Sci-Fi Blade Runner (1982) & Blade Runner: 2049 (2017)

Alien Soup

Head Chef
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
From Deadline.com:
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.
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania
The original film, which has been singled out as the greatest science-fiction film of all time by a majority of genre publications...
So don't ruin it by making a sequel that will likely not hold up to the original and will be forgotten about. The original movie fuels debates even now 30 years after it came out; let it have its place in cinema history without diluting it by trying to cash in by making a bunch of other loosely connected works.
 

AlienView

StarGate Explorer
Joined
Apr 3, 2014
Just saw Blade Runner - thought it was OK but not the great classic some say it is. But what has me confused was the ending. In the version I saw [I heard there are different versions} at the very end Rachel the female replicant that runs off with him drops some crinkled peace of metal and Decker picks it up sort of nods a knowing yes like he now understands and then the movie ends - What is the meaning?
-Thanks in advance
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania
Just saw Blade Runner - thought it was OK but not the great classic some say it is. But what has me confused was the ending. In the version I saw [I heard there are different versions} at the very end Rachel the female replicant that runs off with him drops some crinkled peace of metal and Decker picks it up sort of nods a knowing yes like he now understands and then the movie ends - What is the meaning?
-Thanks in advance
There are a few different endings and each have their own interpretations. The biggest difference between them is the degree to which it is indicated that Decker himself is a replicant. One of the releases leaves it a bit wider open to interpretation while another release has a voice-over that gives a stronger indication of it. The biggest thing is with Decker finding the origami piece indicating that the cop was there (if you recall, the cop Decker was supposed to be working with had a habit of making little origami figures and leaving them in the rooms he was at).
 
Last edited:

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast
Blade Runner 2 Is The Least Necessary Sequel Of All Time
Rob Bricken at Io9

He said:
The only thing a Blade Runner sequel can do is diminish the power of the original. It's a losing proposition for the movie, Ridley Scott, his legacy, and audiences. There is no upside. A Blade Runner sequel isn't just unnecessary, it would be a detriment to one of scifi's undisputed masterpieces. Wake up, Ridley.
I personally do not want to see a sequel to Blade Runner. No prequel and no remake.
 

Alan 47

Scout
Joined
Mar 1, 2015
One of my favourite movies so I would like to see a before or after but the prequel does have a sertain charm to it .

I always wondered why or how the skin jobs defied their programming
 

Anthony G Williams

Greybeard
Writer
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Location
UK
Film: Blade Runner (The Final Cut, 2007)

Blade Runner is one of the most famous SF movies ever made, but I had only seen the original 1982 cinema version, and that a long time ago. Several different versions have been made but in only one of them did director Ridley Scott have complete artistic freedom – The Final Cut, released in 2007 – so when it came up on TV I was keen to watch it.

I'm sure I needn't say much about the plot, concerning the efforts of a specialist police officer (Bladerunner) in a future Los Angeles to identify, track and "retire" (kill) four replicants; very tough and strong artificial humans made for work in outer space who have illegally returned to Earth in the hope of extending their artificially short lives. The four most important characters in the film are the Bladerunner Deckard (Harrison Ford), two of the replicants he is hunting (Rutger Hauer in a compelling performance, and Darryl Hannah) and a young woman who also turns out to be a replicant (Sean Young).

The setting is dystopian, with Los Angeles a grim, dark, dirty, violent and decidedly wet place (most of the scenes seem to be set at night, in the rain). The mood is enhanced by the soundtrack, with strange mechanical noises from the city frequently intruding into the futuristic background music from Vangelis. The most noticeable difference between The Final Cut and the original is the deletion of the explanatory voice-over from the protagonist Deckard; a big improvement in my view, as it adds to the bleak, mysterious atmosphere of the film. Little is explicit and the viewer has to focus to keep up with the often fast-moving action, but time is taken to give some depth to the major characters, and some of the minor ones too. The fact that the replicants are treated with some sympathy adds to an air of moral ambiguity; this is definitely a film for adults to appreciate, in a way that few SF films have been (Gattacabeing another example).

The original release should certainly feature in anyone's list of best SF films; The Final Cut is vying for the top spot. Compared with another good SF film seen recently – Interstellar– it lacks the ambitious plot and spectacular visuals, but as a piece of filmic drama it is clearly superior. Any SF fan who has not seen this film should certainly do so, and try to see The Final Cut if you can.

