New Blade Runner?!?!?

JoshL

JoshL

http://www.deadline.com/2011/08/rid...-version-of-seminal-sci-fi-film-blade-runner/

What. The. Hell. I love Ridley Scott. He's directed some of my favorite movies (I've been seriously obsessed with Legend since I was 8). Blade Runner went far afield from the source material, and was a better film for it (all respect to Phillip K. Dick, one of my favorite sci-fi authors ever). There was a pretty good computer game set in the universe that followed a different story, not counting all of the obvious "inspired by" titles. Is there room in the universe for more stories/film? Sure, who doesn't like dystopian sci-fi noir? But this, right on the tail of the Alien prequel seems a little...well, cash-in-y (is that a word? It is now). Doubly so given all the cyberpunk that HASN'T been made into films (where's our Snow Crash film?) Will it be a good story set in the universe, or will it be a borderline fan fic, with so many winks and nods to the source material and all the stuff people are "expecting" to see?

The concept MUST have been good or he wouldn't have signed, right? Right?

*sighs*
 
My first reaction is to be scared and cynical of any outcome. But if Scott is involved, I have some thin hope that it might be good...ish. A lot depends on the script, and the K.W. Jeter sequel books, for example, sucked hard. I interviewed BR screenwriter Hampton Fancher back in the day, and he talked at length about his struggles with Scott over the script, and how David Peoples was brought on for rewrite -- a conflict that fortunately turned out very well. But it could have just as easily gone south.

On a related note, speaking of cyberpunk brought to the screen, I think that the best cyberpunkish thing I've ever seen is the made for TV anime "Ghost in the Shell: Standalone Complex." It constantly pays homage to Gibson's work, and also delves deeply into the same themes as "Blade Runner," i.e. what it means to be human.

We can only hope that any subsequent BR project is as thoughtful.
 
DirtyPicturesTV said:
On a related note, speaking of cyberpunk brought to the screen, I think that the best cyberpunkish thing I've ever seen is the made for TV anime "Ghost in the Shell: Standalone Complex." It constantly pays homage to Gibson's work, and also delves deeply into the same themes as "Blade Runner," i.e. what it means to be human.

We can only hope that any subsequent BR project is as thoughtful.
Click to expand...

Man, if it turns out half as good as Ghost In The Shell, it'll be awesome. Related note, if you haven't seen Oshii's live action "Avalon", you should. Brilliant film, again, asking similar questions.

cameron, where have you read that it was Scott's idea? Every source I've read about it sounds like the studio that purchased the rights pitched it to him. Again, not necessarily a bad thing and I'll definitely see it, for good or ill. I'm just wondering why a sequel/prequel/bob is necessary. Blade Runner is a complex world, but a pretty stand-alone story. Too soon to tell anything.

That said, if Legend sequels, prequels, spin-offs or remakes get the greenlight, I am VERY interested!
 
JoshL said:
if you haven't seen Oshii's live action "Avalon", you should. Brilliant film, again, asking similar questions.
Click to expand...

Yes, I have, and I wouldn't call it "brilliant," though I liked it. Sadly, his loose sequel to "Avalon," called "Assault Girls," is just awful. He's a wildly inconsistent director; I have been working my way through his catalog.
 
It's his baby. If he wants to re-explore his own universe, I'll eagerly await the next installment.

Remakes and sequels aren't always bad. Where would we be, without "Terminator 2", "Toy Story 3", and "Dark Knight"? A year ago, most people (myself included) were skeptical of a new installment to "Planet of the Apes". Yet, despite our cynicism, it turned out to be a very worthwhile venture.

Let's clear the air, on at least one thing. The way the studio and Scott are describing it, "Prometheus" IS NOT a prequel. It sounds much more like a spin-off; it takes place in the same universe, but it's not the same storyline.

How do we know he isn't planning the same sort of thing for "Blade Runner"? For all we know, he might have a brand-new, 100% unique work of pure genius, but he's smart enough of a businessman to set his new story inside a recognizable universe that will deliver a built-in audience.

The dude has a very strong track-record, filmmaking-wise. Without knowing all the details, my inclination is to trust that he's got a clever idea or two bouncing around that noggin of his. Or, maybe it'll turn out to be a crass abomination. Only time will tell, but I'm not ready to sell one of my favorite directors down the river.
 
Riddley Scott is after all a Legendary filmmaker, and the inspiration that started many on this forum into a career in film.

How many in history have ever achieved his heights? Not many I think.

This makes me wonder about that thread where someone got a 25k grant for going to "Film Criticism School"

Seems odd to spend time or money tearing down films, when there seems to be a very long line of unfunded people that are actually trying to build something to share with the world.
 
Last edited:
I agree and disagree with you, Nate. Ridley Scott is amazing, no doubt. An inspiration and definitely one of the greatest filmmakers. He has achieved more commercially and artistically than anything that I will ever be involved with.

That said, I don't like all of his films. There is (and should be) a distinction between quality and personal taste. Both can and should be discussed, because discussion is NEVER a bad thing (in my opinion anyway. Doubly so, I love discussions where people disagree with me and I can understand a different perspective than my own, but that's neither here nor there). I've met people who wouldn't give me their feedback on music when I asked, because they weren't musicians. I found that silly; just because you can't do something doesn't mean you can't have opinions and personal preference. But I digress.

