Blade Runner

[Jiji]

Is a movie that made $260 million in theatres on a $185 million budget really a huge flop? What am I missing? Did a lot of that come from international ticket sales? Does that not count?

[Contentious C]

Was I the only one hoping the whole time, just a little bit, that 

Spoiler

the climactic fight scene with Luv would somehow reveal that Luv was, in fact, Deckard's daughter? I mean, that would have been the quintessence of mindfuckery.

 

[Ace]

12 hours ago, Oyaji said:

Is a movie that made $260 million in theatres on a $185 million budget really a huge flop? What am I missing? Did a lot of that come from international ticket sales? Does that not count?

The movie doesn't get all the money from box office. At best, it may be a little more than half. And budgets rarely include advertising. 

[EVA]

Yeah, the general rule of thumb is that a movie needs to double its budget before it becomes profitable.  But it gets even murkier when you add international markets to the total, because the studios actually make less money off those than they do domestically.  So for a movie like BR2049, where most of its money was earned overseas, the number to break even is even higher.

[Jiji]

I see. Thanks fellars. This is getting a very early release on Netflix (tomorrow, right?). How do Netflix deals work? A flat fee up front and then something based on views?

I really wanted to see it when it was in theatres but things kept popping up, so I am part of the problem.

[EVA]

Considering Netflix is so secretive that they don’t even tell the people making their own shows how many views they’re getting, I doubt they’re including viewership bonuses in contracts.

Probably just a flat fee to have the streaming rights for a certain period of time.

[Control]

Can’t wait to give this a second watch.

Might be better than the original.

[odessasteps]

I was very impressed by the visuals, less so by the story. Only redeeming thing was Joe not being the kid.

[Technico Support]

The original is in my top five (not director's cut, original).  I didn't like 2049 and I've been trying to put my finger on why, so forgive me for the stream of consciousness here.  I feel like it relied too heavily on philosophy while the original balanced it more. There was a pervasive feeling of hopelessness while watching it...it felt like a depressing slog and was overlong.  I paused it to get a drink after K met Deckard and was like, "holy fuck, there's AN HOUR left?" 

They didn't really sell the stakes; a few people mention that the discovery of a replicant/human hybrid would shake the world to its core, but just saying it a few times didn't do the trick for me.  "Show, don't tell, " right?  So it made the plot feel very unimportant to me.  Also, I just couldn't get past the very concept of a human impregnating a robot.  They hand wave it with the Wallace character saying it was Tyrell's last mystery that he took to his grave, but that's lame.  To me, at least.  "Hey a human fucked a robot and they had a baby!"  "How's that work?"  "We don't know, it's a mystery....moving along!"

This was very much a movie that made choices you have to just accept fully and move on to enjoy, and I didn't.  It was a beautiful film, but the plot was a huge miss for me.  YMMV.

[J.T.]

15 hours ago, odessasteps said:

I was very impressed by the visuals,

Well someone else was also impressed since it got a nom for the Best VFX this year in the Oscars.

[Control]

3 hours ago, J.T. said:

Well someone else was also impressed since it got a nom for the Best VFX this year in the Oscars.

And cinematography, right? Roger Deakins is overdue at this point.

[BurningBeard]

It's gotta be Deakins year surely? This is 10x the travesty the Leonardo Lovers made his snubs out to be.

On 23/01/2018 at 1:28 PM, Technico Support said:

Also, I just couldn't get past the very concept of a human impregnating a robot. 

Well, if Ridley Scott is to be believed, Deckard is also a replicant and their meeting and falling in love and producing a child was Tyrell's last act. Thus the child is a naturally born replicant (hows that for a contradiction in terms!). Alas, despite that being Scott's intentions I still can't see Deckard as being a replicant and 2049 maintained the ambiguity about that IMO

[Curt McGirt]

Without reading y'all interpretations, I just watched it and thought it was alright. The main problem I had with it is with the original, you come in cold and have to figure the story out, here it's spelled out for you -- quite literally -- from the jump. If they just didn't have the opening crawl I think it would have been more interesting. Aside from that, not a bad noir, picked up towards the end but real long in the tooth. Great visuals, dude deserves his Oscar. 

[Curt McGirt]

Also: Is there any film where Ryan Gosling shows an actual emotion facially? I understand in the context of this character, but seriously...

[piranesi]

1 hour ago, Curt McGirt said:

Also: Is there any film where Ryan Gosling shows an actual emotion facially? I understand in the context of this character, but seriously...

