Page 56 of 56

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:25 pm
by Robbo-92
I'm watching Blade Runner for the first time right now, 50 minutes in and it's decent enough but I don't think I'll be one of the people saying its one of the sci fi films of all time. Very interesting setting though.

Edit, now finished. Overall it's ok but I can't say I've got any burning desire to rush out and see Blade Runner 2049.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:48 pm
by fluffyKittan
Robbo-92 wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:25 pm
I'm watching Blade Runner for the first time right now, 50 minutes in and it's decent enough but I don't think I'll be one of the people saying its one of the sci fi films of all time. Very interesting setting though.

Edit, now finished. Overall it's ok but I can't say I've got any burning desire to rush out and see Blade Runner 2049.
Blade Runner is a noir

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2017 2:01 pm
by danbish
At the risk of alienating everyone here, I watched Blade runner for the first time last Saturday and I ended up turning it off about an hour into it - I thought it was rubbish. I really don't get why its got the cult following it has.

As such, I never went to see the sequel after all.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:01 am
by OrangeRakoon
danbish wrote:
Sat Oct 14, 2017 2:01 pm
At the risk of alienating everyone here, I watched Blade runner for the first time last Saturday and I ended up turning it off about an hour into it - I thought it was rubbish.
It's okay to be wrong
fluffyKittan wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:48 pm
Blade Runner is a noir
It is both noir and sci-fi

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 1:32 pm
by D.J
I must admit, i haven't seen Blade Runner, it's just one of those films i've never gotten around to seeing.

It does seem to be something of a marmite movie from what i've heard though.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:49 pm
by Shio hime
It's not really like marmite. You either understand the historical significance and the effect it had on cinema, or you don't.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 5:55 pm
by D.J
Shio hime wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:49 pm
You either understand the historical significance and the effect it had on cinema, or you don't.
The Shining is also revered in a similar fashion, didn't stop me hating it though.

Will still likely try and see Blade Runner at some point, if only out of sheer curiosity.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:21 pm
by Shio hime
Disliking a film and a film being rubbish are not equivalent.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:18 am
by Kriken
Saw Blade Runner 2049 last night. So damn good.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:13 pm
by Rik
I also saw Blade Runner the other day, was pretty sick. Aesthetic and sound was fantastic, liked the focus on Gosling rather than Ford for most of the film too. If anything I think it's after Ford was introduced that it slumped a little, the ending felt a little bit limp tbh.
I was expecting K to "die for the right cause" by claiming to be the child then killing/destroying himself so that Deckard could go free and Wallace would stop looking for the child, would've had more impact than just a generic end-of-film fight in the rain.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:58 pm
by Shio hime
Deckard wasn't in the original script which would probably explain why the film felt quite different after he turned up.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:27 pm
by Edd
Watched Happy Death Day last night and it was actually p.good.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:52 am
by OrangeRakoon
Rik wrote:
Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:13 pm
I also saw Blade Runner the other day, was pretty sick. Aesthetic and sound was fantastic, liked the focus on Gosling rather than Ford for most of the film too. If anything I think it's after Ford was introduced that it slumped a little, the ending felt a little bit limp tbh.
I was expecting K to "die for the right cause" by claiming to be the child then killing/destroying himself so that Deckard could go free and Wallace would stop looking for the child, would've had more impact than just a generic end-of-film fight in the rain.
You didn't find it impactful that it ended with K dying on the steps while Deckard met his long-lost child?

The fight wasn't just a generic end-of-film fight either, it had more to it. Luv stabbing K in the stomach then kissing him and leaving him for dead was her directly copying Wallace's killing of the newborn replicant earlier in the film. She was a great character who could be seen to also be struggling with her identity and sense of self/life throughout

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:37 pm
by Rik
I guess I expected/hoped for more of a twist in the tail, whole film up until that point had been brilliant with how it leads you on to think one thing then turns it on its head (K is the child, no wait it's the memory maker;
Joi really is breaking her programming and loves K, no wait the AI is just perfect at telling what people want to hear etc.)
. Then in the final act K is told to go and kill Deckard but fairly obviously is going to free him instead somehow. Impactful was maybe the wrong choice of words, the end result is still emotional, just not as bold/surprising in how it gets there.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:24 pm
by Shio hime
I thought the idea of the end was when the leader of the resistance says that it's good to die for the cause she means Deckard and instead he chooses to sacrifice himself so that Deckard can continue to live; as he thinks of Deckard like a father. Hence Deckard's question of "What am I to you?" K wanted to believe he was the child and even after he knows that he isn't he continues in his delusion exhibiting the typical childish nature of a replicant. Love's taunt of "I'm the best" after fighting K is another reference to the childish oneupmanship the replicants exhibit throughout the film and the original.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:43 pm
by OrangeRakoon
I don't think he clung to the idea of being a the child or treating Deckard like a father. K (and the audience) were led to believe that being the child and being "born" was what made him special and more "alive", but then he gets hit by the twist. The resistance leader tells him that it's not who you are that defines you though, but the cause you take up. K realises that it wasn't thinking he was the child that made him truly alive- after all he still had those emotions and went off-baseline when it wasn't true. It was taking up the cause that made him alive. Dying for it was the ultimate validation of self.

Luv is definitely distracted by oneupmanship and wanting to prove she is the best, and she is definitely child like - imitating Wallace whilst also being conflicted in her feelings towards other replicants. I think she's also seeking validation in a similar way to K, but K finds it from himself which is why he wins out.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:11 pm
by Shio hime
If it was the cause that mattered to K his subsequent actions aren't in keeping with that. He would be more valuable to the cause alive than Deckard is. If he was truly taking up the banner he would have left Deckard to drown as he was instructed. Nexus-9s are not supposed to be able to disobey, at all, so K choosing not to kill Deckard is not in keeping with his fundamentals as a replicant. If he felt no attachment to Deckard why would he let him live? Deckard's merely being alive jeopardises the cause. If K had no emotional attachment to Deckard he would have done what he was sent to do, but he spares him because he had built Deckard up in his mind to be his father and even after the reveal that he isn't still has an emotional attachment to him.

K's deviation from baseline was his acquisition of a soul, something alluded to in the film by his boss. He drifts because he starts to believe in having his own agency and making his own decisions.

I also didn't believe for very long that K could be the child, it was way too convenient for the narrative and would have made for a worse film. So I kind of metagamed the film's narrative to get to the right answer way before the reveal. It's possible that it wasn't an accident that he was the one with the implanted memory and also the person sent to deal with Sapper and ends up entangled.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 8:27 am
by ZeroJones
Saw Fast & Furious 8 last night. It was good fun, not quite as good as the previous one, but Jason Statham stole the show with an excellent action/comedic turn. Good lad.

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 7:39 pm
by SupaWaluigi
Thor Ragnarok was brilliant, love that it’s not as serious as the previous two Thor films, as I always felt that was what held them back. Now though, it’s another very funny Marvel film, that begins to compete with Guardians as best Cosmic Marvel Film

Re: Film Thread

Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:28 am
by ZeroJones
Thor Ragnarok > GotG 2 by a distance you can measure in light years.

Accidentally saw Justice League with my wife yesterday (yes, really: we wanted to see Paddington 2). It's just as CGI-heavy as all the other DC films (with the exception of Wonder Woman - hooray for practical effects where possible!) and does suffer from having to set up a few people (Cyborg will be better next time, f'r example) but it's got a sense of fun.