As soon as a friend in the group claimed that the movie "Blade Runner 2049" was a bad movie, I knew the group was destined to be quiet, because I must disagree with her, even though I hadn't seen it at the time this movie. That night, I went to the cinema to watch a movie, walked out of the theater, and exhausted myself with a big meal. Then I couldn't wait to post my thoughts in the group: this is an epic masterpiece! Next comes the expected debate. I also hesitated to express my opinion, because it is definitely not conducive to stability and unity, but I couldn’t help but speak. I wanted to cheer for my favorite movie, and I wanted to find some poor sense of superiority. Show off that I understand this better. movie. It's certainly not an obscure movie, but it does require a bit of preparation before watching it. First, it takes a little mental preparation to know what kind of movie you are going to watch. I also mentioned this point in my review of "Dunkirk". If we watch Kubrick or Hou Hsiao-hsien's movies, even if the genre of the movie is science fiction or martial arts, we will have Be mentally prepared, this movie must not be "good-looking", you must adjust your mentality before watching it, burn incense, sweep the floor, bathe and change clothes. With such mental preparation, it helps to brew emotions and patience. But if this movie is Nolan's work, then our psychological expectations will be different, and we are mentally prepared to watch a commercial big movie. Then "Dunkirk" will bring a huge gap to the audience. I have taken off my pants, so you will show me this? "Blade Runner 2049" may have encountered the same problem. I thought it was a superhero, but I didn't expect it to be such a boring movie. I watched that scene, and the statistics on falling asleep were not good, and no less than 10 people left the scene early. In addition to mental preparation, watching this movie also requires a little knowledge reserve. To put it bluntly, this movie is made for sci-fi fans, and there are a lot of indescribable fun in it. People in the circle are very excited when they see it, while people outside the circle are completely clueless. This is like the movie "Warcraft", a sentence "for the tribe" can make game fans burst into tears, and a layman like me will be very surprised, am I sick? So before watching this sequel movie, why should you watch the predecessor "Blade Runner"? This is the minimum reserve. If you want to feel more fully, you can also read the original novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" "I read it. If you want to sort out the film context, it is best to watch the three short films circulating on the Internet, which fill the gap between the two films. And if you want to grasp the theme of this movie macroscopically, it is best to watch all of "Ghost in the Shell", "The Matrix", and the Alien series. And if you want to understand the development and changes of the cyberpunk style, then... In short, for watching this movie, the more work you do, the more fun you will get from watching the movie. Second, the setbacks encountered by "Blade Runner 2049" are nothing compared to the previous work, at least they have won the favor of the majority of science fiction fans. In 1982, the "Blade Runner" hit the streets as soon as it came out, and it was a double failure at the box office. As the pioneering work of cyberpunk movies, audiences all over the world are not psychologically prepared. Have you ever seen this kind of sci-fi film, the rhythm is slow, the style is decadent, and it can't be played for a long time. Then in the long 30 years, the word of mouth of this film is slowly fermenting, not only the theme of discussion is groundbreaking, but even the image style is groundbreaking. The dark tones of the rainy and continuous rain under Ridley Scott's lens, the icy futuristic sense of technology and the chaotic Kowloon Walled City wind are mixed together to create a bizarre cyberpunk classic scene. Of course, the key to really making "Blade Runner" into the house is the rapid development of Internet technology, artificial intelligence and biological engineering over the years, which has made people gradually realize the weight of this work. In particular, the various concerns expressed by the original author and science fiction writer Philip Dick in his works seem to be confirmed by the development of human beings one by one. People suddenly discovered that there was a prophet who touched the future technology and technology just through his own imagination. The predicament among human beings, and the pessimism revealed in his works is really the more profound the feeling as time goes by. In addition to the relationship between human and technology, the theme of Dick's works is also the question of what is real and what is the essence of human beings. He especially likes to blur the lines between the real and the unreal through the description of memory. Science fiction writer Ortiz said of his work: "Between life and death, there are many of Dick's shadow worlds - hallucinations, fantasy worlds, imaginary real worlds, hazy half-dream worlds, and paranoid states." And the latest "Blade Runner 2049" still continues these themes, life, death, and what is human. It was also the theme of the 1982 edition of Blade Runner. And this sequel, not only to explore what a person is, but also to go a step further and explore how to become a real person. The psychologist Fromm gave a definition in his book "Escape from Freedom": "Man is not an immutable individual determined purely by biological factors, piled up by primitive impulses and desires, nor is he absolutely determined by cultural environment. Manipulated puppets." This existential definition fits the film's theme particularly well. three Joey's story 4. Of course, this is not a high-level movie, with an uncomplicated plot, and it also tells about the propositions that are repeatedly discussed in science fiction literature. And the reason why ordinary audiences have trouble viewing the film, I think, is because of the way the film is presented. Director Villeneuve presents the story in a way that is not very friendly to the general audience. First of all, it continues the director's consistent creative style of high atmosphere and low narrative, and also inherits the aesthetic style established by predecessors such as "Blade Runner" and "Ghost in the Shell". For the public, this style is a little bit reluctant to welcome, so it is mysterious. If Villeneuve, Scott and Mamoru Oshii did not deliberately oppose the audience, they also inherited some traditions of modern literature and art, which is to put it in layman's terms - not to speak human words. The purpose of doing so, on the one hand, is naturally the need for artistic pursuit, and on the other hand, it is also to set a