Hacker Cinema
Gran Turismo
2023 · Film · 135 min
Directed by Neill Blomkamp
The ultimate wish-fulfillment tale of a teenage Gran Turismo player whose gaming skills won him a series of Nissan competitions to become an actual professional racecar driver.
1 positive1 mixed4 neutralfrom 6 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
6 comments on Hacker News
It's a hit at the box office, but not so with the critics. The previous F1 film "Rush" (Lauda vs Hunt) is still better. imdb 8.1 vs 7.8, metacritic 8.4 vs 7.6, letterboxd 3.83 vs 3.81 (with a lot of f1 cheaters not accounted for). It's more comparable to "Gran Turismo", which had equally good race fighting scenes. And more realistic simulator training brought to the track.
" If games are a kind of software, why must games face this kind of regulation when other kinds of (actually more important) software doesn't / won't? "
I am neutral to the iniative but I can answer this question very clearly: Games are cultural products and you want to get the exact same experience (as you want to see the same film and not something else)
Using GIMP or Photoshop is a very different experience: Does it matter? Not so much. You can use an alternative and in case user will change. The Crew or Gran Turismo? You don't want to change so much.
Really? You could tell the planes in Top Gun: Maverick were all CGI over reference footage? You could tell the Barbie movie car sequences were shot in front of a green screen (as opposed to a matte painting, which is how it appears)? You could tell that almost all the racing shots in Gran Turismo were CGI?
This wasn't an example given in the video series but what about a movie like Brokeback Mountain? Can you tell which of the sheep or which of the mountaintops are CGI? If you can, that's absolutely shocking to me.
Take a look at this shot: https://www.reddit.com/r/vfx/comments/z8wbv4/whats_the_consensus_on_this_shot_from_the_avatar/
Can you tell which parts are CGI and which are practical?
Here's the answer: https://imgur.com/a/Q7UUn2G
Yeah, the audience score is in no way an accurate measure of quality because it is provided by a self-selected group of people who both paid for the movie and went online to rate it. The end result is that a lot of movies viewed as failures will have high audience ratings as long as they can reach some small passionate audience. Just looking at some current movies:
Blue Beetle: 78% critics, 92% audience
Gran Turismo: 63%, 98%
Elemental: 74%, 93%
Meg 2: 29% 73%
Haunted Mansion 38%, 84%
Indiana Jones: 69%, 88%
Little Mermaid 67%, 94%
Those audience scores are not "more accurate" in any way. People who are forced to see these movies like them less than people who chose to see it.
There also really isn't anything currently that fits into "the political correctness / marketing budget of the movie" claim of OP. It seems like they are just buying into cultural war nonsense. The closest I can find is Barbie and its critic score is 5% higher than the audience score, so not much of a gap.
This sounds a bit like District 9 (albeit having Peter Jackson as producer might exclude it) - the director then "graduated" to Hollywood, resulting in a decline in critical reception (though I've heard Gran Turismo is pretty good by video game movie standards).
Ladies and gentlemen, be prepare for more car exhausts noises in the streets with the upcoming Gran Turismo movie..