(untitled)

Have you seen the reviews, Lain? Looks like the movie is pretty good. IGN gave it a 9.7/10, saying that it was as good as the original movie, and sometimes better. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDmTmOmJBiM I don't trust IGN at this point, but dude. This kinda gives me hope. Are you hyped for this movie, Lain? Do you have any faith in it? I just hope is a good movie and not as bad as Ghost in the Shell was.

Damn, I forgot to name the thread. Blade Runner 2049 thread

I am doing somewhat of what I did for GitS. I will not expect a real sequel, or even a real remake, of the series. Instead I will expect some hollywood soykaf, but hollywood soykaf can be very entertaining, so that's not a big deal.

seems like its generally praised, i think i will go see it.

>>1086 A lot of reviews are calling it the movie of the decade, and it has a 98% on RottenTomatoes. I think I'll go watch it too

I anticipate a lot of closeups of Gosling staring at distant objects.

>>1091 good. Gosling doing Gosling things is a miracle in itself

Ehhh now there's two blade runner threads but I guess I'll post in the fresher one. I haven't seen the film itself yet but I just recently saw the short that Watanabe did for it (as part of their promo campaign) and it was actually pretty schway: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrZk9sSgRyQ Goes for 15 mins but I could watch a whole hour of it. Also I know it's clichéd as fuarrrk but if you're keen for more of that universe then seriously seriously go read Do Androids Dream. I promise you won't regret it.

I'm gonna go see it today. The first movie was fantastic and I thought the anime was okay but not that great as it could have been because it could be completely supplemented with some text in the beginning of 2049 and it would have been just as good in giving the story linking the two movies.

Just saw it today. Long story short, it's a pretty good film, but not quite as good the original, and with a very different atmosphere. This one is much cleaner looking, it does not have the "crowded" feeling of the previous one. In exchange there are some very nice shot of large empty places. Feels less cyberpunk and more straight sci-fi. So, feel free to see it, but don't expect the original or you will be disappointed. Those holograms though, can't wait for the technology to get there.

Seen it yesterday with mates. Left us baffled for half an hour after it ended. Found the visuals and soundtrack beyond amazing. Also, it has a real scenario, and it fits right with the first. As >>1100 said, it's really less focused on the places where people live, and way more around the main characters. Atmosphere is not quite the same, but it's really worthy of the first.

>>1098 Watanabe's short is a masterpiece and I seriously want to watch more scify directed by him

>>1100 >>1101 Those are some pretty good reviews in my book. I'll go watch it on monday if I can.

So is deckard being a replicant canon? This is one thing I didn't like about blade runner, androids was a lot more subtle this is too overt

>>1104 It's still up in the air. They do confront the issue in one scene, but it's not confirmed or denied.

>>1104 >>1105 To add to my comment from earlier: Not only do they explicitly bring up the question again, but they recontextualize it within the themes of the new film, bringing the question new meaning and relevancy in the new story. It's really well done.

>>1104 Apparently Ripley says that Deckard is a replicant and that it is obvious but Harrison Ford disagrees

>>1107 The whole point of him possibly being a replicant was to make the point of where do you draw the line when does a replicant become "human" Ripley is a hack.

>>1107 >>1108 But how would it work if Deckard was a replicant? He outlived every kind of replicant that had been built up until Rachel's model. According to the shorts, Nexus 8 models were given a normal lifespan, but nexus 6 models (such as Roy) only had a 4 year lifespan. According to the narrated ending to the original theatrical release (Iol) Rachel had a 4 year lifespan too. And Deckard grew old and all. So, if he was a replicant, where would his model fit? Rachel was way more advanced than Nexus 6 models, so I guess it's safe to assume that you cold call her a Nexus 7 model, even if she didn't have a long lifespan. Which model would Deckard be then? Btw I haven't watched the new movie yet so please tag your spoilers

>>1109 It all totally makes sense if you watch the new movie. It didn't add up at all before. I'm going to be intentionally vague about this, so this won't change your viewing experience much, but spoilers anyways: They reveal that Tyrell had much bigger plans for Rachael, in a way where it only seems sensible to give her a natural lifespan. If Deckard is a replicant then it's likely he was related to that plan, so he would be given a natural lifespan too.