A final thought: the film is set in 2019, which in 1982 was presumably felt to be far enough into the future for interstellar colonisation to be feasible. It is rather sad, but typical of SF, that this optimistic assumption was so far from reality that we are in fact further from achieving that now than we seemed to be in 1982. Yet the IT visible in the film was far less advanced than ours – which just emphasises how difficult it is to predict technological developments.


(This entry is cross-posted from my science-fiction & fantasy blog.)
 

BudBrewster

Captain
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Location
North Carolina
When I first heard of the idea that Deckard was a replicant without realizing it, I hated the idea. I thought it was just somebody's funky way of throwing in an unnecessary twist.

But after reading some what other folks thought of the idea -- and why they thought it -- I realized I had been dead wrong. Here's why.


Story wise, making Deckard a replicant is completely consistent with the actions of Dr. Eldon Tyrell. Consider: He was proud of the owl he made that was extremely realistic. He was proud of the regular replicants and the way they had asserted themselves by rebelling against their slave status.

He was proud of Rachel and the fact that she was so real she didn't know she was a replicant. So, what's the next challenge for the brilliant Dr. Tyrell? It's obvious.

He creates a replicant that not only doesn't know he isn't human, he unknowingly fools all his coworkers whose job it is to hunt down escaped replicants.

The thing that puzzled me at first, however, was the way Deckard's boss made statements that indicated he'd known Deckard for years. So, how could Deckard be a replicant if he had old acquaintances?

Again, the answer is obvious.

The real Deckard was killed and replaced by the replicant Deckard -- without knowing he was the replacement!

Thus we have the ultimate test of Dr. Tyrell's genius: he replaces a human with a replicant who is an expert on recognizing replicants, but he doesn't recognize his own true nature because he's such a perfect duplicate of the human he replaced.

This is the most interesting aspect of the entire story --- and if it isn't part of the story, the movie has considerably less depth.

So, what do you think, guys. Is he real? Or is he Memorex?


* This is a fine thread, guys. Naturally I added it to The Multi-Board Alphabetical Index.
 

AlienView

StarGate Explorer
Joined
Apr 3, 2014
At some point according to some - true consciousness will be achieved by a machine - The machine will think
and have a sense of self - an identity.

I am old enough to feel physical mortality - my body is wearing out. Now if I can download my conscious
mind into a computer and then upload it into an android - call it a REPLICANT in honor of the film - Will you
deny me the right to sentience? Will you deny me the right to live as a conscious machine? On what grounds?

And yes many will try to deny me this - Why? Because of fear - Man fears the next stage in evolution {Evolution being defined as an endless expansion of intelligence with a definite objective still not calculable
to ordinary mortals}.

Humans fear the next stage in Evolution - Fear that it will replace them - and it will. The mortal physical
biological body is full of flaws that biological evolution can not correct. The 'gene' experiment is reaching
the end point - It is time to evolve through machine intelligence {AI} to the next stage. As the Replicants
begin to take over be thankful that they allow you to live and die naturally as an inferior biological entity.
 
Last edited:

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania
The date has been set... Blade Runner 2 (not final title) with Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford, back as Deckard, will be released on January 12, 2018.

Not much is known yet other than the timeline will be a few decades after the original movie.
 

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast

Blade Runner 2049 2017
Thirty years after the events of the first film, a new blade runner, LAPD Officer K (Ryan Gosling), unearths a long-buried secret that has the potential to plunge what’s left of society into chaos. K’s discovery leads him on a quest to find Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), a former LAPD blade runner who has been missing for 30 years.

Released: 6 October 2017

Genres: Sci-Fi, Thriller

Director: Denis Villeneuve

Cast: Harrison Ford, Ryan Gosling, Ana de Armas


For me this is a Must See film.
 

