Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Filehaus
Recent
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Blade Runner 2049 Reaction! (Patreon)

Published:
2025-04-24 17:00:09
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Files

Previews only

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

Full Reaction You can either stream the Full reaction below using the embedded video player, otherwise you can click the 'Download' button which will take you directly to Google Drive, enabling you to save the video to your computer instead. You must provide your own footage to watch alongside the full reactions.

Comments

Thomas Corp

Bringing us to one of the biggest strengths of the film: the complete refusal to answer questions about Deckard being human or replicant. This was one of the biggest fears when this first got announced. My brother, though not as entrenched in the lore as others, agreed with my assessment that any answer would have pissed everyone off. You expressed loving the refusal to answer as well, which was great. It’s very lovely how the only real parts of the film that even touch on it are Wallace’s ponderance of the riddle, and a line from Gaff that intimates that he at least feels that Deckard is a replicant. Speaking of Gaff: Glad to see that you were not expecting the cameo from Edward James Olmos. Word came my way before seeing this about Gaff having the scene. Watching this again for your reaction, I took the page out of your book and said, “So say we all.” at the end of his scene. He maintains his proclivity for Origami. The other casting bit that I loved your reaction too was Lennie James. It gave me a reaction during my rewatching of the film when he appeared, as I said, “Oh my God, I forgot that he was in this!” LOVE how you clocked the voice right before he turned around. You say how you like his other roles better than his slimeball of a character here, and that makes me ponder how K would have gone up against him if he was going through the clear. Tis great that there is the subversion of the expectations with the whole chosen one deal, where it is Ana who is the fated child, not K. Love how it stands out on a rewatch that Deckard never refers to his kid by any gender specific pronoun, only referring to his kid by saying words like “child”. K, likewise, never uses any specific pronouns either, thus Deckard never has reason to correct K. Subtle enough in the first viewing that one may not even think much of it, yet such a big piece of foreshadowing in rewatches. You also clocked Ana evading the one question. My aunt, rest her soul, would have loved you with that, as she always jumped on avoidance of answering questions like how you clocked Ana doing that. Speaking of my aunt, going back to how you mentioned how your mom doesn’t get too much name representation, and Supernatural gave you a rotten case of that, I got reminded that my aunt gets the nice name representation in Blade Runner with Rachael, with that specific spelling. The question of Ana being sick, that is likely real, given her genetic makeup of being a child between either a human and replicant, or two replicants. Loved your reaction to Deckard rejecting the final temptation of the false Rachael. Likewise, great reaction to the final replicant tussle. Yes, poor Deckard at the end, chained up, wanting to yell “UNLOCK ME!” so he doesn’t drown. And it culminated in the final act of K, where he exhibited his own agency, even at the cost of his own life. He cares far more for other lives, rather than his own. And allowing a father to be able to meet his daughter, is very much a cause worthy of dying for, and is a very human thing to do. And you can tell that he takes succor in that as he feels that his life, all that he is, melts away, like... a snowflake when it hits flesh. Time to die. And of course, they play the famous Tears in Rain cue for that scene, making grown men across the world sob. Yeah, this film is a piece of art, like you said. Gained two Oscars. One for the visual effects. The other Oscar is what you have to thank for this film being so gorgeous. That is the cinematography from the legendary Roger Deakins. Roger being one of the best cinematographers, if not the best cinematographer working today, and just one of the best, period. He’s up there with the likes of Freddie Young. Which made it ABSURDLY frustrating that prior to this film, even with thirteen nominations, he failed to win an Oscar. (Some years did have some pretty stiff competition to be clear.) He was nominated for this, and both passionate film fans and professional film critics more or less agreed that if he lost again, then they would burn some shit. I got in on it myself, swearing to God that if Roger lost the Oscar for this film, then I would go out and set fire to every vhs copy of Shakespeare in Love that I could get my hands on. And I MEANT IT! My brother was simpatico with that as he flat out drools over the gorgeous cinematography, to the point that he bought a 4K player just for this. He also bought the first film too, called me up to verify which cut of the film to get. Roger thankfully did win; I let out a huge “YES!!!” when it happened. Leading to the selling point that I said to people who had yet to see the film, which was, “The film has! Oscar! Winning! Cinematography! From! Academy! Award! Winner! Roger! Deakins! GodDAMN IT, DOES IT FEEL SO GOOD TO FINALLY BE ABLE TO SAY THAT!!!” Most amusing to hear you say that the orange in the Vegas scene was just a wee bit too much, even for you. There are some Lynchian overtones to the scenes, yes. Just a very beautiful reaction, Jess, and I’m very happy that you loved the film as you did.

