|
I watched it the other day and I was like "heh"
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 03:27 |
|
|
Wake up. Time to die.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
Full trailer drops on Monday.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
New trailer is here! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCcx85zbxz4
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:New trailer is here! Man I really don't know what to think of this. There is some fantastic cinematography going on but it looks like there are way too many action scenes going on. Now granted that can be spiced up because it's a trailer, but the whole reason to watch Blade Runner is for an atmospheric dream world. I'm still pretty skeptical, but I like the director and Ridley Scott as a producer is nice. I also like that johan johansson is doing the music because that's exactly who I would have wanted to do it.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
The_Rob posted:Man I really don't know what to think of this. There is some fantastic cinematography going on but it looks like there are way too many action scenes going on. Now granted that can be spiced up because it's a trailer, but the whole reason to watch Blade Runner is for an atmospheric dream world. I'm still pretty skeptical, but I like the director and Ridley Scott as a producer is nice. I also like that johan johansson is doing the music because that's exactly who I would have wanted to do it. To be fair, the trailer for arrival focused on the one "action" scene in the movie and made it out to be more of a thriller or something. Marketing!
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
This looks dope. I can't wait for Ryan Gosling to find out that he was a replicant in Drive.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
That was good. This is a movie I'll most probably watch.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
I've been hating the idea of this movie being made for awhile but I'm willing to give it the slightest benefit of the doubt. You've got Villanueve directing and Deakins on cinematography, so at the very least this film is going to be beautiful just to look at. If there's a story to be gleaned from the trailer then I missed it entirely because it all seemed quite vague, more proof of concept than anything expository. I'm sincerely hoping they find something interesting to do with the concept. The look and feel is definitely there.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
Looks sick [insert Drive joke here because that's the only movie nerds have ever seen]
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
You really have to see his entire filmography to appreciate the depth and nuances of Dopey Gosling Face.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
Looks great to me, can't wait.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
Looks alright but the sound design in that trailer is awful. Should have got Vangelis back I don't care if he's dead or old so is Harrison Ford and the dug him up.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
teaser was much more agreeable for me than the trailer. the movie so far doesnt look much like blade runner so thats dissapointing i guess
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Blue Star Error posted:Looks alright but the sound design in that trailer is awful. Should have got Vangelis back I don't care if he's dead or old so is Harrison Ford and the dug him up. I thought the music was fantastic at the beginning but again that second half of the trailer just turned into such standard nonsense.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
It's trailer music, very likely composed by some random dude commissioned for this exact thing and not Jóhann Jóhannsson. It even sounds like it's a sort of a re-take on one of the original's tracks. I wouldn't worry too much about it.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
Why is there a 5 second trailer to the trailer before the trailer?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
Fellatio del Toro posted:Why is there a 5 second trailer to the trailer before the trailer? I've noticed that on most trailers on Youtube lately. Not sure what they're trying to achieve.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 23:12
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:New trailer is here! The trailer makes it look like a dumb, overblown action movie with some harrison ford fanservice sprinkled on top.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
Fellatio del Toro posted:Why is there a 5 second trailer to the trailer before the trailer? I assume it's for when it appears as a video ad.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
Motto posted:I assume it's for when it appears as a video ad. Yeah exactly. It's for the mandatory 5 seconds before you can click skip on ads. GitS had far better giant holograms. I'm sure that's the only thing it will wind up doing better than this or any Dennis Villeneuve film, but still. Better holograms.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
Oz Fox posted:The trailer makes it look like a dumb, overblown action movie with some harrison ford fanservice sprinkled on top. I think there's enough in the trailer that shows this is clearly a Villanueve+Deakins film. So its going to be ridiculously good looking, at the very least.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
