Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

I was not very pleased when I found out they were making a sequel of Blade Runner. I hate the trend of "out of time" sequels that Hollywood has been following the last couple of years. They usually lack originality and live solely from nostalgia effect. So, when I heard Blade Runner, one of the most perfect, mind challenging, revolutionary Sci-Fi films of all time was getting in the train, I was obviously pissed.
I went to see it today, out of curiosity and, while it's not horrible, it suffers from every problem I feared.

The atmosphere and soundtrack, are recovered (or at least they try to) from the original, which alone builds the movie. It goes to show how incredibly strong the source material is, if it can be used so many years later and still have the same effect.
The rest is subpar, to say the least. The acting is quite bad (I'm glad Jared Leto didn't have more screen time, gosh, he's horrible), the script is laughable and they make the mistake of explaining and make really clear every single philosophical question the original had put, as if the audiences were stupid kids who couldn't think for themselves...
We don't have strong villains like Roy, nor strong existencial questions... Everything that made Blade Runner a special masterpiece is totally ignored.

What happened to the creative geniuses that worked in Hollywood for so many years? Do they really need to murder every single success from the past?

-

I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.

The Man Who Wasn't There (2001)
Director: Coen Brothers

This is stunning film work! Visually the use of shadows and high key lighting, silhouettes and Dutch angles, wide overhead shots and deep focus...are all here, and done to a level of sublime, that I've not often seen in a movie. This film should be used to train new directors in the art of lighting.

Billy Bob Thorton was one of the coolest-odd characters to ever grace a film noir. Damn he made this movie...with his deliberately stoic acting and his taunt face of stone...Then there's his remorseful, yet downtrodden voice over narrative. The narrative itself, is a thing of beauty, both in the way the lines are delivered and by the pulp philosophy that rings truer then most films would ever aspire to say.

This is a slow paced film with long scene length, smooth and even editing between the scene transactions. The Coen brothers even have the genius to let the screen go black for a few seconds, in between major acts.

I thought this would be a 5/5 and be added to my top 10. But true to Coen's style they go a little over the top with the UFO lady and the ending goes a little loose and broad. Still I can't complain as that's what the Coen's are known for, and I guess that's what you call an auteur's stamp.

++

How do you complain about it lacking originality while also complaining that it doesn't do the exact same things that the original does? I thought it asked a good existential question in having...



...and building from there instead of merely recycling the original's exact themes. I find it's better to think about what it does differently to its source and why rather than bristle at its daring to exist at all. At the very least, I'm glad that it's proving divisive instead of just blandly agreeable or disagreeable - that was definitely a problem that I had with Arrival, for instance.

Anyway...

Blade Runner 2049 -

Strong review to follow.

To be fair, you have to have a fairly high IQ to understand MovieForums.com.

Blade Runner (1982)

Was that a first time watch Yam? Which version did you watch?