Follup Movie to Blade Runner ...

[Maelstrom]

... Directed by Ridley Scott. Not sure if I should be excited, or disgusted.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44193291/ns/today-entertainment/

[Corvus]

There are certain movies that should never be tampered with. Blade Runner is one of them.

[Katana_Geldar]

What.


Sometimes that is all once can say.

[Remmirath]

I'll be impressed if they can pull that off decently, but I doubt that it will be so.

[GenericGuy]

Oh crap, they’re going to make Deckard a replicant aren’t they.:smallyuk:

Well it would be funny to see them try to justify the “Japan takes over the world” trope, after the bubble pretty much burst and shows no signs of coming back.

[Klose_the_Sith]

Didn't much care for Bladerunner, not really interested in the sequel - and even the fans aren't that hopeful, by the sounds of things.

I fear for the outcome of this venture.

[Eldan]

They could pull a fast one on the fans of the movie and make it entirely about the parts of the book not shown in the original movie. It's now entirely about weird religions, with no replicants at all :smalltongue:

[Radar]

It is most troubling, that they didn't yet decide whether to make it a prequel or a sequel. In short: they have no story or clue, what to make this movie about. Alternatively someone has written an interesting dystopian SF scenario and producers decided to link it to a well know classic, because that's the way they run things (see Die Hard 2 for example).

[Winterwind]

They could pull a fast one on the fans of the movie and make it entirely about the parts of the book not shown in the original movie. It's now entirely about weird religions, with no replicants at all :smalltongue:That's exactly what I thought when I heard about it myself. :smallbiggrin:

It's kinda scary how incredibly, incredibly distorted the vast majority of Philipp K. ****'s stories end up being when they make the transition to the movies. Blade Runner has virtually nothing to do with Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, Total Recall has virtually nothing to do with We Can Remember It For You Wholesome, Minority Report is actually the exact opposite of the book Minority Report... and without fail they are infinitely less clever and interesting than the original. Impostor was kinda similar-ish to the original, at least, but that's the absolutely only one I can think of (I heard positive things about A Scanner Darkly, but I have to ashamedly admit I haven't read the story this one was based on).


Mmmm. With that in mind, and with Blade Runner being pretty much my #1 favourite movie... I'm skeptical to say the least regarding this new upcoming one. I guess I'll probably watch it though, unless the reviews end up being overly atrocious.

[Kindablue]

That's exactly what I thought when I heard about it myself. :smallbiggrin:

It's kinda scary how incredibly, incredibly distorted the vast majority of Philipp K. ****'s stories end up being when they make the transition to the movies. Blade Runner has virtually nothing to do with Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, Total Recall has virtually nothing to do with We Can Remember It For You Wholesome, Minority Report is actually the exact opposite of the book Minority Report... and without fail they are infinitely less clever and interesting than the original. Impostor was kinda similar-ish to the original, at least, but that's the absolutely only one I can think of (I heard positive things about A Scanner Darkly, but I have to ashamedly admit I haven't read the story this one was based on).


Mmmm. With that in mind, and with Blade Runner being pretty much my #1 favourite movie... I'm skeptical to say the least regarding this new upcoming one. I guess I'll probably watch it though, unless the reviews end up being overly atrocious.

There's an Impostor movie? A Scanner Darkly the novel is good, though it's a bit too schizophrenic to keep up with at times; A Scanner Darkly the film is exactly the same. It apes its rotoscoping style from Waking Life (also made by Linklater), so it looks really cool. Funny too. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2HP25bKztE)

[shadow_archmagi]

That's exactly what I thought when I heard about it myself. :smallbiggrin:

It's kinda scary how incredibly, incredibly distorted the vast majority of Philipp K. ****'s stories end up being when they make the transition to the movies.


To be fair, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep did sort of meander, and Blade Runner was a pretty good film. The story told in the movie is complete as it is; it just isn't the story in the book.

I do not believe that a faithful adaption would have made a better movie; the weird religion, biometronic animals, and emotion bagpipes wouldn't have fit in well with Harrison Ford being a hardboiled detective. It worked well in a book, particularly a science fiction book, where much of the goal isn't to tell a coherent story but simply to express an interesting idea, but not so well for a film, which has its own narrative constraints.

