Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#126 Post by Mr Sausage » Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:22 pm

miless wrote:Variety says: the new film owes more to slow-cinema maestro Andrei Tarkovsky than it does to Scott’s revolutionary cyberpunk sensibility

I'm skeptical (especially coming from Variety), but this does pique my interest
That's an odd thing to write. Blade Runner has a very slow, lingering, poetic kind of style, not exactly Tarkovsky, but hardly opposed to it, either.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#127 Post by swo17 » Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:23 pm

Clarence wrote:
Probably why they ended up going with Leto.
Well obviously.

User avatar
dda1996a
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:14 am

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#128 Post by dda1996a » Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:55 pm

Ribs wrote:
dda1996a wrote:I loved every film he made so far and reviews are hailing this. What are its Oscar chances? That will be the day
...the day for what? I don't really see what the Oscars discourse can add to this film, which will with these reviews do perfectly alright without it. Sure, it could get nominated for some things and will probably win at least one technical category, but there's basically no narrative behind this as a major awards player whatsoever.
It won't, and I usually hate when everyone judges a film based on its Oscar chances. But with everyone raving about this online I was hoping, and with Arrival's nominations last year, that this might slide in. A sci fi sequel being nominated (and hopefully Deakins winning finally) would be a precedent.
Again I am going to see this regardless of any awards (I never go see films theatrically based on awards) but I've longed for Deakins to win and this seems like the best candidate at the moment.
Obviously once I see this I will be able to provide more about the film.

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#129 Post by Ribs » Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:06 pm

Generally speaking, it appears the studio's actually a little surprised to get so rapturous a response, so I'd assume they had a bad test screening or something and just assumed the worst (there was a quiet murmur that it'd actually also super under-perform at the Box Office, which now seems very unlikely, which means WB will have had an even more crazy great year Lego Ninjago excepted). It could come in with a nod for a big prize (Picture seems relatively possible, Director maybe too) but they'll probably be putting their muscle into stretching the almost certain cinematography win into sweeping the remaining below-the-line categories (editing excepted, as that's really Dunkirk's to lose). WB only has so much money to mount campaigns on, though!
Last edited by Ribs on Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Apperson
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:47 pm
Location: Oxfordshire, UK

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#130 Post by Apperson » Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:49 pm

I guess the closest precedent would be Mad Max: Fury Road released in May, which gave it half a year to build up critical support before getting recognized by the guilds.

Pepsi
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:01 pm

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#131 Post by Pepsi » Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:44 am

Some questions:

A) Is Blade Runner 2049 intended for 3D, or is the 3D copy a sort off "Take the Money and Run", made because they can increase the proffit. Is the image made for 3D originally?

B) I tough that Jóhann Jóhannsson was announced to make the music. Why is the score by Benjamin Wallfisch and
Hans Zimmer? Jóhannsson has such a great influence on Villeneuve's films.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#132 Post by MichaelB » Sun Oct 01, 2017 11:00 am

Pepsi wrote:B) I tough that Jóhann Jóhannsson was announced to make the music. Why is the score by Benjamin Wallfisch and
Hans Zimmer? Jóhannsson has such a great influence on Villeneuve's films.
Creative differences between Villeneuve and Jóhannsson, apparently. Villeneuve wanted something that had more of a Vangelis vibe (which, to be fair, isn't an unreasonable request) and wasn't happy with what Jóhannsson was producing.

Although there's a caveat: that's just Villeneuve's version, and Jóhannson is apparently contractually barred from commenting for now.

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#133 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:52 am

Zimmer is for some probably too obvious a choice but I think whatever he has produced will be a good fit. He's said in an interview before the one film he wish he could have done himself was Blade Runner, and he is obviously no stranger to electronic music. Perhaps more importantly, while this is his first film with Villeneuve, his long association with Ridley Scott is a comfort in that they didn't just get him on name recognition alone.

That said I do hope what Jóhannson recorded sees the light of day, if only to hear more of his wonderful music than to compare it to the final product.

Pepsi
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:01 pm

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#134 Post by Pepsi » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:05 am

A) Is Blade Runner 2049 intended for 3D, or is the 3D copy a sort off "Take the Money and Run", made because they can increase the proffit. Is the image made for 3D originally?
Okey, It's NOT COMPOSED FOR A 3D movie!

From Blu-ray.com:

I read an interview with Roger Deakins a while back where he said it'd most likely be a conversion.

Quote:
BRIDGES: It's the future of our business. What we do is pretty primitive in a way. You know, 24 frames—that's about as slow as you can get now.

DEAKINS: Yeah. [laughs] I don't do that virtual reality stuff. I'm not even into 3-D actually.

BRIDGES: Have you shot in 3-D?

DEAKINS: No, I won't. I've been offered it. I just don't want to. I think I'm gonna do this film with Denis [Villeneuve] that'll be made into 3-D eventually, but it won't be shot in 3-D. I don't really like watching 3-D. I mean, I've worked on a lot of animated movies that were 3-D ...

