JUST

>>87597327
IT GOT THE CLUELESS GITS 2017 TREATMENT

STILL THE ONLY DECENT THING ON THE SCHEDULE FOR OCTOBER

File: v.jpg (84KB, 665x437px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 665x437px

>ana de armas keeps getting work

>>87597327
I was gonna give you shit for cherry picking but I can't recall any bad shots in Blade Runner

>it must all look the same 30 years after the first part in every part of the world

Eat shit.

There will be flaws. But not this

>>87597361
new lego movie m8

>action scifi of a film noir
>no vangelis
>unwanted sequel
>clear as day cash in on cult film

>>87597361
Despite all it's problems GitS still LOOKED good

>remake of a classic movie is shit
Wow who could've guessed.

Flat lighting everywhere

Yikes is this shot with a old digital camera or is it just shit color grading?

>>87597749
>hire hacks (Villeneuve/Deakins)
>get shit
who wudda thunk it

File: 1502096147024.jpg (207KB, 840x567px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 840x567px

>>87597784
I'll still go see it but im less hype now reee

>Casting hack meme actors such as leto and goose
goose is only good in autism and comedy
leto is moms spaghetti

>>87597327
desu it's largely a cinematography choice, with the screen less cluttered, viewers will focus more on the center, and notice less cheese

>>87597327
bottom right looks like Ford rocked up to set after everyone had left

i just want ana de armas to spread her pussy for me

>>87597524
>everything should look bland like my marvel movies

>>87597327
FUCK

WHY

>realize blade runner is going to sell on name alone
>make budget 10 million
>make shit movie
>make 100+ million profit from dummies

File: dog kill me.jpg (58KB, 374x500px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 374x500px

My biggest problem with movies today is that almost none of them have any grit to them. They all look so clean, even the ones meant to take place in a dirty, dystopian, cyberpunk future.

>>87598236
there's something dystopian about everything being excessively clean too, retard.

>>87597524
the purpose in the original was to make earth seem less enticing and for it to make sense for people to want to go to the colonies

>>87598179
BASED

isn't it implied a nuclear attack occurred in Asia, and hence why so much of LA was asian? (in the original)

its been a while since I watched, cant remember. Seems like the perfect reason to throw in more asians without it feeling too forced. gotta bump up that box office

>>87598330
He was hanging out in Chinatown

>>87597561
>reddit blocks movie
are you 12?

>>87598330
It was filmed at a time where Americans were really scared Japan was going to buy the country out from under them. Or at least that was the meme in circulation anyway.

>>87597327
God I saw the trailer for this

it hurt my fucking soul

>>87598330
No, just Dick foreseeing future that most of the world's population will be asian.

>>87598330
the book implied that there was a nuclear attack or accident that had happened that made like 80% of the planet uninhabitable because of a mysterious dust cloud, that caused genetic defects, that seemingly appear out of nowhere

File: f63.jpg (41KB, 396x382px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 396x382px

>>87597383
Take it back

>>87597711
It's not a remake dumbass, it's a continuation a.k.a soft reboot

doesn't make it any less shitty though

>>87597327
>B-BUT MUH DEAKINS - t. Reddit

File: 1469624346195.gif (930KB, 200x133px) Image search: [Google]

930KB, 200x133px

>>87597327
>Cherry picking scenes for a attention seeking post
Never change /tv/

File: blade runner 2049.jpg (187KB, 1740x1729px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1740x1729px

>>87597327
>4 entirely different locations on the left
>2 on the right with 3 frames of same
fuck off

anybody can nitpick a few frames, pic related

>>87597327
I fucking hate futuristic movies where everything is concrete, grey and bland. Old Blade Runner had 100% better visuals.

>>87600222
/thread

>>87597327
Disco scene looks good
No excuses for Gosling apartment tho

>>87600241
pleb

See
>>87600222

>>87600222
left still looks better

checkd

>>87600222
Costumes doesn't look as good as the old one too.
And I'm not even talking about Harrison Ford's t-shirt costume.

>>87600295
Keep shilling your nostalgia cashgrab I'm sure you'll get paid in no time.

>>87598330
The book gives some info about ww terminus

File: 2049.jpg (16KB, 676x282px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 676x282px

You're all acting like they wanted to make it gritty and dense like the original and made it "clean" by mistake.
It clearly doesn't try to look like exactly like the original, you think Deakins wouldn't shoot on film on the same camera with the same exact setup if he wanted for it to look exactly the same? And you can't argue about visuals until you see the film and if the visuals fit the narrative, making it look quite empty and clean is clearly a strong stylistic choice most probably because of the narrative which should support it.

>>87600323
Fords costume in this is great for cosplayers

>>87600222
Left still looks much more atmospheric, coherent, consistent and homogenous.
Right looks like Marvel capeshit first time director wanted to show off his mad film school skillz.

>>87600222
the one on the right still looks like a generic shitty dystopian future from a 2010's movie

>>87600222
>Alien engineers
too blatant easter egg

>>87600581
Ridley can't help but shove meaningless lore anywhere he can.

>>87598236
lmao fucking idiot

File: br_statue.jpg (957KB, 1768x742px) Image search: [Google]

957KB, 1768x742px

>Runtime: 2 hours and 49 minutes
The film will be pure visual storytelling with the classic Villeneuve slow tension building narrative and /tv/ will immediately call it "boring" and "nothing happens" because they expected explosions and heavy action because of the mismarketed trailer.
Screencap if you want.

