This is the also feeling I'm getting regarding the look. If imagining early 80s Los Angeles and the dystopian aesthetic applied to it against the film's 2019 setting means there should follow three decades worth of "clean up" I would assume. I lived in LA in the 80s-90s and the same area certainly feels less grimey than I remembered. Hey, or I could just very well be imagining those times through a filter myself. Point is everything now is so pristine compared to 30 years ago and the film reflecting that is just that.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Blade Runner 2049 Official Trailer
- Thread starter Kenzodielocke
- Start date
This is the also feeling I'm getting regarding the look. If imagining early 80s Los Angeles and the dystopian aesthetic applied to it against the film's 2019 setting means there should follow three decades worth of "clean up" I would assume. I lived in LA in the 80s-90s and the same area certainly feels less grimey than I remembered. Hey, or I could just very well be imagining those times through a filter myself. Point is everything now is so pristine compared to 30 years ago and the film reflecting that is just that.
-Plasma Reus-
Service guarantees member status
Wow.
Some of the folk in here.
Some of the folk in here.
Inferno313
Banned
Exactly! Look at literally any movie set in New York in the 80s. Then look at the city now. It's wildly different. As I said earlier, they totally would've been justified in diverging even further from the original film, but I like what we have here.
TheWrathOfSean
Member
Yeah I don't know what to make of it. Some people are getting too worked up over this stuff.
Into the Light
Banned
Don't know what trailers some of you are watching, Even the original had clean shots and dirty shots. We have a director here who is fully aware of the weight behind the original movie. believe me.
In a decade where we got new SW movies, that 5 years ago, we never thought we would veer see another one
Now a beautiful follow up to one of the greatest of all time, and it looks amazing yet people always find the the bad.
I'm happy to be alive and experience all this. Its truly remarkable, in 1987 if you told me one day I would see a sequel to this masterpiece I would have never thought.
Look where we are in time, its amazing. I grew up thinking this was one of the greatest movies ever put to film, and now Im getting another one form someone who appreciates the greatness of the first? Ill take V's JJ approach to Ridley's Lucas. Anyday!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Merchandise
Member
Have never seen the original.
Trailer looks pretty but at the same time not particularly visually interesting. TBH Ghost in the Shell's aesthetic worked more for me. (The outdoor/non city shots though look great.)
Trailer looks pretty but at the same time not particularly visually interesting. TBH Ghost in the Shell's aesthetic worked more for me. (The outdoor/non city shots though look great.)
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Also, attempt giving Deakins/Villeneueve credit for possibly thinking about the imagery they're choosing to put on the screen.
People are criticizing this thing like the visual decisions were arrived at by mistake. Like those guys simply missed what Blade Runner looks like before they started making the direct sequel to it.
Oh shit, okay, you were being ironic earlier. Sorry for the misunderstanding then. It didn't come across.
No, it is a sequel and you can do sequels keeping the visuals intact and including your own style. Cameron proved that with Aliens.
And if CG does not work, well you have to start to use practical effects again. It is not like, everybody who knows about this stuff is dead and all of the knowledge is lost. If the computer can not create filth, use real filth.
Inferno313
Banned
I can picture it now. Denis, sitting down in the editing bay with Joe Walker for the very first time. "All right. Let's see what we've got." he says, as Joe begins to play the assembly cut for him. A sense of dread begins to creep onto his face. "who fucking forgot to turn on the smoke machines"
Bobby Roberts
Banned
This is a bad example, though, because Cameron doesn't really make anything in Aliens look much like Alien. The production design is pretty different. Yes, it looks like it belongs to the same design universe, but what he does with it is fairly separate than what Ridley did with Alien.
The looks at this universe show a tighter connection between the sequels than the one you're pointing out as an aspirational example.
Inferno313
Banned
Aliens aesthetic diverges from Alien just as much, if not more, than this film does from Blade Runner. What are you on?
Hope they don't make weird choices in regards to the world building:
Those empty cities better be empty because of climate change disasters and not because 90% of the population moved offworld. That is something that is absolute BS for 2049. Even hundreds of years later we will not get the majorty off world due to gravity well and physics existing.
So hopefully population density is less because everyone died in climate change disasters or moved to crowded safe havens.
BR also looked more like either only ultra rich folks would go to space, or poor replicants slaving away in a mine.
Speaking of which: I wish they would have gone for more of a "Foxconn builds replicants" approach rather than Jared Leto welcoming every one with a personal happy birthday wish. Clashes with the trailer theme of the need for a slave working class.
Those empty cities better be empty because of climate change disasters and not because 90% of the population moved offworld. That is something that is absolute BS for 2049. Even hundreds of years later we will not get the majorty off world due to gravity well and physics existing.
So hopefully population density is less because everyone died in climate change disasters or moved to crowded safe havens.
BR also looked more like either only ultra rich folks would go to space, or poor replicants slaving away in a mine.
