Its really nice, you wont be disappointed.
I didn't like the first movie tho, even tho the book is probably one of my favorites.
I have seen it and discussed it at length in other forums. I also build/collect prop replicas and have discussed the props in the film a lot as well.
Blade Runner 2049 is a worthy successor to the original. The story is engaging. The imagery is good and the cinematographer will probably get an Oscar for it. It is the most important movie for sci-fi lovers this year.
You should go and see it!
But I would not raise it up and say that it is a masterpiece. I think some points could have been told better or differently only to speed it up. It is 2h 44min long -- longer than it needs to be.
I think that the theatrical release could well have been shorter without being worse - and then they could have released an extended edition on BluRay/DVD later. To compare, the original was just under two hours - and people think that it is too slow and too long.
Don't watch any trailers or read any reviews. There are much too many spoilers out there.
For instance, I did not read the review on Ars Technica until after I had seen the movie, but it made me angry. Reviewers had got a list of things that they had been asked not to divulge. But that review contained almost everything else that happened in the movie. And that is far from the only one that I have seen that have contained a lot of spoilers.
There are three official short prequel films to Blade Runner 2049.
There are three official short prequel films to Blade Runner 2049.
The problem when trying to remain spoiler-free is that most of the uploads of these contain images from the feature film before or after.
I have posted these here, with a starting time where they actually start. Do not rewind to the beginning or you will see a short trailer for the feature film.
1. Black Out 2022 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRWiGZSJ7OU). (only spoiler-free upload I've found)
2. 2036: Nexus Dawn (https://youtu.be/UgsS3nhRRzQ?t=58s)
3. 2048: Nowhere to Run (https://youtu.be/aZ9Os8cP_gg?t=43s).
Seen last saturday in 3D and I would highly recommend this very version. It doesn't make objects fly to your nose, rather it makes everything in perspective. It was amazing.
I have seen it. It was a GREAT movie, great cyberpunk atmosphere. Also really great music that is different from other music in that genre.
However... it left me with more questions then answers.
he is definitely a human in the book which it was based on: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.
I grew up on the voice-over version ... so for me that feels like the true version, even if the voice-over is a bit cringey at times. In that movie, it is not spelled out that Deckard is a replicant, and I always assumed that he was a human. According to the voice-over, he was divorced, which may or may have not been an implanted memory.
I read the shooting script the other day. The script has voice-over at Roy Batty's death - which is where many people dislike it the most, and at the end in the spinner (car) when he is driving/flying away with Rachael.
But those are the only two moments where there is voice-over, and both voice-overs are different from the theatrical version.
There are many other small differences, mostly small nuances in dialogue. Roy Batty's death takes longer and is painful. He also does not hold a pigeon - it merely lands on his shoulder and then takes off at the moment of death.
In the script, the movie ends with Gaff showing up in a spinner in pursuit of Deckard and Rachael.
Edit: Found video of Batty's original death (https://youtu.be/7xBKrz0wdsM?t=39m32s) with the original voice-over.
While Deckard is a replicant in the Director's cut and the Final Cut, and where it is ambiguous in the shooting script and theatrical releases, he is definitely a human in the book which it was based on: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.
I do applaud the choice of keeping it unspecified in Blade Runner 2049.
he is definitely a human in the book which it was based on: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.
People who are interested should certainly read the book - classic mid-period **** paranoid conspiracy fantasy and altogether different from the movie in look, mood, and feel.
he is definitely a human in the book which it was based on: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.
People who are interested should certainly read the book - classic mid-period **** paranoid conspiracy fantasy and altogether different from the movie in look, mood, and feel.
Even though I am genuinely intrigued by the genre as I truly believe we are headed towards a cyberpunk world, most of the books left me disappointed so far: shallow plots, shallow character development. I always think books are BETTER then movies that are based on those books. But for cyberpunk I have yet to find really great literature, but perhaps I just haven't read enough of it.
he is definitely a human in the book which it was based on: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.
People who are interested should certainly read the book - classic mid-period **** paranoid conspiracy fantasy and altogether different from the movie in look, mood, and feel.
Even though I am genuinely intrigued by the genre as I truly believe we are headed towards a cyberpunk world, most of the books left me disappointed so far: shallow plots, shallow character development. I always think books are BETTER then movies that are based on those books. But for cyberpunk I have yet to find really great literature, but perhaps I just haven't read enough of it.
Don't make this out as me attacking you because it's not, but if you don't see it out there you should make some if you have time. Could be fun
he is definitely a human in the book which it was based on: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.
People who are interested should certainly read the book - classic mid-period **** paranoid conspiracy fantasy and altogether different from the movie in look, mood, and feel.
Even though I am genuinely intrigued by the genre as I truly believe we are headed towards a cyberpunk world, most of the books left me disappointed so far: shallow plots, shallow character development. I always think books are BETTER then movies that are based on those books. But for cyberpunk I have yet to find really great literature, but perhaps I just haven't read enough of it.
