Blade Runner 2049 - 10.6.17 (1 Viewer)

[RobertR]

Sorry, I don't buy that the look is based on the "individual needs of the story". The fact that it slavishly (and to an extreme extent) follows the "gotta have teal and orange, gotta have teal and orange" mantra says otherwise. The Matrix example I gave, OTOH, IS an example of a color scheme specific to a story.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I can't really agree or disagree until the film is released - right now, all we have is a trailer which may or may not be representative of the film's final look. Until the film comes out and we see it and have an understanding of what the story is and what techniques the filmmakers are using, I don't think it's possible to say that the film's look is motivated by one thing or another. All I can say is that I think the filmmakers in charge here are the kind of artists that do what's best for their projects. Certainly Villaneuve and Deakins have made films together before that didn't have an orange/teal color scheme, which suggests to me that any look this film has will be because they felt it was the best look for the film, not because someone above them dictated that it feature certain colors.

 

[RobertR]

It's not my contention that this look is being dictated, any more than it was dictated that many women get butt implants simply because of the popularity of Kim Kardashian. I say it's a fashion, a trend, an example of herd thinking, and I find it very very tiresome.

http://theabyssgazes.blogspot.com/2010/03/teal-and-orange-hollywood-please-stop.html

 

[SamT]

 

[dpippel]

Well, that seems to give away the answer as to whether or not Deckard is a replicant.

 

[SamT]

I remember the director saying he is not touching that. If I'm not mistaking.

 

[dpippel]

Deckard saying "They were hunting us!" sounds to me like he has touched it. But, taking a line of dialogue from a trailer out of the film's narrative context and drawing conclusions from it usually isn't a good idea. I just find this line very interesting. I also find it interesting that they made a conscious decision to include it in the trailer.

 

[Alf S]

I've been a fan of the original since it came out. I read many articles about it in Starlog and similar magazines at the time. Several of my friends and I went to see it when it was first released and were blown away. I have re-watched it several times over the years and still enjoy it.

Thing is, anytime I'd try to watch it with other folks, they usually give up soon after it starts or if I've mentioned the movie to co-workers etc, they all say the same thing. Either A.) they've never heard of it, or 2.) they thought it was "dumb" or "too boring".

So I have to wonder, how big (or small) will this be upon release? I don't see there being a huge fanbase out there to help it even get a fraction of its $200 million (?) budget. Speaking of budgets, I know the original did very poorly at the box office at the time, but what's more shocking is what the movie was able to pull off with just a budget of $28 million! Quite amazing for sure.

 

[SamT]

But he is old.

 

[dpippel]

Perhaps that's the central theme of the film (and it appears somewhat likely) - that Tyrell Corporation has always had the ability to make replicants who have a normal human lifespan. Deckard could be one.

 

[Edwin-S]

Deckard saying "They were hunting us!" sounds to me like he has touched it. But, taking a line of dialogue from a trailer out of the film's narrative context and drawing conclusions from it usually isn't a good idea. I just find this line very interesting. I also find it interesting that they made a conscious decision to include it in the trailer.

Not necessarily. Rachael was a replicant. They were a couple, so him referring to "us" could just mean they were hunting the two of them. Her as a replicant and him as their attack dog that had gone rogue.

The guy who is going to turn out to be a replicant in this film is the he new Blade Runner. To me, it was telegraphed in the trailer when he looks at his palm and there is that line about something being wrong.

 

[dpippel]

True enough about Rachael, but this trailer is also telegraphing some discovery as being the end of human society. It's certainly possible that it involves the replicants, and Jared Lito's line about every modern society being built on the backs of slaves could be alluding to a big reveal regarding them as well. Just because the director has said he's not going to address the subject of Deckard's humanity doesn't set it in stone.

We can only wait until the film is released to find out, and I'm looking forward to it. I don't think that Denis Villeneuve will disappoint.

 

[TravisR]

We can only wait until the film is released to find out, and I'm looking forward to it. I don't think that Denis Villeneuve will disappoint.

Yeah, I don't have the love of the original that some folks do but I think Villeneuve is a reason to be excited and hopeful.

 

[Edwin-S]

True enough about Rachael, but this trailer is also telegraphing some discovery as being the end of human society. It's certainly possible that it involves the replicants, and Jared Lito's line about every modern society being built on the backs of slaves could be alluding to a big reveal regarding them as well. Just because the director has said he's not going to address the subject of Deckard's humanity doesn't set it in stone.

We can only wait until the film is released to find out, and I'm looking forward to it. I don't think that Denis Villeneuve will disappoint.

That quote about slavery from the director isn't what I want to hear. If he is he going that route, then he has already flubbed it in my book. AFAIAC, The original was about something even more fundamental than the evils of slavery. It was about what constitutes being human and being recognized as such.

Anyway, I'll be trying to avoid watching any further trailers. They look like they are giving away too much.

I want to see if this film is going to blow me away like the original did right from the classic opening scene and Vangelis score to the, admittedly, botched ending.

Edit: I messed up that that quote about slavery was from the director. It was from a character in the film, so the director is already going that route. I'll still see the film, but it already fails to meet the bar of the original with that on the nose stating of the theme.

 

[SamT]

I don't know why they didn't bring back Vangelis. He is alive. The music was as important as the Star Wars music was to that film. The music I heard in the last trailer was not good.

 

[Edwin-S]

I don't know why they didn't bring back Vangelis. He is alive. The music was as important as the Star Wars music was to that film. The music I heard in the last trailer was not good.

Yeah. I don't know why they didn't just get Vangelis to do it, considering the fellow doing it now just seems to be imitating his style already. Maybe the scheduling couldn't be agreed on or, maybe, they think he was too old.

 

[dpippel]

Or maybe they approached him about doing it, and he turned them down.

 

[Edwin-S]

That's possible too.

 

[Neil Middlemiss]

The trailer music adapts and repurposes the themes from Blade Runner in a similar way to how John William's music is adapted for the Star Wars trailers (to evoke and is not an example of the actual music from the film).

Director Denis Villeneuve's frequent composer collaborator is Jóhann Jóhannsson (and his score for Arrival is magnificent, as is his brooding and moody score for Sicario and Prisoners) and he will be providing the score for this film - which I cannot wait for. I expect him to take the core, thematic essence of Vangelis' masterful work but fit it to Villeneueve's vision - which is how it should be.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

That quote about slavery from the director isn't what I want to hear. If he is he going that route, then he has already flubbed it in my book. AFAIAC, The original was about something even more fundamental than the evils of slavery. It was about what constitutes being human and being recognized as such.

Edit: I messed up that that quote about slavery was from the director. It was from a character in the film, so the director is already going that route. I'll still see the film, but it already fails to meet the bar of the original with that on the nose stating of the theme.

The director did not write the film so that really has nothing to do with him. That is the script he shot...not wrote.

I don't think you can say the film has failed at anything yet as it has not been released and so can't be judged on a single line.