BRIDGES: Those animated films are interesting. It's so expensive to do it that they rewrite that script over and over, and it takes years to do!

DEAKINS: Yeah, it's a crazy process. It takes, like, four years. I've been working on animated films, not at the moment, but for the last few years, and I do it remotely. So when I was in Australia with Angelina Jolie shooting Unbroken, I was working on this film How to Train Your Dragon 2 at the same time. [laughs] You know, because it's so slow.
http://www.interviewmagazine.com/film/roger-deakins#_" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


I don't expect him to shoot much different than he does for 2D, but who knows? That's an all-star cast and crew though. I'm looking forward to it very much as a 2D film.
Last edited by Pepsi on Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#135 Post by Zot! » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:28 am

I assume they had asked Vangelis to score this, and got turned down?

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#136 Post by Ribs » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:29 am

... Roger Deakins worked on How to Train Your Dragon 2?

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#137 Post by hearthesilence » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:42 am

Ribs wrote:... Roger Deakins worked on How to Train Your Dragon 2?
Probably made far more on that film than any other he's done.

User avatar
Forrest Taft
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:34 pm
Location: Stavanger, Norway

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#138 Post by Forrest Taft » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:55 am

Zot! wrote:I assume they had asked Vangelis to score this, and got turned down?
No, I don't think so. I seem to recall reading a story about how much he wanted to score it, but wasn't offered the job. Must have been strange for him to read that they replaced Johansson, and even then chose to go to another composer instead of him, to get something "closer to Vangelis".

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#139 Post by Zot! » Mon Oct 02, 2017 11:32 am

RobertAltman wrote:
Zot! wrote:I assume they had asked Vangelis to score this, and got turned down?
No, I don't think so. I seem to recall reading a story about how much he wanted to score it, but wasn't offered the job. Must have been strange for him to read that they replaced Johansson, and even then chose to go to another composer instead of him, to get something "closer to Vangelis".
Bizarre....

User avatar
jazzo
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 12:02 am

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#140 Post by jazzo » Mon Oct 02, 2017 12:12 pm

Ribs wrote:... Roger Deakins worked on How to Train Your Dragon 2?
I believe he's worked on WALL-E and both HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON films as a lighting and photography consultant. Not sure what the means exactly, but my impression at the time was that the directors each of the films approached him specifically because they didn't want their pictures to look like every other computer animated movie out there, which translates to, have a simple medium-long set up and let the goofy characters enter frame, do their bit, then leave. You can, 100%, see his work in their look (especially WALL-E's eartbound first half).

All three of these films are shot like a live action film, with real thought put into camera framing/placement/movement. Sometimes we even see lens movement with zoom-ins and outs. They're all very visually impressive and each film feels like its respective director is/are directors first, animators second.

And not that anyone would if they weren't parents, but both HTTYD films are defintely worth checking out. The first was actually one of my favourite films its year of release, and it is beautiful crafted. Its characters are very endearing the film, itself, is perfectly scary where it needs to be.

The second HTTYD film is less successful from a story/emotional standpoint, but still very good, and just as beautifully designed.

...And now back to our regular topic.

User avatar
miless
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#141 Post by miless » Mon Oct 02, 2017 3:41 pm

I know for Wall-E they consulted Deakins to learn how different lenses distort the image, and how light plays off the glass, so they could retool their algorithms to make them seem more naturalistic. Wall-E is perhaps the only (animated) Disney movie in two decades that I actually like, and Deakins' involvement probably has much to do with that.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#142 Post by knives » Mon Oct 02, 2017 4:15 pm

He also, more or less, directed the live action segments.

Soothsayer
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 2:54 pm

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#143 Post by Soothsayer » Mon Oct 02, 2017 4:30 pm

RobertAltman wrote:
Zot! wrote:I assume they had asked Vangelis to score this, and got turned down?
No, I don't think so. I seem to recall reading a story about how much he wanted to score it, but wasn't offered the job. Must have been strange for him to read that they replaced Johansson, and even then chose to go to another composer instead of him, to get something "closer to Vangelis".
Speculating, but I'm guessing Villeneuve wanted a "modern" take on the Vangelis sound...something Vangelis himself is not capable of. Modern Vangelis still sounds like 1981 Vangelis.

User avatar
Forrest Taft
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:34 pm
Location: Stavanger, Norway

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#144 Post by Forrest Taft » Mon Oct 02, 2017 4:36 pm

I'm beginning to think I may have misremembered that story I read about Vangelis. After I made that post, I tried to find the article/interview I was refering to, but no luck. The only thing I could come up with was this article. Relevant quote:
Vangelis himself wasn't asked to score Blade Runner 2, and he's OK with that. "You can never repeat certain things," Vangelis says. "It's only once in a lifetime. It's like doing another Chariots Of Fire. It's impossible."

Besides, he'd rather spend his time in the cosmos.