Speaking of which: I wish they would have gone for more of a "Foxconn builds replicants" approach rather than Jared Leto welcoming every one with a personal happy birthday wish. Clashes with the trailer theme of the need for a slave working class.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Or maybe they don't want it to be so dirty, and the story they're working with has a specific reason for that?
Again, it seems like you're approaching this from the standpoint that it has to be some sort of oversight or mistake that lead to this visual choice. That they simply didn't study hard enough or whatever.
I mean, I don't think Villenueve and Deakins skipped their homework. But maybe it's possible. Who knows.
Inferno313
Banned
I think climate change is likely the case, as they said it's a major factor of this film. But you gotta remember that this takes place in the 2049 of the world of Blade Runner, not the 2049 of our world. If off-world colonies existed in 2019, then people living on them by 2049 isn't too crazy of a stretch.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
Yeah Aliens looks very different from Alien.
I would say that in a similar case to this film though, the original's production design is less rooted in reality (tech in particular) and looks like the sequel is the one that takes places decades before because it looks like an evolution of real technology used when the films were made while the original films take more liberties.
I would say that in a similar case to this film though, the original's production design is less rooted in reality (tech in particular) and looks like the sequel is the one that takes places decades before because it looks like an evolution of real technology used when the films were made while the original films take more liberties.
But so many choosing to live off world that whole skyscraper cities that look pretty decent from quality of life are wholly abandoned since what seems at least a decade?
That doesn't make sense for me for the BR universe. Like literally billions of people living in space? That universe would look a hell of a lot different.
Fingers crossed it is climate change and half the population died and the rest lives in crowded safe zones.
EDIT: that came out weird..
Bobby Roberts
Banned
You really don't realize that you're proving our point and not yours, huh
Inferno313
Banned
Y-yeah... All that shit looks fairly different. Especially the sleeping pods. Not sure what those pictures were meant to illustrate?
TheWrathOfSean
Member
Yeah, the first movie will be basically alternate history in a couple years. People were a lot more optimistic about the rate of technological advancement when it was made.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
They could partially be done with the space colonies if need be. For instance, In the sequel to Rendezvous with Rama economic crisis hit so hard that those people that could go back to earth abandoned colonies to survive. Mind you 3 decades could be cutting it short.
Razorback
Member
People that like the new look are totally justified in doing so. I'm not putting into question the talent of the artists here. They obviously know what they're doing. It's the art style choice that disappoints me personally.
Having thought about it a little more I think the main reason for my disappointment is that I'm a huge fan of the cyberpunk aesthetic. And besides the original Blade Runner, I can't name a single high profile big budget movie that nails the look and atmosphere of that style. The new Dredd is great, but it suffers visually due to the low budget.
Anime seems to nail the aesthetic more often. It's hard to quantify what it is but both Ghost in the Shell and Akira capture what I love about cyberpunk.
That's why this recent trailer disappointed me. Especially after the live action GitS dropped the ball. I had hopes that either of these movies would be the definitive modern cyberpunk movie.
The visuals are big deal for me but it's not everything of course. The story and music might still be amazing.
Having thought about it a little more I think the main reason for my disappointment is that I'm a huge fan of the cyberpunk aesthetic. And besides the original Blade Runner, I can't name a single high profile big budget movie that nails the look and atmosphere of that style. The new Dredd is great, but it suffers visually due to the low budget.
Anime seems to nail the aesthetic more often. It's hard to quantify what it is but both Ghost in the Shell and Akira capture what I love about cyberpunk.
That's why this recent trailer disappointed me. Especially after the live action GitS dropped the ball. I had hopes that either of these movies would be the definitive modern cyberpunk movie.
The visuals are big deal for me but it's not everything of course. The story and music might still be amazing.
This whole thing is bizarre. People are treating Villeneuve like he's some scrub instead of being the BEST major scifi director working. Everything he has said in interviews such as respecting the question of whether Deckard is a replicant, shows that he understood the movie perfectly. He probably understood the charm of the film better than Scott does.
You could argue though that the Hollywood GitS stayed too close to the 80s/90s anime's look.
Funny though as both GitS and now BR2049 seem to have stayed with the angular 80s car look for their vehicles. Which in the case of BR2049 seems weird, as the rest is so clean and updated in style.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Yeah, really.
The images you just posted look, from a design standpoint, to be much more closely related than the ones from the previous post using the Alien/Aliens comparison as an aspirational example.
I'm confused as to how it is you're not seeing that. Like, what are you looking at that causes you to believe the BR caps are farther apart than the Alien ones?
Really?
This one is quite interesting in you can see how Ridley filled the frame to the brim to give off the impression that yes, it is fucking crowded. The jars and bottles built up all around Deckard. The smoke, the rain, the two characters flanking him. That shot of Gosling looks a bit bland in comparison.
And I don't know if I like "all the people went off world" as potential explanation.
Isn't one of the plot points in Blade Runner 2049 that the planet is essentially dying?
