Blade Runner 2 gets a green light (1 Viewer)

[mattCR]

Not at all joking.

http://www.deadline.com/2013/05/alcon-ridley-scott-announce-theyve-hired-michael-green-to-script-blade-runner-sequel/

Official press release, so this can be spread whereever

LOS ANGELES, CA, MAY 31, 2013, 3:30 pm, EST—Writer Michael Green is in negotiations to do a rewrite of Alcon Entertainment’s “Blade Runner” sequel penned by Hampton Fancher (“Blade Runner,” “The Minus Man,” “The Mighty Quinn”) and to be directed by Ridley Scott. Fancher’s original story/screenplay is set some years after the first film concluded.

Alcon co-founders and co-Chief Executive Officers Broderick Johnson and Andrew Kosove will produce with Bud Yorkin and Cynthia Sikes Yorkin, along with Ridley Scott. Frank Giustra and Tim Gamble, CEO’s of Thunderbird Films, will serve as executive producers.
Green recently completed rewrites on “Robopocalypse” and Warners Bros “Gods and Kings.”

Alcon and Yorkin previously announced that they are partnering to produce “Blade Runner” theatrical sequels and prequels, in addition to all television and interactive productions.

The original film, which has been singled out as the greatest science-fiction film of all time by a majority of genre publications, was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant.” The film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry in 1993 and is frequently taught in university courses. In 2007, it was named the 2nd most visually influential film of all time by the Visual Effects Society.

Released by Warner Bros. almost 30 years ago, “Blade Runner” was adapted by Hampton Fancher and David Peoples from Philip K. Dick’s groundbreaking novel “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” and directed by Scott following his landmark “Alien.” The film was nominated for two Academy Awards (Best Visual Effects, and Best Art Direction). Following the filming of “Blade Runner,” the first of Philip K. Dick’s works to be adapted into a film, many other of Dick’s works were likewise adapted, including “Total Recall,” “A Scanner Darkly,” “Minority Report,” “Paycheck,” and the recent “The Adjustment Bureau,” among others.

 

[Chris Will]

Does the phrase "quit while you're ahead" many anything in Hollywood. Not every great movie, cult classic needs a sequel. Of course, I'll be there day 1 but, there's no way it will live up to expectations.

 

[Edwin-S]

That's why they keep making garbage like this, because they know that we'll all be there on day one to watch the travesty take place. Then we'll go on HTF and complain how terrible it was and how it didn't need to be made. Meanwhile, they'll be planning number 3 because number 2 made so much money.

 

[Jon Lidolt]

That's why they keep making garbage like this, because they know that we'll all be there on day one to watch the travesty take place. Then we'll go on HTF and complain how terrible it was and how it didn't need to be made. Meanwhile, they'll be planning number 3 because number 2 made so much money.

On the other hand, there's always the possibility that it'll be great. We can only hope.

 

[mattCR]

I will hold out it will be Godfather-II level great. But secretly worry about the worst.

 

[Edwin-S]

On the other hand, there's always the possibility that it'll be great. We can only hope.

Well, there's always a faint possibility; however,writing a sequel to a movie based on a Phillip K. Dick story is pointless.Everything that needed to be said was said in that movie. I'm not much of a fan of Dick's writing, but I will say that he had a unique style and way of looking at things. I do not think that any sequel can be written that will add anything of value to that world and it certainly will not reflect any of Dick's sensibilities.Blade Runner was a one off story about what constitutes humanity. It is not a film or story that lends itself to the creation of a franchise.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Well, Prometheus was just terrible so I would hope that this new Blade Runner film at least is better than that was. Honestly films like Alien and Blade Runner did not need sequels or prequels so I would rather see Scott make another original science fiction story instead of these weak attempts to cash in on his older work.

 

[TravisR]

I don't think this is a good idea but I kinda like that Ridley Scott must just be interested in doing what he wants and apparently isn't concerned with catering to fans who will hate any sequel/prequel/reboot no matter what. I can't wait until this movie comes out because the nerd rages that it's going to create and the histrionics that people will go into are going to be absolutely amazing and hilarious.

All that being said, I hope this sequel (unnecessary as it is) is set in the same universe and has no major direct continuation to the first one.

Well, Prometheus was just terrible...

I think Prometheus is easily Ridley Scott's third best movie.

 

[Edwin-S]

Unless the reviews are beyond stellar, I'll probably skip it. I don't need to watch Scott vomit all over the original with a pointless reboot or half-baked sequel.It's bad enough that he vomited on the original with his stupid "Decker is a Replicant" inference.edit: ***Deckard***, not Decker

 

[Brett_M]

I think the universes Scott created in both Alien and Blade Runner are worth venturing into again.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

It's bad enough that he vomited on the original with his stupid "Deckard is a Replicant" inference.

Rarely has a creative person shat so profoundly on his own work (although I suppose it wasn't really his).

Hopefully this is an unrelated story set in the same universe. I would have no problem with that.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

I think Prometheus is easily Ridley Scott's third best movie.

I haven't seen it, so I can't tell if you're being sarcastic. I do have a friend who saw it 5 times in the theater and told me that it's his favorite film.

Spurred by a seeming trend of lousy flicks from Ridley (who, in past times, was my favorite director) in recent years, I looked up his filmography and discovered that it actually contains way more hits than misses. Just off the top of my head, The Duellists, Black Hawk Down, Matchstick Men. . .

