Blade Runner 2 coming?

Loved Bladerunner, of course. Brilliant movie. I expect I'll ignore a remake though, so I don't much mind if Ford's in it or not. It will be crap, I think. We could pretend to ourselves it might be good if they only do this or that, but I'm fully expecting the worst, especially if Deckard is in it. He's a replicant, so Ford cannot play him, but play him he will somehow, so for me that smells funny already. If heaps of people come on here saying that against all expectations it was actually quite good, then I'll eat my tit-for-tat and go and see it. I'm not holding my breath, unfortunately.
 
Highly speculative of course, but he might not play Deckard the replicant, and play Deckard the human template. Or why not someone else we haven't even thought of.

I'll just wait and see. I do believe that there are more fascinating stories that could be told in the Blade Runner universe, but of course that does not mean that the one Scott et al. will pick will be one of them.
 
Well that is too bad...

http://www.vulture.com/2014/11/ridley-scott-blade-runner-2-sequel.html

Then again, it could also be a chance for the film to become its own beast and venture where Scott would not have dared had he also directed.

A bit out of left field, but I would love to see Kathryn Bigelow do it. One, because she is great, two, because we need more female directors on high profile, highly anticipated movies.

Amongst the big names, I'm sure Alfonso Cuaron, David Fincher or Nicolas Winding Refn would turn the film into something both compelling and highly stylized. Or maybe a younger director who has proven themselves with one or two recent low-to-medium-budget credits. David Michôd and Denis Villeneuve come to mind...
 
It's been confirmed that Harrison Ford is to reprise his role as Deckard, but can't at the moment remember who the Director will be
 
My first thought...

I'd have hoped Harrison Ford would have enough saved away that he wouldn't need to do things like this at his age.

My second...

Just how many combinations of box sets will they be able to make?
 
I've got severe misgivings about the follow-up; I knew it was going to be inevitable at some point, but I still think this could fall ultimately fall flat on its face.

I guess the appeal will be aimed at the younger post-BR generation, totally used to the concept of cgi, and won't be overly critical if BR2 is saturated with it.

But the key thing is the story- the writers have to decide who they're writing this story for in terms of its intended audience. The beauty of BR - both in the book and film - was its subtle & challenging writing throughout. I just wonder if BR2 will be written in similar challenging fashion, or the writers will simple go through the motions of getting from Point A to Point Z as quickly as possible.

I don't blame the studios for going ahead with the sequel: at least it wasn't a rushed decision. But I guess for those old enough to remember watching BR for the very first time during the early 80s, we will probably not bother watching BR2, if only to not allow our worst fears to be realised.
 
I think I would prefer it not to be a direct sequel. Too much time has passed for that. In fact, I'm not sure a sequel is needed any more. When you think about it Deckard was meant to retire Replicants. I'm not sure I want to watch Ford or anyone else hunting Replicants in a weedy homage to the original film.

It would have to be something in a completely new vein in order to live up to the original.
 
Thing is a prequel has to answer questions the original raised to work; so it will in a way spoil the earlier film for many as it answers questions many have debated over for years. Sometimes; especially after so long, part of the appeal of a film is the missing bits. The bits that you think over, talk over and generally invent for yourself (which also means they can never please everyone)

A sequel similarly can have problems because it might again answer those questions, but it can also end up very forced feeling if the original film ended itself fairly well tied up.

Best way would be something set in the same world setting; but which runs tangential to the original story. Maybe set a bit before; a bit during or a bit after; but something that only uses the world setting. That means it can keep the themes, whilst also being able to develop its own characters, its own style and to work without having to touch on the original films content.
 
If Harrison Ford is in it as Deckard I wont watch it, simply because I like the questions the first film raised and left unanswered and I think if a prequel/sequel answers such questions it would take some of the magic away from the original....
 
He could always be in as a camo appearance; not actually contributing anything to the story or they could do a segment of his history; such as a mission, which doesn't really answer things but plays out with him. However considering his age right now I suspect that it must be a sequel set after the events of the first (unless they go to town with CGI on him)
 
I think it would be great with the characters older to see how things have progressed such as Indiana Jones. I also think different characters based on a slightly later time frame would be interesting to see how that universe had changed based on the first movie. There are a number of different avenues that could be taken that would further the story with out using younger actors to portray the same characters.
 
My main problem is Ford as Deckard. They've basically ruined already what made the first movie great IMO. The whole argument and speculation over whether he was or wasn't a replicant is what made Blade Runner a fan favourite... That question should have been left unanswered.

Spoiler for those who haven't watched Prometheus:

It reminds me of Prometheus. Although I enjoyed it, the Space Jockey scene in Alien now holds less power ad mystery when I watch it, as I know the space Jockeys are tall, bald weight lifting creator gods :D
 

Similar threads


Back
Top