I know some of you might have seen this video from 6 years ago when I originally posted it here in 2016 (old alias then DeadlyShadow47) but I thought maybe some newcomers both to the forum and the franchise would be interested to see this.
Still an enjoyable watch after all this time.
Remember watching it years ago, still laughed
Never did like that cinematic. Good visuals, but it seemed to canonize several kills over the course of the series (WoA seems to attempt that a lot), which really goes against the whole meat of the franchise, really (Fritz’s death by drowning, specifically, is the less sensible of the two main methods to take him out). The only things I’m glad it does is confirm Absolution’s place in the series as legit, but now that we have Mendoza for that, and set the stage for what’s to come with Grey’s speech and appearance. Aside from that, I pretty much discount the trailer completely.
Damn man, we get an awesome cinematic with stunning visuals and music, where 47 is being badass while wasting some bad guys, who all are nice nostalgic callbacks to all the previous installments, and you’re worried about the CANON™ status that doesn’t matter in the long run and how it’s aligned with your Heisenberg Pee Pees.
I honestly don’t even get what his problem is lol. Not that I care to begin with
First of all, we don’t need a cinematic for that; we played those moments.
Secondly, I hadn’t even conceived of the HPP at that point, because I only even came up with them during WoA, and at the time I first saw that trailer, I had only played the ICA training scenarios and had no idea what I was getting into for this new game, same as everyone else, and it still bothered me.
Thirdly, yes I’m worried about the canon status because it literally went against what went down in those games, no matter how you chose to play them, and that was rather insulting in my view.
Did you not…read it, right up there, just a few posts ago? I stated it plainly.
You didn’t liked the trailer because IOI shown how 47 did those hits canonical way while you fantasize it should have been made differently because you have your own image of 47. Despite the fact IOI created the franchise in the first place. Aight.
The cinematic doesn’t exist to insidiously rewrite the respective parts of Hitman history; it is here to fill in the twenty years between the Prologue and the main story of H2016, to showcase what 47 does best to newcomers to the franchise and to reference the long history it has, and to trigger nostalgia for long-time fans and show them that the devs care for the franchise’s roots (in case anyone had a different impression after the previous installment fiasco). Also - it’s a footage of 47 being badass and killing dudes which is a win in any case.
Sorry, I assumed otherwise when you mentioned the Fritz drowning being less sensible. I can’t figure what’s wrong with that one other than 47 wearing his suit in the swimming pool, which is a question to the Contracts game, as the cinematic clearly recreates that game’s interpretation of TotT. In any way, it’s the fastest and probably the most popular and recognizable way to kill him in that mission.
Firstly, the canon issue is pretty much irrelevant in this case as it doesn’t affect the game’s story. It doesn’t matter if 47 choked Don Fernando inside a wooden mansion or at a marbled balcony. Inconsistencies like 47 not wearing a hobo version of his suit in Dom Osmond’s part, staying on the wrong side of the mirror and holding a wrong gun (which is yet another variant of a Hardballer we never got) exist for the sake of the cinematic being… well, cinematic.
Secondly, everyone understands that there are no canonical ways of completing missions, you yourself know that IOI have contradicted these “canon kills” (Fernando garroted but mentioned to die in an accident) as they are simply nods to the players.
Thirdly, the cinematic itself suggests that 47 doesn’t stick to a single “canon” method by showcasing his numerous tools of the trade and all the kills being of a different (yet classical) method.
This so much. Imo it was especially shown in Hitman 3 where:
47 uses remote explosive to kill Diana’s parent with a big car boom. And ofc even more booms in C47, H2SA etc. Booms are cool.
All of that is irrelevant. The point being, new people, or ones who never really paid much attention to the story or character beats of the series, may be led to believe those kills were canon. That’s misleading, much like some of the stuff that has come since then that has led some to believe that as well, when it really shouldn’t. WoA is the only part of the series that has ever done that, and it was totally unnecessary.