Don't make this out as me attacking you because it's not, but if you don't see it out there you should make some if you have time. Could be fun
What are you saying.. that I should MAKE / WRITE cyberpunk basically?
Even though I am genuinely intrigued by the genre as I truly believe we are headed towards a cyberpunk world,
most of the books left me disappointed so far: shallow plots, shallow character development.
I find Harrison Ford really annoying as an actor so I'm only luke warm on the original Blade Runner.I think he was good at playing a troubled man in Blade Runner. Pretty much down on his luck, probably depressed. Once you are in that mindset, the way he delivers the voice-over makes sense.
I just pre-ordered BladeRunner 2049 on UHD BluRay, the limited edition with whisky glasses. Bought it for the whisky glasses - shaped like those Deckard drank from in the original movie. I don't have a UHD-capable BluRay player (yet).I find Harrison Ford really annoying as an actor so I'm only luke warm on the original Blade Runner.I think he was good at playing a troubled man in Blade Runner. Pretty much down on his luck, probably depressed. Once you are in that mindset, the way he delivers the voice-over makes sense.
At the end does he find a way out of his misery, through his love with Rachael.
he is definitely a human in the book which it was based on: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.
People who are interested should certainly read the book - classic mid-period **** paranoid conspiracy fantasy and altogether different from the movie in look, mood, and feel.
Even though I am genuinely intrigued by the genre as I truly believe we are headed towards a cyberpunk world, most of the books left me disappointed so far: shallow plots, shallow character development. I always think books are BETTER then movies that are based on those books. But for cyberpunk I have yet to find really great literature, but perhaps I just haven't read enough of it.
Don't make this out as me attacking you because it's not, but if you don't see it out there you should make some if you have time. Could be fun
What are you saying.. that I should MAKE / WRITE cyberpunk basically?
Yea, totally. If you're worried no one will read it, I'm down. I'll be your first fan
Even though I am genuinely intrigued by the genre as I truly believe we are headed towards a cyberpunk world,
most of the books left me disappointed so far: shallow plots, shallow character development.
Cyberpunk and steampunk are both fascinating literary styling/function/concept milieus that have never seemed to gel properly entirely on their own, either on the page or on the screen.
I don't think that I have ever read a really great book that is commonly placed in either genre, partly because of what you mentioned above, but mostly because science fiction has already "been there and done that" so many times, and so much better. There are literally hundreds of books that have sat on the science fiction shelves for decades that were in fact, although not in name, exemplars of these "new" genres. Film, which might seem to be a more friendly vehicle, has generally been disappointing, too, although there have been some successes.
The space faring voyager landing on the planet with a slightly pre- or post-Industrial Revolution level of technology has been a stock in trade since the beginning. Also, for me personally, the fact that magic is so prevalent in mainstream steampunk often makes it boring, because it usually seems like it is a plot crutch that weakens the story rather than strengthens it. One successful but very strange advanced example might be “Perdido Street Station” by Mieville.
If I had to pick a single favorite steampunk book, it would probably be “Leviathan” by Westerfeld because he managed to weave the conceptualization of a steampunk into a larger narrative. Much more interesting to me is something like Alastair Reynolds’ “Terminal World” with its “technology gradients” wherein there is a “steampunk” band among numerous others.
Drawing a line between cyberpunk and science fiction is very difficult, if not impossible. Almost as soon as the idea of humanoid robots was introduced, the merging and intermingling of meat intelligence and machine intelligence has been a very common theme, or at least undercurrent, of many, if not most, stories set in the future. Do the Terminator and Matrix movies fall inside or outside of this category?
Picking my favorite book, commonly considered as a mainstay in this genre, I would probably select “Snow Crash” by Stephenson, but which is already showing its age. Somewhat tangential but far more advanced, I would again give a nod to Reynolds and his magnificent “Revelation Space” where all the lines are blurred, and additionally there is a huge ancient mysterious non-living “system” which has ill intentions towards pretty much all living intelligence.
And it is hard to believe that this is almost 20 years old now:
https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2/ (https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2/)
I just pre-ordered BladeRunner 2049 on UHD BluRay, the limited edition with whisky glasses. Bought it for the whisky glasses - shaped like those Deckard drank from in the original movie. I don't have a UHD-capable BluRay player (yet).I find Harrison Ford really annoying as an actor so I'm only luke warm on the original Blade Runner.I think he was good at playing a troubled man in Blade Runner. Pretty much down on his luck, probably depressed. Once you are in that mindset, the way he delivers the voice-over makes sense.
At the end does he find a way out of his misery, through his love with Rachael.
When you said whiskey glasses, for some reason I thought glasses that enabled to simulate how you would see when you were drunk (inaccurately.)
SF books with a "cyberpunk" or post-apocalyptic dystopian technological society element, what would it be?
A few decades ago we talked about "hard" science fiction = space travel, aliens, very high technology versus "soft" science fiction which was set in the future but where the real emphasis was psychological and/or social, often with less technology involved.No, I think you got that wrong.