FILM REVIEW – BLADE RUNNER 2049 (2017)

Review written by Raul De Leon

br2

Blade Runner (2049)

Thirty-five years later, we get the unexpected sequel to the sci-fi classic Blade Runner (1982). Most fans of the original, like myself, were probably content without a series of films following the original, especially considering the direction Hollywood has taken this century, where every film has got a reboot, sequel, or spinoff that is more than often underwhelming. But with producer Ridley Scott, A-list director Dennis Villeneuve, thirteen time Oscar nominated cinematographer Roger Deakins, and respectable lead Ryan Gosling, who never chooses his roles for the money, this sequel gave us sci-fi and film aficionado’s an authentic hope for a beautiful continuation of the Android dream.

Since the first film was based off of existing material; Phillip K. Dick’s novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, screenwriters Fancher and Green would have to come up with a fresh narrative for the sequel. This time around, the film is set thirty years into the future and back in semi-dystopian cyber-punk Los Angeles. K (Ryan Gosling) is the new Blade Runner hunting down his own kind. His main mission is to find the child who was miraculously born from an android. As K searches for the android child, he struggles with his personal nature and existence, and the film blurs the lines of reality and artificiality.

It pleases me to say that 2049 expands the exploration of the original’s themes. There would be no other way to do Blade Runner justice and satisfy its fans. 2049 introduces novel ideas to continue challenging its viewers intellectually and emotionally on what it means to be human. Thanks to a fine vision and impeccable execution from the filmmakers, the soul-arousing script is fully brought to life.

2049 shines in every aspect of filmmaking. Master composer Hans Zimmer (The Lion King, Inception) and new Hollywood talent Banjamin Wallfisch (It, Dunkirk) design a reverberating score that is inspired by Vangelis’ genius original. It’s an eerie sci-fi sound that blares through your eardrums. The slick futuristic neon city-scape is its visual counterpart. Predictably Villeneuve and Deakins make every frame of 2049 gorgeous. LA’s barren outskirts is swamped with a ravishing permanent orange tinge that suggests post-apocalypse. My eyes were floored at the sight of the Tyrell corporation headquarters where glowing water reflections oscillated on the walls behind the deep-blue eyed android dean, Niander Wallace.

With Blade Runner, visuals are consistently compatible with significance and substance. K owns a popular household-HAL type computer that projects a holographic girlfriend. There is an impressive visual effects scene where the hologram woman attempts to sync with an android that K spends the night with. A massive Atari sign that K flies his ship through is one of the stand out super-giant advertisements that are an actual part of the city’s infrastructure. Another striking effect to stimulate your head-gears is the image of the creation and editing of memory implants. All of these visual innovations add layers to the philosophy of the series.

In 1982, Blade Runner bombed at the box office because there just wasn’t enough butter on the popcorn. 2049 is still mostly concerned with being its artistic self, but it comes as a mixed bag. The mystery elements that it has is its weakest point. Blade Runner is at its best when it lives as a sitting portrait to be contemplated by its viewers. When the story heads in the direction of ‘who is the android child?’ and ‘where is Deckard?’, our attention is pulled away from what really makes this series great, which is; the examination of the nature of human and android existence.

Due to a slight lean toward dramaturgy and a lesser overall atmosphere, I cannot say that this surpasses the original, but it absolutely does one heck of a job succeeding it. Blade Runner 2049 is what a sequel is supposed to be. It does not recycle its predecessor, it expands upon it.


If you liked Blade Runner 2049, you might also like; Blade Runner (1984), Dark City (1998), Minority Report (2002), Her (2013), Ex Machina (2014).

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: cerebralfilmreviews.com.

FILM REVIEW – LA LA LAND (2016)

Review written by Raul De Leon

lll

La La Land (2016)

La La Land is a stunningly beautiful dream on the wonders and angst of career chasing in the entertainment capital; Los Angeles. This musical romantic-dramedy fusion dazzles the eyes and tunes the heart with sparkling imagery and bountiful love. Its artistic theatrical expression of the grand Hollywood masquerade sets itself as one of those special American musicals never to be forgotten.

Aspiring actress, Mia, and Jazz pianist, Sebastian, fall in love and tumble through the thorny vineyard of fame, fortune, and ordinary life. Equally passionate and motivated, the two chase dreams together in money-motored, forever-gridlocked, sunny southern California. The bumpy glamour-paved road makes it difficult for Mia and Sebastian to sit comfortably in their seats as artists and as lovers. Their relationship with each other and the Hollywood dream factory are cleverly alluded to with extravagant musical numbers.

The film’s music and dance routines vary in form. Some are grand, some are personal, some don’t include our lead characters, and some are purely musical, doing without dance altogether. The wide spectrum of performances allows for fresh emotional touches every time. The film opens with a musical performance in heavy freeway traffic; big smiles in the wonderland and unceasing horn-honking in the real world. A perfect summary of LA (we actually don’t honk that much; we’re used to the traffic). Music breakouts are always thematically charged. Mix the soaking signification of it all with a touching romance story and top-tier, outside-the-box filmmaking, and you’ve got yourself quite a picture.

Damien Chazelle (Whiplash) proves himself to be one of Hollywood’s best directors. His camera lives in experimental dance, rhythmically composed to La La Land‘s magical sight and sound. Linus Sandgren’s cinematography is masterful. Night shots are a cool blue grace-land. His intentional light manipulation and spotlighting breathes expressive visual cinema. This is why we go the big screen. La La Land lives in a phantasmagorical scope that is larger than life.

Every romance story needs likeable leads. Gosling is his usual self; handsome, charming, genuine, and kinda funny. Stone gives the performance of her career with a spot-on portrayal of a struggling actress. Her voicing and facial expressions brilliantly discharge the mixed emotions of a talent with self-doubt due to repeating rejection. The pair could teach chemistry class together. Whether you’re watching them fight in frustration or dance in classy reverie, these two are always fun and believable. I admit, I had to check if they were a couple in real life after the movie was over. To my dismay, they are not.

Fun, emotional, passionate, creative, and high grade; La La Land gets checks across the board. Even those who are not fond of musicals should give this one a chance. The romance is touching and the imaginative images are too majestic to go unnoticed to our lustful eyes. Congratulations to Damien Chazelle on a truly delightful, one-of-a-kind, melodious tale.


If you liked La La Land you might also like: Singin’ in the Rain (1952), The Sound of Music (1965), Chicago (2002), Moulin Rouge (2001).

Check out the rest of my reviews on my website: cerebralfilmreviews.com.