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast
Blade Runner ( 1982 )
Blade Runner: Deckard, a blade runner, has to track down and terminate 4 replicants who hijacked a ship in space and have returned to earth seeking their maker.

https://images.-.-/thumbs/926_Blade_Runner_1982.jpg https://www.-.-/images/ribbon_watched.png
  • Currently 3.97/5
(747 votes)
Ratings: IMDB: 8.2/10 Metascore: 88% RT: 91%
Released:
June 25, 1982
Runtime: 117 mins
Genres: Action Thriller Sci-Fi
Countries: USA Hong Kong
Director: Ridley Scott
Actors: Alexis Rhee Ben Astar Bob Okazaki Brion James Charles Knapp Daryl Hannah Edward James Olmos Harrison Ford Hy Pyke James Hong Joanna Cassidy Joe Turkel Judith Burnett Kevin Thompson M Emmet Walsh Morgan Paull Rutger Hauer Sean Young William Sanderson

 

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast
Blade Runner 2049 - 2048: Nowhere to Run ( 2017 )
Blade Runner 2049 - 2048: Nowhere to Run: Gentle Sapper a replicant unleashes his true power when he sees his loved ones in trouble.

https://images.-.-/thumbs/2800245_Blade_Runner_2049_2048_Nowhere_to_Run.jpg
  • Currently 4.04/5
(23 votes)
Ratings: IMDB: N/A Metascore: N/A RT: N/A
Released:
September 14, 2017
Runtime: 5 mins
Genres: Action Sci-Fi Short
Actors: Björn Freiberg Dave Bautista Gaia Ottman Orion Ben

Blade Runner 2049 - 2036: Nexus Dawn ( 2017 )
Blade Runner 2049 - 2036: Nexus Dawn: Niander Wallace demonstrates the merits of new type of Nexus to the LAPD.

https://images.-.-/thumbs/2800200_Blade_Runner_2049_2036_Nexus_Dawn_2017_55.jpg
  • Currently 3.75/5
(16 votes)
Ratings: IMDB: 7.1/10 Metascore: N/A RT: N/A
Released:
August 30, 2017
Runtime: 6 mins
Genres: Sci-Fi Short
Countries: USA
Director: Luke Scott
Actors: Benedict Wong Jared Leto Set Sjöstrand
 

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast
I personally do not want to see a sequel to Blade Runner. No prequel and no remake.
Funny how an actual trailer can change my expectations.
That and I am also jonesing for some good scifi movies.
Here's hoping it isn't a sux fest
 

sci-fi-dude

1963, 1899 called they want every thing back....
Joined
Jul 20, 2017
Location
DFW
Its should be ok, if they don't focus too much on pc, and stick to the script;);)
 

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast
Watched it Christmas Night.
First one is much better, more action, better story.
This one felt like it was trying to grandiose the story.
The music got on my nerves it was so boring.
A filler movie with very little substance.
The future is very foggy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

sci-fi-dude

1963, 1899 called they want every thing back....
Joined
Jul 20, 2017
Location
DFW
In a way, I think the first blade runner was kind of like a ghetto sci-fi, Star-trek is much better....
 
Last edited by a moderator:

sci-fi-dude

1963, 1899 called they want every thing back....
Joined
Jul 20, 2017
Location
DFW
The Origional had Rutger Hower, so that was pretty good....
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania
Netflix US has Blade Runner 2049 available on DVD so I watched it that way.

Visually, it's a stunning movie and it almost makes me regret not seeing it at the theater when given the chance. Set 30 years, well 29 to be pedantic, after the original it feels like the Blade Runner world of 2020 that is in decay. The landscape scenes are sweeping and watching it on a TV doesn't really do them justice.

Story wise, there are few things that bug me about it. For example, if Wallace is willing to do just about anything on Earth, including murder, then why does he need to take Deckard off-world to torture him? That's a bit of a "Huh?" moment. And the bit with the blackout years earlier as the excuse for missing records seems more like a giant McGuffin than something that was instrumental to the story.

One bit of fun was the giant trash dumps of San Diego. Keep an eye out for the large floating ships that are dumping trash to the ground below, they might look familiar to you from a different movie. ;)
 

Jethro

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Also finally caught up with the sequel, in a word disappointed. Fan theories around the first movie once again proved to be false, but the twist coming at you in this one is left field, re-watching the first movie there is simply no ground work for it.

Overall found the movie to be bloated and a tad on the boring side, though as Kev has pointed out the visuals are awesome.

Clearly things are being set up for a 3rd movie, though given the box office results that might not happen.
 
Top Bottom