Blade Runner 2049

deckard24 said:
What's up with all the board members here who haven't seen Blade Runner? Rick Deckard is by far one of Ford's best roles, along with Det. John Book in Witness, and Dr. Richard Kimble in The Fugitive! In a way I kind of envy you, because you get to experience it for the first time! If and when you do see it, make sure it's on a great screen and as close to HD as you can get, because the new remastered DVD looks amazing! Even better would be to see it in the theater, as it's been popping up in smaller art house theaters a lot as of late.

You think that's bad. I still haven't seen The Empire Strikes Back. :gun:
 

Insomniac

New member
Saw 3lade Runner last night really good!
But they wold have to get Ridley scott again to pull it off or James Cameron and possibly Guillermo del Toro for possible directors.

But you would really need a good replacement for Deckard.
I'm thinking Viggo Mortensen or Liam Nesson. They would both be good.

I'm interested in another but as long there isn't an android army like Terminator, I Robot, Star Wars or any other Sci-Fi films.
Keep it real minimum CGI and maximum drama!
 

Dewy9

New member
I don't think it'll ever happen.

But for all those who haven't seen Blade Runner, well, you should! It's one of Harrison's best roles, and the BR world is so different than anything before. It practically started the whole cyberpunk look. If you think about it, Harrison was on a great roll there of genre movies. Star Wars in '77, Empire in '80, Raiders in '81, Blade Runner in '82, Return of the Jedi in '83, and Temple of Doom in '84.
 

Bjorn Heimdall

Active member
I've been meaning to pick up Blade Runner, been too long since I saw it the last time, but I've been confused with all these versions coming out... I want the one with the... really cool ending:p
 

Insomniac

New member
Bjorn Heimdall said:
I want the one with the... really cool ending:p
Are you talking about the no voice over ending or with them driving thou the country side (I heard that one sucks)?
 

AlivePoet

New member
Insomniac said:
Are you talking about the no voice over ending or with them driving thou the country side (I heard that one sucks)?

The first version I saw ended as soon as Rick joined Rachael and closed the doors. Bang--credits. Best version in my opinion, as it leaves the most uncertainty.

I checked out the voice-over version on YouTube and it leaves a less-than-pleasant taste in the mouth. My mouth, anyway. Too family-friendly, pandering to those who always want a happy ending. That wasn't the film's message--it was nearly the opposite! Loosely quoting from what I remember in the ending voice-over: "Rachael was a special kind of replicant, and they said she would never die." :sick:
 

Bjorn Heimdall

Active member
Insomniac said:
Are you talking about the no voice over ending or with them driving thou the country side (I heard that one sucks)?

No That one doesn't sound very cool. And you guys should watch out with the spoilers.:gun:
 

Insomniac

New member
Sorry for the spoiler but you shouldn't be poking around a thread with a purposed sequel if you haven't seen the original!
It doesn't make sense...:hat:
 

Dewy9

New member
AlivePoet said:
The first version I saw ended as soon as Rick joined Rachael and closed the doors. Bang--credits. Best version in my opinion, as it leaves the most uncertainty.

I checked out the voice-over version on YouTube and it leaves a less-than-pleasant taste in the mouth. My mouth, anyway. Too family-friendly, pandering to those who always want a happy ending. That wasn't the film's message--it was nearly the opposite! Loosely quoting from what I remember in the ending voice-over: "Rachael was a special kind of replicant, and they said she would never die." :sick:

"It's too bad she won't live. But then again, who does?"

It's also funny how Edward James Olmos, one of the greatest actors ever, did Blade Runner and went on to do Battlestar Galactica 20 years later. Both of which deal with robots who are identical to humans and whether or not they should be treated as such.
 

Dewy9

New member
ResidentAlien said:
That's the quote from the Director's Cut. AlivePoet was referring to the (inferior) theatrical version in which the line is as he stated.

There are so many versions, I can't keep them straight. I thought that was in all of them.
 

Goonie

New member
A new Blade Runner project?

Aintitcool has an interesting article, or blurb I should say about a possible new Blade Runner project:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/44418

Hmmm, not sure what to think. But I thought the accompanying commets were hilarious. And of course someone had to mention Shia as a new Rick Deckard.
 

DocWhiskey

Well-known member
I wouldn't necessarily want a reboot, but I wouldn't mind a new film about a new Bladerunner agent. Maybe taking place after the 1st film. Have a nod to Deckard and the events.

Or better yet....

Stop reboots and remakes and have an original movie for once.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
K W Jeter has already written sequels to Blade Runner (2: The Edge of Human and 3: Replicant Man). I've had the books on my bedside table for months, but have been too busy reading Star Wars novels to get around to them (currently reading the final part of Jeter's 'Bounty Hunter Wars' trilogy).

There's already been so many versions of Blade Runner, that I'd rather see a sequel than a reboot.
 

Finn

Moderator
Staff member
A really clever thing would be to do a prequel, one with the real Deckard...
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Is it ever really established beyond doubt that Deckard was an android?

I've had the Final Cut DVD for some months, and haven't gotten around to watching it yet, so I don't know if Ridley ever came to a definitive answer. There are three commentaries on the discs, so there might be some light shed amongst them.

Blade Runner definitely doesn't need a reboot. Right from the original it had a special haunting quality, through the imagery, music and pensive tone.

I'm not sure if a prequel would be a good thing, if it answered questions that were best left open.
 

Finn

Moderator
Staff member
Montana Smith said:
Is it ever really established beyond doubt that Deckard was an android?
The original version is ambiguous, but the subsequent cuts by Ridley Scott don't leave very much room for other interpretation than that he is, in fact, a replicant.


Interestingly enough, in Philip K. Dick's original novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Deckard is never represented as anything but a human. This is also the case with Jeter's literary sequels (there's also 4: Eye and Talon) for the movie. But if we consider the Final Cut to be the definitive version as indicated by Scott... there's not really a 'canon answer' to be found here.
 
Top