[dehro]

It is most troubling, that they didn't yet decide whether to make it a prequel or a sequel. In short: they have no story or clue, what to make this movie about.

yeah.. I saw this interview of..I think the aspiring producers, who claimed to be big fans of the original movie... they kept prattling on about it
..all I could hear was "I know blade runner is a cool title for a movie, it's worked once and has become a classic. now I want to milk it some more, even though I haven't got a clue what I'll make the movie about"

[Winterwind]

There's an Impostor movie?Yes, there is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_%28film%29).

It tells more or less the same story (only with the whole running part massively extended to provide more action scenes and bring the story to full movie length - personally, I think they did this pretty well though). They actually kept the twist ending, too, which I found rather surprising, except
they kinda portray it as if the Impostor blowing up where it does was a failure on part of the aliens, rather than exactly what they intended to happen. Apart from that one derp at the very end, though, I thought it actually worked fairly well.


A Scanner Darkly the novel is good, though it's a bit too schizophrenic to keep up with at times; A Scanner Darkly the film is exactly the same. It apes its rotoscoping style from Waking Life (also made by Linklater), so it looks really cool. Funny too. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2HP25bKztE)Yeah, I've seen the film. Liked it, but was confused to no ends by it. :smallbiggrin:
I want to read the novel, too, as soon as possible; I love just about all of PKD's work. :smallcool:


To be fair, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep did sort of meander, and Blade Runner was a pretty good film. The story told in the movie is complete as it is; it just isn't the story in the book.

I do not believe that a faithful adaption would have made a better movie; the weird religion, biometronic animals, and emotion bagpipes wouldn't have fit in well with Harrison Ford being a hardboiled detective. It worked well in a book, particularly a science fiction book, where much of the goal isn't to tell a coherent story but simply to express an interesting idea, but not so well for a film, which has its own narrative constraints.Oh, I agree; the same applies to most of his stories, really - the movies based on them range between good and excellent, for the most part, they just happen to tell very, very different stories (except for Minority Report. That one was just infuriating, in my humble opinion.). I'm kinda torn on what to think about this - on one hand, the stories the movies tell are very good, too, and provide much better action for entertainment purposes; on the other hand, they are much, much less intellectually challenging...

[Tiki Snakes]

Oh crap, they’re going to make Deckard a replicant aren’t they.:smallyuk:

Well it would be funny to see them try to justify the “Japan takes over the world” trope, after the bubble pretty much burst and shows no signs of coming back.


You're worried about this now? The film came out a long time ago, and he explicitely was in that version.

The director and several others have been pretty explicite about it.

You can leave the stable door, the horse has bolted. :smallsmile:

[kyoryu]

That's exactly what I thought when I heard about it myself. :smallbiggrin:

It's kinda scary how incredibly, incredibly distorted the vast majority of Philipp K. ****'s stories end up being when they make the transition to the movies. Blade Runner has virtually nothing to do with Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, Total Recall has virtually nothing to do with We Can Remember It For You Wholesome, Minority Report is actually the exact opposite of the book Minority Report... and without fail they are infinitely less clever and interesting than the original. Impostor was kinda similar-ish to the original, at least, but that's the absolutely only one I can think of (I heard positive things about A Scanner Darkly, but I have to ashamedly admit I haven't read the story this one was based on).

I'll actually defend Blade Runner on this - while it wasn't a scene-for-scene translation of the book, it did a pretty good job of hitting the major themes of the book, in a way that translated far better to film than the actual story would have.

It's possible to have a movie that is scene-for-scene the same as the book (John Carpenter's The Thing comes to mind), but it's equally possible to have one that cribs almost every scene and line from the book, and completely screws up the meaning and major themes (Lynch's Dune - Dune is about a man PLAYING god, not a man that IS god).


To be fair, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep did sort of meander, and Blade Runner was a pretty good film. The story told in the movie is complete as it is; it just isn't the story in the book.

I do not believe that a faithful adaption would have made a better movie; the weird religion, biometronic animals, and emotion bagpipes wouldn't have fit in well with Harrison Ford being a hardboiled detective. It worked well in a book, particularly a science fiction book, where much of the goal isn't to tell a coherent story but simply to express an interesting idea, but not so well for a film, which has its own narrative constraints.

Exactly my point - and yet the major themes they both hit are constant (the nature of humanity).

[comicshorse]

It is most troubling, that they didn't yet decide whether to make it a prequel or a sequel. In short: they have no story or clue, what to make this movie about.

Haven't disclosed whether it is a prequel or sequel not haven't decided

[Kindablue]

Yes, there is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_%28film%29).