>>87600714
>the classic Villeneuve slow tension building narrative
"classic" lmao you fucking egg

>>87600222
>nitpicks to make new one look good
>old one still looks better

kek

>>87600817
I know right, embarrasing

File: 21273525_1814924495191310_3874896418819232754_o.jpg (54KB, 604x1000px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 604x1000px

>>87600581
>>87600662
I hope that the Blade Runner, Alien and Prometheus universes are now a shared universe. Imagine all the great movies we'll get.

>>87600714
i bet i could easily point out an entire hour that could be cut with no problem after seeing this. 2h49 is much too long.

>>87598267
Fuck off, everything in sci-fi looks like a fucking Applestore nowadays. It's just unispired and lazy

wtf?
Tell me that's just shots of the actors audition or something

>>87600885
So whichwhich hour would you "cut" out of Das Boot then? Lawrence of Arabia? Godfather II? Andrei Rublev?

>>87600906
that's just shots of the actors audition or something

>>87600885
Asolute pleb.

>>87600883
>getting good movies in 2017+

>>87600926
>comparing villeneuve to these
oh i am laffin

File: 1491237659931.jpg (30KB, 411x380px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 411x380px

>>87600714
he made it 2h 49m because it's 2049 didn't he

>>87597383
my dick can't help it anon

>>87601019
HAHAAHAHAHA

File: woah.jpg (47KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1280x720px

>>87601019

File: Dana-Scully-dana-scully-25301499-2560-1709.jpg (1MB, 2560x1709px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1709px

>>87597327
Film will always be superior.
Digital loving dipshits need to get this through their thick skulls.

File: 1498276114770.jpg (17KB, 262x228px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 262x228px

>>87601019

>>87597327
holy fuck, how can they be so bad

File: Untitled.jpg (33KB, 481x372px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 481x372px

>>87601019
Google says it's 2 hours and 43 minutes

>>87600926
>Andrei Rublev
you've exposed yourself as a neet

>>87601093
>2 + 4 + 3 = 9

>>87600883
so that's what Gigolo Joe looks like

>>87601058
I can't tell if you're serious, the difference in these shots is entirely lighting direction or lack thereof

>>87601128
Is that your iq?

>>87598236
because of this>>87597891

>>87601019
shut the uck up james

>>87597891
t. first year film studies student lmao

File: 20170911072013.jpg (10KB, 541x258px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 541x258px

hey, that's her.
We got to see her boobs in this film or not?

its like what a fan thinks of Bladerunner should look like

>>87600222
Even here left looks way better.
Right looks like guardian of the galaxy.
Is it because of digital camera?
Let's not even talk about the accessories, the costumes, the decor.

>>87600516
>dude IA lmao, should i care about my computer?
Here i gave you the narrative.

>>87601356
yeah anon, this is exactly what I thought

but no, it looks like generic marvel flick because the illumination is bad and it's paired with bad set pieces

>>87601395
you could say the same thing about the original

>>87601484
but it was original back then.

>>87601518
lmao nice delusion you fucking idiot

>>87601356
This.
It just looks like any bland digital capeshit from the past 10 years to me.
It has no own character, no soul, no heart. It looks like those "paint by the numbers" checklist committee flicks.
Take any Marvel dreck since Iron Man 1, Robocop reboot, Total Recall reboot, Ghost in the Shell from last year. They all look the same.
>BUT MUH VILLENEUVE MUH DEAKINS
Absolute 5/10 meme director and meme dop.

File: 1495788616034.png (30KB, 564x584px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 564x584px

>>87597327

WHERE DID THE MONEY GO

Why is it so fucking sparse and ugly? The entire point of the aesthetic was the fantastic setting where you feel the oppressive weight of overpopulation and decaying old shit stacked on top of new things. That is the cyberpunk way.

The new movie looks like some fucking Scandinavian drama taking place in commie blocks.

>>87597383
The gay board is /co/. Stay there.

>>87600714
literally this
is there actually a shill campaign against this film?
since the first teaser, there have been idiots slagging this film off non-stop

>>87601518
Not really. Blade Runner didn't invent the concept of AI.

File: 1476532242282.gif (2MB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 600x600px

>>87601019

Absolute pottery.

>>87601619
found the liberal

>>87597784
>implying Deakins is a hack
Fucking plebs I swear.

>>87601356
>Is it because of digital camera?
Every time someone asks a question this stupid, I can hear Lucas spinning in his grave
No is the short answer to that
The long answer is kinda, but only in the sense that shooting digital gives you more flexibility to control the image and so a conscious effort was made to have it look like how it looks. If they wanted it to look the original, that is beyond easy to do on a digital camera

>>87600883
I hate you and I hope you die.

>>87601656
don't you have a cuck shed to be waiting in?

File: br2049_LSDXHsaC.jpg (437KB, 2600x1800px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 2600x1800px

>>87601576
>The entire point of the aesthetic was the fantastic setting where you feel the oppressive weight of overpopulation and decaying old shit stacked on top of new things
Well clearly the entire point of the new one that the world after 30 years isn't the same overpopulated world we've seen and that it is sterile and empty. Why would you want it to look the same and be about the same thing?

>WHERE DID THE MONEY GO
Basically every set piece is completely practical, minimal use of CGI.

>>87601619
>people are tired of reboots/remakes

imagine my shock

>>87601560
Only dredd reboot was an exception.

