SOMEONE’S FINALLY GOTTEN A NEW BLADE RUNNER OFF THE GROUND… RIDLEY SCOTT

I can get behind a movie set in the Blade Runner/future L.A. noir universe that doesn't involve lots of mopey scenes between Ford and Sean Young.  Bring it, Rids.  

I'm open to this, but only if they tell a new story with new characters. I have no interest in watching an old and cranky Deckard mumble his way through the movie.

Rather he works on this than MONOPOLY.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Allen 

Rather he works on this than MONOPOLY.

Combine the two, and turn Park Place into The Tyrell Corporation.  

I would pay good money to see a Monopoly movie with Joe Turkel as The Monopoly guy. Double if he still wears the Tyrell glasses.

Although I hope he just focuses on this and forgets about the Monopoly movie. Unless it has Joe Turkel as The Monopoly guy.

I won't deny that this news has me excited beyond rational thought right now. Hope they get Harrison Ford back. somehow. Ridley Scott said Deckard is a replicant, and they could always explain him being older by using that "special case" scenario they used for Rachel in the happy studio ending.

Considering BR is easily one of my favorite films of all time and one of the most inspirational pieces of art on my own creativity, the idea of returning to the universe of November 2019 with Ridley at the helm leaves me positively giddy.

That said, Scott the elder is now sitting around 74 now - how many more projects does the old war horse have in him?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Rain Dog 

Considering BR is easily one of my favorite films of all time and one of the most inspirational pieces of art on my own creativity, the idea of returning to the universe of November 2019 with Ridley at the helm leaves me positively giddy.

 

That said, Scott the elder is now sitting around 74 now - how many more projects does the old war horse have in him?

Also as much as I like some of Scott's films, it feels like he's been on something of a creative downswing for the last....two decades. GLADIATOR and KINGDOM OF HEAVEN (a film I don't like, but see the merits in) both feel like films elevated by individual elements rather than any overarching design. Watching the (utterly excellent) three hour documentary on the making of BLADE RUNNER suggested that there were multiple cooks in the kitchen for that film, a process which will probably not be there for this new feature (watching the documentaries on GLADIATOR and KINGDOM showed a far more authoriative Scott).

I can hope, because like you Blade Runner is in my top ten and was a massive influence on me as a kid and growing up, but I'd rather the series be left alone than have Ridley create a hollow, aesthetically correct, sequel.

Is Peoples gonna write the script? I thought he was working on something else for Scott.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spike Marshall 

 ...but I'd rather the series be left alone than have Ridley create a hollow, aesthetically correct, sequel.

 

Agreed, but that's not the Hollywood reality we have to contend with these days tho is it. If it has to be made - and make no mistake, if Ridley doesn't someone else will - so I'll take Scott every time.

You know what, I'd be more interested to see Scott s a producer and some younger director like Romanek, Arononofsky, or Duncan Jones have a shot working in that playground. I feel like all three directors have dabbled with minor sci-fi aesthetics before, but they've also all made films very much focused on the psyche, on what makes a person a person, on latent humanity and I think they'd be a stronger fit for the material than Scott. I feel like there's some great films to be made in the Blade Runner universe, but I just don't feel like Scott's the guy to do that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spike Marshall 

You know what, I'd be more interested to see Scott s a producer and some younger director like Romanek, Arononofsky, or Duncan Jones have a shot working in that playground. I feel like all three directors have dabbled with minor sci-fi aesthetics before, but they've also all made films very much focused on the psyche, on what makes a person a person, on latent humanity and I think they'd be a stronger fit for the material than Scott. I feel like there's some great films to be made in the Blade Runner universe, but I just don't feel like Scott's the guy to do that.

I agree with everything until that very last assertion. Hopefully Ridley could kick off a series of films returning to that playground - that'd have potential.

Seeing Aronofsky or Jones play around in that sandbox would be incredible I agree.

I'd rather just see a different PKDish tale in the same universe, or something like Kurt Russell's SOLDIER.

Let's just hope he settles on a script before shooting this time. Although part of what made Blade Runner so effective was the friction between its conflicting creative voices.

I think I am in the minority as someone who prefers the original cut of Blade Runner (with 40's style voiceover) but even with that in mind i'd like to see another tale in that univerese.

Why doesn't this excite me? It should excite me, but it doesn't.

I've only seen the original cut. Doesn't the Final Cut come down on the side of Deckard being a Replicant? Because that doesn't fly with me.

Because it's a director who's struggled these past few years returning to something from thirty years ago when he - and us as the audience - should be taking on new and different challenges. I'm not sure why it excites anyone - it's merely a symptom of the mindnumbing cycle of regurgitation that pop culture has become, and if it's not cool for Conan and FRIGHT NIGHT and so on then it's not cool when Ridley Scott does it. BLADE RUNNER is BLADE RUNNER, just leave it alone. Not everything need Extended Universe bolt-ons.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cooper 

I've only seen the original cut. Doesn't the Final Cut come down on the side of Deckard being a Replicant? Because that doesn't fly with me.

Nobody in the film comes right out and says it, but that implication is very strong in both the DC and the FC.

I see. I prefer more ambiguity when it comes to things like that, a la the ending to Total Recall which leaves open the question of whether or not it was all a dream.

I prefer ambiguity, as well, but I appreciate both the theatrical and the director's cut. I had the good fortune to have taken a class in college dedicated entirely to the genre of Science Fiction (Yay, Liberal Arts) and covering both versions of the film, as well as Phillip K Dick's novel, endeared me to finally embracing the idea of multiple interpretations of a story. However, the idea of Scott returning to the well again, along with the production of Prometheus, makes me side with Andrew.

Ridley Scott shouldn't have to return to making sequels/prequels/sidequels/whatever to 30-year-old movies. He should continue making new and original movies. It's really depressing that he's had to seemingly return to the well, so to speak, to get projects off the ground.

Y'see I've never liked the idea of Deckard as a replicant. Largely because I've always enjoyed how the humans in the film are kind of cold and vaguely emotionless, apart from Bryant who's just a cunt, in contrast to how wildly exuberant and emotional the replicants are. Having Deckard, who because of the noir-archetypes is largely shutdown emotionally, be a replicant takes away from that symmetry for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spike Marshall 

Y'see I've never liked the idea of Deckard as a replicant. Largely because I've always enjoyed how the humans in the film are kind of cold and vaguely emotionless, apart from Bryant who's just a cunt, in contrast to how wildly exuberant and emotional the replicants are. Having Deckard, who because of the noir-archetypes is largely shutdown emotionally, be a replicant takes away from that symmetry for me.

Yeah I agree with this totally. On one hand it'd be cool for Ridley to return to this world, but I really do not jive with the idea that Deckard is a replicant, which is the way Ridley interprets the character. I think Ridley is great visually, but I don't think he has a good handle on story, characters or theme. Deckard being a replicant totally cheapens the film and makes the act of Batty saving him at the end less meaningful. Like you said Spike, the idea is that Deckard, the human, has become more machine-like than the machines, and through hunting them down he rediscovers his humanity. Deckard being a replicant just seems like a "neat twist."

I'll never be able to watch that last scene with the foil unicorn without being super-aware that that just ain't Harrison Ford reacting to the realization that he isn't human (and will die soon and his memories are fake).

According to the producers, Harrison Ford and the character of Rick Deckard will not feature in the new film..............unless Ridley decides otherwise.  Basically, they want to have the new film set within the Blade Runner universe but not carry over any characters from the original film.  So Ridley will be doing the same thing here that he is with Prometheus.  A new tale set within the same universe.  They don't expect the film to go into actual production for AT LEAST 18 months, meaning it won't be filming before early 2013 and they don't expect it to hit theaters until at least 2014.  With that in mind, it seems highly likely that Sir Ridley will be making another movie while this is being written (it has no screenwriter attached just yet) and designed.  I'm willing to bet said film will end up being The Wolf of Wall Street or his odd Gucci biopic thriller, since both projects are practically ready to go.

Anyway, I'm completely down with this after what I have seen from Prometheus so far.  Ol' Ridley seems to have his mojo back.  Also, why is anyone shocked by this?  Ridley has been talking up doing some sort of follow-up to Blade Runner for well over a decade now.  He's been talking about it FAR longer than he had about making another Alien film.  This was a long time coming.

As for Ridley's age?  For one thing, he still seems to be in good health.  I am of the mind that whenever he kicks the bucket, it will be on a film set and he'll leave us with an unfinished flick (to likely be finished by his brother or son, I bet).  Hell, Scott has said the same thing himself on more than one occasion!

Would be more interesting if they made this as a sequel. Set the film in the future ( 50 years plus from original). Set in a different cfity or off world. The novels by KW Jeter 'blade runner sequels' explored the idea of setting it  off world as though they were even worse off than earth.It would also free it of the noir dective trappings.

Also thy could have more advanced replicants and making than more human than before (super-super human?), bluring the lines even further as tyrell corp slogan was 'more human than human'. ..

It's going to have to be set at the same time or later.  I can't really see a prequel working, at least not one that takes place a long time before, since the original is set in 2019.

Quote:

Originally Posted by S.D. Bob Plissken 

It's going to have to be set at the same time or later.  I can't really see a prequel working, at least not one that takes place a long time before, since the original is set in 2019.

Agreed. The film wont be released till 2014 ar latest and technically the film would feel dated.

Righto.  I wouldn't be surprised to see it set pretty far after Blade Runner timeline-wise.  It will allow Ridley to expand and evolve the aesthetic he had in place for the first, which I imagine will be a blast for him.