A fourth option, if I may: Record companies and film studios know/can make a fair guess as to what will sell. Musical hooks are sampled, popular genres are milked of value, and old movies and shows are dug up to to "reimagine". Is it lazy? Yes. Does it stiffle creative innovation? Yes. Does it make people big bucks? Definitely yes.

---
þ Synchronet þ electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com

A fourth option, if I may: Record and film companies know/can make a fair guess as to what will sell. The goal, after all, is to make as much money as possible on as little risk as possible. Music hooks are sampled, genres are milked of all value, and movies and tv shows are dug up to be "reimagined". Is it lazy? Yes. Does it stifle creative innovation? Yes. However, this method earns companies loads of money before slow innovation forces them to change.

---
þ Synchronet þ electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com

Re: Re: Blade Runner Sequel
By: RookJooms to Entertainment on Fri Jun 02 2017 04:45 pm

A fourth option, if I may: Record companies and film studios know/can make a fair guess as to what will sell. Musical hooks are sampled, popular genres are milked of value, and old movies and shows are dug up to to "reimagine". Is it lazy? Yes. Does it stiffle creative innovation? Yes. Does it make people big bucks? Definitely yes.

i think eventually people's images will be digitized and they will just cgi the whole fucking thing. they can have regular actors play the bit parts, then have a standin for hugh jackman and he can be a beefcake forever

---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: Blade Runner Sequel
By: RookJooms to Entertainment on Fri Jun 02 2017 04:45 pm

A fourth option, if I may: Record companies and film studios know/can make a fair guess as to what will sell. Musical hooks are sampled, popular genres milked of value, and old movies and shows are dug up to to "reimagine". Is lazy? Yes. Does it stiffle creative innovation? Yes. Does it make people big bucks? Definitely yes.

The reboots are about a risk-averse, conservative industry. Why take a risk
on the unknown, when you already know that Blade Runner was popular? Why
take a risk on a new movie, when you can do another Captain America.

What has happened, is the industry has discovered that remakes have market (they may always have had a market), and they're milking it for all it is worth.


---
þ Synchronet þ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Re: Blade Runner Sequel
By: Mro to RookJooms on Fri Jun 02 2017 23:51:03

i think eventually people's images will be digitized and they will just cgi whole fucking thing. they can have regular actors play the bit parts, then have a standin for hugh jackman and he can be a beefcake forever

Two examples that I can think of right off hand that proves that they can do CGI that is realistic: "TRON: Legacy" where they were able to put in the much younger version of Jeff Bridges, and the latest Fast and Furious (I forget which one because there has been so many of them that I am not interested in watching) where they did use CGI to fill in for the actor that passed away in the middle of making of the movie.

Won't be too much longer before they will replicate thier voices perfectly as well, but I think TRON: Legacy has done that already.

-jag
Code it, Script it, Automate it!

---
þ Synchronet þ MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Boraxman wrote to RookJooms <=-

The reboots are about a risk-averse, conservative industry. Why take a risk on the unknown, when you already know that Blade Runner was
popular? Why take a risk on a new movie, when you can do another
Captain America.

What has happened, is the industry has discovered that remakes have
market (they may always have had a market), and they're milking it for
all it is worth.

I'm over remakes, I'm more interested in new material. There's a number of literary works that haven't been done or only a couple of books have been turned into movies (e.g. Arthur C Clarke's 2001, 2010 adaptations - 2061 and 3001 have never hit the big screen), and it's a safe bet with new material for the screen, if done properly.

For me, remakes are mostly ired, old material that's often best left alone (was done right the first time, don't mess). I'm paying less attention to Hollywood as they go theough this remake craze (i.e. they're not getting my money).


... DOS means never having to live hand-to-mouse.
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49
þ Synchronet þ Freeway BBS in Bendigo, Australia.

Re: Re: Blade Runner Sequel
By: Boraxman to RookJooms on Sat Jun 03 2017 07:19 pm

The reboots are about a risk-averse, conservative industry. Why take a risk on the unknown, when you already know that Blade Runner was popular?

The new Blade Runner movie isn't a reboot though, it's a sequel.. It still seems like somewhat of a risk to me, considering that the first Blade Runner movie came out 35 years ago. There's a whole new generation of viewers these days, and who knows how many of them have even seen the first one? I heard the first one got only a mixed reception when it was released, so it developed a cult following only in the years after it was released on video. I suspect many of the people who will go see the Blade Runner sequel will be people who are fans of the first one.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: Blade Runner Sequel
By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Sun Jun 04 2017 08:34 pm

Re: Re: Blade Runner Sequel
By: Boraxman to RookJooms on Sat Jun 03 2017 07:19 pm

The reboots are about a risk-averse, conservative industry. Why take a risk on the unknown, when you already know that Blade Runner was popular?

The new Blade Runner movie isn't a reboot though, it's a sequel.. It still

it's a sequel but it's really a reboot.
too much time has passed and they are trying to rehash it

---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::