I know its way early, but damn.

Denis Villeneuve. Roger Deakins. Jóhann Jóhannsson.

:shock::shock:

[video=youtube;haXvp8M9Cog]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haXvp8M9Cog[/video]

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

Villeneuve will be the reason to see this - he's been on a wicked hot streak with Sicario and Arrival.

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

[video=youtube;gCcx85zbxz4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCcx85zbxz4[/video]

Dare we hope?

Re:

Can't wait!

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

Did anyone go see this?

While I do really like the movie and really enjoyed the vision of 2049 Los Angeles, it didn't really feel like it was the sequel that needed to be made. I mean, it's a nice epilogue, but I'm not sure if it "added" a whole lot to the first movie's mythology. Other than showing that as bad as things could be in the first movie (Global Warming causing constant rain in Los Angeles, the line between human and their creations blurring more and more), they got a whole lot worse 30 years later. We get to see Rick Deckard again (but not until the last 45 minutes - out of a running time that exceeds two and a half hours), but it feels more like an extended cameo than it does part of the Blade Runner story.

Don't get me wrong, this movie is beautiful to look at and hypnotic to experience - but I have to admit that it's far more a movie doing fan service than expanding the Blade Runner universe and making it more accessible. It feels and looks as much of a landmark movie in the sense of set design and the depiction of Los Angeles in 2049 as it did the first. The look of this film is completely unique and while the soundtrack never really electrifies the way Vangelis' did, the violent, crashing score of Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch does make an impression, if maybe a bit heavy handed.

The blu ray release also features three short stories by three different directors (one of the shorts is an anime) - bridging three key events that tie the first movie to the sequel and fills in some of the oblique references that are mentioned (ie. The Blackout - an event mentionned in passing a few times). You can also see the shorts on Youtube.

It's a beautiful, gorgeously catastrophic vision of the future, but I'm not sure how much people other than the fans would enjoy it, or maybe not find it as spellbinding.

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

2 words - Roger Deakins

I didn't see the 1st BR, so I didn't have much to compare - I have been meaning to see it. Really enjoyed 2049 though.

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

I haven't seen the original movie, and to be honest I'm not a massive movie fan, especially Hollywood blockbusters (have never seen the Star Wars movies, any Marvel movie, any Harry Potter film) but I really enjoyed this. It was mesmerising to look at the scenery, and the soundtrack was great too. Maybe a bit too long but it was definitely something I'd watch again

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

[QUOTE=el presidente Highsteppa;1209813]Did anyone go see this?

While I do really like the movie and really enjoyed the vision of 2049 Los Angeles, it didn't really feel like it was the sequel that needed to be made. I mean, it's a nice epilogue, but I'm not sure if it "added" a whole lot to the first movie's mythology. Other than showing that as bad as things could be in the first movie (Global Warming causing constant rain in Los Angeles, the line between human and their creations blurring more and more), they got a whole lot worse 30 years later. We get to see Rick Deckard again (but not until the last 45 minutes - out of a running time that exceeds two and a half hours), but it feels more like an extended cameo than it does part of the Blade Runner story.

Don't get me wrong, this movie is beautiful to look at and hypnotic to experience - but I have to admit that it's far more a movie doing fan service than expanding the Blade Runner universe and making it more accessible. It feels and looks as much of a landmark movie in the sense of set design and the depiction of Los Angeles in 2049 as it did the first. The look of this film is completely unique and while the soundtrack never really electrifies the way Vangelis' did, the violent, crashing score of Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch does make an impression, if maybe a bit heavy handed.

The blu ray release also features three short stories by three different directors (one of the shorts is an anime) - bridging three key events that tie the first movie to the sequel and fills in some of the oblique references that are mentioned (ie. The Blackout - an event mentionned in passing a few times). You can also see the shorts on Youtube.

It's a beautiful, gorgeously catastrophic vision of the future, but I'm not sure how much people other than the fans would enjoy it, or maybe not find it as spellbinding.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, didn't bring anything new to the table. It seems to be setting up for a rebellion in Pt 3. We'll never see that now I suppose. Maybe the next time Blade Runner comes about, it'll be a reboot.

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

[QUOTE=REDROCK;1209817]2 words - Roger Deakins

I didn't see the 1st BR, so I didn't have much to compare - I have been meaning to see it. Really enjoyed 2049 though.[/QUOTE]

With Dennis Villeneuve directing and Roger Deakins doing the cinematography - they're an unbeatable combo. I loved Sicario and Arrival, they really compliment each other extremely well.

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

sicario was a big disappointment to me for some reason