>>87601750
nice shilling you coward

>>87601759
>meanwhile everyone's been furiously masturbating to the new It for the last 3 months

File: 1422845896855.jpg (264KB, 693x849px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 693x849px

>shooting a Blade Runner remake on digital

>>87601680
Deakins is an overrated hack memester who hasn't won a single oscar despite being nominated like 11 times. he is like a living, breathing solid shit - nothing out of the ordinary and the only ones who suck his dick are 1st semester film school plebbitors. He is the MTV music video director of the Y2K10s.

>>87597327
The '80s were a different time, we will never be able to have sci-fi likes the ones from the '80s.

>>87601802
You fell for shills spamming the board, /tv/ moslty hated IT since it was announced.

File: HAPPYleo.png (256KB, 273x354px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 273x354px

>>87601821
>thinking your opinion is worth shit

>>87601826
Now form an actual valid argument without using any buzzwords please.
Talk about why is his work not good instead of talking about some random film students praising him.

File: 1490252168605.jpg (27KB, 750x422px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 750x422px

>>87597561
What?

File: 1504462547325.jpg (28KB, 540x960px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 540x960px

>>87601019
You weren't always cool.

>>87601855
>Talk about why is his work not good
burden of roof is on you, YOU need to provide evidence for why he is a good DOP. but you can't because he sucks.

File: dawson-social_11.jpg (124KB, 900x470px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 900x470px

>>87597561
>lets replace the ginger with a nigress

every fucking time

>>87601750
>the entire point of the new one that the world after 30 years isn't the same overpopulated world we've seen

Yeah the entire world changed in 30 years.

> Why would you want it to look the same

Visual consistency should be the bridge between the films, otherwise you can just make a new IP you cunt.

> and be about the same thing?

When the fuck did I say anything about the content. It can be about something new, I welcome it. The visual identity and framework are the only things that need to transfer to be the glue binding the stories into the same world.

Hell I have nothing against opening up the entire world it's set in, into some shared universe cyberpunk story. Films and movies. Cyberpunk is criminally underused and is shockingly on the money for what our future is steering toward.

>>87600222
I originally decided not to see it based on OP's image, but after seeing this I've decided to see it again.

>>87597524
Is not that is different,is looks like shit.

So bland and generic looking, no effort.

>>87597601

not just good, but great

>>87601944
And I've not been paid to make this post, this is the personal opinion of a moviegoer.

>watch the new pirates of the caribbean
>looks washed out and lifeless
>look at these pictures
>the same

T-thanks CGI....But really, every second fucking movie is boring, bland and tasteless. Like it's streamlined so it won't have too much of a style and impact and retards can enjoy it.

>>87600883

They have been since Prometheus marketing had Weyland name Tyrell in an email

>>87597891
Isnt the point of the original blade runner to show that the future is an overpopulated polluted shithole?.

How did they get away with this with scott permission?.

>>87601937
>Yeah the entire world changed in 30 years.
A simple war or government exchange can do that, yes. And no one said the entire world, I meant the setting we see in the movie.

>Visual consistency should be the bridge between the films, otherwise you can just make a new IP you cunt.
The new film is still very much heavily stylistic and has a focus on the visuals and the atmosphere, not the plot points, just like the original. Visual consistency isn't just replicating the entire look as close as possible.

>When the fuck did I say anything about the content
"Overpopulation" and "decaying old shit stacked on top of new things" is pretty much the content of the original movie.

>>87602022
All of those shots are completely practical my man. There is little to no CGI in the new Blade Runner.

>>87598450
Now the fear is China, so the film stays current.

This is going to suck so bad

>>87597361
GITS had many problems but its look wasn't one of them.

>>87602096

THOSE shots are and yet they are still boring as shit.

>>87597601
>>87601994
no it didn't

>>87597891
>t. retard.

>>87600222
You do know that the left one is objectively better right?.
Are you able to recognize the plebness of the remake at least?

>>87601680
>thinking Deakins isn't a hack
>calls others plebs
lmao rēddit

>>87600222
It's tragic that you think this shows 2049 in goodlight. Composition and framing of each scene is literally according to the most basic interpretation of rule of thirds or halves.

It's hackwork.

>>87597784
It could be worse. It could be Iñarritu/Lubezki.

>>87597327
this is what fucks me off about present day future movies everything "clean and minimal" around people..

no.

>>87600714
Villeneuve is a hack. Both Prisoners and Sicario clearly show this spic cannot understand moral depths or come to conclusions that make sense after a moral dilemma has been introduced.

Watch more films, embryo.

>>87600222
nice fucking job, the one on the left still looks better, good luck next time

>>87602248
>this spic

he's from quebec lol

>>87600926
>Comparing any work of /v/illenu to Lean, Coppola or Tarkovsky.
Watch more films, for starts, those you mentioned.

Alright fags, cinematography looks worse than the original but still you have to compare it with all the garbage release it this days.
I mean still looks 10 times better than nu-starwars and capeshit.

How are the performances?

File: 1438917800089.jpg (176KB, 568x543px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 568x543px

>>87600222
its fucking hilarious how you nitpick in favor of the new and it STILL looks worse

>>87602248
>that verbiage
go back

>>87597784
>Denis
>Deakins
>Hacks

Fuck this board. Too many fucking plebs these are literaly the kinds of faggots who make capeshit and GoT threads every single day

GITS was shit, but I'll unironically laugh if gits had more environment than blade runner

File: No Country for Old Men.jpg (627KB, 1600x666px) Image search: [Google]

627KB, 1600x666px

>>87601886
He literally tells the story with his visuals, zero gimmicks and zero attention calling to himself with some extravagant camera moves which have no correllation to the narrative.
Not one frame of his films is made just to look like an empty pretty picture, his framing and composition is always in support of the narrative and the lighting is always motivated, not just blindly stylistic to look "good".

