Search results

I hate to be a Debbie Downer here but due to the relative faliure of this new Blade Runner, I would have a hard time believing that Dune is going to move forward.

Agreed Well, we know that Deckard's assignment wasn't to VK the escaped replicants. Still though the VK was a bit of a plot hole. Why did Leon need to be VKed in the opening if the BR unit already had his dossier? What was the purpose of sending Deckard to do the VK on Rachel. If I remember...

Yeah it has that. Personally though I don't love those "who's really more human?/who are the real monsters" because it's really been done to death. I admit that I always found the whole premise of Blade Runner somewhat suspect. Why would you build something that could turn on you (especially...

@Ronald Epstein How can I fix before my edit window expires?

Sorry, I really didn't, as far as I can see. My iPad (or HTFs response to iOS posts, and no offense to HTF but it seems to me that a lot of sites don't handle iOS well) This is what my post looked like to me (after struggling to get fonts and color consistent

I don't necessarily think that's true. Seeing the original helps, but from what I saw, this movie was very different from the original. The original was essentially just a futuristic detective story. This one was much more dystopian. This was a movie that I think I'm going to have to watch...

I think what we all want to know is if this film is a comedy.

There was a thread about IMAX and 3D not too long ago. Their reasoning for cutting back on 3D seems to be that because Dunkirk did so well in the format and that was a 2D only film, that somehow is a direct correlation to audience preference for 2D over 3D. Now it might be true that 3D is on...

Is it also possible that the critics are over praising this because they are afraid of being "wrong" again when it comes to Blade Runner?

This is actually starting to worry me a little as some other Ridleyverse films (Prometheus, Alien C) got good reviews from critics but flopped with large portions of audiences.

Partially true, but it's been pretty widely accepted that E.T. being out at the same time hurt the box office potential of The Thing and Blade Runner. Pretty much everything I've ever read about the box office failure of those two films mention that they were competing with E.T.

I get that credits are the resume of people who work in the industry, but even if you dont get an on screen credit, you'd think there would still be a record that you did indeed work on a given production.

Damn you, E.T.!

"Hollywood Homocide II"

Ooof! How hard, how damn hard is it to create a non shit poster. Especially for an iconic brand. Do these studios have any regard at all for how things used to be done.

I'm not sure that's true. As I mentioned before, Bryant had to tell Deckard that Roy and co. had 4 year lifespans (clearly it's exposition for the viewer, but it also seems to be new to Deckard). Deckard also indicated that off world replicants, in his experience, have little motivation to...

I could be mistaken, but doesn't the opening crawl of Blade Runner specifically mention that replicants were used as slave labor in the off world colonies?

I don't think that dialog specifically makes it clear, but, again if you go by the theatrical cut, they can make replicants without a four year lifespan. And If your not watching the theatrical cut, Deckard has to have it explained to him by Bryant that Roy and co have a four year lifespan which...

Not to nitpick, but Francis Ford Coppola has sort of done that on some of his films ("Mario Puzo's The Godfather", Bram Stoker's Dracula")

Plus, if the replicants did have machine parts; they'd be very easy to detect. All you'd need to do is X-Ray suspected replicants.

True, but I take that to mean that once they implement the limited lifespan, they can't undo it. But it's a non issue to the replicants that never had a limited lifespan in the first place.

Replicants as I understand are not required to have a limited lifespan, this was put in place as they found that if a replicant is alive for too long they eventually revolt. If you go by the theatrical cut, Rachel did not have a limited lifespan. This makes sense since Rachel had memories...