fumi
-
Posts
3,605 -
Joined
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Downloads
Store
Everything posted by fumi
-
There are so many amazing touches and stuff in this movie. I wonder how long before someone copies the presentation box that the Emanator come in? Also, good article on how likely/realistic the technologies in the movie are in the near future (50 years). https://qz.com/1095377/how-realistic-is-the-incredible-futuristic-technology-in-blade-runner-2049/
-
I read before that the budget was 150-185 mil, but everywhere I read now says 150 only? I imagine that 185 included marketing etc. Or maybe that figure was just an estimate and the 150 is known to be actual now? Bladerunner 2049 will undoubtedly make its money back eventually. The problem is that studios and investors want that money now, not two or three years down the road. When you consider how Hollywood works now - endless comic book movies, (conveniently) expanded universes for every concievable intellectual property, millions flocking to see an emoji movie, it's nothing sort of a miracle in itself that Blade Runner 2049 ever got made and turned out to be so magnificent.
-
That's really bad. If I had paid $15 or whatever to see a film, I would have grabbed that phone and chucked it. Or complained to the staff. There's no excuse. People who need to check their phones during a movie don't have an attention span long enough for any movie, let alone one running nearly three hours. LOL. Dune was an even bigger financial failure with an even smaller niche audience. There's no way that's going to be made now. In today's Hollywood, how would you even market a film like this? I assume you've seen the film and/or read the book. Critics and fans are the only people who've bothered going to watch it. And they mostly saw it within a day or two of release.
-
Already up for pre-order on Amazon. The Blu-ray and digital downloads are as early as 14th December. It's a (happy) but unfortunate side to a film that has bombed really badly. It only took 15 million dollars this past weekend and has suffered a 50% drop since last week. Profit is so far only $60 million (domestic) and $158 million worldwide. That's crushing for a film that cost upwards of $155 million. In contrast, I.T has cruised past 600 million (it only cost 35 to make!!) and shows no sign of stopping. I think we'll have to wait another 30+ years for another Blade Runner movie.
-
A bit sad that this masterpiece has been knocked off the top after only one week by some teen-orientated B-Movie Horror flick.
-
This image is pretty popular when you google Bladerunner 2049. I saw it also in some of the previews and early reviews and yet I don't recall seeing it in the film.
-
Just saw this today. There were three people in the theatre, including me. Like oscillik, I was extremely wary of this film when it was first announced. I thought the whole thing was a recipe for disaster - an unnecessary follow-up to a film that for me, is a sort of holy grail. I didn’t like the casting. The thought that the studio would just make a mockery of the original. I am more than happy to be proved completely wrong. This film was utterly stunning from beginning to end. The sets, visuals, design etc was incredible. The acting was superb - even Jared Leto wasn’t too bad. Small screen time probably helped there. The technology was cool, the story was well-written, intelligent and thought-provoking. It didn’t feel like nearly three hours, at least for me. A total immersive world brought to life on screen. Absolutely amazing. This is a film I will want to watch over and over again. I think the reason I like it so much was simply this: The people who created this film totally understood what made the original so good. I only really had two issues with the film. The first, really minor I guess. The world they envisioned in 2049 didn’t seem ‘lived in’ compared to the original where there were really old, ruined buildings, piles of refuse etc. It made it all seem very believable. I’m thinking about the litter blowing along the streets, neon signs working intermittently, the grimy elevator in Deckard’s building, Pris covering herself in newspapers while waiting for Sebastian and the closing section in the original where Roy is chasing Deckard through dilapidated, rotten buildings with water dripping everywhere. In 2049, the world of Los Angeles seemed sleek, angular and clean in a CGI way that I didn’t believe in. It felt like all the signs of human habitation had been brushed away. That’s a sobering thought if the future does indeed play out that way. The future portrayed in the world of 2049 is truly horrifying to me. Where is everyone? The second (more problematic issue) was the soundtrack. Within the confines of the movie, it was okay ( but as a stand-alone work that you would want to listen to in the same way fans still enjoy the Vangelis work from 1982), Hans Zimmer’s score was lazy and unimaginative. When you look back at truly epic films from decades past, Ben Hur, Lawrence Of Arabia, Ryan’s Daughter, E.T, Star Wars and many, many others; they had a film score that was so truly wonderful, it could survive without the film and exist on its own for decades. A film as beautiful and memorable as Blade Runner 2049 deserved something far, far better, in my opinion. Overall, a stunning achievement. 9/10 for me. Where's my 4K Blu-ray?