Also 13 Oscar nominations are not bad I think.

>>87602283
some shots look like they came from guardians of the galaxy, so fuck off

>>87597327
Fantastic.

Compare one location of expository dialogue to 4 sets from the other. Seems fair.

File: 1504066070242.jpg (130KB, 1242x1191px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1242x1191px

>>87598450
>australia land and canada houses all belongs to china now
>it's just xenophobia guys, lets remove that social commentary we don't want to offend our chinese market XD

>>87602329
>If you don't watch Denis or Villeneuve you are GOT shitter.

It's truly astounding how much of a pleb this outs you as. First you think you have found the depth of patricianhood in Deakins and Denis Villeneuve, thus everyone is GOT shitter.

This conclusion tells more about how pleb you and your neural connections are than it tells about anything else.

Start watching They Shoot Pictures Don't They list, maybe someday you stop being such a gigapleb.

>>87602208
>Composition and framing of each scene is literally according to the most basic interpretation of rule of thirds or halves.
And the left one isn't?

>>87602374
can confirm
t. aussie

>>87602371
read the whole thread before replying retard

>>87602329
a nolan wannabe and an old hack, atleast capeshit entertains some people.

Not going to defend the new one but the original was way too dark and black.

>>87602360
Coens have always reigned in Shitkins with the exception of True Grit which looked like garbage.

but it's clear hack directors like Mendes and /V/illeneuve use Deakins to shine shit, but if you are smart it won't work.

>>87598289
>forgetting the happy end ending withthe shining footage

File: VittorioStoraro-SergioUghi2009.jpg (287KB, 1487x1772px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 1487x1772px

>>87602329
lad youre the pleb

File: landscape-1503393493-dave-bautista-blade-runner-2049.jpg (16KB, 640x320px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 640x320px

>>87602283
Dave Bautista will have the best performance of the entire cast, mark my words.

>>87602407
>a cyberpunk take on 50's noir
>too dark

it wasn't for you

>>87602384
It's far more inspired on the left (overall).

File: IMG_2501.jpg (24KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 480x360px

>>87602424
Iam ok with this earth
>>87598289

>>87602067
>"Overpopulation" and "decaying old shit stacked on top of new things" is pretty much the content of the original movie.

Opinion discarded.

>>87602402
In what way is Villeneuve like Nolan?
Villeneuve is closer to Fincher than to Nolan in terms of the execution.

>>87602375
Instead of using memewords, Please name us a better director and cinematographer currently working today.

>>87598025
I hate marvel senpai

>>87602481
>implying it's better

>>87602450
You shit on the framing and composition of the new one because it follows the basic rules of photography, but it's good in the first one because it's "inspired"?
holy fuck my dude you're lost

File: unnamed-2-6.jpg (87KB, 1344x662px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1344x662px

>>87602483
Allen/Storaro. now fuck off

>>87602481
you obviously aren't knowledgeable enough to carry on this conversation so I'm just going to leave

>>87602512
Who said it's better? I just said the comparing Villeneuve to Nolan is stupid.

>>87602364
>looks the same as guardians of the Galaxy.
>This is the kind of pleb posting on this thread.

Why are you guys arguing with fucking plebs?
They literally cant tell apart one movie from the other

File: amy-schumer.jpg (61KB, 980x490px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 980x490px

>>87602375
>Denis or Villeneuve
lmao, imagine being this stupid

>>87602539
Underexposed stylistic lighting with crushed blacks, cluttered blocking and the framing and composition of a TV show.
Try again.

>>87602481
Nolan fanboys got very triggered when Arrival was a fresh take on sci-fi and a genuine masterpiece, after Interstellar was a piece of shit ripoff of 2001

I am 100% convinced that all of the posters in this thread know of maybe of two or three cinematographers in total, but shit on Deakins just because he's popular.
Never change /tv/.

>>87602611
>actually ripping on Cafe Society cinematography while claim Villenueve/Deakins are best working
jesus christ I can smell the teenager on you

It's stylistically designed to be that way

>>87601850
>image i took still being used

yeah

>American ''''cinema''''
Nolan, Fincher or Villeneuve if you think any of these directors are good then you don't have any taste in cinema and you shouldn't express your opinions.

File: 1502877460083.gif (993KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

993KB, 250x250px

>>87602539
>Allen.
Jesus fucking christ kid.

I know theres not many good directors around but but cv at least pick someone with a cleaner record.

>>87601175
This. At least to me, digital cinematography just looks better, not in this particular case though.

File: 2-64-.png (977KB, 1200x578px) Image search: [Google]

977KB, 1200x578px

LADS! imagine actually not rating the photography from Cafe Society. The sole film in existence to prove that digital film can be as good as 35mm. Imagine being this much of a redditor to OPENLY admit you have a crap opinion.

Literally worse than a public shaming

>>87602483
Doyle, Lubezki, Soderbergh, Elswit, R., Lipes, Ihre, Lachman, Cronenweth, Prieto,Erdely,Richardson, HHH, Arkapaw, Debie, Godard (or Denis).