I love that Ridley Scott is doing sci-fi again. I just wonder why he's rehashing stuff he did 30 years ago. As Cracker said, it seems Prometheus started out that way, and kind of wandered off, so who is to say Blade Runner won't do the same. I can understand looking to your past to be inspired, but I think I would just rather see him start somewhere new. Personal preference there :-) I love that he created worlds that inspire, and I'd like to see a world that inspires for the next 30 years, rather than just building on previous ideas.

Again, I have mixed emotions about this. I think "excited" is winning, but either way I will go see it.
 
Nate North said:
It seems somewhat out of place for a bunch of us amateurs to judge Riddley Scott, he is after all a Legendary filmmaker, and the inspiration that started many on this forum into a career in film.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Then no-one can ever express an opinion on this forum about professional filmmakers?

This is getting kind of boring.
 
NickClapper said:
:rolleyes:

Then no-one can ever express an opinion on this forum about professional filmmakers?

This is getting kind of boring.
Click to expand...

I didnt say never, It's just that the guy is one of the top 10 directors in history. What's boring is youtube video makers condescending to literally the best directors in the world.

of course there is and should be freedom of speech, I'm just saying that when someone is lets say, "100,000" times more advanced than me, I usually stop thinking I know better than them. Maybe the new movie will suck, I don't know, but I think Riddley Scott should get some degree of respect. My comment wasn't really about censoring forum discussion, I'm entitled to my opinion as well right?
 
Last edited:
If I'm going to pay money to see a filmmaker's work then I get the right to criticise it.

If you think Ridley Scott is one of the Top 10 filmmakers in history then that's fine, you're welcome to defend him. But referring to us as 'youtube video makers' as a means of invalidating our opinions is not really on.

You sound like George Clooney at the Solaris (shit) press conference.

Does the fact that people on here make videos for YouTube make a difference to their opinions? If Roger Ebert posted a short film on Vimeo would his opinion no longer be worthwhile?
 
My understanding from reading interviews with Ridley is that, since he does not own the rights to either of the original Alien or Blade Runner movies, he has no say in how an Alien "prequel" or Blade Runner "sequel" might be made. Since both of those movies were very important to him he'd just as soon make them himself, rather than let someone else potentially screw them up. And, being one of the top filmmakers in the world, he has the influence to get the job if he wants it -- who in their right mind would turn him down?
 
NickClapper said:
If I'm going to pay money to see a filmmaker's work then I get the right to criticise it.

If you think Ridley Scott is one of the Top 10 filmmakers in history then that's fine, you're welcome to defend him. But referring to us as 'youtube video makers' as a means of invalidating our opinions is not really on.

You sound like George Clooney at the Solaris (shit) press conference.

Does the fact that people on here make videos for YouTube make a difference to their opinions? If Roger Ebert posted a short film on Vimeo would his opinion no longer be worthwhile?
Click to expand...

Well, maybe that came across the wrong way. I make a ton of youtube videos, and in general I'm in the same boat as the rest of you. There's just a few directors I'm kind of protective of. For example, if even a released feature director like the the guy who make "Skyline" were to insult Kubrick, I would probably bitch slap the guy.

This mainly comes from years of martial arts training, where they stress heavily the value of respect for those more advanced than you. So consider it a cultural thing, rather than just me being a jerk. I'm part of a culture where it would be considered very stupid and rude to insult someone of higher rank.
 
It's not that we can't criticize Ridley Scott, but at this stage, why would you? We really don't know anything about either of these projects, so telling Ridley Scott that he's doing it wrong is like telling Tiger Woods that he's using the wrong club, when we don't even know what type of shot he's trying to make. We're not standing next to him on the golf course, we aren't even watching live TV coverage; we just know that he's somewhere on Pebbles Beach, and with that information, we're going to tell him that he should be using the pitching wedge, instead of the driver.

When the movies come out, if they stink, then criticize all you want. But at this stage, anything you or I say is purely hypothetical.
 
Cracker Funk said:
It's not that we can't criticize Ridley Scott, but at this stage, why would you? We really don't know anything about either of these projects, so telling Ridley Scott that he's doing it wrong is like telling Tiger Woods that he's using the wrong club, when we don't even know what type of shot he's trying to make. We're not standing next to him on the golf course, we aren't even watching live TV coverage; we just know that he's somewhere on Pebbles Beach, and with that information, we're going to tell him that he should be using the pitching wedge, instead of the driver.

When the movies come out, if they stink, then criticize all you want. But at this stage, anything you or I say is purely hypothetical.
Click to expand...

Thank you! That's exactly right!
 
Cracker Funk said:
It's not that we can't criticize Ridley Scott, but at this stage, why would you? We really don't know anything about either of these projects, so telling Ridley Scott that he's doing it wrong is like telling Tiger Woods that he's using the wrong club, when we don't even know what type of shot he's trying to make. We're not standing next to him on the golf course, we aren't even watching live TV coverage; we just know that he's somewhere on Pebbles Beach, and with that information, we're going to tell him that he should be using the pitching wedge, instead of the driver.

When the movies come out, if they stink, then criticize all you want. But at this stage, anything you or I say is purely hypothetical.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... I think we're still open to criticising the decision. If/when they announce Transformers 4 and/or Pirates of the Caribbean 5 I will be criticising them asap.

I have no problem with Scott doing this but I just think that coupled with Prometheus it seems like he's ignoring his recent duds (Kingdom of Heaven, Robin Hood) and just revisiting his good movies in order to restore his studio and critical cred. I think his motives in this are very sketchy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top