Blade Runner 2 coming?

[Brian G Turner]

No idea whether this would be a good idea - if it even saw the light of day:
Ridley Scott Taps 'Green Lantern' Writer Michael Green to Pen 'Blade Runner' Sequel (Exclusive) - TheWrap

Especially with Harrison Ford reprising his role??

 

[Dave]

Especially with Harrison Ford reprising his role??

If he has aged then we have the definitive proof that Deckard is not a Replicant.

 

[Overread]

Ehh I think in the future we'll look back on this era of films from Hollywood and say it was a period blighted by a lack of inspiration and too much franchise chasing.

I'm getting bored of remakes and sequels so late in coming that the original charm, feel, and visuals of the film along with its story are lost. Heck you can't easily make a sequel to something like Blade Runner without spoiling the story and the mystery that built up around it.
Plus it will end up looking the same - all clean cut, shiny flashy CGI.

 

[Dave]

Ehh I think in the future we'll look back on this era of films from Hollywood and say it was a period blighted by a lack of inspiration and too much franchise chasing.

People keep saying that here, and then I think of all the Tarzan, Frankenstein, Mummy and Wolfman films that Hollywood use to turn out in its golden days, and really I don't think that much has changed.

I don't disagree with you about the present lack of originality. These http://www.sffchronicles.co.uk/forum/542391-what-movies-would-you-make-if-you-could.html are what Hollywood ought to be making but isn't. And this http://www.sffchronicles.co.uk/forum/548249-what-happened-to-ridley-scott.html is the question we really should be asking.

The reasons (as discussed before here) are a combination of not wanting to take risks, a bankruptcy of ideas in Hollywood, and the overall main reason - we still go and watch the S**t they make in very large numbers.

 

[Foxbat]

People keep saying that here, and then I think of all the Tarzan, Frankenstein, Mummy and Wolfman films that Hollywood use to turn out in its golden days, and really I don't think that much has changed.

I don't disagree with you about the present lack of originality. These http://www.sffchronicles.co.uk/forum/542391-what-movies-would-you-make-if-you-could.html are what Hollywood ought to be making but isn't. And this http://www.sffchronicles.co.uk/forum/548249-what-happened-to-ridley-scott.html is the question we really should be asking.

The reasons (as discussed before here) are a combination of not wanting to take risks, a bankruptcy of ideas in Hollywood, and the overall main reason - we still go and watch the S**t they make in very large numbers.

I don't disagree with your points but I think it's also worth remembering that, whilst these things do re-occur every generation, they start off with fairly ground-breaking movies (James Whale with Frankenstein and Scott with Blade Runner). It's what happens after that that is the real problem. Innovation and originality take a back seat to churning out more of the same.

But you're right - as long as we keep watching, they'll keep on churning.

 

[Nerds_feather]

The writer from Green Lantern--one of the worst films of the past decade? Really? Not a good sign.

 

[Overread]

I feel sorry for the writers - from what I understand of the Hollywood film machine once the writer has penned the script and its finalised - it gets changed by everyone.

Publishers - directors - actors - the cutting room - as a result what was once a coherent script can end up being blended into an utter mess with holes and gaps in the plot and major missing content. The cutting room also has a lot to answer for in trying to get films to fit the perfect time-frame.

The cutting room is where Once Upon a Time in America was butchered (the cinema group that bought it to show apparently cut content); it was apparently the stick that broke the camels back and is why it was the last film that Sergio directed. Alien 3 is also another film that got cut badly - you can really see this in the directors cut where huge and very key chunks are added back in.

I think its why we often see writers directing their own films or writers and directors working much closer than standard, often produce far superior or at least coherent films.

 

[Nerds_feather]

Overread - depends on the film and studio involved. Ridley Scott, for example, has stated that the original theatrical release of Alien is exactly how he wanted it to be (he only did a Director's Cut edition because the studio asked him to); on the other hand, he was not happy with the theatrical release of Blade Runner.

 

[Overread]

Aye things do get messed around - though Alien was a solid film, it was the 3rd in the series that got seriously messed up.

The end result though is that its a complicated affair, but the writers oft take a lot of rap for things which can not be their fault at all (since its rare for us to see the original unaltered script).