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#145 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:22 pm

When the final cut came out in 2007, there was an expanded version of the original soundtrack that included a disc of music he composed for a sequel that didn't exist yet. Some of it's good, but not as memorable as what he did originally. So I think what he said there certainly applies.

User avatar
Bumstead
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 12:25 pm
Location: Dubai

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#146 Post by Bumstead » Thu Oct 05, 2017 2:35 pm

Just returned from the screening (DCP). Long, slow and somber must be Denis Villeneuve's favorite three words. This is an exceedingly manicured sequel with all the BLADE RUNNER prerequisites: rain, mist, replicants, funky coats. But Fancher's script feels too exiguous to buttress all of 160 mins. There's some HER-style intrigue which allows Ryan Gosling to flex his facial muscles beyond stern or mute face. Jared Leto is surprisingly NOT annoying (okay, may be a just a tiny tiny bit); unfortunately, his character is practically one-note.
SpoilerShow
Speaking of which, 2049 wallows in its sustained gloom until...bam! Enter Harrison Ford, grumpier than ever! But that's 120 minutes already in.
Big action finale is something Paul Verhoeven would shoot in his sleep.

There's no memorable villain or tears in the rain. But we get Roger Deakins, which is fine, I guess.

User avatar
R0lf
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 7:25 am

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#147 Post by R0lf » Thu Oct 05, 2017 5:31 pm

Yeah. It's average.

The plot is built like a Virginia Andrews sequel where the audience already knows what will happen from having read the previous novels but keeps the new characters in the dark. It then uses the nostalgia people hold for the original movie to build its finale instead of taking the story in any new or significant ways forward. Ford carries this to a certain extent but some of the nostalgia is not well thought out and so poorly executed it really sinks the film. Despite being built like a melodrama the film doesn't then offer the joy of being played as a melodrama (ARRIVAL hit these notes with no trouble).

The female characters are the life of the film but between Wright, de Armas, Davis, Hoeks, they are spread far too thin. Given some of the throwbacks it was a shame they didn't stage a role reversal of the soft rape scene from the original film with Wright throwing Gosling against the venetians (there was a chance early in the movie).

The soundtrack is Vangelis soup and despite hitting the musical cues of the original doesn't seem to understand the pitch, volume, or pace. Truly awful in places. Lots of long winded electronic farting sounds.

Great sets, costuming, pretty faces. This really sustains the first act of the movie where I was constantly ignoring the plot telling myself that the atmosphere and the way it was executed are what is really important. This really wears thin fast as the visuals all become far too ubiquitous.

The entire thing reminded me heavily of the recent, mediocre, 007 movie SPECTRE where I had hoped for something with the visual style and visceral pleasure of ONLY GOD FORGIVES.

User avatar
Bumstead
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 12:25 pm
Location: Dubai

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#148 Post by Bumstead » Fri Oct 06, 2017 6:18 am

R0lf wrote:Yeah. It's average.
...it was a shame they didn't stage a role reversal of the soft rape scene from the original film with Wright throwing Gosling against the venetians (there was a chance early in the movie).
Hilarious! I'm glad you brought up Robin Wright. She delivered Fancher's ultra-noirish dialog cold, which killed her character's credibility; perhaps not her fault in a film whose director plays fast and loose with the arthouse-mainstream dynamic. Her costume (ridiculous) was another problem for me. For an actor of her stature, to be reduced to a I'll-have-your-balls-for-breakfast barking boss was jarring. Which reminds me of Beat Takeshi in GHOST IN THE SHELL, a far more successful version of this archetype.

The comparison to SPECTRE is perfect. That film also coasted on nostalgia, creating pop history instead of authentically expanding the mythology. Another long, dour film with a hero looking pissed/sad all the time.

But I should take a step back, while I can, and say that 2049 is not a bad film. It just should not be compared to the ballsy, iconic original. All of the ebullient praise from the critics will be embarrassing in a couple of years...

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#149 Post by tenia » Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:52 am

R0lf wrote:The entire thing reminded me heavily of the recent, mediocre, 007 movie SPECTRE where I had hoped for something with the visual style and visceral pleasure of ONLY GOD FORGIVES.
I'd still take SPECTRE over the endlessly dull and empty shell that Only God Forgives was.

This being written, it definitely seems like the OST is a misfire of epic proportions and the only thing common to bothe yay- and nay-sayers. It actually makes me want to give it a try just to see how bad it can really be.

User avatar
dda1996a
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:14 am

Re: Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve, 2017)

#150 Post by dda1996a » Fri Oct 06, 2017 9:53 am

I highly disagree. This film builds on the original while using the past as another thematic side to an already deep mythology. Deakins is predictably brilliant but I found Villeneuve's slow burning direction incredibly impactful. Honestly this is as worthy a sequel to the brilliant original.
Also that "sex" scene was incredibly potent and beautiful (even though it reminded me a bit of Her)

Post Reply