>>87602522
Yes it's unironically better in the older because the images are full of atmosphere and feel unlike the TV-show looking garbage /v/illeshit has vomited out of Deakins's anus

The lightning alone makes the cinematogrpahy of the original better.

>>87602686
This. All three are trash can directors and their fans irredeemable plebeian shitstains.

File: blade runner 2050.jpg (736KB, 1740x1729px) Image search: [Google]

736KB, 1740x1729px

>>87600222
Just up the contrast, desaturate, and nuke the highlights and it looks slightly better.

>>87602776
now we are talking

>>87597327
>practical effects
vs
>cgi movie
Can't choose

>>87602650
>actually defending a surface-level self indulgent utterly forgettable Allen film that is just an empty "pretty" collage of references to the golden age of Hollywood
jesus christ I can smell the tumblr on you

>>87602776
the first and last shots look better, the second and third are still too light

File: pl3ykgapasr6rfx1c373.jpg (19KB, 680x288px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 680x288px

>>87602748
>Using the tired sleek look as example of digital.
>not appreciating the true power of digital

>>87602686
Nolan and Villeneuve never made a single "bad" film, ever.
Prove me wrong.

>>87602823
lad, youve been rumbled as a clueless redditor. shitting on good cinematography has proven this

>>87602849
You are right, they haven't made "bad" film, they've made bad films.

>>87602444
Doesn't mean the screen has to be half black at all times.

>>87602748
>that awful green screen
Are you even trying?

>>87602765
Lubezki is just a "handheld/long take" gimmick machine now, Children of Men is the last good film he shot.

>>87602891
Hot take, go wank over more dead Deakins images.

"Oh so smart, body in the corner, murderer in the front, I CAN CONNECT DOTS, VISUAL STROYTELLING bOYS"

>>87602374
Things like wanting to have a country are racism & xenophobia! White folk are a dying breed! We'll all be brown in the future!

>>87602444
Back then America was white, so people could conceive of living in dense communities next to other whites.
Now we're in shitskin land...

>>87602748
This. Film had its time but digital surpassed it. In a few decades people will stop looking at film wearing nostalgia goggles and will realize digital cinematography looks way more aesthetic.

>>87602876
I can tell by your post you dont follow films much. CS is literally one of those films where the photography cannot be questioned, please learn this to save further embarrassment

>>87602855
"Good cinematography" isn't just empty pretty pictures anon, the visual narrative is the most important aspect.

Quality cinematography isn't just pretty frames but actually telling the story using visual narrative through framing and composition and the performances.
So the context is important, you can't judge it by a screenshot alone.

There is technically bad cinematography, like too strong obvious night scene lighting or breaking the 180 rule for no reason.
And there is bad cinematography because of the lack of actual substance, empty pretty pictures which only fill the form without actually using framing and composition to propell the visual narrative.
And I think the second one is a bigger problem in today's industry because everyone can learn basic photography and produce balanced well framed pictures, but it takes talent/vision to be able to actually tell the story through the visuals.

End of blog post

File: 1334903567300.jpg (61KB, 333x500px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 333x500px

>2 hours 43 minute of LOOK I'M CINEMATOGRAPHING

>>87602946
not even bothering to read, youve shown your stupid opinion.

>>87602946
how fucking pleb are you?at least stop parroting other people's opinions.

fucking retard

>>87602748
That film looks very decent, but everything about it is the usual Woody Allen garbage.

On the other hand Most good cinematographers are dead, and Hollywood is dominated with tv hacks like jj Abrahams.
We have to be appreciate the ones putting the extra effort.

>>87602424
>intentionally watching the inferior version

>>87602765
>Currently working.
>Post dead people

Stop trying to pretend you didn't google that list you fucking pleb.

>>87602891
YOU DUMB PLEB PIECE OF SHIT, DONT even dare to shit on Lubezki. He's literally the greatest cinematographer of all time. He won three fucking OSCARS IN A ROW. Deakshitns haven't even won a single one. LMAO

>>87602914
Why would it need to be "smart"? Is it bad because it's straightforward?
Do you think shoving symbolism and hidden meaning everywhere is "smart"?

>>87602984
Storaro is probably the best working today and his previous work speaks for itself
>Apocalypse Now
>Dick Tracy (cinematography)

>>87603021
Bad bait.

>>87603020
I googled dops of my favorite directors. But shitkins is still shittier than them.

>>87603045
>"best working today"
>his last good film was in 1979
lmao good one anon

>>87603063
How? Form a single coherent buzzword-free sentence of why is any of his work bad.
Use any shot or film as an example.

>>87602944
I was able to spot a shitty green screen from a still thumbnail, so it can. The fake Technicolor also looks like shit.

>>87603084
last good film was Cafe Society, anon. broke the boundaries for shitty digital film

>>87601259
Wasn't she a porn star? Is that the joke

>>87602438
The guy has really turned out to be a pretty impressive actor. Even in Bushwick, his performace was excellent.

>>87598403
>anon is so autistic he didn't even play with legos as a kid

File: 1490435365362.gif (4MB, 280x302px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 280x302px

>>87597327
>OLD: Harrison at ground lvl aka the poorest area dive bar
>NEW: Human-bean in a highrise condo and a seemingly highlevel club

>>87602375
Nigga its the fact that they arent hacks. You're sense of scale is warped beyond imagination. Denis is like Tarantino: he makes solid blockbusters but fans suck his dick way too much.

But when you call a competent filmmaker a hack it naturally makes the majority even worse. How the fuck do you live on this planet when 95% of movies are uttet irreedemable shit.

