5 reasons why BladeRunner 2049 sucked epic ass compared to the original.
Goodbye hollywood.
You came home drunk and told me my best days were behind me and my memories sucked!
Ridley Scott’s 1982 #BladeRunner is one of my Top 5 all time movies and one of my strongest artistic influences. My lips were licked electric at the prospect of another redefinition of the cyberpunk sci-fi genre. Tonight I paid my $22 and settled in to be transported away to have my mind blown all over again.
Three hours later I emerged with a furrowed brow and a strong and virile ANGER. It’s now transmutated into resolve. I hereby announce that this was the last time I will pay to watch a classic movie’s legacy taken from the bottle, watered down and served back to me in a plastic cup.
As I scuffed home, hands in pockets, searching in passer-by’s eyes for scraps of human decency (I didn’t find any, but I did freak out some of the Halloweeners), I arrived home and here I am at the keyboard with my beautiful click bait headline of… 5 reasons why BladeRunner 2049 sucked epic ass compared to the original:
1. It was gratuitously long because of lazy pacing and ugly editing. At just under 3 hours it dragged on like a night at Weinstein’s apartment. I wanted to go after the shower and the fondle, but was forced into staying for the drink and the wank into the pot plant.
2. The screenplay was functional instead of beautiful. Keep the camera still and create a balanced and beautiful shot. You’re BladeRunner ffs, not Star Wars. (And while I’m on Star Wars — fuck off with the spaceships. A vehicle in BladeRunner takes you down the street to another building — it doesn’t transport you to another metaphysical realm. Regardless of whether the strange land traversed symbolises lost innocence betrayed by the flesh of a woman or not — who cares! Keep the characters grounded).
3. The handful of good new ideas present were unfortunately lost to the drain, dashed away to make room for the banal and derivative sets that were more focussed on lighting than on weaving a rich texture of narrative detailing, history and culture. Nothing new was created in this film except a weird robot threesome (that, short from being a climax, did push me over the edge into uninstalling Siri as I was leaving the cinema).
4. Absent was the wrestle between the organic and the metallic; the heartbeats of light through the window, the moments of peaceful reflection. The original let the city b r e a t h e. The sequel strangulates the soul of the setting and casts you in the role of robot cyborg on your own quest to find beauty. This is the basic serving you get in everyday life, why do we want more of that? We go to the cinema to be awestruck with spendor — not heaved upon with post-modern AI angst. There’s plenty of meaning and soul in an aesthetically intruiging screenplay. Aim for that.
5. Too many scenes. There’s a principle in design called negative space — that is, what you leave out in equally as important as what you put in. Moreover, strategically leaving things out ENHANCES what’s there. Subtract the INCREDIBLE score and the movie would collapse like a rag doll, exposing sloppy structure and characters that barely believe their own story. I’ve heard friend chatter that the visuals and audio were great but the story lacked. I don’t write it off so simply -there are elements at play that fly under the radar if you’re not an anally retentive traditionalist like me — it wasn’t 2049’s story that sucked, it was the way it was put together that sucked.
This was the last roll of the dice for me. Hollywood has had years to listen to the punters, change their ways and start producing art again. I for one, will not stick around to be taken for granted and cop any more abuse.
So, like an aspiring east coast actress who chooses morality over fame, I’m outta here!
Goodbye hollywood.
