Blade Runner 2047 Teaser Trailer

What do you guys think?

I've been really looking forward to it.
But I was a bit sceptical that Roger Deakins would be the cinematographer. He's always competent, but never exciting. And after seeing this I'm a but underwhelmed and a bit worried... Street scenes look ok. But the interior with the monochromatic yellow look? Horrible! And the set design looks to be nowhere near the original.

Gonna stay optimistic though. Even it's a tenth as good as the original, it still gonna be twice as good as everything else coming out these days ;)
 
I don't think the DP is the problem. By far the bigger problem is that hopeless director, Villenueve. I hated Prisoner and I thought his direction was the worst thing about Sicario. But Sicario made money, so here we are. I predict BR under his direction will be a shambles of mediocrity and completely unimaginative direction. I'm not at all optimistic. Being a big fan of the original BR, I think there were a few key magical elements that made that movie work: Sean Young in her best performance, Rutger Hauer in top form, art direction which was striking for its time, the composed music by Vangelis that was perhaps the best soundtrack work he's ever done, and the direction done with a light touch (which Villenueve is constitutionally incapable of, being a cack-handed-heavy-on-the-nose brute cliche). It all worked. I don't see that magic being re-created, especially not under the direction of a man so devoid of talent and imagination.
 
OldCorpse said:
I don't think the DP is the problem. By far the bigger problem is that hopeless director, Villenueve. I hated Prisoner and I thought his direction was the worst thing about Sicario. But Sicario made money, so here we are. I predict BR under his direction will be a shambles of mediocrity and completely unimaginative direction. I'm not at all optimistic. Being a big fan of the original BR, I think there were a few key magical elements that made that movie work: Sean Young in her best performance, Rutger Hauer in top form, art direction which was striking for its time, the composed music by Vangelis that was perhaps the best soundtrack work he's ever done, and the direction done with a light touch (which Villenueve is constitutionally incapable of, being a cack-handed-heavy-on-the-nose brute cliche). It all worked. I don't see that magic being re-created, especially not under the direction of a man so devoid of talent and imagination.
Click to expand...

You ok bro?
 
OldCorpse said:
I don't think the DP is the problem. By far the bigger problem is that hopeless director, Villenueve. I hated Prisoner and I thought his direction was the worst thing about Sicario. But Sicario made money, so here we are. I predict BR under his direction will be a shambles of mediocrity and completely unimaginative direction. I'm not at all optimistic. Being a big fan of the original BR, I think there were a few key magical elements that made that movie work: Sean Young in her best performance, Rutger Hauer in top form, art direction which was striking for its time, the composed music by Vangelis that was perhaps the best soundtrack work he's ever done, and the direction done with a light touch (which Villenueve is constitutionally incapable of, being a cack-handed-heavy-on-the-nose brute cliche). It all worked. I don't see that magic being re-created, especially not under the direction of a man so devoid of talent and imagination.
Click to expand...
I agree. Villanueve always feels derivative of the likes of Nolan, Ghondry, S Jones et al. and nowhere near as creative or original.
 
I argued long and hard with OldCorpse over Sicario, and whilst I liked that film, I have to say OldCorpse is right about Villenueve. Having now seen both Enemy (laughable plot) and Arrival (derivative and lacking drama) I have little faith he can deliver what we're hoping for with BR2. I'll still be first in line to see it though..
 
Don't think I've ever seen anything by Denis Villenueve. Looking through his credits, I see almost nothing that interests me. And the same goes for Roger Deakins. And the few of his I've seen has been very far from my visual taste.
I was hoping that with a good script and a pretty well defined cinematographic blueprint they could get it right. Let's see.
Definitely gonna try to catch it on the premiere though. And when is that? 10th of June or 6th of October? I'm always confused by the way the Americans throw the numbers around in dates ;)
 
WRT Villeneuve, do yous think that so many tent pole directors - you know, the Michael Bay types - are all about technical skills, the camera movement, the frame composition, the lighting and so on but just can't relate to the actors and lack, for the lack of the better term, the human touch? I remember when I first saw "Pearl Harbor" and was just stunned how dead its actor interactions were. Granted, Ben Affleck and Kate Beckinsale were never a threat to the Bogie&Bacall legacy but ... jeez ... I've seen more human emotion expressed on a Jerry Springer Show.

And if the directors don't have a feel for it, then what sort of a script do they decide to work off? They pay $200k/week to the top script doctors but still get nothing more than a facsimile of what a major feature film should feel like.
 
Off topic this, but I think it a travesty that when you pull up the IMDB page for a film the Cinematographer isn't listed on the main information page and you have to click to another page to get to the DP's credit.



The one thing I loved about the original Bladerunner that will unlikely be the case with any modern update is the melancholy of the film. Or maybe despondency is a better word for it. Part of that was obviously the soundtrack from Vangelis.

I really hope they didn't ham-hand some global warming message into the film.
 
DLD said:
WRT Villeneuve, do yous think that so many tent pole directors - you know, the Michael Bay types - are all about technical skills, the camera movement, the frame composition, the lighting and so on but[...]
Click to expand...

Well not wrt Villeneuve, as he has no technical skills, especially lacking when it comes to camera movement and framing. Watching Sicario, this was my #1 problem on a technical level: abysmal camera placement and framing choices, just completely clueless and brain-dead (see the big thread I started on Sicario in this forum some time ago). Sicario felt like something a student would do - a student who at his best gets a D. Not that he compensates with any great insight into acting, as he atrociously miscast Emily Blunt in Sicario. Villeneuve is just an abysmal hack. At least Michael Bay has a mad kind of panache. Villeneuve is simply dull.
 
OldCorpse said:
Well not wrt Villeneuve, as he has no technical skills, especially lacking when it comes to camera movement and framing. Watching Sicario, this was my #1 problem on a technical level: abysmal camera placement and framing choices, just completely clueless and brain-dead (see the big thread I started on Sicario in this forum some time ago). Sicario felt like something a student would do - a student who at his best gets a D. Not that he compensates with any great insight into acting, as he atrociously miscast Emily Blunt in Sicario. Villeneuve is just an abysmal hack. At least Michael Bay has a mad kind of panache. Villeneuve is simply dull.
Click to expand...
I just watched ten minutes of "Sicario" ... from the beginning ... not seen any of it before ... ten minutes is all I could take ... (thanks for nothing!)*

*I kid, I kid.

Edit - might as well throw this in here because someone makes my point a little better than I did.


"Cinema is gone," Scorsese says. "The cinema I grew up with and that I'm making, it's gone."

"The theater will always be there for that communal experience, there's no doubt. But what kind of experience is it going to be?" he continues. "Is it always going to be a theme-park movie? I sound like an old man, which I am. The big screen for us in the '50s, you go from Westerns to 'Lawrence of Arabia' to the special experience of '2001' in 1968. The experience of seeing 'Vertigo' and 'The Searchers' in VistaVision."

Scorsese points to the proliferation of images and the overreliance on superficial techniques as trends that have diminished the power of cinema to younger audiences. "It should matter to your life," he says. "Unfortunately the latest generations don't know that it mattered so much."
Click to expand...

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-12-20-17-45-42
 
Last edited:
I think Scorcese's talking bollocks there. 90% of movies have always been rubbish, particularly in the golden era of the 1950s that he so loves. Has always been so, always will be. In the UK, audiences are growing after the main cinema chains have heavily invested in new technology. And, to dismiss the 'latest generation' so lightly is disingenuous, certainly my kids all love going to the cinema.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top