TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 132

Thread: Blade Runner sequels, prequels and spin-offs, oh my!

  1. #26
    Southquarter.com/fms
    Registered: Apr 2000
    Location: The Akkala Highlands
    I've also noticed another thing they've been doing lately is to put in big bold letters at the beginning of the clip - "OFFICIAL TRAILER." It's kind of obnoxious, and seems unnecessary. Might be to
    combat all the fan trailers on youtube maybe? Still seems unnecessary. And dumb.

  2. #27
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Qantas
    Quote Originally Posted by ZylonBane View Post
    At least the trailer doesn't give away the entire plot. So it has that going for it.
    ^
    This

    Quote Originally Posted by N'Al View Post
    And yet it's still better than anything we've seen so far of Alien: Covenant.
    ^
    And this

    Mild optimism here.

  3. #28
    verbose douchebag
    Registered: Apr 2002
    Location: Lyon, France
    Quote Originally Posted by Pyrian View Post
    Yeah, me too. Nothing in there grabs me. It's like they're selling it on Harrison Ford and Ryan Gosling just being there? FFS crack an expression, young goose.
    Same here. All this trailer gives me is:

    1) A Blade Runner sequel has been made
    2) It has a faithful visual style
    3) We have tried to copy the music style (but to me it just sounds like mid 00's synth patches trying to be Vangelis-y, but then I am a synth nerd)
    4) Ryan Gosling is in it
    5) Harrison Ford is doing a return (seems to be his main thing these days)

    Those are all surface details. There is little else there to make me feel like it will be good or bad. Though a lack of the former, hints at the latter.

  4. #29
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Qantas
    A neutral first impression is better than a bad first impression. It's been a while since I saw a trailer for a sci-fi film that didn't make me immediately want to say No thanks, I'll skip it. The bar is pretty low these days.

  5. #30
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2001
    Location: Somewhere
    I think the bar has been pretty low for sci-fi films forever

  6. #31
    Promo shots are also confusing as hell. Not sure how Harrison Sadface and Ryan Who Likes His Car In a Fog But It's Too Cold would possibly sell me on the idea that this is a good photoshoot for a good movie. Oh, and that flare on the left is soo cool, I'd love to hear the Photoshop Guy elaborate on how meaningful addition it is to this superb image.




  7. #32
    Southquarter.com/fms
    Registered: Apr 2000
    Location: The Akkala Highlands
    Yeah, you have to love Ford's $7.99 Target t-shirt.

  8. #33
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    Clearly the future is for people who have an affinity for flashing bright lights just off-camera and/or have no genetic predisposition towards epileptic attacks.

  9. #34
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2009
    Location: Situation's changed, Tom.
    I can't remember seeing a Villeneuve film that I actively didn't like. Sicario and Enemy are reaaaally good. So I'm thinking this film will be a gorgeous, well-crafted film that can't possibly capture the intricate philosophies that are at work in the original. And I'm at peace with that.

  10. #35
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2008
    Location: in your second eyelids
    Hipster pussy.

    Anyway, this movie looks very aesthetic except for Harrison Sadface.

  11. #36
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2001
    Location: Somewhere
    Hipster Pussy, I like it.

  12. #37
    ZylonBane
    Registered: Sep 2000
    Location: ZylonBane
    Quote Originally Posted by PigLick View Post
    I think the bar has been pretty low for sci-fi films forever
    The bar has been low for ALL genres forever. /sturgeon's law

  13. #38
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    blade ruiner

  14. #39
    Still Subjective
    Registered: Dec 1999
    Location: Idiocy will never die
    After the utter bollocks that was Alien Covenant I just want the sci-fi classics to be left alone.

  15. #40
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Location: Canuckistan GWN
    Quote Originally Posted by SubJeff View Post
    After the utter bollocks that was Alien Covenant I just want the sci-fi classics to be left alone.
    No! They must be remade into oblivion so that when they are eventually resurrected, as original stories for our VR implants, they will seem fresh, even as we molder on the excrement soaked mattresses of our retirement pods, inside vast life extension warehouses.

  16. #41
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    I don't see the problem. There's a 50% chance a new story could be worthwhile and add something of value to a franchise's legacy; if it doesn't, the originals aren't going anywhere, so nothing is lost either way.

  17. #42
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2008
    Location: in your second eyelids
    Black Runner

  18. #43
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Sulphur View Post
    There's a 50% chance a new story could be worthwhile and add something of value to a franchise's legacy
    Yep, that's how statistics work.
    I'm planning to compete in the Olympics. 50% chance I win a medal, 50% chance I won't win a medal.
    The odds are good !

  19. #44
    Still Subjective
    Registered: Dec 1999
    Location: Idiocy will never die
    Quote Originally Posted by Sulphur View Post
    I don't see the problem.
    Where to start?!

    Crappy sequels mean less good original content.

    Financially successful crap means more crap. What's the incentive if people pay for rubbish? Come on man, be sensible.

    Does anyone remember Highlander? It's great. The sequels are all utter tripe. The series was nonsense. The original is less remembered because it's overshadowed by this.

  20. #45
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2002
    Location: Cologne
    I read that some Hollywood figures fear a bad financial year because 2017 will be packed with sequels and not much else.
    Oy vey.

  21. #46
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    Quote Originally Posted by SubJeff View Post
    Where to start?!

    Crappy sequels mean less good original content.

    Financially successful crap means more crap. What's the incentive if people pay for rubbish? Come on man, be sensible.

    Does anyone remember Highlander? It's great. The sequels are all utter tripe. The series was nonsense. The original is less remembered because it's overshadowed by this.
    I think you're over-reacting.

    To address the first point: if you don't want the cycle to perpetuate, then people need to stop paying to see them. If you want the cycle to stop, vote with your wallet, etc.

    As far as Highlander is concerned, it was overshadowed by the sequel because a) the original was never anything above merely decent and b) the sequel showcased such a sharp drop-off in quality, it was kind of unprecedented.

    If the originals were good enough, shitty sequels are never going to be bad enough to pull them under. Alien: Resurrection was pretty bad, but that doesn't stop people from mentioning Alien as a classic. The same with The Terminator's endless sequels, but everyone still considers the first two as products of great craft. The same goes for Jaws, Predator, A Fish Called Wanda, and whatever else that had undercooked follow-ups.

    Gryzemius: I was talking probability, not stats. There's a slight difference between guessing the outcome of a coin toss as an analogy for liking or not liking a movie, and comparing the results of all coin tosses for a certain coin in certain conditions for a certain time period because someone disagreed with you. But hey, if you wanna do them Olympics, I hope the pole vault bar's low enough for you.

  22. #47
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    The Predator sequel wasn't that bad, was it? I have to confess, I never understood why it gets such a bad rap.

  23. #48
    Member
    Registered: Dec 2006
    Location: Washington DC
    I'm kind of surprised at these comments saying the trailer didn't give away the plot because I thought it nearly outright stated that the twist is that Gosling's character is a replicant. I may have seriously misunderstood something so I'll have to re-watch it later.

  24. #49
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    I may have not been paying enough attention, but to me the only thing that gave away a possible twist that Gosling's character is a replicant was the fact that Gosling was playing it. I guess I'll have to re-watch it later as well.

  25. #50
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Does that even count as a twist any more?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •