Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Robin Bland

Blade Runner Sequel

50 posts in this topic

Honestly? I like 2010 far better.

* pretending I didn't read that... *

giphy.gif  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly? I like 2010 far better.

* pretending I didn't read that... *

giphy.gif  :P

2001 is just a little too esoteric for my tastes.

 

Apologies. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly? I like 2010 far better.

* pretending I didn't read that... *

giphy.gif  :P

2001 is just a little too esoteric for my tastes.

I like esoteric.   :P

But no matter.

Blade Runner sequel.  Horrible idea.  There. :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Visually the teaser hits all the right marks. I like Ryan Gosling. I think the director is one of the best out there working right now.  The teaser did nothing for me, except reinforcing my feelings that I want little to do with it.  Seeing "Decker" old just made me really understand how little I want to see him older and disrupting the ambiguity of the original.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Visually the teaser hits all the right marks. I like Ryan Gosling. I think the director is one of the best out there working right now.  The teaser did nothing for me, except reinforcing my feelings that I want little to do with it.  Seeing "Decker" old just made me really understand how little I want to see him older and disrupting the ambiguity of the original.

^
I'm right with you on preserving the fragile ambiguity and soap-bubble reality of the first movie.  
I agree that the teaser 'looks' right; Denis Villeneuve is certainly the right visual stylist for the job working today, but again I ask; do we need this at all?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder who will do the score because Vangelis score for the original movie was perfect.

Gus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder who will do the score because Vangelis score for the original movie was perfect.

Gus

Well whoever has been scoring Villenuve's movies is bound to have the right talent to mimic that score, which is all they will try to do. But beyond maybe someday picking this up at the library, I doubt I will get so far as to need to find out who does it or how it turned out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup.

Despite Villeneauve's involvement, and Ford's, still feeling this is not necessary. Except for the studio who owns the rights to Blade Runner.

 

Plenty of stories around that i don't want told, though.

Gus, I wonder if Vangelis was approached? That score - like the original film - is iconic. One of my all-time favorite movie scores. They've got a decent enough cover of it on this teaser trailer, but like the directorial job, I wouldn't want to follow in the original's footsteps.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Villeneuve, sorry (sp)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets see...a movie that was never a box office hit, that has only developed a cult following over the years, now gets a sequel 35 years too late, and a plenty of people who should be the target seem disinterested. 

I smell a huge box office take for this one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets see...a movie that was never a box office hit, that has only developed a cult following over the years, now gets a sequel 35 years too late, and a plenty of people who should be the target seem disinterested. 

I smell a huge box office take for this one!

Well, then again the original tanked too, but ultimately it turned out alright (only took a couple decades or so to finally gain a cult following... :P ).   I think the curiosity factor will get oldsters like me to see it initially, but beyond that?  The movie will have to be intriguing enough on its own to warrant a new audience.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets see...a movie that was never a box office hit, that has only developed a cult following over the years, now gets a sequel 35 years too late, and a plenty of people who should be the target seem disinterested. 

I smell a huge box office take for this one!

Well, then again the original tanked too, but ultimately it turned out alright (only took a couple decades or so to finally gain a cult following... :P ).   I think the curiosity factor will get oldsters like me to see it initially, but beyond that?  The movie will have to be intriguing enough on its own to warrant a new audience.  

That's what I'm saying, the original tanked...but even it's cult following has been so tremendous that I really see this as a huge tentpole draw. There are plenty of sci-fi fans who hand their money over for something that has a branding they know...but if there are a lot like me and others here who seem to lack real interest, it can't bode well for this picture...purely because I think it isn't a property that has ever appealed to the masses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets see...a movie that was never a box office hit, that has only developed a cult following over the years, now gets a sequel 35 years too late, and a plenty of people who should be the target seem disinterested. 

I smell a huge box office take for this one!

Well, then again the original tanked too, but ultimately it turned out alright (only took a couple decades or so to finally gain a cult following... :P ).   I think the curiosity factor will get oldsters like me to see it initially, but beyond that?  The movie will have to be intriguing enough on its own to warrant a new audience.  

That's what I'm saying, the original tanked...but even it's cult following has been so tremendous that I really see this as a huge tentpole draw. There are plenty of sci-fi fans who hand their money over for something that has a branding they know...but if there are a lot like me and others here who seem to lack real interest, it can't bode well for this picture...purely because I think it isn't a property that has ever appealed to the masses.

I guess that why Villeneuve is the director...? I dunno, it sounds like someone, somewhere is aware of BR's arthouse appeal and lured the right kind of production team.

You're right though - that, in itself, doesn't make me want to see it, even though I really liked Villeneuve's Arrival. I'm sure I will see it, like Vie, out of simple curiosity, but I'm not going to go into it with good graces because the original is not a story I ever felt demanded a sequel.

I will be really interested to read Villeneuve's reasons for making it when the Promo kicks into high gear.

 

 

[Edit]:

Talk of the devil:

http://io9.gizmodo.com/blade-runner-2049-has-an-r-rating-possible-sequels-an-1790364225

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BLADE RUNNER 2049 Posters Spotlight Ryan Gosling As K And Harrison Ford's Returning Rick Deckard

18221547_10213007823129469_2612411387088

18275209_10213007823769485_1029788651636

 

Gus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That image of Harrison Ford is EXACTLY what I don't want to see in Blade Runner. Deckard as an old man just upends some of the ambiguity of his character and the film for me. No thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kenman said:

That image of Harrison Ford is EXACTLY what I don't want to see in Blade Runner. Deckard as an old man just upends some of the ambiguity of his character and the film for me. No thanks.

I agree that it negates the ambiguity of my preferred version of Blade Runner (wherein I accept that Deckard IS a replicant; how else could Gaff access his unicorn dreams?), but I don't have any problem with Harrison Ford just being older.... come on, my father in law is 81 and he travels the world; he's in Greece at the moment...I'm 30 years younger and even I don't have his endurance.

And it could still be explained within continuity; the Nexus 6 replicants were given a 4 year lifespan.   Maybe earlier models (of which Deckard was probably one) were not.  Deckard's lifespan may be 80 years.  Who knows.   There's plenty of wiggle room, continuity-wise...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Sehlat Vie said:

I agree that it negates the ambiguity of my preferred version of Blade Runner (wherein I accept that Deckard IS a replicant; how else could Gaff access his unicorn dreams?), but I don't have any problem with Harrison Ford just being older.... come on, my father in law is 81 and he travels the world; he's in Greece at the moment...I'm 30 years younger and even I don't have his endurance.

And it could still be explained within continuity; the Nexus 6 replicants were given a 4 year lifespan.   Maybe earlier models (of which Deckard was probably one) were not.  Deckard's lifespan may be 80 years.  Who knows.   There's plenty of wiggle room, continuity-wise...

I am not saying "ew old people" I am saying "ew old Deckard." Simple as that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sehlat Vie said:

I agree that it negates the ambiguity of my preferred version of Blade Runner (wherein I accept that Deckard IS a replicant; how else could Gaff access his unicorn dreams?), but I don't have any problem with Harrison Ford just being older.... come on, my father in law is 81 and he travels the world; he's in Greece at the moment...I'm 30 years younger and even I don't have his endurance.

And it could still be explained within continuity; the Nexus 6 replicants were given a 4 year lifespan.   Maybe earlier models (of which Deckard was probably one) were not.  Deckard's lifespan may be 80 years.  Who knows.   There's plenty of wiggle room, continuity-wise...

Replicants were manufactured. He's not the same Dekard. Or Dekards memories are transferred to a new older Deckard body every 4 years to maintain the illusion of aging for Deckard. Its SF, if you want it to happen it can. I still don't like the idea of the movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BLADE RUNNER 2049 Gets A Visually Striking Second Trailer Which Provides A Better Idea Of The Sequel's Plot
Beware of possible Spoilers
 
Following a couple of brief teasers, a terrific second trailer for Denis Villeneuve’s highly-anticipated follow-up to Ridley Scott's Blade Runner is now online
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I think I'm joining the 'why?' crowd here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't make any sense of it but it looks cool.

Gus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks good; Denis Villeneuve certainly is the right director to get the visual aesthetics of the Blade Runner universe right, but the story just feels very...similar.  

Replicants are still being created as a labor class, 30 years hence.  Cars still fly.  The world's ecology continues to go to s#!t.    

What I want to know is what's new? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does look cool.

I said this about a year ago:

On 6/8/2016 at 9:39 PM, Robin Bland said:

... ambiguity as a quality in and of itself, is becoming a rarer species. Everything has to be explicable, explained and labored upon these days.

Even having just watched Villeneuve's excellent Arrival again yesterday, I'm still wondering why this is existing. But maybe it'll turn out to be just a load of random, Blade Runner-flavored imagery that we can bathe in. That might not be so bad.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Robin Bland said:

It does look cool.

I said this about a year ago:

Even having just watched Villeneuve's excellent Arrival again yesterday, I'm still wondering why this is existing. But maybe it'll turn out to be just a load of random, Blade Runner-flavored imagery that we can bathe in. That might not be so bad.

I could think of worse ways to kill a couple hours.... :happy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0