"The first assembly of the film was nearly four hours and for convenience sake and – to be honest – my bladder’s sake, we broke it into two for viewings," Walker said. "That break revealed something about the story – it’s in two halves. There’s K discovering his true past as he sees it and at the halfway mark he kind of loses his virginity. (laughs) The next morning, it’s a different story [...]We toyed with giving titles to each half but quickly dropped that. But what does remain is that there’s something of a waking dream about the film."
Support this blu-ray and it could potentially pay off.
Eh, it isn't like it is more expensive than other movies.
It's Blade Runner, which was a divisive movie when it got released. And this is a sequel 30 years later, but it is still Blade Runner. Add in the word of mouth that this is a long ass movie with little action, and that the resolution might make you feel a bit upset (easily 1/2 of the audience when I saw it last Thursday left with audible "WTF was that?" type conversations, and not the good kind) and I can see this not going well for a movie going experience. Saw some couples at the showing and you could tell the dudes knew fairly quickly into the movie that they made a poor decision.
I loved it, but then I love Blade Runner anyway. I'm definitely not some pretentious art-fag who thinks their opinion is better than others, but it had a lot of cool visuals and I liked the storytelling, especially the tragic-hero ending.
But it is very, very easy to see why this isn't doing well.
Translation: Scott's buttmad his latest science fiction films were nonsensical shitfests and this wasn't.
just watched it and was going through the thread and wanted to reply to this sentiment.
blade runner is an amazing sci-fi BOOK. it's a terrible sci-fi MOVIE. you go back 50 years and guys like isaac asimov were writing all kinds of sci-fi stories just like blade runner, but somewhere along the line, sci-fi movies have to be cool space lasers and explosions. i really enjoyed blade runner 2049, though i don't think the original really was that great. well let me rephrase, i think it was great for it's time but it hasn't aged well. i think this one took a lot of the same existentialism of the first one but made it a lot more subtle and nuanced and i think it was a better story for it.
but again, the general audience doesn't understand what sci-fi started off as, the same way they don't understand what fantasy started off as. fantasy is all about wizards and magic and elves and that's it, and sci-fi is the same, but space elves and/or space magic/explosions. people hear the term sci-fi and fantasy and they expect action when those terms don't have to have anything to do with action.
Prometheous is about a 2/10 and new Blade runner is about a 6/10, so yeah its three times better!Translation: Scott's buttmad his latest science fiction films were nonsensical shitfests and this wasn't.
Blade Runner is still slow and boring.
Weed would make it even slower?Its actually quite fast and exciting. Smoke more weed.
Weed would make it even slower?
Just saw it, this movie kicked ass. I am so upset that it didn't do well enough. I would kill for a follow up sequel, a series on HBO or something, anything to continue the universe.
Just saw it, this movie kicked ass. I am so upset that it didn't do well enough. I would kill for a follow up sequel, a series on HBO or something, anything to continue the universe.