Much like how “tough is for amateurs,” 47 has no use for being “badass.” Indeed, those scenes weren’t scenes of badassery at all; they were scenes of perfection. John Wick is badass; Black Mamba is badass; Leon the Professional is badass. They’re also sloppy, trigger-crazy body-leavers, who reduce the profession of contract killing to being any random schlub who can pick up a gun and mow down every bodyguard in a building before finally getting to the target. That’s being a badass; that’s not 47. 47, as those scenes show and Grey’s voiceover confirms, is an artist.
What does this have to do with the legacy trailer? There were no “booms” in the legacy trailer.
I don’t know, maybe read reply again? I was agreeing with @Hotel_Pollisya about the fact 47 uses variety of ways to kill his targets. Loud and quiet. I wasn’t replying to you.
Why do you think the kills shown in the Legacy Cinematic aren’t canon @Heisenberg?
Well, I honestly don’t think any kill in the series should be committed to or implied as canon. I think each of them, and the fates of past targets, should be kept absolutely nebulous; it’s mentioned that they died, but not what of. That was pretty much done in Colorado, talking about how each of the past kills listed were either accidents or unknown, and without specifying which was which.
Aside from that, the main issue is that how they are presented in the trailer isn’t even how those particular kill options where carried out, and yet after that trailer, it was accepted by the general, not-to-serious-about-it gaming community that those were examples of IOI confirming how past game kills really went, and I’m just over here pulling my hair out, shouting into the ether, “No!”
To be honest, I always took the intro cinematic as an homage to past Hitman games, not official or canonical assassinations of targets in the game.
While this semantics analysis is impressive, it is irrelevant as it doesn’t change the gist of my argument, and in fact…
… you agree that the cinematic correctly represents 47’s character
May be, but without context this “misleading” information would be of no value to them. If someone would ignore the cinematic being a generalized showcase of 47’s long history of assassinating people, and they would care to learn the context of who the hell are these guys and why 47 kills them, they would look that up and learn that these come from the previous games where there are obviously plenty of ways to kill them. And if they don’t care about that, surely they wouldn’t care that according to a video 47 killed some specific guy in a specific way.
Regardless, I’m starting to see your point and I remember feeling in a slightly similar way during the first watch myself. However I still appreciate the strengths of this beautifully crafted cinematic by the reasons already stated somewhere above.
Sort of agree. The problem is imho that the other way the writers would be constrained to not make any references to previous 47’s hits at all, as any details would likely make some of the ways “non-canon”. What do you think?
They can make the references to the previous hits as far as who and when, but not specifying how. Just say that they died. Like in Hokkaido, the bio for Yuki Yamasaki, it mentions the Hayamoto hits, but not how they were done. A similar thing in Whittleton Creek, where Cassidy’s bio mentions that Daniel Morris was killed, but did not allude to how in any capacity. Was it really necessary to say that the Delgados in Blood Money died in an accident? An accident, indicating a singular event, even though there were two targets, who it was not possible to kill in a single accident? And especially after the trailer showed the Don strangled?
Now, if IOI put that in to directly contradict what the trailer showed, to indicate that you can’t rely on any information given in the game, I could understand that. Maybe the accident methods were used and we ignore the trailer, maybe the trailer method was true and in-universe the Don and son’s deaths were reported as accidents “officially” to cover up the fact that it was a hit, which would lead people to wonder why the beloved target had a hit on him in the first place. Maybe it’s a combo of both (personally, I prefer to kill Don while he’s playing cello, but I cut his throat with a knife rather than strangle him; same animation either way, but with blood down his shirt).
And if they did do that, since that’s conflicting info from both the trailer and the game itself, that means that any mention or implication anywhere in the game of any target’s death cannot be taken at face value, whether that be the Legacy trailer, the target bios, chatter from NPCs, or, of course, 47’s nightmare at the end of the game. So while they’re making it murky and contradictory anyway, why bother showing or mentioning a possible death method and implying that it’s the canon kill at all?
I get what you mean @Heisenberg but at the same time it’s a trailer and it should show some kills/action to be entertaining for old fans (and especially newcomers). If I understood you right (if not correct me) you wouldnt shown any kills happening on the trailer. So then how would u make an interesting trailer? Just curious on your take how you would have liked it more. Cheers