-
The Ringer: Heading into this past weekend, Blade Runner 2049, the sequel to Ridley Scott’s pioneering 1982 sci-fi film Blade Runner, was expected to be the box office’s big winner. With a ton of critical praise and hardly any competition, experts prognosticated that the movie would pull in close to $55 million. By the time Sunday rolled around, however, Blade Runner 2049 was performing well below those expectations. In all, the movie—which had a whopping budget of $150 million—made only $36 million domestically in its first weekend. For a movie that seemingly had so much buzz, and that has two very famous leads in Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford, to pull up so short of predictions, which really weren’t all that high to begin with—for context, a $55 million domestic opening would have been the 12th-biggest opening of 2017—is both surprising and unsurprising. On the surprising side, Ford and Gosling’s star power has perhaps been overstated. With the exceptions of returning roles in the Star Wars and Indiana Jones franchises (can we all forget The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull even happened though?), Ford hasn’t been a bankable box office winner since the days of Air Force One. Two of his biggest blockbusters of this century, Ender’s Game and Cowboys & Aliens, barely made back their budget. You probably didn’t see Morning Glory—and that’s a good thing. Gosling, meanwhile, has found his best success when he shares the spotlight—think Emma Stone in La La Land, Brad Pitt, Christian Bale, and Steve Carell in The Big Short, or Emma Stone in Crazy, Stupid, Love. (Maybe “make movies with Emma Stone” should be his strategy.) But even with stars, 2049 was always going to be a tough sell to a broader audience, even as some trailers marketed it as a blockbuster action movie. In fact, those who made the movie actually went out of their way to keep details about the movie limited. Critics were given strict guidelines for spoilers in their reviews, meaning even the many pieces of effusive praise for the sequel were vague. That extended to many of the film’s trailers too, which ditched all semblances of a plot for gorgeous frames of Roger Deakins’s cinematography. For example, that Ryan Gosling’s blade runner, K, is a replicant is revealed within minutes of the film’s start, so it’s not exactly a huge spoiler. But even that’s unclear from the trailers. Perhaps most indicting, though, there was the a misunderstanding of how popular Blade Runner was as a property to begin with. Since 1982, the movie has maintained a niche fandom, beloved more by cinephiles than a mainstream audience—nowhere near as popular as Star Wars, or even Star Trek. However, a $200 million budget placed 2049 in the realm of the Star Wars spinoff Rogue One and Star Trek: Beyond, and with that came higher expectations at the box office. The money put behind Blade Runner 2049 saddled it with the perception that it was a blockbuster, when the finished product stays true to the original. It’s an artsy, meditative slow burn that once again holds a niche appeal. The list of less important, but still influencing factors continues: It has the longest run time of any major studio film this year, a fact that became an internet punch line. Additionally, Warner Bros. reported that 71 percent of opening-weekend ticket buyers were male, a fact the studio points to as being most responsible for the flop. “The real trick now is to expand the audience past older men,” Warner Bros. president of domestic distribution Jeff Goldstein told The New York Times. The lesson to be learned from 2049’s box office failure is a familiar one for Hollywood: It’s probably best to avoid spending an absurd amount of money on properties that have proved to not have a mainstream appeal, especially when the movie’s information gap is nearly impossible to bridge. Unfortunately, that means more of the same and less original ideas. Did you know Harrison Ford is making a fifth Indiana Jones film?
-
‘Blade Runner 2049’ Sputters at the Domestic Box Office https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/08/movies/blade-runner-2049-box-office.html?partner=rss&emc=rss LOS ANGELES — The expensive science-fiction sequel “Blade Runner 2049” collapsed at the North American box office over the weekend, taking in $31.5 million, or roughly 30 percent less than analysts had expected, as younger audiences and women failed to materialize in sizable numbers. “I’m disappointed,” said Jeff Goldstein, president of domestic distribution for Warner Bros., which released the independently produced movie in the United States and Canada. “The real trick now is to expand the audience past older men.” Warner said that 71 percent of opening-weekend ticket buyers were male. Euphoric reviews and possible attention on Hollywood’s awards circuit could help “Blade Runner 2049” play longer and more successfully in theaters than would be typically expected. Denis Villeneuve, who directed the film, had that kind of luck with his last movie, “Arrival,” which had $24 million in initial ticket sales last fall and ultimately collected $100.5 million. And “Blade Runner 2049” did better overseas, where Sony Pictures Entertainment has the distribution rights. Sony said that the movie took in $50.2 million in partial international release, with major countries like Japan, South Korea and China still to come.
-
I'm booked to see this next Wednesday, perfect seat in what will be a mostly empty theatre. Trying to avoid spoilers in this thread.
-
You haven't seen the movie. Soundtrack isn't great, but it works in general WHEN WATCHING THE MOVIE...which, ya know, is the point of a soundtrack. The music has moments of good though it has some bits that are definitely weak/rushed.. Nothing was ever going to live up to the original, of course. That interview/review sums it up well though. If anyone was thinking meh maybe don't see it, go to about 11:00 and listen to his summation and ultimate reaction watching it, I'd agree with most everything he said. It's a pretty damned good film. I'm sure it works fine within the confines of the movie. That's the least it should be doing. As a stand-alone album that you'll still want to listen to years from now.. I really doubt it.
