• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About boojam

  • Rank
    Council Member
  • Birthday 10/25/1940

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. The shorts for Blade Runner 2049 at the Warner site on YouTube. These are teasers as well as connectors , interesting stuff. BLADE RUNNER 2049 - "2036: Nexus Dawn" Short BLADE RUNNER 2049 - "2048: Nowhere to Run" Short BLADE RUNNER 2049 - "Black Out 2022" Anime Short I am not so taken with the Anime one, seems some Japanese-anime-think about what characters are where. Also seems the story is a hyped compared to what may have happened even tho we don't know the details of what happened. 2022 seems imply that the Replicant Underground was already in place , that's ok, but an elaboration about how that got to be would have been better. The 2036 story seems to be set too close 2049 , in my mind it should have put it at 2030. The 2048 story is a segue to the very first sequence in the film. That is the most interesting one. From the movie the implication is that Freysa and Sapper are/were members of the Replicant Underground with the snap to put together a complex scheme to hide and keep secret Dr. Ana Stelline. That sounds very interesting. Sapper and Freysa were apparently off planet colony replicants , who came back to Earth and where ready to execute (with Deckard and Rachel) the 'Stelline secret' in 2020! That seemed a more interesting story than elaborating K's love life! I know flashbacks are considered taboo in movie making, but it does work at times. It's like BR2049 had a 'bible' , maybe we will see it.
  2. I can see the flaws and seams, but , for me , it comes across as a better story than the first Blade Runner. It does a clever job of picking elements from the first film and developing. I found the film engaging enough that the length didn't bother me. Gee I remember loving 3 hour , plus , movies back when they had road shows. They did have intermissions then , of course exhibitors would not go for that these days. I thought the length could have been used for more back story , there seems to be a very interesting one of how Deckard and Rachel and 'rebel' androids set the 'secret' , plus there is an 'android' underground moving is sophisticated ways that is never explained. I still love the original Blade Runner too. Man I grew up in the 1950's watching Queen of Outer Space and Plan 9 From Other Space and god know how many other Z films... it's a relief to see serious SF films in the last decade , recently Ex Machina , Predestination, The Martian, Interstellar, Gravity ... and this film.
  3. I wonder if was Denis Villeneuve or producer Scott who wanted it to sound more 'Vangelis' like? It mostly does not sound Vangelis like. I think the score is kind of OK enough, don't understand some of the overt percussion or at least the number of amps they were played at. Was this more Wallfisch than Zimmer? The score seemed to have a kind of 'hasty' feel to it , as if done in a short amount of time. I hope the Jóhann Jóhannsson score is released some day. Interesting there is a small clip of Johannsson's score on the web, gee that is even more strident than what they have. It's funny listening to the score for Arrival it seemed Johannsson would have been a good choice for BR2. I can't really figure out what they were after with this score for BR2. Vangelis was asked in 2016 if he was scoring Blade Runner 2049 and he said he didn't want to, I wonder if he was even asked?
  4. I like that! Both Deckard and Wallace knew it , so twisty!
  5. if Wallace had a video of Rachel why didn't he know that?
  6. They did use a very short piece of video from the first when Deckard is talking to Wallace, but further in that scene they have a 're-created' Rachel. I am sure they took her face from the original film, but , now that I have seen it twice, the CGI for Sean Young's face is uncanny. Here is a story about it:
  7. I see, had to go back an read all those entries, I had to synthesize those to see it. This seems an important plot point , but very subtle, have not seem much talk about it. Had you read the 'leaked' info about Sean Young having come to New York to film secret scenes? That was not until like only a few days before the film opened. Seems she signed a non disclosure agreement and stuck to covering it.* Her involvement is still a bit mysterious . I understand she was a coach for the stand-in, but there is a hint she did ADR for the voice, but that still not clear. Two things, there is a short video clip of Young from the first film , that probably legally warrants a credit, also the CGI** image of her may be also , now days, means , I thing, a legal commitment to a credit. (I went and looked on IMDB at Rogue One to see if Peter Cushing and Carrie Fisher get credit , and they do.I think there are rules these days on 'image' use and am guessing that Cushing's estate and Fisher got paid , something.) *Edward James Olmos had also signed a non disclosure , but someone leaked his appearance and he seemed irritated about it but confirmed that he would be in the film. It was interesting that it was Olmos who insisted that he not speak 'City-Speak' in his appearance ... I think only fans of the first film would know about that.) ** By the by that CGI 'replacement' image on the stand in was incredible! Much better than they did for Rogue One and better than they did for Lena Headey's 'walk'.
  8. I agree, I grew tired of the "Westworld Theme Park' ... ground hog day looping, on the other hand the story within the story about Delos INC. I thought was fascinating. The problem , as I see it, with season 2 is they are going to have start tap dancing , tho they could prove me wrong with a lot of imagination. I remember when watching the first season of Mr. Robot , I thought, well that's that. Season 2 cued up an even denser and more involving story, I was amazed. That is a deep show!
  9. Passes beyond my understanding that a 'big' film has to have 2 multiplier at the box office before it makes a good profit. Marketing costs seem out of line for even the biggest films that are successes. I recall , not going looking for it, that Warner did made a profit on Blade Runner but it took a long time. Mainly by way of VHS and DVD and continued interest in the film. Probably the case here but we do live in the Age of Impatience.
  10. Man! I too missed that. That is clever. Also Steeline is a sub contractor for the Wallace Corp!
  11. It getting to be hard to figure the Academy these days. I never figured 'genre' films like Arrival , Max Max: Fury Road and The Martian, even with the expansion would get a nomination. Thinking that Blade Runner 2049 will, not sure what it will be up against. (I am not too taken with any nominations for best film in the last two years, not that any were bad films. Only film that stuck with me that I thought worthy in the last two years was The Big Short.)
  12. More I think about it the more I am impressed with Sylvia Hoeks ,Luv, performance, she steals every scene she is in. Wonder if an Oscar nod happens?
  13. There is a also a very short video clip in that same sequence of the real Sean Young (30 years ago) from the original film. There is also some indication that she did ADR for that scene, but that's not clear. She seems to have said something about the film since it's opening, but I can't find a thing where she has been asked about her involvement. One thing, her name appears by itself in the closing credits.
  14. Yeah that is odd, Deckard and the Android Underground go to a ton of trouble to keep secret and hide Ana Stelline. Could Ana reproduce ? With other Replicants? What's the big miracle if there is only ONE replicant-replicant child or replicant-human child (the later is more poignant , to me). Only one and no more? A lot of fixing need here. Actually we get almost zero back story on the 'rebel replicants' even in the three added interim features on YouTube.
  15. As I walked out of this film I had a this ‘story thought’ that would have put another real twist in the plot. As K is about to leave Sapper's place and drone surveys the area and spots a small box , buried next to the tree. K recovers it and keeps it for himself. Later he finally opens it and finds two locks of hair. He has them examined. One belongs to a woman but has serial numbers on it, the other to a child with no numbers at all. Rest of the plot the same. Later K encounters , per the film, not Freysa, but a thirty years older Rachel, now the leader of the underground Replicants. The kicker being that she and Deckard separated, on purpose, 30 years ago , to keep the secret and hide their daughter, she and Deckard can never see one another again. Just saying.