It tells more or less the same story (only with the whole running part massively extended to provide more action scenes and bring the story to full movie length - personally, I think they did this pretty well though). They actually kept the twist ending, too, which I found rather surprising, except
they kinda portray it as if the Impostor blowing up where it does was a failure on part of the aliens, rather than exactly what they intended to happen. Apart from that one derp at the very end, though, I thought it actually worked fairly well.

Sounds cool. I'm surprised I hadn't heard of it.




Yeah, I've seen the film. Liked it, but was confused to no ends by it. :smallbiggrin:
I want to read the novel, too, as soon as possible; I love just about all of PKD's work. :smallcool:

If you like audiobooks, Paul Giamatti, of all people, did a good reading of it.



(except for Minority Report. That one was just infuriating, in my humble opinion.)

I completely agree. Precrime works.

[chiasaur11]

I'll actually defend Blade Runner on this - while it wasn't a scene-for-scene translation of the book, it did a pretty good job of hitting the major themes of the book, in a way that translated far better to film than the actual story would have.

It's possible to have a movie that is scene-for-scene the same as the book (John Carpenter's The Thing comes to mind), but it's equally possible to have one that cribs almost every scene and line from the book, and completely screws up the meaning and major themes (Lynch's Dune - Dune is about a man PLAYING god, not a man that IS god).




Major themes are pretty different from my angle. Book Deckard is defined by empathy which book Roy, Pris, and Rachel lack. Thinking of the scene with the spider. And the goat.

Meanwhile, film Deckard is a bitter, broken man (More like Phil Resch in some ways) and the Replicants are sympathetic.

Book says androids don't dream of electric sheep, but people do. Movie, Andys are as human as anyone else. Both interesting, but different.

[Dr.Epic]

What? No way people. This is gonna be the best sequel made decades after the last installment since Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.:smallwink:

[Weezer]

No. Just no. This should never be allowed.
I think the most horrifying line is this:

Alcon ... recently partnered with producer Bud Yorkin to produce new "Blade Runner" films as well as TV and interactive productions based on the property.

Blade Runner TV shows and video games? That's just a horrid idea.

[Tengu_temp]

There was a Blade Runner adventure game. It was okay.

[Brother Oni]

Blade Runner TV shows and video games? That's just a horrid idea.

Too late (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_%281997_video_game%29).

That said, it wasn't bad for its time. I remember spending far more time than I should have messing about with the photo machine. :smallbiggrin:

[Dr.Epic]

Blade Runner TV shows and video games? That's just a horrid idea.

It can't be worse than the E.T. Video Game.

[Ashen Lilies]

See for yourself. There's an LP. (http://lparchive.org/Blade-Runner/)

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

but...
I loved this movie.
I don't want to see them mess it up.
Please don't mess it up...

[Om]

It can't be worse than the E.T. Video Game.The two shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence. Blade Runner was a pretty solid, if somewhat unforgettable, adventure game. You could do worse than check it out

[Morph Bark]

but...
I loved this movie.
I don't want to see them mess it up.
Please don't mess it up...

They can't mess it up because it has already existed for 29 years.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

They can't mess it up because it has already existed for 29 years.

But having to go "My favourite movie ever is Blade Runner! I love that movie"
and then explain which bloody movie I mean.

That will SUCK

[Eldan]

Nah. You can just say "Blade Runner". The new one will be "Blade Runner 2: Running faster" or something like that.

[Killer Angel]

... Directed by Ridley Scott. Not sure if I should be excited, or disgusted.


I'm for the disgusted approach. It falls between the Things That Should Not Be.

[Tebryn]

He did the first one, what's the big deal really? You're aware the books have sequels as well?

[Killer Angel]

He did the first one, what's the big deal really?

Must I really remember you John Landis and the sequel of Blues Brothers? :smallamused:

[Kindablue]

Nah. You can just say "Blade Runner". The new one will be "Blade Runner 2: Running faster" or something like that.

I heard they're going with Blade Runner 2: Replicant Boogaloo.

[Eldan]

Making up titles is more fun than discussing the movie :smallwink:

"Blade Runner II: Deckard Reloaded"

[Winterwind]

He did the first one, what's the big deal really? You're aware the books have sequels as well?Huh? :smallconfused:
*looks up in Wikipedia*
...no, not really. Those weren't written by Philipp K. ****, so I see no reason to let them count. If a story is continued by a different author, it's not really the same story anymore (and if Wikipedia is to be believed, judging by the reception these books got, it would seem they weren't quite up to ****'s quality anyway).

