Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

FAILS WERE SYSTEMIC FOR HOLLYWOOD 1 – Family ‘heroic’ (child, daughter, father,) does not play in western civ since we are the least familial and clannish people. It feels ‘trivial’ and effeminate – not heroic. The plot would have been fine without all the sentimentality. Playing up the desire for replicant reproduction would have been enough plot – and heroic, deep, and meaningful. The personalization of the plot trivialized it. 2 – Bringing in (a) tie into Kurt Russell’s “Soldier” (trashlands), and (b) Harrison Ford’s ‘still around’ (desert lands), (c) child workers (Thunderdome and variations), were trite, forced, and took the audience out of context – just to appreciate the painting of the scenery rather than the story. The story was just fine as rainy urban noir, with the main story arc of the lead and the girl-bot all that was needed. Another shot breaker – the police offices were environmentally tight, leading to weak shots in tight scenes. 3 – Add the woke chick-washing and woke brown-washing, and the absence of ‘men-with-chests’ other than Bautista, Even casting Gosling was a men-without-chests casting. Not exactly Achilles – which is what the role demanded. Gosling, Armas, Hoeks, Wright, and Leto delivered flawless performances – given the absence of men with chests. It only stretched suspension of disbelief a little more. 4 – The end fight scene is as bad as the bridge scenes in the most recent tragic terminator – ridiculous, forced, and unbearably unbelievable. By the time you get there you just can’t wait to be over because it so staged, forced, unbelievable, and unrelated to the plot. 5 – That movie could have been produced for a 100M budget (or less) and made good money with customers paying for repeat showings. Keep the production quality. Cut it down. Focus the story. Fine. The market for those things is endless. But we’d need to recreate the studio system to produce them with regularity the way Blumhouse produces cheap fare audience eat up. The upmarket is there. It’s just not there for this ‘reach’. BR’82 is in my top five of all time. But I didn’t walk out of 2049. I did feel like it though. And I felt depressed at the lost opportunity before I reached the parking lot. VERDICT? (a) denis was a bad choice – he blew off the world the original movie had created (b) studio interference clearly evident – to try to get a blockbuster by ‘piling shit on’ (c) no one trusting the material and the actors to carry what could have and should have been a love story and noir. ALSO; almost guaranteed Denis will repeat his failure with 2048 on Dune for the exact same reasons. He can make a simple film look like Lawrence of Arabia, but he cannot make a Lawrence of Arabia or a blade runner. He doesn’t have the chops for it. you need balls of steel, dominance off the charts, OCD and IQ for those works of art and he doesn’t have them.

FAILS WERE SYSTEMIC FOR HOLLYWOOD 1 – Family ‘heroic’ (child, daughter, father,) does not play in western civ since we are the least familial and clannish people. It feels ‘trivial’ and effeminate – not heroic. The plot would have been fine without all the sentimentality. Playing up the desire for replicant reproduction would have been enough plot – and heroic, deep, and meaningful. The personalization of the plot trivialized it. 2 – Bringing in (a) tie into Kurt Russell’s “Soldier” (trashlands), and (b) Harrison Ford’s ‘still around’ (desert lands), (c) child workers (Thunderdome and variations), were trite, forced, and took the audience out of context – just to appreciate the painting of the scenery rather than the story. The story was just fine as rainy urban noir, with the main story arc of the lead and the girl-bot all that was needed. Another shot breaker – the police offices were environmentally tight, leading to weak shots in tight scenes. 3 – Add the woke chick-washing and woke brown-washing, and the absence of ‘men-with-chests’ other than Bautista, Even casting Gosling was a men-without-chests casting. Not exactly Achilles – which is what the role demanded. Gosling, Armas, Hoeks, Wright, and Leto delivered flawless performances – given the absence of men with chests. It only stretched suspension of disbelief a little more. 4 – The end fight scene is as bad as the bridge scenes in the most recent tragic terminator – ridiculous, forced, and unbearably unbelievable. By the time you get there you just can’t wait to be over because it so staged, forced, unbelievable, and unrelated to the plot. 5 – That movie could have been produced for a 100M budget (or less) and made good money with customers paying for repeat showings. Keep the production quality. Cut it down. Focus the story. Fine. The market for those things is endless. But we’d need to recreate the studio system to produce them with regularity the way Blumhouse produces cheap fare audience eat up. The upmarket is there. It’s just not there for this ‘reach’. BR’82 is in my top five of all time. But I didn’t walk out of 2049. I did feel like it though. And I felt depressed at the lost opportunity before I reached the parking lot. VERDICT? (a) denis was a bad choice – he blew off the world the original movie had created (b) studio interference clearly evident – to try to get a blockbuster by ‘piling shit on’ (c) no one trusting the material and the actors to carry what could have and should have been a love story and noir. ALSO; almost guaranteed Denis will repeat his failure with 2048 on Dune for the exact same reasons. He can make a simple film look like Lawrence of Arabia, but he cannot make a Lawrence of Arabia or a blade runner. He doesn’t have the chops for it. you need balls of steel, dominance off the charts, OCD and IQ for those works of art and he doesn’t have them.