List your 5 favorite films or ones you found good in the last couple years. Enlighten me please. Or are you just a film 10 pseudo that watches movies off the imbd top 200

>>87597327
In the future everyone will wear t-shirts

>>87603268
in the book the entire world is described as a total dump with the colony being the place where everything is clean and perfect

>>87603109
The images of 2049 are deader than fukushima's dead fish and convey nothing to the viewer other than videogame aesthetics.

>film vs digital

>>87603277
Moment of Innocence, To the Wonder, Miami Vice, A City of Sadness, Once Upon a Time in the West.

Tarantino's above garbage like Villeneuve. IB is morally too complex for Villeneuve to ever replicate in any form.

>>87603530
I said buzzword-free. Also you can't comment on a film that isn't even released yet, but you can pick any film from his vast filmography and use it as an example.

>>87603561
To The Wonder over Knight of Cups or Tree of Life?

I like Malick a lot, but I haven't seen that one. Others at least make me confident you have an opinion rather than being a imbdrone.

>>87603127
Just empty pretty pictures if we take it in context of the film.
Avatar also broke some technical boundaries, is it a great film because of it then?

>>87603676
>Avatar also broke some technical boundaries, is it a great film because of it then?
yes. where do you think you are

File: 1501953495863.webm (2MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x360px

Came to the thread to see someone dumping Ana de armas pics, what a dissapointment.

>>87601915
Go fuck off. Dawson is fucking hot, you sad incel

>>87603714
you are the most retarded person in this thread and there are people who think nolan is a good director here

>>87602402
>Nolan
>Good
LOL. Go end yourself, you dumb casual.

>>87597784
Name two better living directors than Villeneuve that are currently out there. I'll wait.

>>87602329
so cute. No, people who care about Villenueve, Nolan, Inarritu are only 1.5 steps above purely commercial Hollywood drivel. You're cinematically an infant so you haven't figure that out yet.

>>87597327
so it's like total recall then ?

>>87603820
Coen bros. That'll do it.

>>87603714
Oh look, a narcissist. How special.

wow /tv/ is especially cancerous today

>>87603825
Villeneuve beats the two by lenght.

>>87600222
Thank for proving that every shot from the original is superior

>>87603775
>>87603793
I repeat, Nolan never made a single "bad" film.
Prove me wrong.

>>87603929
It's you.

>>87603976
he made plenty bad movies

>>87603976
Lol.

>>87603986
Nope, every film he made is atleast above average.
Yes they are not absolute masterpieces, but not a single outright bad movie.

>>87603820
even Snyder is better than that hack

>>87603976
Neither did Michael Bay.

>>87600222
Original still looks better.

You tried.

>>87604028
>The Dark Knight Rises
>Above average
Lol

>>87600222
Still way too clean and Apple-product like.

I mean, fuck, that "dive bar" looks like a trendy hipster place.

>>87602686
100 percent my man

>Crying over a film that isn't out yet

Classic /tv/tardation.

>>87604081
It has poor writing and close quartet choreography, but that alone does not result in a bad movie. The set pieces are still impressive, the production design also, cinematography, soundtrack, costume design, sound design all pretty decent.
I'd say realistically a 6.5/10.

Try again.

File: 1501089910469.jpg (65KB, 362x358px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 362x358px

>>87597784
>Dennis VIlleneuve hack
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

File: caveman.jpg (38KB, 1180x1000px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 1180x1000px

>attempting to recreate 70s-80s sci-fi and concepts of what the future would look like

I love the way it looks but I gotta be honest you can't really do it anymore without it looking kind of goofy. I think the biggest problem with sci-fi right now is how nobody saw smartphones coming and it killed a lot of myths about how some things would be done. We hit peak engineering autism by about 2007 and it's just been about refining it ever since.

There's plenty of ideas you could do though for good modern sci-fi but there's just one big problem: Why the fuck would I tell you when I could make it myself? or why would anyone utter a word about making good modern sci-fi for free? You'd be insane to even speak of it. Everyone who knows how to do it right wont talk about it and I don't blame them, hollywood are parasites that gotta die out first.

>>87604237
>it's the hollywood jews fault my epic scifi idea will never be made

>>87604193
If that movie is above a 5 in your book you need to reconsider your standards.
Thanks for playing.

>>87604193
*close quarter choreography

>>87604148
It's going to be shit. It's a movie that doesn't need to be made, with a story that nobody asked for, in an attempt to cash in on an old IP that might bring some oldfags back into the poorly performing theaters. It's a cynical cash grab that's going to mar the name of the original for cheap, potentially profitable "nostalgia" points that retarded hipsters gobble up like candy these days.

>>87604336
>Denis Villeneuve directing
>Roger Deakins as the DP
>Hampton Fancher again on the screenplay
>Johan Johannsson and Hans Zimmer on the score
>Joe Walker as the editor
>Ryan Gosling as the main protagonist
>Ridley Scott as the executive producer

It's basically impossible for this movie to end up as a total flop, just can't happen on any level.

The least this film will be is mediocre, but there is no mediocre movie on /tv/, only "kino masterpieces" or "utter dogshit"
So it depends will it be closer to one extreme or another for a somewhat general /tv/ consensus

>>87597383
Faggot.

>>87604488
>Denis Villeneuve directing
>Roger Deakins as the DP
>Johan Johannsson and Hans Zimmer on the score
confirmed shit

Oh, /tv/ hates this?
Then it will be without a doubt be a highly critically acclaimed financially successful oscar winner loved by pretty much everyone.