Ryan

This movie crashed and burned at the box office, mainly because the marketing crew was way too confident that the franchise name alone would bring people in. You know, the one that's just a single other movie from decades ago which didn't even do that well itself. And I'm so profoundly grateful that it didn't end Denis Villeneuve's shots at doing big budget sci-fi and we got his Dune movies. And apparently it's gotten so much good word of mouth by the few people who did see it that Amazon is now doing a whole series about Michelle Yeoh as a hero Replicant, with Ridley himself back on board. Sometimes the little guy can get a win. The first great idea here is making our new protagonist well aware that he's a Replicant. You're not going to beat the first film's portrayal of that ambiguity, so just go in a totally new direction. Plus, I don't want to think about what dreaming about a unicorn would do to Joe after the effect that regular horses had on him. Our introduction to him is instantly iconic with big thanks to the support of Dave Bautista. At this time he was known purely as Drax outside of wrestling, and no one saw this kind of acting skill coming from him, leading to a ton of comments that wished he had more screen time. Well, that's kind of what the rest of his career is for. Robin Wright's casting is a neat bit of meta misdirection, since her position as Joe's boss plus most people these days thinking of her mainly as Claire Underwood probably led to a lot of assumptions that she'd turn out to be a bad guy. And while she can get a little overbearing in wishing Replicants wouldn't think for themselves and just respond to every order with "As you wish," she ultimately does turn out to be generally well-meaning in a way that makes sense with what we've seen and leaves us grieving her loss. And I have to note David Dastmalchian doing quite a lot with a little screentime; it's been a lot of fun to gradually start noticing him in these little roles, then they got bigger, and last year he got his first ever lead which turned out great. There is one weak link in the cast with Jared Leto, the guy who's managed to appear in one of the worst movies of both Marvel and DC and is such a gigantic asshole to boot that I have no idea why anyone hires him anymore. Thankfully he's only in two scenes so we're able to focus on the far superior Luv as the main villain. Sylvia Hoeks is currently starring in biopics of both Florence Nightingale and Anna Nicole Smith; you try to make sense of that because I'm too tired. But in the meantime she kicks so much ass here in all senses. So, the story itself. I went into this not really expecting much in the way of big reaction moments because it's not really that kind of movie, though Gaff's entrance and the delayed response to the child being a girl were a lot of fun. I think it was a mistake to put Harrison in the ads at all, which could only lead to frustration when he only shows up after a point that a lot of entire movies have ended. What's next, giving away that he turns into some kind of red monster in a movie's last few minutes? But it's worth the wait, as it's clear that unlike certain other major roles of his, he still has a lot of affection for Deckard and was happy to continue his story. There's some concern that Rachael's role here could have come off like fridging, but I'm not too bothered by it since she only had four years anyway (among all the ambiguities of the first film's various editions, one part everyone pretty much agrees on is her unlimited lifespan isn't canon), and how much of a life can anyone really have in this version of the future? It's too bad she won't live, but then again who does? I was grumbling a little when it looked like Joe would be their kid, since it seemed way too pat and obvious, not to mention insanely coincidental that he'd stumble onto all this from a totally unrelated direction. So I was very happy when we hit that twist. Which leads into the climax, and it was so insanely ballsy to hinge the whole meaning and subtext of Deckard's confrontation with Wallace on a tiny detail from a decades-old movie that a lot of people might not have even noticed at the time. See, Rachael's eyes were brown, just like the new model here (and how about that deepfake, scarily good stuff there). Wallace cracked the problem, and Deckard could have had a happy life with this new version of her. But instead he lies that there's a physical difference, counting on Wallace being such an impulsive dick that he'd just kill her rather than check for himself. So Wallace is totally screwed and will never figure things out, and Deckard may have sacrificed any more of a life with Rachael but at least gets to connect with his daughter. It's far from a niche opinion that this movie tops the first one, which is saying quite a lot given how beloved it's become as a sci-fi classic. And it's a bit staggering how many great careers could have been killed by its flopping, but somehow we ended up with everyone where they are now. It's always a treat to see someone discover it.