I haven't seen it but I assume in La La Land he shows lots of whimsy and verve.

And he explains jazz to us.

[Curt McGirt]

Another issue I had was the Jared Leto character. We're introduced to this guy and he spells it out in the most obvious terms that he is the big bad, even emphasizing it by killing a Replicant. Whatever happened to subtlety? I mean one look at Jared Leto and you're like "he's a villain", no need to be bludgeoned about the head with it. 

[Technico Support]

1 hour ago, Curt McGirt said:

Another issue I had was the Jared Leto character. We're introduced to this guy and he spells it out in the most obvious terms that he is the big bad, even emphasizing it by killing a Replicant. Whatever happened to subtlety? I mean one look at Jared Leto and you're like "he's a villain", no need to be bludgeoned about the head with it. 

And they introduce him as the Big Bad in the first act, then you don't see him again until...I'd say "act 3" but that's being charitable.  And then he does pretty much nothing and you never see him again.  God damn, this movie is the opposite of the last Star Wars movie.  I like it less the more I think about it.

[Curt McGirt]

4 minutes ago, Technico Support said:

I like it less the more I think about it.

After reading back through the rest of this thread, I'm getting the same feeling. Thankfully not Alien: Covenant levels of disdain and regret though. 

[EVA]

I feel like some of these criticisms of the Wallace character are more criticisms (or lack of familiarity) with the noir genre.  It’s a pretty standard trapping of noir for there to be these “big bad” characters who loom large over the story but are only tangentially involved in the plot insofar as they’re the greater force that sets evil deeds in motion.  They’re very rarely involved in the main action and almost never get any kind of comeuppance beyond whatever inconvenience the hero’s often relatively small victory causes them.

[Contentious C]

Well, the real sting to Wallace is that he is so overtly megalomaniacal and did single-handedly prop up the human race, but even guys like him still crave the one thing they can't have. All that pomp and verbosity merely lacquers over a little boy who wants someone else's toy. And that certainly extends well beyond the noir genre.

This is a movie that, at its best moments, is about empathy, when it comes down to it. I'm beginning to finally appreciate how much all good/great films distill one's ability to find it. This is Ryan Gosling's best work since Lars and the Real Girl and his "lack of facial expressions" never, for so much as a second, put a hindrance on my ability to understand and connect to the feelings K is having and the choices he's making throughout the entire film. Same with Joi, for that matter. Far, far more there than "'Her' with a bigger budget".

[Curt McGirt]

3 minutes ago, Contentious C said:

his "lack of facial expressions" never, for so much as a second, put a hindrance on my ability to understand and connect to the feelings K is having and the choices he's making throughout the entire film

I agree, it's just frustrating and weird. You'd think he could do something -- ANYTHING -- to emphasize emotion in a film that spells itself out so clearly otherwise, but no. I suppose all considered that's talent on his end. He has a style, he does it, and it fits the role. 

[Technico Support]

2 hours ago, EVA said:

I feel like some of these criticisms of the Wallace character are more criticisms (or lack of familiarity) with the noir genre.  It’s a pretty standard trapping of noir for there to be these “big bad” characters who loom large over the story but are only tangentially involved in the plot insofar as they’re the greater force that sets evil deeds in motion.  They’re very rarely involved in the main action and almost never get any kind of comeuppance beyond whatever inconvenience the hero’s often relatively small victory causes them.

Heh.  What's funny is I always thought of the original as a noir (shit, I even took a film class in college where detective films were the focus, and the original was presented as an example of a noir detective film) and I absolutely didn't even consider the sequel as such.  No idea how I spaced on that; good call.

[Matt D]

The scope felt a little too big for that to me.

[TheVileOne]

The Wallace plot is the worst thing about Blade Runner 2049, and the relationship with Joi is the best part of the movie. The whole Joi storyline is almost like a mini-movie on its own.

In terms of K/Gosling not showing emotions, his emotions are IMHO externalized through Joi.  Joi is his creation of an ideal girlfriend. Throughout the film, she is more than just the sounding board, she is saying the things K is really thinking and feeling but isn't necessarily expressing himself.  Remember what the ad says?  "Everything you want to see. Everything you want to hear." To me, that's symbolic of Joi not being an independent, sentient AI. 

[odessasteps]

4 hours ago, Matt D said:

The scope felt a little too big for that to me.

Future of humanity > California water rights > Bird statue