-
Mark Kermode's interview is good. I'll see it next week, I guess. He's wrong about the soundtrack though. It's shite.
-
It's the soundtrack. Check out the track 'Sea Wall' - it's a really jarring, awful sound. Zimmer's trademark really.
-
Haven't seen the film yet but the soundtrack is just bland and boring, Zimmer tooling away on the CS80 or pounding you into submission with his super-heavy approach. It's nothing like Vangelis at all. It's so far below what he achieved, it's not even funny. There are no real identifiable melodies - in fact the only real melody on here is the Vangelis track towards the end. Seriously, go back and listen to the original again, it's chock full of ideas - even on the very small, almost incidental pieces. I'm still hopeful I will enjoy the film but the soundtrack is a fucking travesty. Even without the BR baggage, this would be a very weak effort indeed.
-
Well, I only picked that review from the many out there because it has a more balanced appraisal than all the over-the-top reviews I've read elsewhere. I think the movie will be excel at some things and also be a disappointment in others. by the way, there are reviews out there that basically say the film is at least an hour too long and offers visual spectacle only to prop up a thin script. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/452208/blade-runner-2049-review-dark-vision-weak-storytelling
-
Vox Media Review (No Spoilers) If you are already inclined to see Blade Runner 2049, then go for it. Rest assured: It’s not a disaster. It’s the sort of original and stylish film that — if Hollywood is going to insist on resurrecting everything — is actually worth the film it’s printed on. And it’s worth seeing on a big screen, because if there’s one thing Scott’s successor Denis Villeneuve knows how to do, it’s make a compelling image. In this film he works with his frequent collaborator, the great cinematographer Roger Deakins, whose comically accomplished oeuvre and work in this film almost certainly guarantees him an Oscar nomination, if not the still-elusive Oscar itself. Blade Runner 2049 does its due diligence as a sequel, wrapping up some threads from the original film that may (or may not) satisfy some fans still puzzling over Blade Runner’s biggest open question. But it’s not mere fan service; the film tries very hard to sustain interest with new characters and developments that draw on the past without being handcuffed to it, throughout its sometimes ponderous 163-minute runtime. But far too often that attempt to be interesting fails. Its score (from Benjamin Wallfisch and the ever-present Hans Zimmer, detectable because your chair shakes when the music plays) lacks the pristine transcendence of the original Vangelis score. The Blade Runner 2049 screenplay (co-written by Logan screenwriter Michael Green and a returning Fancher) doesn’t have the thematic or even structural clarity of its predecessor. Too many of its scenes seem invented as vehicles for cool images, without the latter also informing the former. Much of cinema’s greatest sci-fi leans heavily on visuals for its storytelling, of course — Tarkovsky’s Stalker, Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, Blade Runner itself. But all the senses need to work in tandem, and in Blade Runner 2049 they fall out of sync. And it’s the thematic material that suffers.
-
I posted up the soundtrack release details. https://forum.watmm.com/topic/94034-hans-zimmer-benjamin-wallfisch-blade-runner-2049/?p=2581168
-
I think you can be confident in that.
-
It's even on the front page of the Guardian tomorrow. Either this is a good film or after a very poor year for Hollywood (sales-wise), studios are paying for this to be a hit. Mmm. I'm highly suspicious of someone gushing over a film so completely. Lots of these early reviews are just press/PR paid for by film studios. In addition, this reviewer is usually quite balanced in his opinion so why he has gone so overboard with this is mystifying. nah peter bradshaw is a good critic he hits the nail on the head a lot of the time. there used to be a weekly show called the guardian film show which sadly stopped but he was great on that he also quite readily tears films apart also I'm waiting for mark Kermode to weigh in. I'm sure he's already seen it. If it gets the thumbs-up from him then I'll probably go see it.
-
I really don't know what to believe with all these gushing reviews. Time after time, I've seen this happen only for a week or so to pass, things calm down a bit and folks are like, "Yeah, it's good. But...."
-
Have we reached peak Hans Zimmer? https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2017/sep/18/hans-zimmer-blade-runner-2049-film-composer
-
Empire Magazine. 5 Stars too. They don't think much of Jared Leto though. http://www.empireonline.com/movies/blade-runner-2049/review/
-
Wired Magazine also seem to have got caught up in the heat of the moment. I wonder what normal folk will make of it? People who actually pay to see it. https://www.wired.com/story/blade-runner-2049-review
-
Peter Bradshaw, Guardian Newspaper Review (5 Stars) Mmm. I'm highly suspicious of someone gushing over a film so completely. Lots of these early reviews are just press/PR paid for by film studios. In addition, this reviewer is usually quite balanced in his opinion so why he has gone so overboard with this is mystifying.
-
Trish Keenan (of Broadcast) passes away
fumi replied to jeremymacgregor87's topic in Music Discussion
Happy Birthday, Trish. https://nosdam.bandcamp.com/track/t-r-i-s-h