 

[JoanDrake]

I don't think they'll get Ford or even should. Stars don't age well in roles they've done and besides, while Ford did turn in a fine performance, Rutger Hauer made that movie.


I have to wonder what they could do with it. They might explore the relationship between Deckard and Rachel, which had a certain poignancy, and could explore the theme of how much of life is just memory but I don't see that as having anything like the natural pathos and excitement that made the original so good.

 

[Overread]

Eh I hope they leave Deckard and Rachel alone - leave the whole original story line alone and use the world, the setting and possibly the events that unfolded there to tell a new story set within the same world. They could give Ford a camo appearance if they set events far enough after the original (timeline wise) that he's started to age (however doing so would give answer and closure to the biggest question about Deckard which spoils things a bit)

 

[JoanDrake]

Eh I hope they leave Deckard and Rachel alone - leave the whole original story line alone and use the world, the setting and possibly the events that unfolded there to tell a new story set within the same world. They could give Ford a camo appearance if they set events far enough after the original (timeline wise) that he's started to age (however doing so would give answer and closure to the biggest question about Deckard which spoils things a bit)

That might be very interesting. The lives of the replicants are a unique device to explore Dick's overriding theme of questioning reality from all sorts of angles. Like how would accepted replicants deal with nonexistent people from their implanted memories. Would they get another Sebastian to make them and then have get togethers in which they relived pasts that never were?

 

[End of Time]

nope... just nope...

they should do a tv-show. Like they did in the 90s with Total Recall.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

You can't possibly have a sequel to Blade runner, other than an unrelated story in the same "Universe".

They did a good Radio Play version of it on R4 recently. Much better than the Film I think. But then I'd read the book and lot else of Philip K. Dick before I ever saw the Film.

 

[BAYLOR]

How much of an audience will there be for this one?

 

[Rodders]

I hope that many people would see it. Even if it's just to bash the movie as it doesn't live up to their hopes and expectations of nearly 25 years of fandom.

I, for one will go and see it. I hope it's good.

 

[Dave]

I, for one will go and see it. I hope it's good.

I would too, and isn't that the whole crux of the problem.

For the reasons already outlined, I know in my heart that it will be as bad as Prometheus was to Alien, or even the re-imagined Star Trek to TOS. Yet, I will still go along, and pay my £10 (+parking) that it costs to watch something today (while simultaneously being kicked in the back, listening to popcorn being munched and Coke slurped and mobile phones ringing.)

We are just like the Football fans who despise the team manager and chairman but who still sell out the stadium for a home game no matter what. If we all decided not to watch just once then we could probably bring about real change, but we won't, and we won't, and we deserve what we get.

 

[Zoe Mackay]

We are just like the Football fans who despise the team manager and chairman but who still sell out the stadium for a home game no matter what. If we all decided not to watch just once then we could probably bring about real change, but we won't, and we won't, and we deserve what we get.

Regrettably, I agree.

I just can't wait for this. I'm sure that revisiting a thirty-year-old film to attempt to mine a sequel is an artistic choice, because they have an amazing script at hand, and not a desperate cash grab. I know that the outstanding design and model-work of the original will be even better now that we can use all of the CGI ever.

Now, can I have my movie version of Clans Of The Alphane Moon, please?

 

[The Crawling Chaos]

Blade Runner is my favourite film, and I am looking forward to the sequel with great anticipation.

I am also a big fan of Alien AND Prometheus, and I hope that they go the exact same route with Blade Runner : Use the same universe, but make it an almost totally unrelated story.

I think the problem with Prometheus is that it was too heavily marketed as a direct prequel to Alien, when in fact the two movies should never even be compared to one another, as they are such different beasts. To me, it was the best science-fiction film of the last fifteen years at least, although this year's Under the Skin is now at least on par with it, maybe even a little better.

Like all good Science Fiction stories, Prometheus is more concerned with ideas rather than plot, and it is much more interested in what it has to suggest than what it is actually saying. As far as I'm concerned, the first Blade Runner is guilty of the same thing, and following that route is again the way to go with the sequel.

I only hope that Ridley Scott and his screenwriter(s) resist the urge and public pressure to make this a direct sequel. There can be no direct sequel to Blade Runner, only a thematically linked movie set in the same grandiose visual universe.

 

[Rodders]

i hope it's set in one of the off world colonies.