[Tebryn]

Must I really remember you John Landis and the sequel of Blues Brothers? :smallamused:

You could, but I quite liked it. Was it the best sequel ever? Heck no. But that is what you get when the second half of the comedic duo dies.


Huh? :smallconfused:
*looks up in Wikipedia*
...no, not really. Those weren't written by Philipp K. ****, so I see no reason to let them count. If a story is continued by a different author, it's not really the same story anymore (and if Wikipedia is to be believed, judging by the reception these books got, it would seem they weren't quite up to ****'s quality anyway).

Ummm...they're counted as sequels. They continue the story...just because -you- don't agree with the assessment doesn't make them not so.

[The Succubus]

Nah. You can just say "Blade Runner". The new one will be "Blade Runner 2: Running faster" or something like that.

Blade Runner 2: I managed to chop my own feet off.

[Eldan]

Ooh, I know.

Blade Runner 2: Replicant Story

"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I've watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those ... moments will be lost in time, like tears...in rain."


About Roy Batty before he came to Earth.

[The Glyphstone]

Making up titles is more fun than discussing the movie :smallwink:

"Blade Runner II: Deckard Reloaded"

"Blade Runner II: Blade Harder"

"Blade Runner II: The Replicants Strike Back"

[Eldan]

"Blade Runnerer"

"Blade Runner II: Don't run with scissors"

[Weezer]

Ummm...they're counted as sequels. They continue the story...just because -you- don't agree with the assessment doesn't make them not so.

Sorry, but no. Three novels published 13 years after the original authors death and 27 years after the orginal publishing date are nothing more than glorified fanfiction and seem to just be an IP holder's attempt to cash in on the popularity of Androids and the cult status of Blade Runner. If PKD had left notes for a sequel which were then written up by someone else, that would make it a sequel, but just writing three more novels in the same universe does not legitimize them as sequels. They may be perfectly fine books, wouldn't know, but simple distance from PKD disqualifies them as sequels.

Also, according to wikipedia Pris is a human in the sequels and is resurrected as a replicant. I have no words.

[Axolotl]

Ummm...they're counted as sequels. They continue the story...just because -you- don't agree with the assessment doesn't make them not so.Counted by who exactly? They were written by a different author and have a different title. Sure they may continue the story, but I'll bet I can find a dozen Harry Potter fanfics that continue the Harry Potter story but that doesn't make them real sequels.

[Killer Angel]

that is what you get when the second half of the comedic duo dies.


Good point, but still I barely tolerated it. Although the way they park the blues mobile is amazing. :smallbiggrin:

Edit:

"Blade Runner II: The Replicants Strike Back"


or "Blade Runner: revenge of the Replicants".

[Kindablue]

Sorry, but no. Three novels published 13 years after the original authors death and 27 years after the orginal publishing date are nothing more than glorified fanfiction and seem to just be an IP holder's attempt to cash in on the popularity of Androids and the cult status of Blade Runner. If **** had left notes for a sequel which were then written up by someone else, that would make it a sequel, but just writing three more novels in the same universe does not legitimize them as sequels. They may be perfectly fine books, wouldn't know, but simple distance from **** disqualifies them as sequels.

Also, according to wikipedia Pris is a human in the sequels and is resurrected as a replicant. I have no words.

Let's call him PKD, or Phil.

[Weezer]

Let's call him PKD, or Phil.

That would've been intelligent of me. It show's how rarely I hit up against the filters that I'd completely forgotten their existence...

[Tiki Snakes]

I just want to say that anyone questioning the quality of the Blade Runner game is sadly mistaken.
It's one of the best examples of it's genre by far and impressively fitting with the atmosphere and themes of the film.

It's also one of the only Adventure games I've ever seen with any replayability, due to the randomized branching storyline.

[pendell]

Oh crap, they’re going to make Deckard a replicant aren’t they.:smallyuk:


...

you mean he wasn't? I'm pretty sure he was in the original movie.

Interview with Ridley Scott (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/movies/30kapl.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1314028982-5b1+/uWm3Lj3aRWPXtegjQ)



The film’s theme of dehumanization has also been sharpened. What has been a matter of speculation and debate is now a certainty: Deckard, the replicant-hunting cop, is himself a replicant. Mr. Scott confirmed this: “Yes, he’s a replicant. He was always a replicant.”

This may disappoint some viewers. Deckard is the film’s one person with a conscience. If he’s a replicant, it means that there are no more decent human beings.

“It’s a pretty dark world,” Mr. Scott acknowledged. “How many decent human beings do you meet these days?”

