Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Realistically, I mean. Given the remake/sequel climate as it is, I can't see this not happening. Is there really someone that could ease any pain or are they just better off giving it to someone terrible so we don't have to worry about whether it'll be good or not (ala Terminator 3/4/5)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So who would be a suitable director?

Snyder.

A 30 years younger Ridley Scott, like Steef has suggested, will also do.

It reminds me of the situation when Terry Gilliam asked Alan Moore: "How would you do a Watchmen movie?" and Moore said: "I wouldn't". ;)

Karol

Nah, that's a typical attitude of the rebellious book author against film adaptations. Philip K. Dick also had problems with Hollywood making a film about DADOES.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Danny Boyle might be capable. But anyway, it should be left alone.

Or if they absolutely must make it because they simply can't help themselves, then I want a Verhoeven/Arnie reunion.

Blade Runner 2: Replicant Recall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, it is scary. In fact, if I was Lucas or someone who plans a Blade Runner prequel, or Witness: The Barn Is Still Standing, I would take notice of this guy. OTOH, the audience might freak out, saying the resemblance is too close. The idea that nobody can replace Harrison Ford must remain intact! Clones are scary!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if i were harrison i would freak out and think someone had cloned me...

Some of his other ones are eery too.

I particularly like his George McFly and Bill the Butcher impressions (he's got the facial look down on the later,in particular)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange, because it wasn't a rumor at all. It was already set in stone. OTOH, signing to direct doesn't mean the movie will ever see the light of day (meaning that it's still not a guarantee it will made)

Alex

As long as it's like a completely different story set in the same universe it's fine. It wouldn't even be a sequel as I see it.

But how this film could be, I don't know...

It would be weird for me to see a Blade Runner 2 without a Deckard or a Roy Batty. It will be difficult for me to accept a Matt Damon or a Leo DiCaprio walking around in the same future. I think it's best to re-design the whole damn thing and place it 50 years in the future.

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say if it's a new story re-design the world and place it in a different world.

It could be a Minority Report/A.I. kind of world, with nanomolecular tchnology and organ printing and advanced robotics and longevity augmentation and aneutronic fusion and shit like that. The same way the future of Blade Runner feels like an actual possibility while you're watching it, flying police cars aside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as it's like a completely different story set in the same universe it's fine. It wouldn't even be a sequel as I see it.

It should be a prequel. We see the creation of the Replicant project. The film can end with the birth of Deckard as a Replicant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A prequel?! Set before 2019? I don't see that happening, Steef.

Well Scott can easily change the date in Blade Runner to make it something like 2059 or something. It's not like that film has not been tinkered with before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A prequel?! Set before 2019? I don't see that happening, Steef.

Well Scott can easily change the date in Blade Runner to make it something like 2059 or something. It's not like that film has not been tinkered with before.

That would form a problem with the film's blend of the past and the future. Put it too far in the future and there's no more past. The date will not change. It will not be a prequel.

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or Ridley has to come up with at least some very concrete ideas. Anyway, I no longer see Ridley working with these type of special artists. Did he ask Giger for Prometheus? No, he just continues working with the same crew from the previous film or so. Ridley is a factory. To him Blade Runner 2 is just one of the many, many projects he will do in the next few years.

Still, the few photos on board of the Prometheus looked promising. It's like he can perfectly duplicate the atmophere of a 30 year old movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Ridley Scott updated the status of the second movie, saying it's, "Liable to be a sequel...I think I'm close to finding a writer that might be able to help me deliver. We're quite a long way in, actually." He said an entirely new cast will be involved. Asked if Harrison Ford will be returning, Scott replied, "No, not really." Scott also commented on PROMETHEUS, his quasi prequel to ALIEN, "the central metaphor of the film is about a "higher being" who challenges the gods, and the gods don't want to give him fire. "Fire is our first form of technology," Scott says, and so by taking fire, the higher being is punished "in perpetuity in a horrible fashion.". Much like the story of the mythological god, Prometheus, who stole fire from Zeus and for his actions was bound to a rock with an eagle eternally devouring his liver." Scott said the last eight minutes of PROMETHEUS is "a pretty good DNA of the ALIEN one."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×