Apparently, the comments were taken out of context. It's from a 2 hour interview, edited down to 30 minutes. Hence the confusion.
this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2024
49 points (83.6% liked)
movies
1927 readers
200 users here now
Matrix room: https://matrix.to/#/#fediversefilms:matrix.org
Warning: If the community is empty, make sure you have "English" selected in your languages in your account settings.
A community focused on discussions on movies. Besides usual movie news, the following threads are welcome
- Discussion threads to discuss about a specific movie or show
- Weekly threads: what have you been watching lately?
- Trailers
- Posters
- Retrospectives
- Should I watch?
Related communities:
- !showsandmovies@lemm.ee
- !animation@lemm.ee
- !homevideo@feddit.uk
- !horrormovies@lemm.ee
- !martialartsmovies@lemm.ee
Show communities:
Discussion communities:
RULES
Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.
Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title’s subject matter.
Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown.
2024 discussion threads
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
That podcast did him dirty.
I mean, did people expect anything good from a sequel to a movie that literally didn’t need a sequel?
I mean Blade Running 2049 is the rare lone exception to being a good sequel to a movie that didn't need a sequel.
Maybe someday another film will achieve what it did, so I gotta keep hoping, but I know it isn't likely.
Speaking of Ridley Scott.
But then in an astute creative move, the sequel was put in the hands of one of the truly best directors working today, in fact it could be said that Dennis Villeneuve is the Ridley Scott of his day. Like Michael Mann has been the John Ford of his day.
Although Villeneuve so far has been a guarantee of quality both in content and presentation, while Scott's erratic career is sprinkled with quite a few mediocre efforts and misfires, like he gets easily distracted, and you can even get a whiff of that in the way he fidgets unnecessarily with his older movies (speaking of Blade Runner) like Lucas did with the Star Wars original trilogy.
You mean that?
On average I do.
Luckily, they didn't really bother making a sequel, they just remade the original and pretended it was a new film.
Wow. Even worse! Haha.
Especially as some of the recycled plot points make no sense with the slightly tweaked setting.
What is this Avatar? New blue, new you.
Couldn't even do a new biome smh
I dunno, from what little I've seen of Ridley Scotts newer films, they don't live up to his older works.
I'd say they feel uninspired by comparison.
Being SLaMmEd for being lazy
Oh the delicious irony
And I bet he didn't even use sharp swords for the fights /s
Are you trying to tell me, they don't really kill all those people in the movies?
Those lazy directors keep using props and trick shots.
Coward!
G2 sucked and was dull. I'm no film buff to say it was the cameras fault, but it sucked.
They made a gladiator 2? But wasnt he dead, doing a ghostly backstroke atop grassy fields at the end? Who's he fighting now, Hades?
It's not him. The other characters are still in it and it's based around the Colosseum with the politics and training and slavery etc if the first.