>>1109 Implanted memories, he may not actually be that old The main idea for him being a replicant was that he was ruthlessly efficient at his job, very cold and emotionless at terminating others similar to replicants

>>1111 Even if it's implanted memories and he was born in 2019, he's still alive and old in 2049. He outlived by far the life expectations of every known replicant model. >>1110 Thank you for being vague about it, I'll find out soon enough

>>1112 He doesn't necessarily have to be the same model could be some GitS tier soykaf, this idea may be stretching it though I will admit

All humans are replicants and "All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain"

Went to see it yesterday The focus was more on the characters than the world building so if you want to watch only for cyberpunk cityscapes it might not be for you, though there are some nice scenes in there. Plot is not so bad 6/10 really, still following on the usual themes of how do you define human, also about love in the style of "her" Music very nice very cyberpunx, no complaints other than can be a bit overpowering and loud in some scenes baby goose stares into the camera a lot like drive but in a /cyb/ car instead Overall a decent watch, would recommend but watch BR first before 2049, one of the top films of the year but I haven't enjoyed much this year anyway so take it as you wish Its a long watch at 2hr 40ish so buckle up

>>1115 I didn't like the music that much to be honest. I know Vangelis was a pretty hard act to follow, but I think they could have come up with a better soundtrack Not as many shots of Gosling staring off moodily into the distance as I was hoping for, but enough to hold me over until his next film Action scenes were good, but I think the movie focused on action and plot too much, whereas the original is more about the vibe of the world I think they kinda missed the heart of the cyberpunk genre though. The city wasn't dirty enough, the vibe was just all wrong

I went in with an open mind and loved almost every bit of it. I'm thinking of going again as it's one of those big screen movies that won't feel the same at home. It could have been a little dirtier atmosphere-wise but it sure was pretty.

Alright I'm going to say what we've all been thinking. No QT AI gf why even live at all. I thought she was the most interesting aspect of the movie. I thought that he did a tremendous job humanizing that AI, for example at the end you're left wondering if she really felt for K. And to be honest I think that this movie handled that kind of love in a a completely unique sorta way.

>>1120 I think the moment she went from being just a program to genuinely loving K was when she told him to disconnect her from the network She risks her own life out of love for him, just as the police sarge risked herself to protect him They paralleled the behavior of the AI and the human to humanize the AI and get the audience to start questioning if she can really love K Before the projector thing is destroyed and she dies, her last action is to tell K she loves him, not to try to stop the evil bitch from killing her She chose love over self preservation twice; I think that makes it genuine

>>1121 It might just be that I had Lainchan on my mind when watching it, but I just figured from her mannerisms in the first scene that she was a fairly unintelligent robot, and when she started talking to K about him being a natural birth it was just whats-her-face assuming control of the software and trying to lead him on. It made it pretty confusing when she did start acting out, but I suppose that's my fault for misreading how advanced their technology is. As for the rest of the movie, I'd call it fairly solid. It didn't soykaf on the world built in the first one, it didn't hold your hand that much, and it didn't feel like one of those "safe bet" scripts built to get bodies in seats. It's certainly not one of those sequels you sweep under a rug and pretend never happened; in a fews years I imagine I'll probably recommend "Blade Runner and 2049". Maybe somebody will release a version without the annoying *THUUUUUUUMP* sounds that come out of nowhere. Why do I need to have a movie growl at me because a bee flew into a dust cloud? Also, did anybody else notice that they seemed to have replaced the Chinese with Japanese in Cityspeak? At the very least I don't remember so many signs in katakana.

I watched it yesterday. It was good. Way better than what I was expecting if I am going to be totally honest. As others have said, the music and visuals where absolutely mindblowing, just like the original. I feel like it maintained a pretty similar aesthetic in that sense to the others. The pacing was very similar to the original movie. A long, drawn out build up to about 10 minuets of action. I love this about the original, but I think it didn't work as well on this one. I stewed on it a bit, and I think that is because this new one looses some of the film-noir styling that the original had. I would love to hear some other opinions about that though. I am going to be totally honest, I wasn't a fan of the whole "you aren't special because we all have those implanted memories" part near the end. I understand why they did it, but I think it feels weird because you expect the main character to be unique/heroish/special in some way. Also, I am really glad they went with Gosling as the MC. I think he did the role really well, plus he is very cute. It is kinda hard for me to imagine anyone else performing like him. Overall I think I would give it around a 7 or 8 out of 10. I would recommend it if you are a fan of the aesthetic and universe, but if you don't care that much or have ADHD and can't stand awkward pacing you can skip it.