Mordja posted:To be fair, the trailer for arrival focused on the one "action" scene in the movie and made it out to be more of a thriller or something. Marketing! Regular people are idiots and have to be tricked into seeing it. Fact
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
Marginally scared... don't like some of the cinematography and sets that feel too clean. Blade Runner is a movie that's if nothing else atmospheric and I want to see and feel that atmosphere tangibly. No one can fill the air with poo poo and make it look as good as Ridley.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 01:02
|
|
|
What I liked about Tyrell is that he's just some brainiac who cares about technology, and was very cold when it comes to the moral issues/replicant feelings, but he wasn't cartoonishly evil or anything. Leto, otoh, reminds me of Eddie Redmayne in Jupiter Rising (or was it Ascending? Or Falling?). That feels all wrong, but then again, it's only 20 seconds of a trailer.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
See, this is the problem with making a sequel/reimagining to a really beloved movie. On the one hand, you can just slavishly try to recreate the original, and be dismissed as revering the matrial too much. On the other, you can try to do your own thing and have people complain that it's not exactly like the old thing. I don't need it to have dirty, Ridley Scott style photography or Tyrell being cold because the original, nearly forty years ago, had that. I want Villeneuve's take. Not his Ridley Scott imitation.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
From what I was reading earth is very very depopulated like in the book outside of a few major urban centers and, like in the book, the eccentricity that comes with that isolation comes through with the folks with the means. In the book it's very clear that anyone living on earth at all is basically a loser and not all there in some way no matter who they are. It might be interesting if that's what they're going for with him. But it also seems just as relevant, Tyrell is a cold braniac, oblivious to any of the implications of what he's done beyond them making an even more advanced servant, but when you look at the way Silicon Valley douchebags talk about themselves and their visions today, like, what we see of Leto is exactly what someone with the money and space would do if we got so advanced that someone could straight up create life on par with the replicants we see in Blade Runner. Again I'm blind to the movie outside of the trailers and the old rumors but the way we see him here feels more like the logical endpoint of where Tyrell would be going if he didn't get killed. I'm really happy with how beautiful it looks. It doesn't have the same look as the original but the original was made thirty-five years ago. Even if Scott directed it himself and the same set/effects/etc. people were all back working on it it wouldn't look like the first movie.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 01:31
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:See, this is the problem with making a sequel/reimagining to a really beloved movie. On the one hand, you can just slavishly try to recreate the original, and be dismissed as revering the matrial too much. On the other, you can try to do your own thing and have people complain that it's not exactly like the old thing. But that's the issue, is it really his take? The first shot is a giant Atari logo, when is he last time they have actually been relevant. that's weird as poo poo to me. It'd be more refreshing if the premise was just New Deckard and old Deckard sit in a barren wasteland and have a two hour conversation. I'm not writing this movie off but it just still seems like fanboys are behind it.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 02:19
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:But it also seems just as relevant, Tyrell is a cold braniac, oblivious to any of the implications of what he's done beyond them making an even more advanced servant, but when you look at the way Silicon Valley douchebags talk about themselves and their visions today, like, what we see of Leto is exactly what someone with the money and space would do if we got so advanced that someone could straight up create life on par with the replicants we see in Blade Runner. Again I'm blind to the movie outside of the trailers and the old rumors but the way we see him here feels more like the logical endpoint of where Tyrell would be going if he didn't get killed. Who said Tyrell actually was killed?  One of the things that was planned but never filmed was Batty going to Sebastian after killing Tyrell and asking where the real Tyrell was. At which point, Sebastian would take him to a cryogenic crypt and show him the real Tyrell, suspended in a transparent sarcophagus over liquid nitrogen, the implication that Tyrell was long dead yet continuing to live on in Tyrell replicants. Even the BR easter egg in Prometheus hints at this, with Weyland talking of a "mentor and long-departed competitor" looking for the secret of immortality through "genetic abominations" "implanted with false memories".