Ryan
>>171977863

One of the best cases ever of dodging pronouns to conceal a character's gender without making it obvious. Like, even if I didn't know Talia al-Ghul was a thing, everyone just calling her "the child" might as well have been shouting she was a girl. Or the worst I've ever seen, Jack in Mass Effect 2. Tommy Lee Jones was so great in that movie, shame he lost the Oscar to Ralph Fiennes, which I feel completely confident saying without looking anything up.

Thomas Corp
>>172113238

Like I said, I would have loved to have seen this in the theater. I was planning to see it with my one friend, though unfortunately, our schedules didn’t mesh right away, and when they did, box office numbers were poor enough that the film was pulled from the theater. My brother and sister in-law likewise couldn’t see it right away. The day they went, every conceivable technical issue happened causing them to leave, and when they tried again, it was gone. This and Dial of Destiny suffered from the thought that just the name would get the younger audience into the the theater. Yes, thankfully this did not kill Villeneuve’s career, and from the sound of it, the film itself is a big reason why he got hired for Dune. Since one isn’t topping the first film’s ambiguity with Deckard, yeah, the film wisely just says within the first scene that K is a replicant. I remember pondering that possibility as the trailers kept that under wraps. And now the upcoming Amazon show, looking forward to that, is openly advertising Michelle as a replicant, so that sounds exciting. Bautista is amazing in his scene, and you get the complaints that he’s gotten somewhat pigeonholed as Drax. My perception of Robin shows my age as my default image of her is Buttercup, so I avoided the red herring thing that they counted on with House of Cards. (And I guess Jenny as people really seem to love hating Jenny, and I’m always puzzled by the vitriol.) She is well-meaning in a way that makes sense as you say. Love how they don’t overtly spell out that Joshi is surreptitiously telling K to run and warning him how much time he has before the heat’s on him. David Dastmalchian’s career rise is fantastic; we need him in more lead roles following his fantastic lead performance last year. Jared Leto is the weak link of the cast. Setting aside behind-the-scenes trouble with him, he’s not even bad in this, though his presence is very jarring. Thankfully, as you note, he only shows up briefly, letting Luv shine so very brightly as our heavy of the film. Another occasion where it’s a delight that Jess says one of her favorites of a film or show is the villain, and a damn good villain at that. Making sense out of the two projects that Sylvia is in, uh, it’s indicative of her range? Given the slow burn, there wouldn’t be the greatest amount of big reaction moments, and whilst the big reaction moments that Jess has are great, a film like this, you come for what Jess has to say about the film. Her reaction to Gaff and the revelation of Ana’s parentage were great moments. As I mentioned, I forgot about Lennie James being in this, so when I caught him when rewatching, I knew Jess would love him in his one big scene. I get that you want to include Harrison in the trailers to hook the older audience/fandom. Man, how amazing it would have been if you went into this not knowing if you’d see him as Deckard. (And I had heard about the Captain America film giving the red rage monster game away in the similar fashion.) Frustration about that aside, Harrison delivers as the older Deckard. The concern of fridging Rachael only really connects to the theatrical cut as that was the only version of the three cuts that has the happy ending. The other two cuts having the downbeat and uncertain endings that fits like a glove. So, I too did not see it as fridging. Plus, like you said, the four years, meaning that it’s too bad she didn’t live. But then again, who does? Didn’t hate the idea of K being Deckard and Rachael’s child, though it was feeling highly contrived in that though not impossible, the sheer coincidence would have been terribly improbable, and it would have stretched suspension of disbelief to its breaking point, hence I don’t begrudge the grumbling. Nice that they did take the direction they did. The Sean Young deepfake is one of the more realistic looking ones that I’ve seen, the lighting helps too. I love Deckard rejecting the final temptation by counting on Wallace’s elephantine ego. More, they establish information about Rachael is largely lost due to the blackout, so Luv can’t exactly verify either way. A perfect “fuck you” from the hero to the villain. Like I said, my brother’s definitely on the side of loving this one better than the first. It is great to see more and more people discovering it.