>>1123 I actually really liked that he wasn't special, that he didn't get to be the savior Every movie you see, the main character finds out that he is special, and the movie ends with him in the arms of his dream girl But Blade Runner, and anything in that genre, it isn't about the character, or the plot, its about the setting He's just more replicant meat in a world that does not care about him, and he isn't any more special than any of us And he dies willingly, knowing that he is protecting the ones who really do matter, which is beautiful When he sees the ad for an AI girl just like the one he lost, and realizes that she wasn't special either, its almost painful to watch But I think the idea is that it doesn't matter that they weren't special, they still mattered And when he dies for the sake of the daughter and harrison ford, he finally becomes a real human being and a real hero

>>1125 The way you phrased that made me like the movie even better, thanks lain!

Watched it yesterday. It was so good, holy soykaf. I loved it. My only complaint is the music, I think it could've been so much better, but the visuals, the acting, the story, the direction... almost everything was amazing. I'm totally getting a bluray copy as soon as they launch one. It's totally worth it.

I saw it the other day alone and going to see it again with the old man. The the cinematography was breathtaking; like, there's a shot with K standing in the snow or with Joi in the rain, it's all gorgeously shot. Tip of the hat to Ryan Gosling and Dave Bautista. The latter for doing so good with such a small roll, and the former for being way better than just the character from Drive again. Ford was alot better than I actually thought from the trailer, I figured he'd be in for a cameo and it was just fanservice, but the movie does more than that. My one complaint was with Hanz Zimmer. To me the score often sounded blaring and too heavy for my taste. But the original Vangelis score coming in at one point was beautiful. The fights are brutal in this. And it's just awesome to see what a replicant can do >I fell in love with Joi.

>>1116 I agree, I liked the style of the music in the first movie way more

I've avoided learning too much about it first but I just discovered that Robin Wright is in it. All signs are pointing in the right direction here, I haven't really heard anything bad about it. I'm going on monday. Want to see Ford and Gosling lose their composure in a TV interview? This ought to bring a smile to even the most jaded fan: https://youtu.be/bAb8KIhgVAI

Spoilers ahead, obviously. I f​ucking loved it. That's taking into consideration that I was expecting lukewarm actionflick garbage, because that's what you usually gets when Hollywood decides to drag an 80s property back from the dead. But it's pretty much exactly what I was secretly hoping it would be, Villeneuve clearly understood what made the first one work and what made it different and made a new story with those elements. It's not just a cheap action flick in an established universe, and it's not just a passing-the-torch retelling of the same story like TFA was. It was proper scifi-noir, even more so than the first because there's a good bit of detective work and slowly unraveling plot. The plot is more involved this time around and there's some parallels with Her that I really dig. It paid its respects to the first movie (nothing about the unicorn dream, leaving Deckard's replicant question suitably unanswered, new story with clean tie-ins to the previous). It was a little less cyberpunk than the first though, I missed those calm establishing shots in the city where Deckard is just eating some sushi. The scene where K was eating on the street before the 3 girls approached him lacked that coziness, the streets and other sets feel a lot colder and a bit more classical scifi. I also missed the interesting and mesmerizing villain of Roy Batty. The new villain is... well, he's a step up from the cardboard-cutout ruthless businessman they could have used instead, and if you want a self-aggrandizing pseudo-philosophical wackjob, you might as well cast Jared Leto as himself. He felt moderately suitable but was a far cry from the greatness of Rutger Hauer who really pulled the first film together. Overall, 2049 will never get that special place in my heart that the original has, but I definitely like it and feel that it enhances the overall world to such an effect I will enjoy my rewatches of the first even more. 10/10 would watch again. Also I want that f​ucking coat.

>>1138 >that video Holy hell I'm losing my soykaf Thanks for sharing that

>>1140 >Also I want that f​ucking coat. This so much. It looks really comfy and the winter season is starting in my country.

This left me wondering who would win in a fight between Kay and Roy Batty.

>>1145 K had this aimbot thing going on where he nailed one headshot after the other impossibly fast (side note, I loved how that was just a thing that's there and never explicitly drawn attention to), so if he has his gun I'm placing my bets on him. If he doesn't have his gun, I'd cautiously bet on Roy since he just has a "stronger" presence.

>>1117 >>1120 >>1125 I'm glad to find some like minds. I went in to my theater last weekend--and I know it's not opening weekend--but my friends and I were the only ones in the theater, which surprised me. Will probably end up seeing this again just to support this director/production team for doing something right. I may even end up buying it on Blu-Ray.

