wrong, but it's more a reboot of SW IV than a sequel, plot-wise).

The cast is very good, so too are the visuals, can't add much to what has already being said.

The most common mixed review I've seen is about the rythm, and it's kinda relevant. The film is like 1 hour longer than it's predecessor, with more or less the same amount of action (basically, the very few action scenes can be seen in the trailer). So I think a lot of people have been misled into something that wasn't for them. In one word : 2049 is really not an action-packed film, and it's often contemplative pace is definitely not for everyone.

I my opinion, 2049 is to the first Blade Runner what Terminator 2 is to the original Terminator : an excellent sequel that has it's own relevance and complement it's predecessor without stepping on it's toes. So there is really no point comparing the original Blade Runner and 2049 IMO, and if you have appreciated the former, the latter is definitely worth watching.

[Wintermute]

Meh. Finally watched it, was heavily disappointed.

Visuals are easily 10/10. On of the most beautiful examples of scenery probably in existance. Still, visuals alone don't make a movie. And they are static. God they are static. Just like entire movie.

Story is just plain bad. It's full of holes from start to finish, and has several plotlines that just get dropped without going anywhere. Also, that "big plot twist". Love directors that think they are so much smarter than wievers. Like, my friend has actual autism, and he cought that "twist" the moment the character in question appeared on screen.

Actors are bad. Granted, there's nothing to play in this, but what they attempt to play is still bad and unemotional. In a sequel to film about emotions. How fitting. The only remotely convincing character with actress that actually plays something is that AI girl (lol at the irony), but her character is close to useless and gets killed just to show how evil the evil guys are.

And nothing happens in that movie. It's a slog. I'm no stranger to slow, meditative movies with not much happening in them - I like Jarmusch, I respect Tarkovsky (can't say I like him that much, but there is a certain charm). This movie is just boring. It has nothing smart to say (unlike the first one), it has very little to show in terms of action (unlike the first one), its story is shallow and predictable, and even its views, as good as they are, eventually blend together. There's nothing in it, except some good wallpapers you'll be able to cut out. It's bad movie riding the cult status of its predecessor, while being too busy paving the way for 4 sequels. 4 sequels. ♥♥♥♥.

[UnKn0wN]

Originally posted by Wintermute:

Meh. Finally watched it, was heavily disappointed.

Visuals are easily 10/10. On of the most beautiful examples of scenery probably in existance. Still, visuals alone don't make a movie. And they are static. God they are static. Just like entire movie.

Story is just plain bad. It's full of holes from start to finish, and has several plotlines that just get dropped without going anywhere. Also, that "big plot twist". Love directors that think they are so much smarter than wievers. Like, my friend has actual autism, and he cought that "twist" the moment the character in question appeared on screen.

Actors are bad. Granted, there's nothing to play in this, but what they attempt to play is still bad and unemotional. In a sequel to film about emotions. How fitting. The only remotely convincing character with actress that actually plays something is that AI girl (lol at the irony), but her character is close to useless and gets killed just to show how evil the evil guys are.

And nothing happens in that movie. It's a slog. I'm no stranger to slow, meditative movies with not much happening in them - I like Jarmusch, I respect Tarkovsky (can't say I like him that much, but there is a certain charm). This movie is just boring. It has nothing smart to say (unlike the first one), it has very little to show in terms of action (unlike the first one), its story is shallow and predictable, and even its views, as good as they are, eventually blend together. There's nothing in it, except some good wallpapers you'll be able to cut out. It's bad movie riding the cult status of its predecessor, while being too busy paving the way for 4 sequels. 4 sequels. ♥♥♥♥.

+1

sequel can´t hold a candle to the original, especially the final cut.
even visually it´s inferior, everything else I agree with you.
Blade Runner didn´t need a sequel because it´s damn near perfect on its own.
this one doesn´t add anything substantial and the story is so far fetched it´s not even funny.
I watched the original like 40 times and never get bored of it, the new one? It´s a borefest.
I don´t feel like I am going to ever watch it again.
says it all.