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
There's a lot to like in this trailer, but here's what I don't like: 1. Stupid holograms; between this and Ghost in the Shell, the future looks lame. 2. Rough visual f/x (probably not finished, admittedly) 3. Harrison Ford (hang it the gently caress up, or please don't run when you're in movies nowadays) 4. Jared Leto 5. Daryl Hannah-esque tramp squad @ 1:31 in the trailer. 6. Anytime Harrison Ford opens his mouth and says something. 7. Atari logo (between this and the Pan Am poo poo in Ghost in the Shell, it just seems like some people are trying too hard for nostalgia; frankly, it's a lame easter egg). CDHiggs fucked around with this message at 03:49 on May 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
The_Rob posted:But that's the issue, is it really his take? The first shot is a giant Atari logo, when is he last time they have actually been relevant. that's weird as poo poo to me. It'd be more refreshing if the premise was just New Deckard and old Deckard sit in a barren wasteland and have a two hour conversation. I'm not writing this movie off but it just still seems like fanboys are behind it. I have no idea how you've connected the deliberately anachronistic Atari logo with it being a fanboy movie.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
Hey nerds. This looks like a good movie.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 05:34
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:I have no idea how you've connected the deliberately anachronistic Atari logo with it being a fanboy movie. The Atari logo is in the original kind of hidden away as a cute little Easter egg in 1982 when they are actually relevant to the world. This new trailer opens with an Atari logo that takes up 95 percent of the screen in 2017.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 05:40
|
|
|
I mean it's a good way to visually signal "this isn't the future of our 2017." The original wasn't a cute easter egg, it was just product placement that could have been any corporation that wanted to pay. This time it's a deliberate signal.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
It's also big hit of nostalgia for 80s kids who grew up with Blade Runner. Remember Atari? Wasn't it great? Yeah, remember Blade Runner? That was great too right? Here, have both. Come see this movie.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 05:51
|
|
|
The_Rob posted:The Atari logo is in the original kind of hidden away as a cute little Easter egg in 1982 when they are actually relevant to the world. This new trailer opens with an Atari logo that takes up 95 percent of the screen in 2017. As said, it was product placement at the time. It was relevant because they were a company who wanted you to buy their products. Now it's an easter egg, especially since they haven't released a game in 9 years or so, and when they did, they didn't use their logo that way. It's a retro future easter egg, and you're angry because it used to be product placement. It's like you're upset that it no longer has a commercial purpose. Actually, it turns out they may have new games out, but, honestly, the answer is sadder than 'no games' "On June 22, 2014, Atari announced a new corporate strategy that would include a focus on "new audiences", specifically "LGBT, social casinos, real-money gambling, and YouTube".[49]" Having 'LGBT' right next to 'social casinos' suggests they're even more behind the times than you might have thought. They're a perfect emblem of a future gone wrong. They're retrofuture cyberpunk now.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 06:16
|
|
|
I don't think Denis Villeneuve of all people is going to make this movie squarely as a nostalgic piece, friends.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:As said, it was product placement at the time. It was relevant because they were a company who wanted you to buy their products. Now it's an easter egg, especially since they haven't released a game in 9 years or so, and when they did, they didn't use their logo that way. It's a retro future easter egg, and you're angry because it used to be product placement. It's like you're upset that it no longer has a commercial purpose. You think that's something? The more you learn about Atari the more it seems like the ideal company to show off in this movie. Much like Eldon Tyrell "Atari" as most people would know it hasn't actually made a game or even been alive for about twenty-five years. Around 2002-ish, the European company Infograemes purchased the name itself and changed their name to Atari to coast on its reputation. After releasing several high profile flops through out the 00s they were reduced to just a brand yet again as the sold off/couldn't renew more and more licenses as time went on, Only in the past three years have been successfully selling compilations of their ("their" as in thirty+ year old games no one at the company had any involvement in in any context in any way) classic games on modern consoles and those plug and play TV anthologies along with the aforementioned casino stuff. One of those properties, and their most infamous and controversial (they paid a bunch of companies to give the game ridiculously high review scores and praise when the game was unfinished absolute dogshit) flop is Driver 3, or Driv3r as it was officially titled. Part of the massive marketing done for Driv3r at the time included a ten minute short film I somehow still possess the DVD of. A live action affair of some woman hiring a dude to steal and transport stolen sports cars followed by a brief chase scene. It was directed by Tony Scott and produced by Ridley Scott. Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 07:06 on May 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 07:01
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:I don't think Denis Villeneuve of all people is going to make this movie squarely as a nostalgic piece, friends. Snowman_McK posted:"On June 22, 2014, Atari announced a new corporate strategy that would include a focus on "new audiences", specifically "LGBT, social casinos, real-money gambling, and YouTube".[49]"
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 07:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 03:27 |
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:You think that's something? The more you learn about Atari the more it seems like the ideal company to show off in this movie. Atari hasn't actually made a game in about twenty-five years. This is insane. The more I read about the behind the scenes of video games, the more amazing it is that anything ever gets made.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 07:04
|
|