>>1177 I have a feeling that there was some drama behind the movie being released Movies like 2049 don't get made because they don't make money, they have a specific target audience that will love it, but most people won't get it Usually when a director says, "I want to release a 3 hour long film with 2.5 hours of world development and art shots" the studio says nah, cut it down to 1.5 hours and add a few explosions It instantly became a cult classic, there's no doubt about that. I'm gonna buy it when I can and I know a lot of other people will too But it probably won't even turn a real profit, especially since it was a pretty high budget movie with lots of cgi and high profile actors I think somebody behind the scenes somehow pushed it through the hollywood machinery and got it onto the screen in all its glory Whoever they are, they deserve our thanks

I liked how every death in the movie was shown. It makes you feel every impact in the body of the victim. Maybe except for the bombing scene after K's car crashed. Also, I wouldn't have guessed that the place in the trailer was actually a kind of Las Vegas.

It was good but the music was fuarrrking soykaf. Hans Zimmer is what they went with. It's really dull ambient drones with the ocassional BWUUUUAAAAH as the ultimate kick in the nuts. I can't believe they followed Vangelis up with this. The best moments were when it just covered a track from the original and a part that might have just been a sound effect

>>1196 i used to be decent at sound production stuff, and i can probably get my old setup going again if i can resuscitate my old desktop at some point, i may try replacing the soundtrack with some quality vaporwave and maybe some more laid back trance stuff i think it would be much better with a properly /cyb/ soundtrack

Is the replicant K kills in the beginning a Nexus VI? If so, how could it survive all this time? I thought the Nexus VI could only live 4 years.

>>1202 No, one of the newer models that rebelled because he witnessed a miracle

movie was good except for a few nags I have. The big bad was total trash and they did well to cut him out as much as possible. The music has annoying at many points. It wasn't ambitious at all in terms of theme exploration, but they didn't reduce it completely to soykafty hollywood tropes, which is a big plus for me. I'd give it a 7/10. After the GitS remake it felt like a breath of fresh air.

>>1121 I haven't seen anyone bring this up, but in the scene where Luv destroys the projector module. Right before Luv stomps on it, she says "I hope you're satisfied with our product" to Joi. She said this same line to K about Joi earlier. This means there is acknowledgment on some level that the emotions of Joi are just as real as those of K. These two technologies are created, not born, and they both blur the lines between humanity and artificial life

>>1212 that's a really interesting point, I had missed that I interpreted that as Luv talking to K but looking at Joi to mess with her too I like your interpretation a lot better though, she was in a way acknowledging that K and Joi were alive though artificial in the same way

The scene with Luv and the police chief was brutal with the glass and everything

>>1212 Agreed. I went to see it the other night, and for me, the really fascinating thing about the film was the way it opened up this kind of spectrum (or hierarchy) of sentience. The whole thing about a "born" replicant was then just further evidence that new types of being could (and would naturally) emerge in the gaps between the existing categories. Also, I thought the "baseline" tests were a really well-done continuation of the Voigt-Kampff tests from the original.

I thought the plot was dumb. It was beautiful though.

The music was dull, which is a big disappointment considering how vital it was the first movie, how iconic that score has become in the decades since. Throwing a bit of the old Vangelis in only made it worse. It was just a reminder of how good it should have been.

So Blade Runner won 2 oscars: - cinematography: it is an award for the director of photography, ie the guy who manages the lights and the camera lenses, and so is responsible of the A E S T H E T I C S during the live filming - visual effects: A E S T H E T I C S by modifying/adding stuff after the filming

>>1246 Interesting trivia: The baseline test was Ryan Gosling's idea. At least, that's what I've heard. The story I heard was that he was talking with the director and came up with the idea to do it. It wasn't necessarily in the script to begin with, but got added in later.

It was pretty good to me.

I loved this movie

>>1838 >>1845 Care to explain why?

mods feel free to move this post if it does not go with the thread, but it seemed like the only cyberpunk movie thread in the catalog. I just re-watched gamer after first seeing it when it came out ,and I have to say I had forgotten how cyberpunk a movie it is. The action is on par with blomkamps films (somewhat graphic) but not too heavy on the plot (it is a hollywood movie) >nano machines embedded into people for money or inmates >people can pay to control nanomachined people and see life through their eyes >this technology is abused by corps for mass marketing schemes, corporate conspiracy >people who get paid to become NPCs >a second life style reality game where people control other humans and play dress up and do lewd things at parties >IRL COD kiddies who pay to win first person shooters with real people by using sci fi aimbot guns >hackers trying to fight the system (from an old school arcade)

I have nothing to contribute with, but I like posting these pics