PLEASE BE GOOD PLEASE BE GOOD

PLEASE BE GOOD PLEASE BE GOOD

youtube.com/watch?v=haXvp8M9Cog

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=-DSVDcw6iW8
youtube.com/watch?v=mSEUpJIg52U
my.mixtape.moe/dhmvvh.webm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Wow it does look fucking good

desu I wanted Vangelis to write the score but let's hope it will turn out well.

So, i guess Dekard wasnt a replicant. Or is there a way for repliants to age?

The twist is he's a newly made old man replicant implanted with the memories of the old Deckard.

>Denis Villeneuve
>Roger Deakins

Only plebs think this will fail

Maybe Gosling needs the guidance of Ford who will subsequently die later

It's gonna kill my childhood pretty sure. I don't like the sound design or cinematography. It's just too loud.

I think they should have tried to make it look more 80s visually even if this happens in 2049. Like an MTV video feel or something. This is too Mad Max and too slick for my taste.

And is it happening in North Korea? That building which Gosling enters has some weird Asian characters on its entrance.

...

That would be pretty good. Although I really don't want them to outright confirm he was a replicant. I guess that twist wouldn't mean old Deckard was definitively a replicant though. I'd be okay with this.

>Dat music at the end

I get nice chills

>And is it happening in North Korea? That building which Gosling enters has some weird Asian characters on its entrance.
Bait?

Please for the love of god fuck off with this shithouse attempt at a minimalist poster

Taking a title literally does not make it minimalist

Is Blade Runner the coolest name for anything ever? I can't think of a more awesome title.

DUDE RAIN AND NEON LIGHTS LMAO

kinoneuve is a future master but I have no hope for this. it should be pretty at least - outside of the above lmao meme shots that have been done 9000 times before.

>it should be pretty at least
This. Scott is still capable of making pretty images. That's all I'm hoping for. Even if you hated Prometheus it's a great looking film.

>blade runner
>he runs on the dull side of the knife

...

w2c Gosling's coat?

I like it.

Ridley Scott is not directing BR 2049

Roger Deakins is DP; not Jordan Corenwealth

he's a big guy

Has Ridley Scott done anything bad recently? Don't know how I feel about Denis Villeneuve as director.

I actually think I am optimistic about this. I thought the scenes in the city were flashbacks of footage from the original movie at first, but it looks like that is just part of the film. Not going to be building a shrine to this, but I feel slightly optimistic.

Villeneuve definitely captured the look and feel. I knew he would. Let's just hope the script isn't shit like the original.

It's already kino.

My friend's hot mom

This. I need that coat.

hahahhaa holy fuck, for the first time in my internet life, i actually laughed at something, not just a smile, a fucking laugh

Please watch the first film again, you fucking retard.

Die, faggot; you're a retard.

Do Replicants even feel emotions?

I love what they went with for the logo. No unnecessary minimalist update like every other sci-fi title.

Why technology not improve in 30 years time?

Perfect response. Thanks for the (You)

I still stand by my point

The twist is that Gosling is the replicant

Ironic, really.
youtube.com/watch?v=-DSVDcw6iW8

>things were simpler then

could he be a worse actor? be honest

Except Twin Peaks, I think this is what I'm most excited for right now. I'll actually go see this in the theaters. Literally haven't been since TFA which sucked anyway.

Why would you respond like that to ? He is commenting on the fact that Deckard is still alive when he should have died/been decommissioned months or maybe a year after the movie. Instead he has aged and is still alive today.

Unless you didn't see the director's cut or any of the actual versions of the movie that don't have that forced daylight car ride ending. You do know what the unicorn dream and the origami figure represents, right?

Watch Blade Runner again, it is pretty obvious that some of them feel emotions and can actually experience things. It seems like some Replicants are less advanced like Leon who are missing a few zeroes, but Deckard, Roy, and Rachel are very articulate and emotional.

The book is different with the Replicants more like emotionless A.I. who can understand the concept of emotion and exploit it, but lack empathy or any form of living human connection with other living things. Though that also seems to be by choice, because there is a Replicant that is programmed to think he is a human police officer and has an emotional breakdown when he discovers the truth.

>Literally haven't been since TFA which sucked anyway.

No one asked.

no one cares.

>Deckard
he is not a replicant get over with it

Did you ever watch the original?

Ville makes ok movies, nothing even close to what early career scott did. This movie will suck

This, their proven duo but Deakins more than anything is proof.

cared enough to reply : - )

He is a Replicant in every single version of the movie besides the second cut of the theatrical release that was changed because people in the test screening didn't like bittersweet endings and the fact that Rachel and Deckard were going to die.

I'm so fucking hyped

Please be good

>Blade Runner 2049
>Cyberpunk 2077

Best genre is back

youtube.com/watch?v=mSEUpJIg52U

No, it's left ambiguous in every version except the one where Ridley Scott shit the bed and edited in some random unicorn footage to cement his personal opinion that Dekard was a replicant.

It was originally and should have been left ambiguous, which is the whole point of the movie; blurring the lines that define what it means to be human.

...

>The Counselor

shittiest movie i've seen in years.

When's the last time Ridley made anything good?

MORE REAL
THAN HUMAN BEANS
my.mixtape.moe/dhmvvh.webm

American Gangster

IT'S TOO BAD MY HANDS ARE A LITTLE DIRTY
BUT THEN AGAIN WHOSE AREN'T

JESUS CHRIST

It's too bad he won't drive...

