VoA Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 You can Google the various articles about it (as you should) - but Ridley Scott is coming back with a Vengeance...... with Alien Convenant and now the sequel to Blade Runner (with apparently another Blade Runner Planned after this one). Of course....... Harrison Ford is in it as well Looks Awesome!!! Slicknifty, J. Coren, AstroJak and 4 others 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroJak Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Very cool, ive always been a big fan of bladerunner and its dystopian future. Ford and Scott individually do excellent work but when they are together on a project, its like... "wonder twins activate!!!"I like gosling but he's a little too pretty, i would have cast Tom Hardy.The only thing i disagree with Scott on, regarding this film is his later comments that Deckard was infact a replicate himself which just doesnt match the way the story plays out.AstroJak VoA and Kemalis 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snakebyte Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 2 hours ago, AstroJak said: The only thing i disagree with Scott on, regarding this film is his later comments that Deckard was infact a replicate himself which just doesnt match the way the story plays out. That was always the point of the film and why removing the unicron dream sequence along with the voice over ruined the initial cinema release version, by dumbing it down (for US audiences, who 'wouldn't get it'). How else would Gaff know to leave an origami unicorn outside Deckard's apartment as a warning and a wake up call. Until this point Deckard doesn't know he's a replicant, in the same way Rachael didn't. "They're not your memories, they're Tyrell's niece's". Yes, I'm a Blade Runner nut and had read Philip K Dick's 'Do androids dream of electric sheep' before the film was released. And here's a bit of Vangelis for you all: And for bonus points, look for the neon street signs in the film for companies that don't exist anymore, such as Atari. Gremlich 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErrolMc Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 16 minutes ago, Snakebyte said: Philip K Dick's 'Do androids dream of electric sheep' Great read. https://goo.gl/4FJ95T (Amazon Link) As usual, the book is way more enthralling than the movie. Still, enjoyed both and looking forward to Blade Runner 2049 Kemalis 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Coren Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 "and Director Denis Villeneuve" Sold! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroJak Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 That was always the point of the film and why removing the unicron dream sequence along with the voice over ruined the initial cinema release version, by dumbing it down (for US audiences, who 'wouldn't get it'). How else would Gaff know to leave an origami unicorn outside Deckard's apartment as a warning and a wake up call. Until this point Deckard doesn't know he's a replicant, in the same way Rachael didn't. "They're not your memories, they're Tyrell's niece's". Yes, I'm a Blade Runner nut and had read Philip K Dick's 'Do androids dream of electric sheep' before the film was released. And here's a bit of Vangelis for you all: And for bonus points, look for the neon street signs in the film for companies that don't exist anymore, such as Atari.Yeah but no...i disagree with it all. Ive see many of these claims ever since the 2007 directors cut was released and even Ford was reluctant to agree with scotts interpretation of Dicks novel. Ford only relenting for the sake of a pay day as a result of the release of said directors cut. dicks novel is purposefully ambiguous regarding deckard's true nature and he never comes out and actualy says deckard was a synthetic.As for Gaff and his unicorn i think people read way too much into it. Deckard had fallen for rachel and wanted to ensure her safety as well as getting away from his own miserable life. Gaff was simply telling him its a dream and shes going to die soon but live your life with her for as long as it lasts, u have earned it... Besides who in their right mind would give a robot a gun and badge and tell him to hunt his own kind in the hopes he wont ever realize what he truely was? In short Gaff wasnt saying that deckard wasnt real but rather deckards hopes and wishes for a happy future with rachel is the dream.Ps - My daughter bought herself a shirt with a unicorn on it, does this mean shes a robot or is she telling me im a robot? Im so confused...I met a unicorn once... I was watching the anniversary live stream in a coffee shop in downtown seattle, when this beautiful girl stopped and asked if what i was watching was starcitizen!!! I was lost for words but eventually said yes. She went on to tell me she loves the game so far and can't wait to play 3.0!!! OMG i found the unicorn but i'm pretty sure she wasnt a robot... Hold on... Am i the robot? I cant get this misuse of the term unicorn correct. Lolololol[emoji12] AJAstroJak Kemalis and Barabit 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyberianK Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 Blade Runner and Dunkirk by Christopher Nolan are my most awaited movies of 2017 Apallous 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snakebyte Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 15 hours ago, AstroJak said: Yeah but no...i disagree with it all. Ive see many of these claims ever since the 2007 directors cut was released and even Ford was reluctant to agree with scotts interpretation of Dicks novel. Ford only relenting for the sake of a pay day as a result of the release of said directors cut. My understanding is that the original version had the unicorn dream sequence and no voice, but it was changed after the film was given an audience test before release. The audience didn't get the film, so the backer (I think it was Warner Bros) insisted that it be changed to improve their return. The Director's Cut came about because a long while later a copy of Blade Runner was shown at an event, but they were sent the wrong version. They were sent the original pre-release audience test film, which made a lot of people ask for it to be released. Hence, the Director's Cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VoA Posted May 8, 2017 Author Share Posted May 8, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VoA Posted May 11, 2017 Author Share Posted May 11, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VoA Posted July 17, 2017 Author Share Posted July 17, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VoA Posted August 30, 2017 Author Share Posted August 30, 2017 Check out this Short Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VoA Posted October 2, 2017 Author Share Posted October 2, 2017 When Harrison Ford describes a movie like be this you know that it will be awesome.