Blade Runner 2049

[intlzncster]

Official 1st trailer is coming out in a couple of days. I'm excited to see it.

They released a teaser to the trailer--which is a hilariously ludicrous concept in and of itself but whatever):

 

[ZooCougar]

Really glad Ridley Scott isn't directing.

 

[intlzncster]

Really glad Ridley Scott isn't directing.

Any particular reason? I'm not fussed either way, just want it to turn out good.

Having George Lucas so involved in the SW prequels was a disaster. Same thing?

 

[Mano]

Ridley's later years have been ok I think. He's gotten to be a little obvious perhaps with his storytelling and IMO has concentrated a bit more on style over substance, but he's still putting out some interesting stuff at, what is he, 79 or something? The talent around him is always top notch at least and that helps. I was super excited for Prometheus, less so for the impending Covenant. The Martian was good though, even if the book was better. Exodus was blah, didn't bother with The Counsellor.

Denis Villenueve is, however, one of the absolute best, and one of my favorite, directors working right now.

 

[intlzncster]

Ridley's later years have been ok I think. He's gotten to be a little obvious perhaps with his storytelling and IMO has concentrated a bit more on style over substance, but he's still putting out some interesting stuff at, what is he, 79 or something? The talent around him is always top notch at least and that helps. I was super excited for Prometheus, less so for the impending Covenant. The Martian was good though, even if the book was better. Exodus was blah, didn't bother with The Counsellor.

Denis Villenueve is, however, one of the absolute best, and one of my favorite, directors working right now.

I was unimpressed with Prometheus. I haven't even seen The Martian yet. Though I've heard it's worth a watch.

I just really don't want them to duck up BR49

 

[ZooCougar]

Any particular reason? I'm not fussed either way, just want it to turn out good.

Having George Lucas so involved in the SW prequels was a disaster. Same thing?

Because he sucks 4ick as a director now.

 

[CL82]

I've read that some believe that Deckard is also replicant. Was this ever made clear?

 

[ZooCougar]

I've read that some believe that Deckard is also replicant. Was this ever made clear?

Depends on which version of the movie you saw.

 

[CL82]

Depends on which version of the movie you saw.

I just remember Deckard seeing the origami and leaving. I think there was a voice over with the other blade runner saying something like "it's too bad she won't live, but none of us do" or something like that. I remember that that there are a few versions though. Is there one that makes it clear that he's a replicant?

 

[Mano]

Yup.

 

[ZooCougar]

I just remember Deckard seeing the origami and leaving. I think there was a voice over with the other blade runner saying something like "it's too bad she won't live, but none of us do" or something like that. I remember that that there are a few versions though. Is there one that makes it clear that he's a replicant?

So the title of the book is "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep". In the movie Deckard has a random dream of a Unicorn which doesn't seem to fit in with the narrative. And Replicants have implanted recurring dreams.

I believe that in the Director's Cut Edward James Olmos leaves the Unicorn Origami to let Deckard know that he in fact is a Replicant because he knows about the planted Unicorn dream.

Also, just like Replicants, Deckard's apartment is festooned with pictures which is another characteristic of Replicants.

In the original theater cut I believe the Deckard as a Replicant was minimized because the studio felt that the audience would feel ripped off, because the were hoping for a futuristic Indiana Jones movie.

 

[intlzncster]

In the original theater cut I believe the Deckard as a Replicant was minimized because the studio felt that the audience would feel ripped off, because the were hoping for a futuristic Indiana Jones movie.

The dumbing down of movies 'for the masses' is one of Hollywood's greatest travesties. Let the artists make art. And get out of #$king way.

 

[ZooCougar]

The dumbing down of movies 'for the masses' is one of Hollywood's greatest travesties. Let the artists make art. And get out of #$king way.

I think the original was a bit of a flop based on expectations. But it aged remarkably well. I'm just glad Denis V. is directing.

 

[HuskyHawk]

So the title of the book is "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep". In the movie Deckard has a random dream of a Unicorn which doesn't seem to fit in with the narrative. And Replicants have implanted recurring dreams.

I believe that in the Director's Cut Edward James Olmos leaves the Unicorn Origami to let Deckard know that he in fact is a Replicant because he knows about the planted Unicorn dream.

Also, just like Replicants, Deckard's apartment is festooned with pictures which is another characteristic of Replicants.

In the original theater cut I believe the Deckard as a Replicant was minimized because the studio felt that the audience would feel ripped off, because the were hoping for a futuristic Indiana Jones movie.

I never interpreted the unicorn origami this way. I've seen the movie 20+ at least. Maybe I'll watch the director's cut again. I had always interpreted the unicorn as Olmos tipping Deckard that he knew Sean Young was a replicant...Deckard had a unicorn, and he was letting them go. But I usually skip the Director's cut because it's too damned long.