I personally love the opening sequence:
The thing with Sapper was an unused idea from the original.
I personally love the opening sequence:
The thing with Sapper was an unused idea from the original.
I really enjoyed it. My wife fell hook, line and sicker for the main misdirection. I didn't but not sure if that means I am smarter or more dumb because I didn't pick up what the movie was hinting at quick enough 
I am a sucker for the art and music style of this type of film so I wasn't surprised that I really like it.
I am a sucker for the art and music style of this type of film so I wasn't surprised that I really like it.
The pacing is a throwback. You can't really cut anything because it's all essential to the story. It feels slow because it is cut like a much older movie; takes are long and the cuts are not very rapid. It lingers on the atmosphere and the dialogue is deliberate. If you cut it more aggressively, it would come off as pretty bland and ordinary.
Just watched it. Felt it was long on style but short on substance. The music kind of bothered me because it sounded too much like Interstellar (which I loved). Just not nearly as good as the original imo.
Tw1ster
Registered User
Finished watching it and just as I thought I would, I loved it......actually felt too short to me, mainly because I would like to see Wallace's arc unfold. The music was great.....obviously the visuals were outstanding, but I think Gosling was what drew me in and kept me there. Very emotional performance. Can't wait to watch it again
Trap Jesus
Registered User
- Feb 13, 2012
- 28,686
- 13,457
That is exactly how you build (or I guess in this case add to) a world in a movie. Everything about the world felt fully realized. Did not lack in atmosphere whatsoever, which was easily the best selling point of the original. This movie was just drenched in atmosphere, and, like the original, wasn't afraid to get weird.
The usual components like story, writing and acting were whatever. Good enough. This is obviously more about the visuals, on top of the atmosphere, which work hand in hand.
I completely understand the style vs. substance argument, but to be honest, I don't care. It's a movie, the visuals are a massive part of it. The "Elvis fight" is a great example. Why exactly did Deckard turn the power on? Didn't make any sense to me, but at the end of the day, it created an unbelievably memorable, interesting and visually/sonically stunning scene.
So many shots that are going to stick with me from this movie. Don't understand why "style" gets looked down on sometimes. It's OK for things to look cool; visual flair is a good thing.
The usual components like story, writing and acting were whatever. Good enough. This is obviously more about the visuals, on top of the atmosphere, which work hand in hand.
I completely understand the style vs. substance argument, but to be honest, I don't care. It's a movie, the visuals are a massive part of it. The "Elvis fight" is a great example. Why exactly did Deckard turn the power on? Didn't make any sense to me, but at the end of the day, it created an unbelievably memorable, interesting and visually/sonically stunning scene.
So many shots that are going to stick with me from this movie. Don't understand why "style" gets looked down on sometimes. It's OK for things to look cool; visual flair is a good thing.
Last edited:
The same reason the Americans were able to win the revolutionary war. Familiarity with the territory. Knowing where all the seats and tables were gave Deckard a tactical advantage in the semi dark.
- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,616
- 12,090
Haven't seen Darkest Hour or Mudbound yet, but it's pretty tough to choose between BR49 and Dunkirk for best Cinematography. I'm really curious to see who wins
Tasty Biscuits
with fancy sauce
Don't sleep on Shape of Water either. Sometimes, if a movie ends up crushing it come awards night, it ends up winning things it was never even favored in. While I would be surprised to see it happen, I could see Deakins getting robbed yet again.
This is his 14th nomination. It will be a crying shame if he never wins one. He's getting up there in age.
Tasty Biscuits
with fancy sauce
Hey, I'm with you on that one. It just feels like the "Deakins is a lock, he's due" conversation has been had so many times now. And BR2049 isn't exactly an Academy friendly movie this time of year due to the length -- not a ton of people saw it in theaters, and screeners won't do the same justice. No nominations in any of the major categories either means that those with movies to catch up on won't be able to kill two birds with one stone by watching it. I hope it doesn't happen, but it wouldn't be a huge shocker if it did, IMO.
Trap Jesus
Registered User
- Feb 13, 2012
- 28,686
- 13,457
There's no way he loses another one. I just can't see it happening. Feels like Leo in the Revenant a little bit.
The Crypto Guy
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2017
- 26,746
- 34,113
Hivemind
We're Touched
You can enjoy it, but I suspect you'll enjoy it significantly more if you watch the original.
Jussi
Registered User
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
You never know.
Sometimes seeing the older film second makes it feel dated.
I was shocked for my nieces to dislike Star Wars and Return of the Jedi compared to the prequels. They did like Empire Strikes Back.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
There are three prequels, one of which stars Wallace and another with Batista:
I can't say enough about Batista's subtle performance that still had a kind of stately gravitas to it.
Blackhawkswincup
RIP Fugu
The Crypto Guy
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2017
- 26,746
- 34,113