/tv/ is literally NEVER right.

I'm slowly yet strongly growing to hate film and modern filmmaking in general so much. I can't even really put a finger on it why in particular.
It's just like it has become this bland, cold endeavuor which is all artificiality and no real artistic value at all. There are no artists anymore, only hipsters (if it was ever any different at all); arthouse as it were is dead and everything remotely resembling artistic or even personal statements must wear the codes of hipsters.

Films don't have impact on you unless you are a child and they change nothing in the world around them. At best they speak of a simulation of what we ought to have and should be able to access to at this point in modern society, which is a poor consolation.

It has gotten to the point where I can't even enjoy old films anymore, because all they do now is make me nostalgic, which I hate.
I don't know what to do to be honest; It all sucks.

>>87604307

I'm not mad and I'm not even a 'director' I'm just following the advice of god. "Do not cast pearls before swine"

>>87604643
I feel you. I blame Spielberg. He singlehandedly killed cinema as an artform with Jaws and proceeded to made it a marketspace for entertainment.

>>87603976
Inception, The Dark Knight Rises and Interstellar are all appalling films and offenses to the practice of filmmaking

>>87604706
>I'm just following the advice of god
Fag

>>87597327
>t-shirt and jeans

they aren't even trying

>>87603976
lol, Nolan defenders excited about Villenureddit's laughable hack job of "Blade Runner 2".

You can't even make up how bad the plebbery is here and how reddit it is. Just astounding.

File: 3d7fe50747c2b5f04bf66fbc933e8b1f7c3c6823e991659bf90d53c1918db38f.jpg (32KB, 600x531px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x531px

>>87601915
You fucking moron, it's a lego. It's a toy. If you're upset over the VA not looking like the character they're portraying, neck yourself.

>>87603498
>books never has been ignored in movie history before

>>87604908
not the point

>>87598330
It's written during the Jap bubble

People were fucking amazed at Japan's economy and confident they would take over the whole globe

Turns out it was all smoke and mirrors which is why Japan still has absolutely ginormous debt

>>87604854
>Villenureddit
>hack job
>plebbery
>reddit
How much empty buzzwords can you fit it in a single post?

>>87604749
Though not perfect, the world is a richer place with Inception and Interstellar being made.

>>87600222
how will /tv/ EVER RECOVER

>>87597327
>3 shots are just ONE location, probably even the same scene

Come on now. I'm pessimistic about it as well but at least cherry pick less obviously.

>>87604488
lol
The fact that Villenueve is directing GUARANTEES it won't be better than 5.5/10. You didn't need to list anything else. he is literally Nolan with less awkward dialogue and longer takes for "muh art." Maybe manchildren and housewives think he's a real artist though.

There is much potential for sub-5/10 here.

>>87597327

Times change buddy.

We went from Deus Ex level aesthetics to some fucking sterile chinese cesspool.

>>87597595
>unwanted sequel

You ought to realize the only alternative to this is an unwanted REBOOT.

sequel > reboot every time

>>87605064
No, no it isn't
Those films actively add to the dumbing-down of cinema and audiences, and the destruction of artistic integrity

>>87604588
>oscars
>critics
Are you suggesting that critics are right and oscars are given to great films? That outs you as a raging pleb.

>>87601232
james is still cool!

>>87605110
>he is literally Nolan with less awkward dialogue and longer takes for "muh art."
How? Explain in what ways is he similar to Nolan in terms of his execution

>>87605152
he was given lots of money to make a scifi film lol

>>87605027
Doesn't matter, because Villenueve, just like Nolan, will never get a movie on a top 1000 list because they are not great directors.

How many times do your thick pleb skulls have to be told this? No one who really cares about film will remember these hacks like they remember real directors.

Just fuck off to r/movies. Do you even know who David Lean is? Fucking manchildren.

>>87605098
see >>87600222
It looks worse even with counter cherrypicking

>>87605128
>the destruction of artistic integrity
What? If anyone has artistic integrity today it's Nolan. He makes every film out of passion/desire to make that film, not because some studio exec calculated what should be done.

I mean he even made an almost experimental original film that no one asked for with basically no dialogue in 2017 that is not a remake/reboot/sequel/prequel with a full white male brit cast and STILL made mad box office money.
His artistic integrity is completely intact, it's like he gets blank checks from the studio everytime and does whatever he wants to do.

>>87602269
I don't know if he's a spic but I can tell you that where he comes from has nothing to do with it.

>>87605202
Memento is on almost every acclaimed top 100 list ever, but you go on being an ignorant delusional cunt if you want.

>>87604588
This.

>>87604749
>No one tell him about Suicide Squad, Batman Versus Superman, Marvel Movies, Transformers, or any remake in the last 10 years.

>>87602776
This I Like

>>87597383
I thought it was Felicity Jones

>>87605202
What the fuck does David Lean have to do with anything? Are you implying that he was some obscure director or?

>>87605292
>If anyone has artistic integrity today it's Nolan.
Holy shit. Kill yourself.

>>87602625
Arrival was pretty fucking bad. It had ridiculous potential and some parts of figuring out the alien language were interesting to watch. But the time travel twist was simply illogical and there was ZERO chemistry between the main characters so no way to get invested in their romance arc. Can you imagine a man and a woman having less sexual tension than those two? Seriously. I have no idea why Jeremy Renner was ever cast for any movie. Has to be nepotism.