It would make sense that pretty much everybody would be bailing and living on colonies at this point. There's probably just flat out less people living on the planet compared to Blade Runner.
It would make sense that pretty much everybody would be bailing and living on colonies at this point. There's probably just flat out less people living on the planet compared to Blade Runner.
Chained Prometheus
Member
To be fair, that's because that BR2049 shot isn't actually from the movie and is instead your run-of-the-mill bad Entertainment Weekly promo shot.
Into the Light
Banned
I think what I wrote was beautiful and no one put me over.
Fair point. I concede. To be clear I really like most of the imagery in the trailer. But I also have my inner 80s cyberpunk style afficiado fighting with modern day me about that.
TheWrathOfSean
Member
Sorry buddy, we're busy working ourselves into a shoot.
You keep saying this but I don't think anyone here to honestly discuss the changes is suggesting that. It should be obvious creatives this talented on a property and budget this large aren't just winging it. I'm actually not sure how you're getting that impression.
TheWrathOfSean
Member
PSY・S;236269131 said:
I agree. Villeneuve is absolutely the perfect person for this job, but there's nothing wrong with analyzing his attempt at resurrecting a level of world building that many of us feel has become a lost art.
You're now comparing anamorphic wide shots from one film to mid close up shots from production B-roll photographers in another.
No, it is a movie shot, that is the problem. You can see, what is a promo shot and what is out of the movie.
https://www.yahoo.com/movies/see-bl...ording-blade-runner-2049-photo-211515951.html
Bobby Roberts
Banned
PSY・S;236269131 said:
Because it seems to be the root reason behind so many of the complaints.
Why wouldn't I get that impression when the comparisons seem to begin and end at "It doesn't look like this! Like this thing exactly, right here. They're not the same!"
Well yeah. Once you realize they're not the same the next question is probably why. And it seems like the answer to that why tends to suggest that the people in charge didn't notice like we have.
Which seems silly to me. It seems like the changes were done on purpose, that there's likely a reason for them, that they're not a mistake or a slip-up or an oversight. And if you understand that there is a reason for them, and it's probably story based, then it's kind of a matter of trying to figure out what that reason is, or guess at it, or failing that, waiting for it.
And if there isn't a reason for it then the complaining will really kick in, and once I eat all the shit I will have coming to me, I will join right in.
Tony Redgrave
Member
Are people even willig to wait and see why it's less crowded? There might be a perfectly sound story reason for it. If you think it ruins the aesthetic, well, deal with it.
If creators can't modify the property even in the slightest what's the point of even making a sequel? I think I remember Scott saying something akin to "when I made it they said it was awful and now it's become untouchable" and I'm with him, Blade Runner is possibly my favourite movie but new cinematographers need freedom of movement (within reason) if we want to see anything memorable again.
If creators can't modify the property even in the slightest what's the point of even making a sequel? I think I remember Scott saying something akin to "when I made it they said it was awful and now it's become untouchable" and I'm with him, Blade Runner is possibly my favourite movie but new cinematographers need freedom of movement (within reason) if we want to see anything memorable again.
Even sequels (or prequels) done by the same director tend to look different than their original entry. Established directors don't like remaking the same film. Hell just look at Prometheus or Covenant and contrast that with the original Alien. How about Terminator 1 and 2? I imagine if Scott was directing BR2049, it would look very different compared to the original BR because technology has changed and his own directorial style has changed. I find it important that good staff do their own thing to the best of their abilities rather than just trying to imitate someone else from a different era.
Chained Prometheus
Member
Okay, so the shot is from Warner Bros and not EW. My bad there.
That's still very clearly a promo shot and not a shot from the film proper.
You're now comparing anamorphic wide shots from one film to mid close up shots from production B-roll photographers in another.
I think the BR2049 picture is a production still, actually.
Imagine if Ridley Scott went back to Blade Runner and adjusted it to suit his current sensibilities.
Oh, we don't have to imagine it.
Is it too hopeful for me to believe that in 2049 they would have solved the climate change problem? Those spinners are electric aren't they?
Bobby Roberts
Banned
^^that's some good shit
Into the Light
Banned
^^^ LOL. it is.
The original Blade Runner is filthy and grimy now? What? Even the seedier locations looked relatively clean.
I thought I predicted all the nitpicks people would have, but damn some of you have outdone me. Faulty memory is all I can chalk it up to. That or the last time you watched Blade Runner was the Director's Cut DVD with its crappy dark transfer. Go watch Blade Runner on Blu-Ray, whichever cut you like.
Also I agree with everyone saying Deckard sucked and is a rapist.
I thought I predicted all the nitpicks people would have, but damn some of you have outdone me. Faulty memory is all I can chalk it up to. That or the last time you watched Blade Runner was the Director's Cut DVD with its crappy dark transfer. Go watch Blade Runner on Blu-Ray, whichever cut you like.
Also I agree with everyone saying Deckard sucked and is a rapist.