 

[TravisR]

I haven't seen it, so I can't tell if you're being sarcastic. I do have a friend who saw it 5 times in the theater and told me that it's his favorite film.

It's not sarcasm as much as it's a very backhanded compliment because I think Ridley Scott has made two great movies (Alien and Blade Runner) and the others range from pretty good (Black Hawk Down, The Duellists and Prometheus) to nothing all that special (nearly everything else). To give credit where credit is due, he's a truly brilliant visual stylist and I know people love his work but given his output, I'm at a total loss as to why he gets as much praise as he has gets.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Well, consider that his first 15 years or so of work consisted of these films:

The Duellists
Alien
Blade Runner
Legend
Someone to Watch over Me
Black Rain
Thelma and Louise

That is a pretty incredible track record. (I actually have never seen Legend or Someone to Watch over Me, but they don't exactly have terrible reputations.) Then came 1492. . .

(Now, if you're wondering why he *still* gets as much praise as he gets, you're not alone.)

 

[Coressel]

The only thing that would truly bother me about this is if they actually called it "Blade Runner 2." Hopefully they can come up with something more creative than that.

Hell, "Blade Runners" would be better than that.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

I think the universes Scott created in both Alien and Blade Runner are worth venturing into again.

What is so special or unique about the universe of Blade Runner that we would want its world rather than any other standard future world with androids that may or may not know they are androids? At least in the Alien universe, it was all about the aliens and their specific history/future as opposed to a generic alien species so that makes sense.

 

[Brett_M]

What is so special or unique about the universe of Blade Runner that we would want its world rather than any other standard future world with androids that may or may not know they are androids? At least in the Alien universe, it was all about the aliens and their specific history/future as opposed to a generic alien species so that makes sense.

I will try to explain my comment a bit more. I think a world in which androids were created for hazardous off-world work in space colonies is truly unique in cinema. It is only hinted at in Blade Runner through the use of adverts and a bit of exposition. I find the concept fascinating and I hope the new film investigates the ethics of creating slave androids that have thoughts and feelings but are simply grist for the mill for multinational conglomerates bent on colonialization and profit. I want to see these colonies. Are the replicants battling aliens species on these new wrolds? Are they battling androids made by other companies who are also colonizing space? Are the replicants used to infiltrate and exterminate humans that work for Tyrell Corps competitors in these colonies? Simply put, the dystopian future shown in Blade Runner only scratched the surface. I would like to see more of that future. Blade runners, skinjobs and who is or isn't an android aren't the attractions for me -- it's the world they inhabit. That's the juice and that's what I want to see more of.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

I will try to explain my comment a bit more. I think a world in which androids were created for hazardous off-world work in space colonies is truly unique in cinema. It is only hinted at in Blade Runner through the use of adverts and a bit of exposition. I find the concept fascinating and I hope the new film investigates the ethics of creating slave androids that have thoughts and feelings but are simply grist for the mill for multinational conglomerates bent on colonialization and profit. I want to see these colonies. Are the replicants battling aliens species on these new wrolds? Are they battling androids made by other companies who are also colonizing space? Are the replicants used to infiltrate and exterminate humans that work for Tyrell Corps competitors in these colonies? Simply put, the dystopian future shown in Blade Runner only scratched the surface. I would like to see more of that future. Blade runners, skinjobs and who is or isn't an android aren't the attractions for me -- it's the world they inhabit. That's the juice and that's what I want to see more of.

My point was "Why does the world have to be Blade Runner and not the effectively identical setup of the future and have nothing to do with Blade Runner" If you want a movie about the philosophical ethics of creating androids / thinking machines that humans control as slaves, there are movies already and more could be done and have nothing to do with the Blade Runner universe.

 

[Brett_M]

My point was "Why does the world have to be Blade Runner and not the effectively identical setup of the future and have nothing to do with Blade Runner" If you want a movie about the philosophical ethics of creating androids / thinking machines that humans control as slaves, there are movies already and more could be done and have nothing to do with the Blade Runner universe.

I see your point but I want to experience more of the Blade Runner universe, not another version of a similar dystopia. You obviously feel the opposite. I don't think a sequel will have any bearing on the original in terms of my enjoyment of it. Prometheus worked for me and it did not diminish or intensify my love of Alien. A sequel is exciting to me because I love the original so much.

For others interested, here is a tid-bit I found today that totally bums me out:

Mary/Irmgard Batty, the 6th replicant. Actress Stacey Nelkin was cast in the part of Mary but the character was cut from the film early on in principal photography due to budget constraints. This created a plot hole and speculation among fans as to whether Deckard was the 6th replicant with new memories. However, in the 2007 Final Cut, Captain Bryant's dialog was altered, so he now mentions two Replicants killed by the electric field, rather than just one as in the 1982 U.S. theatrical version. In the original workprint version, Bryant also mentions two Replicants killed.

I mentioned this actress in the Halloween III BD review thread because I am in love with her (1980s incarnation anyway). Does any film of her exist? I have the ultimate edition in the brief case. I watched all the extras when I bought it upon release and I don't remember if there is any footage of her there.

 

[TravisR]

I mentioned this actress in the Halloween III BD review thread because I am in love with her (1980s incarnation anyway). Does any film of her exist? I have the ultimate edition in the brief case. I watched all the extras when I bought it upon release and I don't remember if there is any footage of her there.

My memory could be wrong but I thought Stacey Nelkin's screen test was on the Blu-ray.