Michael Mann made that movie

holy fuck

I like that

I could be wrong about this but it seems to me that with the hostile desert landscape they're taking some inspiration from the next best thing to H.R. Giger - Zdzislaw Beksinski

Well played my good sir.

...

>le spooky landscapes from bones man
he is NOTHING like Giger, take that back

>tfw that place looks more interesting than anywhere youve been in 10 years

dont forget ghost in the shell

>>forced daylight car ride ending
What the hell? I've seen the extended and final cut, and I don't remember this.
>>Declare finds the origarmi unicorn, and flees with his replicant honey.

What the fuck is this giant head?

A decaying replicant factory?

...

In the books, he is human.
In Scott's film adaptation, he is a replicant.

...

>implying that place isn't more interesting than any place anyone alive has been to in a 100 years

It's a narrow walk way with 60 meter tall statue of spooky skeleton lords. What's more interesting than that?

Anyone have a cinegrid for the trailer yet?

...

...

>/vg/

Soundtrack by Mitch Murder, Kavinsky and College + Electric Youth

so..first day on the web huh? welcome

I had your job once...
PART TIME

Living in isolation on mars Rick Deckard comes face to face with a Replicant LAPD Officer K (Ryan Gosling) who has come to ask for his help, in hunting down four rouge Replicants, upon returning to earth Deckard sees life has change dramatically from his simpler past.

Sex bots everywhere.

It's the same plot as the first movie.

I don't know the lifespan of replicants, but do their skin age like Terminators?

If so, it's possible Gosling is there to retire Ford.

Villeneuve should have cast Jake instead of Gosling

It was implied in the first movie that they only live for like 4 years, or maybe it was 6?

And that towards the end they go a little crazy.

I hope in the sequel they show a little bit of the BR universe outside of Earth. The stuff Roy talked about sounded interesting to watch.

I'm looking at you

Ah, you're also a retard. You fucking retard.

What makes that shit good is the knowledge it exists but we don't get to see it. The movie is a tiny fraction of a world that feels bigger. The limited scope is what makes it good.

This is a problem with sequels. Remember seeing Zion in the Matrix sequels?

That's the director's cut. The one that ends on the elevator once he understands he is a replicant.

On the theatrical version not only his replicant nature is more ambiguous and unconfirmed but they run away together somewhere out of the city on a car on broad daylight leaving the darkness of the city behind...

So on that version he is not a replicant and runs away to save her and nothing more...

He is producing though, not directing. The director is the guy from "Arrival".

The director's cut (AKA definite canon version) implies that while Roy was more than human and thus got his life hampered Dekard was made to be "human like", which could be interpreted as both, that he is weaker and less intelligent than Roy but at the same time it could mean he has more time or the capacity to live as a human.

They don't actually have to go there, just showing something like in the news on a tv screen or something would be good enough.

At what point did the Director's Cut become the canon verison?

>Has Ridley Scott done anything bad recently?
Only ever movie post '85.

When it was objectively the best version.

The cave, remember what we were forced to watch in the cave!

Seriously though, the Matrix sequels were just so terrible. They made Neo unbeatable, and half of the fights were about the villains getting him away from the fight so that they could fight Morpheus and Trinity. Then the way Zion acts when the literally Jesus character walks in is just silly.

>it's a soft reboot

Think the movie looks okay but agree he was miscast. Should've been Fassbender.

ofcourse its not gonna be fucking good. its going to be yet another great looking but godawful movie like everything else released in a long time

No, it was said flat-out that Nexus-6 models die in four years, but that Rachel's type—presumably the Nexus-7—don't have artificial expirations. It was also never addressed whether the 7s would appear to age the same way humans do, so I think we can assume, if Deckard is indeed a Replicant, that they do.

Also: ATTENTION ALL CASUALS. PLEASE WATCH THE FIRST FILM AGAIN AND MAKE YOU SURE UNDERSTAND IT AND CAN RECOUNT THE ELEMENTARY DETAILS BEFORE YOU SHIT UP THESE THREADS WITH YOUR FAGGOTRY. THIS IS NOT A REMAKE OR A REBOOT, AND GETTING ANUS-HURT ABOUT DECKARD AGING IGNORES A NUMBER OF ESTABLISHED FACTS WHICH YOU SHOULD ALREADY KNOW.

PLEASE GROW A BRAIN AND FILL IT WITH INFORMATION BEFORE SPERGING. THANK YOU.

1) I'm fucking tired of "soft reboots". Especially ones like TFA that end up almost being a shot-for-shot remake.

2) I'm REALLY fucking tired of seeing sequels to classic Harrison Ford movies decades later where we have to see our favorite characters reprised by an old grumpy version of Harrison Ford

3) Deckard being a replicant is fucking stupid. I don't even care if that's what Ridley Scott proclaims to be canon. It's retarded. It completely undercuts the moral of the story about how people can realize that these replicants are just as human as themselves. And the implications it causes create this bullshit "hurr everyone is a replicant!" speculation that feels like it comes straight out of Battlestar Galactica.

Why are they releasing the trailer 33 years early?

you

>The cave, remember what we were forced to watch in the cave!
I never thought of it in reference to that before, but yes, that makes sense.