threshold and select the target group. Let us recall the literary and artistic works before modern times, whether it is Shakespeare's novels or Da Vinci's paintings, we can see clearly what themes we want to express, and the techniques are all in a realistic style, with characters and stories. But in modern times, looking at the works of Joyce, Eliot, Picasso, it becomes obscure and difficult to understand. This drastic change in style was interpreted by scholar Xiong Yi as a counterattack by the cultural elite. This kind of change is related to the times. Before the birth of modern literature, major changes took place in the cultural field. It was an era when education was popularized and popular newspapers and magazines were surging. In a word, popular culture began to emerge. Before this time, knowledge was monopolized by monks and aristocrats, literature and art were the pastimes of the upper class, and the masses were illiterate and naturally excluded. But things are different now. The masses are literate, and they are starting to pick noses and eyes on writers and artists. Artists can't bear this anger, they simply raise the threshold, so that the public loses the ability to point fingers again, from now on, let the serious return to the serious, and let the popular return to the popular. In 1922, the poet Eliot founded the literary quarterly "Standard", determined to set cultural standards for the whole society with the traditional elite pattern, but the circulation of this magazine was only a pitiful 800 copies at the best of times. Xiong Yi commented: "This event has a symbolic meaning of reminder, it not only means that cultural standards have been subverted, but also that the natural order of cultural standards has been subverted - top-down has become bottom-up. " Science fiction literature is naturally not serious literature, but popular is just a label of this type of literature in a broad sense, which does not mean that serious ideological works cannot be produced in it. There will always be geniuses who use popular carriers to incubate themselves. thought golden egg. Pop music, such as country folk, has also produced Nobel Prize winners. And the three-body world written by Liu Cixin is so cold that Gao Xiaosong has been wandering for a long time without being able to enter. Taking a step back, even if we don't take science fiction literature that high, or Blade Runner doesn't qualify for the realm of serious literature. But as a subculture that has developed very well, with its own traditions and styles, artists are also less likely to sacrifice style in favor of commerce. Imagine, when Villeneuve, Ridley Scott, Hampton Fancher, Harrison Ford get together, they might come up with a "Transformers"? Like when Martin Scorsese, Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, Joe Pesci got together and could make a Mission Impossible? And when this kind of persistence meets the commercial market, it is not surprising that it brings about a split in word of mouth. In the eyes of ordinary audiences, the film looks flashy and cryptic. But in the eyes of senior sci-fi fans, to paraphrase the words of Hao Jian, a professor at the Film Academy: (Film) has inherited, defended and developed the tradition of film noir in a genius, creative and comprehensive way. When it comes to compromising with the market, Ridley Scott compromised back then. His "Kingdom of Heaven" was cut into a pile of rubbish by the production company because it took too long and did not conform to the rules of film arrangement. It wasn't until later that we saw the director's cut that people realized what a masterpiece this was. So it's better to let the director insist a little bit, this is also an explanation for himself and the fans. Wouldn't it be good to make it like "Ace Agent 2"? Taking a step back, even if we don't take science fiction literature that high, or Blade Runner doesn't qualify for the realm of serious literature. But as a subculture that has developed very well, with its own traditions and styles, artists are also less likely to sacrifice style in favor of commerce. Imagine, when Villeneuve, Ridley Scott, Hampton Fancher, Harrison Ford get together, they might come up with a "Transformers"? Like when Martin Scorsese, Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, Joe Pesci got together and could make a Mission Impossible? And when this kind of persistence meets the commercial market, it is not surprising that it brings about a split in word of mouth. In the eyes of ordinary audiences, the film looks flashy and cryptic. But in the eyes of senior sci-fi fans, to paraphrase the words of Hao Jian, a professor at the Film Academy: (Film) has inherited, defended and developed the tradition of film noir in a genius, creative and comprehensive way. When it comes to compromising with the market, Ridley Scott compromised back then. His "Kingdom of Heaven" was cut into a pile of rubbish by the production company because it took too long and did not conform to the rules of film arrangement. It wasn't until later that we saw the director's cut that people realized what a masterpiece this was. So it's better to let the director insist a little bit, this is also an explanation for himself and the fans. Wouldn't it be good to make it like "Ace Agent 2"? Taking a step back, even if we don't take science fiction literature that high, or Blade Runner doesn't qualify for the realm of serious literature. But as a subculture that has developed very well, with its own traditions and styles, artists are also less likely to sacrifice style in favor of commerce. Imagine, when Villeneuve, Ridley Scott, Hampton Fancher, Harrison Ford get together, they might come up with a "Transformers"? Like when Martin Scorsese, Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, Joe Pesci got together and could make a Mission Impossible? And when this kind of persistence meets the commercial market, it is not surprising that it brings about a split in word of mouth. In the eyes of ordinary audiences, the film looks flashy and cryptic. But in the eyes of senior sci-fi fans, to paraphrase the words of Hao Jian, a professor at the Film Academy: (Film) has inherited, defended and developed the tradition of film noir in a genius, creative and comprehensive way. When it comes to compromising with the market, Ridley Scott compromised back then. His "Kingdom of Heaven" was cut into a pile of rubbish by the production company because it took too long and did not conform to the rules of film arrangement. It wasn't until later that we saw the director's cut that people realized what a masterpiece this was. So it's better to let the director insist a little bit, this is also an explanation for himself and the fans. Wouldn't it be good to make it like "Ace Agent 2"?
View more about Blade Runner 2049 reviews