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Coren Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 On 10/2/2017 at 5:48 AM, VoA said: When Harrison Ford describes a movie like be this you know that it will be awesome.... *video snip* Oh, Harrison. Please never stop showing up to interviews roasted. What spoke most to me was that he seemed to pay attention to what was being said and had a conversation rather than drifting off to attend the Jefferson Airplane concert in his head. LowZone 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VoA Posted October 5, 2017 Author Share Posted October 5, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlich Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 On 12/21/2016 at 7:06 PM, Snakebyte said: And for bonus points, look for the neon street signs in the film for companies that don't exist anymore, such as Atari. Think again https://www.atari.com/ https://www.ataribox.com/ https://twitter.com/atari Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeraldEvans Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 Just saw this the other day. Hands down the best movie I've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fintz Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 One of the best movies of 2017. CyberianK and Valenquo 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snakebyte Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 Saw the film a few days ago and it was so much better than I expected. There were so many links back to the original that I was open-jawed the whole time, but the bit that did it for me was the way that certain scenes started with the first note of the original theme tune. This was really irritating, as it is actually 3 very distinctive notes and every time I heard it, I expected the next 2. Well, 1 1/2 hours into the film I got all 3 notes and the timing just blew me away... On 10/10/2017 at 10:20 PM, Gremlich said: Think again https://www.atari.com/ https://www.ataribox.com/ https://twitter.com/atari OK, Atari was resurrected. But Pan Am is still dead.:-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyberianK Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 I saw the movie yesterday and its a masterpiece. Has been years since I saw a movie that good. I would say its even better than the first one even though certainly less groundbreaking. But the weaknesses story wise the first one had this one didn't. Its definately one of the best sequels ever really true to the original in style while not being a soulless copy. Sure theres peoples saying it was too long and too slow pacing but thats what good movies used to be and imho should be. For every movie with maybe a little too slow a pacing theres tens of movies these days where fast pacing ruins the whole build up and story. I think the slow pacing was good for experiencing the visuals and audio and atmosphere and cinematography. I think it did not hurt the movie quality wise even though it probably did regarding box-office success. And btw. you really should watch this on the big screen at home its probably only half as good. GeraldEvans 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeraldEvans Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 The counter point between a human that's become less than human and a machine that's become more than human is perfect. Seriously, watch this movie. Truly amazing stuff. CyberianK 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drum Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 While I did enjoy this flic, and agree it was awesome, some of the critical reviews did hit on a truth. Mainly, if you did not KNOW the story of what is considered a niche film, then the whole plot was very vague and the movie was too long (drawn out was a popular theme). I don't think there is anyone alive who did not know the plot line of Blade Runner, but the point is valid. I also felt that two of the three 'short stories' should have been shown with the main movie to give more weight to the characters, (even the cartoon one could have helped explain the plot thread). They possibly were, but became directors cut floor fodder, since the show was already too long. Despite all that distraction, it was a stunning and really great show. I hope someone convinces them to do sideline shows in the Blade Runner world. Rise of the replicants, where did Wallace come from, and so on... - DRUM out GeraldEvans 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barabit Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 21 hours ago, CyberianK said: I saw the movie yesterday and its a masterpiece. Has been years since I saw a movie that good. I would say its even better than the first one even though certainly less groundbreaking. But the weaknesses story wise the first one had this one didn't. Its definately one of the best sequels ever really true to the original in style while not being a soulless copy. Sure theres peoples saying it was too long and too slow pacing but thats what good movies used to be and imho should be. For every movie with maybe a little too slow a pacing theres tens of movies these days where fast pacing ruins the whole build up and story. I think the slow pacing was good for experiencing the visuals and audio and atmosphere and cinematography. I think it did not hurt the movie quality wise even though it probably did regarding box-office success. And btw. you really should watch this on the big screen at home its probably only half as good. Honestly curious... which weakness story wise of the first one you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyberianK Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 10 minutes ago, Barabit said: Honestly curious... which weakness story wise of the first one you mean? Deckard is not doing much proactively hes more like stumbling through the world. The movie is hugging along in the amazing scenery and atmosphere and acting by Rutger Hauer and Olmos and such. In the second one theres actual detective stuff happening more like what you would expect from a Blade Runners job. That said "weakness" is probably too much I don't want to step on anyones toes I love the original too GeraldEvans 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barabit Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 Thanks for the insight, I see what you mean now. One more reason to watch it, I'm going to the theater some day next week, hopefully. GeraldEvans 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now