The clue to Deckard’s true nature comes in a scene that was cut from the original release and only recently unearthed by Charles de Lauzirika, Mr. Scott’s assistant and the restoration’s producer. In the film, Deckard falls in love with Rachael (played by Sean Young), a secretary at the Tyrell Corporation, the conglomerate that makes replicants. She discovers that she’s a replicant too. Her memories of childhood were implanted by Tyrell to make her think she’s human.

In the last scene of Mr. Scott’s version, Deckard leads Rachael out of his apartment. He notices an origami figure of a unicorn on the floor. A fellow cop has often left such figures outside replicants’ rooms. In an earlier scene, Deckard was thinking about a unicorn. Looking at the cutout now, he realizes that the authorities know what’s in his mind, that the unicorn is a planted memory, that he’s a replicant and that he and Rachael are both now on the run. They get into the elevator. The door slams. The end.

Neither this scene nor any unicorn appeared in the 1982 release. That version ended with Deckard and Rachael escaping, driving through green countryside, Deckard telling us in his Philip Marlowe voice-over — which ran throughout the movie — that he had learned Rachael is a new type of replicant, built to live as long as humans. They smile. The end.



Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Eldan]

Let's call him PKD, or Phil.

I usually call him Horselover Fat on forums :smalltongue:

[Kindablue]

I usually call him Horselover Fat on forums :smalltongue:

Ha! Why didn't I think of that?

[dehro]

blade runner 2: the prequel.. a.k.a. Edward Scissorhands' college days on the track and field team.

blade runner 2: payback time for Tonya Harding

blade runner 2: unplugged

[HFool]

I admit I've never seen Blade Runner and with that I can't construct a strong or well thought-out opinion on giving it a late sequel, but I will contribute to the next movie's naming with 2 Blade, 2 Runner.

[Maelstrom]

Blade Runner II -- Firefly was right, China wins

[kyoryu]

Blade Runner II: Shear Nightmare

[Horrorshow]

Drama: Blade Runner 2: Running with Scissors

Musical: Blade Runner on Ice

Origin Story: Batty Begins

[Eldan]

Run, Deckard, Run!

Or how about a sports movie where a team of replicants goes to the olympics. In a bob sled.

Yes, that's right. I'm talking about Blade Runnings.

[Ravens_cry]

"Blade Runner II: Don't run with scissors"
Also known as the crossover with Edward Scissorhands, the first replicant.:smallcool:
All kidding aside, from what I understand the movie really only took some general themes and ideas from the book, so complaining that the sequels won't have anything to do with the book is pretty silly considering the movie had little to do with the book.
Will it be good? To be honest, I don't know.
Fans running the asylum, as TV Tropes puts it, can be very good and also very bad.
On one hand, you can get fresh ideas from people who understand what the piece is about and are not simply after a cash grab.
On the other hand, you can get a bunch of exclusionary in-jokes and references as well as being so dedicated to 'respecting' the work that they don't let it change.
Which will it be? 80's nostalgia seems to be in right now, so my hopes are pretty low, but hey, there seemed to be more stories in that universe.
Let's see if they can find them.

[Tyndmyr]

Blade Runner 2: The Bladening!

Harrison Ford and the Chamber of Secrets

[Eldan]

Stealing subtitles from other movies, eh?

Very well.

Blade Runner: reloaded.
Blade Runner: The Fellowship of the Blade.
Blade Runner: the Two Deckards.

[H Birchgrove]

Can someone explain to me why there were refineries on top of skyscrapers in middle to the mega-city in the ("first") film? :smallconfused:

Jump to 1:06. (http://youtu.be/YaR5wVL9x2I)

[Axolotl]

Can someone explain to me why there were refineries on top of skyscrapers in middle to the mega-city in the ("first") film? :smallconfused:

Jump to 1:06. (http://youtu.be/YaR5wVL9x2I)Well just think of the damage they'd do if you put them on the bottom of the skyscrapers, putting them on top is just much safer overall.

[H Birchgrove]

Well just think of the damage they'd do if you put them on the bottom of the skyscrapers, putting them on top is just much safer overall.

I see what you did there. :smallamused:

[shadow_archmagi]

I see what you did there. :smallamused:

Because whoever designed that city realized that spitting fire into the sky was AWESOME?

[SlyGuyMcFly]

*reads the news*

What's that you say, Tommy?

http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/uu55/EvenHuman/TommyLeeJones.jpg


My thoughts exactly.