>>87605292
masturbating on camera might technically count as artistic integrity
but when it's this poorly done and makes as much money as it does, it ruins it for everyone else and makes people think that's what it means to have artistic integrity

>>87605398
>>No one tell him about Suicide Squad, Batman Versus Superman, Marvel Movies, Transformers, or any remake in the last 10 years.
The difference is that they aren't proclaimed to be bastions of auteur filmmaking.

>>87602844
wtf is that?

>>87605461
>Arrival was pretty fucking bad
I stop reading there. Get some taste you filthy fucking pleb

I don't know if it's the reason movies look like this now, but honestly it feels like cinematography has become less about interesting lighting and more about facilitating colour grading

>>87605461
I give you the character chemistry, but that's about it. Renner was also forced on Villeneuve, he wanted Gillenhal for the role.

>>87605478
Do you even know what artistic integrity means?
The movie can be absolutely terribly done and the filmmaker would still have his own artistic integrity if everything he did in that film was his decision. And what does the box office have to do with that?

>>87597361
>gits 2017 was bad
Fuck off, retard.

>>87597327
do i have to watch the old movie if i want to watch the new one?

>>87605292
>artistic integrity
You have no idea what either of these words nor the combination of the two mean.
Are you under age? Or just illiterate?

>>87597327
Extras are expensive and a pain to direct

>>87605579
You 'have to' nothing, anon. Only to die at some point.

>>87605461
>But the time travel twist
lol, imagine being so stupid that you couldn't understand the film

>>87605569
did you even read what i wrote you utter waste of semen?

>>87605541
>too pussy to make one argument

I reluctantly accept your surrender.

Can't wait too see this film become a complete all-around success while /tv/ autistically screeches in rage.

>>87605716
Imagine being so stupid you think the film makes sense. What the alien language enables people to do is functionally equivalent to time travel and I use the term because the film falls into the same trap that most time travel films fall into. It has the same logic holes.

>>87605567
>Renner was also forced on Villeneuve

See, I fucking knew it. Nepotism red flag #21.

>>87604488
Villeneuve makes sure it's at best mediocre, at worst, complete shit like his work so far

>>87605813
>Imagine being so stupid you think the film makes sense
Being so stupid you can actually understand the film? lmao
At least you tried

>>87605871
Name two (2) good directors currently working.

>>87600222
The fucking wrinkles on the Tyrell chair always gets me, it's such a small, insignificant thing but holy shit that's some delicious attention to detail

>>87597327
wow it literally looks sterile

>>87598403
Um, are you? You probably don't realize it but some of us were posting on 4chan before you were born. The true oldfags have children, and sometimes we take our kids to Lego movies.

>>87605953
HHH, Weerasethakul, Mann, Malick, Godard, Reichardt

>>87605953
Easy, Nolan and Tarantino
(JJ Abrams would be my third pick)

>>87605899
I'll break it down for you briefly:

>girl in present day perceives a future conversation with king chink where he gives her his phone number
>calls his number and thereby prevents nuclear war
>the future conversation only ends up actually happening because the nuclear war was avoided

She looked into the future from a point in time where nuclear war was inevitable, so she should have seen a future where everyone is fucking dead. Instead she magically sees a different future that would never result from the current state of things. This twist blatantly defies cause and effect and beautifully illustrates why the alien language concept couldn't work in the first place. The only defense butthurt fans of the movie have is to say that cause and effect don't real in the world of the movie, that it's fantasy and you should just ignore any plot holes. Go ahead and say that shit now, it's all you got.

>>87606158
He said TWO you goddamn illiterate retard
Also, Mann's the only you mentioned who isn't terrible

>>87606207
>when you drink the vulgar auteur kool aid too much
pls

>>87606189
>She looked into the future from a point in time where nuclear war was inevitable
This is your mistake. She didn't "look into the future".
The past, present and future stopped existing to her and became just events all simultaneously happening.

Because the only way the concept of atemporality can exist is in a deterministic universe, it was always going to be the case that there wasn't a nuclear war.
She doesn't prevent the war by looking into the future, she prevents the war because she already knows everything that's going to and has happened in her entire life
Hence, you didn't understand the film

>>87606030
Wow that's literally the point

>>87606354
>Dude Cyberpunk means CLEAN SLEEK FUTURE xD

Fuck off nerd if you don't know the culture.

>>87606390
Who said the new one is cyberpunk?

>>87606455
It's not, that's literally the point ;)

It's a soulless hollywood imitation

>>87606311
>the only way the concept of atemporality can exist is in a deterministic universe

You just rephrased why you can't prevent a nuclear war with a phone number from the future. That's not deterministic. Determinism builds on the idea that all of time follows cause and effect in a linear manner. Using knowledge about the future to affect the present breaks that causal chain.

>>87606735
>Determinism builds on the idea that all of time follows cause and effect in a linear manner
It can do, but not necessarily. Cause and effect is not required for determinism

>Using knowledge about the future to affect the present breaks that causal chain.
See above.
Because of he deterministic nature of the universe, she was always going to have knowledge of everything at that moment (from everything in her life that came prior) and thus she was always going to stop the war with the phonecall. There's no plothole

>>87606874
>Cause and effect is not required for determinism

That's true, you slippery bastard. But it's fairly obvious that cause and effect exist in our world and in that of the movie. Denying that is just sophistry.

How many recut versions this time ?