Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

'Blade Runner 2049' Isn't the Movie Denis Villeneuve Wanted to Make (vice.com)

Posted by msmash on from the somebody-had-to-say-it dept.

Readers share a Motherboard article: There are seemingly two inescapable realities for big-budget filmmakers in 2017: you have to use existing intellectual property and you must provide spectacle that can lure massive domestic and foreign audiences to the the theater. It seemed that Denis Villeneuve chose wisely when he selected the IP that he would ride into the mainstream. [...] There is much to admire, but as a whole, Blade Runner 2049 works best as a case for why filmmakers like Villeneuve should be given big budgets to try out new concepts rather than retread what's come before them. Just like Arrival was at its best when we saw the elegance of how the space ship and the aliens within it actually functioned, this version of Blade Runner shines when we get to watch how Villeneuve's dystopia operates. Moments of technical brilliance small and large are at the soul of this film. Whether you're watching the creation of robot memories, the execution of an air strike from an effortless, detached distance, or even something as simple as a stroll through a hall of records, the mechanics of this world are jaw-dropping. Ryan Gosling (K) wisely opts for a muted, brooding performance, allowing the world to steal the show while still illustrating the burden of living in it. Even with all of this technical brilliance on display (the costumes, sound, and special effects are brilliant), the baggage of the original film's mythology weighs down Blade Runner 2049. The most burdensome baggage for Villeneuve to carry, sadly, is the Blade Runner story itself.

10 of 264 comments (clear)

  1. Everyone will downplay this.... by Zurkeyon3733 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Until the following starts. Its clearly a brilliant piece of work. Regardless of the complications of following the cannon. Many of the films of today are NOT following the established universe that made us love them to begin with. STRONG deviations, work 10-20% of the time from what I have seen. Sticking to cannon, and/or at least making an attempt to tie in, while making something totally NEW in that universe... THATS what we really want to see. If you can still be creative from within the box, and when there is no box at all, you'll have forever fans...

  2. The movie was superb; what's the beef? by Zelig · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What are we supposed to be unhappy about? That it wasn't another baygasm?

    I've never been so spellbound by a 2+ hour movie ..

    1. Re:The movie was superb; what's the beef? by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've never been so spellbound by a 2+ hour movie

      I'll second that.

      Just everything, from the gorgeous visuals and the awe-inspiring visual design of literally everything in the movie, to the bleak attitude of life in 2049 Los Angeles, the sheer noise (visual and auditory) of the city, and the overarching theme of Man playing God.

      I loved it.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    2. Re:The movie was superb; what's the beef? by Fortyseven · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Greatly dislike how this article frames opinion as fact. It keeps saying "Villeneuve does this", or "Villeneuve wanted that", but gives no source for the claims. To me, it's clear this article is just a shitty, deceptive, self-righteous way of stating one's personal observations.

      Observations I happen to generally disagree with. I loved the hell out of this flick; it touched me on an almost personal level, like no film as done in a long time.

      I'm not going to suggesting this article is just the inevitable mainstream contrarianism when something is widely beloved, but I'm having a hard time not pulling the trigger on saying it...

      --
      BytesTemplar.com
    3. Re:The movie was superb; what's the beef? by imidan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I agree. I went into it not knowing much about it--I avoided press and reviews beforehand. I also didn't expect much. I was quite doubtful that they'd be able to do it right. But, having seen it, I liked everything about it. It was great. It makes some of the other sequels that have come out (Star Trek comes to mind) look like something that you might accidentally step in on the street.

      Having read this review, I'm not even really sure what the guy is complaining about. It seems like he's been wanting to write an article about how bad franchises and sequels are, and Blade Runner represented an opportunity to do that. The problem is, Blade Runner is actually a good movie.

    4. Re: The movie was superb; what's the beef? by sound+vision · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I enjoyed the movie overall - amazing visuals, atmosphere, things like that. But it was a bit light on plot. I think the themes could have been explored more enjoyably with a thicker plot. The problem reviewers seem to have with it is the same, that it's too beholden to the both the successes and shortcomings of the original. I'm of the opinion that theres a middle ground between the artsy style of Blade Runner and the more conventional stuff like The Martian, and that's where the sweet spot is.

  3. No. by Simulant · · Score: 5, Interesting

    No. No. No.

    It's a good sequel. Better than anyone could have asked for.

  4. Why complain about a great "sequel" by lordmage · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This sequel was a slow rolling dramatic tale and I will say.. IT WORKED.

    SPOILERS ahead.

    I mean it!! Spoilers ahead!!

    Seriously.. SPOILERS.

    I have to say.. Spoilers cause spaces are removed.

    Yes.. SPOILERs..

    1. I loved that every Replicant felt that they were the "One"
    2. The death scene at the end was just.. perfect. The falling Snow.
    3. Everyone wanted a piece of the Child.. and yet... that is the real human condition... everyone wants to use you.
    4. In the end, this is a story about a Dad and a daughter. What they represent, does not matter.

    I wanted to cheer the ending as it was.. just perfect.

    --
    I can program myself out of a Hello World Contest!!
  5. Re:it attracted the wrong demographic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    wrong demographic

    I think they just missed the necessary demographic. I didn't know it was opening this weekend. Who's fault is that?

    I knew they were making this, but I didn't care enough to track it closely; there is a lot of stuff on a lot of media competing for attention. Apparently they took it for granted that everyone was breathlessly awaiting their big opening weekend and didn't bother to advertise where someone like myself would notice.

    Whatever. The original was a cult thing. Seems like this one is true to form. Maybe that's for the best.

  6. Misleading, opinion-based article by Nicolas+Cage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So... did Mr. Villeneuve actually say this wasn't the movie he wanted to make? Am I going crazy or is the author of this rant putting words in Villeneuve's mouth to back up their own opinion about the movie? Their arguments don't even make sense.

    I actually read something before where Villeneuve specifically said that there won't be a director's cut, final cut, or any other versions of this movie. We got the exact version he intended us to see, and at nearly 3 hours, that's not hard to believe. The author of this article thinks the movie should have been much shorter (which is obviously what the movie studios and theaters would prefer) while simultaneously suggesting that Villeneuve wasn't in complete creative control here. Again, am I going out of my mind here? What the hell? This should have been titled "'Blade Runner 2049' Isn't the Movie I Wanted Denis Villeneuve to Make".

    I think the movie's great. For whatever reason, the author of this didn't agree. Fine. But they're taking what is clearly an opinion piece about them not liking the movie and disguising it as some kind of fact-based informative news article where they present some kind of insight into the director's thinking process. There are no hard facts in this story, just speculation. That is extremely misleading.

    And yeah, I think the film is excellent and way better than we had any right to expect. To be brutally honest, given the complete dearth of creativity in Hollywood today, and given the kind of movies and properties that usually find success, and keeping in mind that just a few months ago the same studio released the fucking Emoji Movie... this is a much better film than we deserved. The only thing worth regretting here is that there won't be a third movie given how few tickets were sold (a combination of many factors including long runtime/fewer showings, vague advertising, R rating, older franchise, etc.). That's what we should be mourning here. This movie was great and deserves a followup as it's fairly open-ended and there are clearly more stories to be told about the emancipation movement or Niander Wallace, who didn't get nearly enough screentime. The clueless writer of this article doesn't even mention that in passing -- understandable if it was written last week before the box office returns came in, but it looks like it was published today. Talk about missing the point.