Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

BladeRunner II

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films >> BladeRunner II Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
BladeRunner II - 21/8/2011 12:06:22 AM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010
With the announcement of Ridley Scotts new film... what direction do you look to?... Do you see a continuation of a cerebral film noir or a adrenaline filled adventure featuring a mass replicant rebellion?.... Is there a role for Harrison Ford as Blade Runner Jedi Master or Over The Hill Killer?
Post #: 1
RE: BladeRunner II - 21/8/2011 12:57:15 AM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010
Just thinking about the usual plot holes of the limited lifespan of replicants and any extended rebellion of the replicants.... maybe a few replicants could learn to reprogram the replicants to overstay their welcome, utilising the wisdom of lord replicant(Dekkard) in order to overthrow their masters...

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 2
RE: BladeRunner II - 21/8/2011 1:03:25 AM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010
Just wondering who could provide an appropriate soundtrack.... Vangelis or ????????

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 3
RE: BladeRunner II - 21/8/2011 1:10:29 AM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010
Jeeze... the backdrop of BladeRunner was dark and depressing... Would the vibrancy of a modern backdrop add to the commercial appeal of the film??????
Would the addition of a perky addition of a teen actress with pert breasts increase interest?

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 4
RE: BladeRunner II - 21/8/2011 1:36:53 AM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010
Gerard Butler as Rebel Replicant????

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 5
RE: BladeRunner II - 21/8/2011 12:21:50 PM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010
How about Russell Crowe and Viggo Mortensen as leaders of a BladeRunner army? .... bloody hell, not sure what you'd do with Lee Evans though... maybe you could use him as a schitzo droid with Arnie as his alter ego.

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 6
RE: BladeRunner II - 21/8/2011 4:20:23 PM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8533
Joined: 13/4/2006
Why are they making a follow up?
What a dumb idea! The first is a unique one off film, and the ending does leave your mind to wonder, why fuck it up by filling in the blanks and adding to the series?

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 7
RE: BladeRunner II - 22/8/2011 9:32:37 AM   
JIm R

 

Posts: 9185
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Surrey
my suggested plotline contain spoilers for anyone who hasn't seen the original yet...
 
So in invisi-text
 
Said it in the news thread, plot that I'd have is a continuation, Deckard is told there is one replicant left to take out and running along this narrative he finally establishes that he is in fact a replicant and it is himself he has to destroy, making it a sci-fi version of Angel Heart.

< Message edited by JIm R -- 22/8/2011 9:33:21 AM >

(in reply to ElephantBoy)
Post #: 8
RE: BladeRunner II - 22/8/2011 10:25:44 AM   
pete_traynor


Posts: 3010
Joined: 28/11/2006
From: Balboa Towers, Balboa Island, CA
I very much doubt this will be a straight follow up. As rightly pointed out, the ambiguity of the originals (preferred) ending is one of its greatest strengths and I don’t think Scott would toy with that. I imagine (like Prometheus) this will be a story within that world but not directly linked to most of the principals of the first film. Potentially the story of the beginnings of the relicants or perhaps the story of a younger Tyrell. There are also the off world colonies and those could make for potentially interesting environments to set this piece. As long as this has no direct impact on the events of Bladerunner itself, I say why not.

Not sure about the idea of Deckard having to destroy himself because he finds out he is a replicant though. Little bit Arnie in the steel works . Also, Harrison is far too old to return in that role. Four year life expectancy and there is no telling how long he had been about when Bladerunner begins. He could have expired mere days after he fled with Rachel. Think Scott will avoid these characters all together.


< Message edited by pete_traynor -- 22/8/2011 10:27:05 AM >


_____________________________

EXTREMELY LIMITED 1/1 FILM DIRECTOR HAND DRAWN ORIGINALS COMING SOON - http://lomierart.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to JIm R)
Post #: 9
RE: BladeRunner II - 22/8/2011 2:22:17 PM   
Marwood

 

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows
I'd rather it wasn't a prequel or a sequel - just something set in the same universe. It's a pretty rich world Scott created on screen and the central story point of humans vs their creations (but not in a Terminator way) has a lot of possibilities.

I think it's a mistake to try and do something directly connected to Deckard's story as a belated sequel could go either way for every Colour of Money there's a Die Hard 4.0. Likewise a prequel could be a bad move if it tries to explain things mentioned or hinted at in the original - I don't really need to see how the Replicants rebelled or Deckard on his first ever case (depending on your opinion of his true nature obviously).

Nah, if Scott and co are keen to revisit that universe then give us a new story and set of characters that introduce new ideas or expands on the original film rather than boxing it in.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to pete_traynor)
Post #: 10
RE: BladeRunner II - 22/8/2011 6:31:48 PM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010
In response to elephantboy's question about the validity of a sequel/prequel; with the current technology available and the increased ability to explore the potential of a replicant's ability, both physically and mentally could be pretty spectacular...as long as it's not too overthetop, I'm sure the menace of a superdroid(s) could bring out a superb cat and mouse adventure... the only problems could be poor casting and scripting, but if done right could spawn dramatic and action gems...

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 11
RE: BladeRunner II - 22/8/2011 6:56:56 PM   
Marwood

 

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

In response to elephantboy's question about the validity of a sequel/prequel; with the current technology available and the increased ability to explore the potential of a replicant's ability, both physically and mentally could be pretty spectacular...as long as it's not too overthetop, I'm sure the menace of a superdroid(s) could bring out a superb cat and mouse adventure... the only problems could be poor casting and scripting, but if done right could spawn dramatic and action gems...


Just as long as the tech isn't abused to have them leaping around like Spider-Man....

I liked how their abilities were shown in the original, they're more intelligent, faster, stronger, more agile (on the whole) but not superhuman and that fits the context of why they were created according to the film's story - they're just tougher so they can do dangerous jobs that would put humans at significant risk.

However Rachel (and possibly Deckard) was supposed to be the next step - a Replicant that could more easily pass for human and aside from intelligence appeared to have the same frailties we do as a result. Of course we don't really know what her physical abilities or potential were so I'm just speculating.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 12
RE: BladeRunner II - 22/8/2011 11:40:28 PM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood


quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

In response to elephantboy's question about the validity of a sequel/prequel; with the current technology available and the increased ability to explore the potential of a replicant's ability, both physically and mentally could be pretty spectacular...as long as it's not too overthetop, I'm sure the menace of a superdroid(s) could bring out a superb cat and mouse adventure... the only problems could be poor casting and scripting, but if done right could spawn dramatic and action gems...


Just as long as the tech isn't abused to have them leaping around like Spider-Man....

I liked how their abilities were shown in the original, they're more intelligent, faster, stronger, more agile (on the whole) but not superhuman and that fits the context of why they were created according to the film's story - they're just tougher so they can do dangerous jobs that would put humans at significant risk.

However Rachel (and possibly Deckard) was supposed to be the next step - a Replicant that could more easily pass for human and aside from intelligence appeared to have the same frailties we do as a result. Of course we don't really know what her physical abilities or potential were so I'm just speculating.

I wasn't really thinking of a variation on a theme of spiderman but something akin to a six million dollar man type version... add to that the intelligence and persona of hannibal lechter and you're looking at a fun character... the android may have been used as a military droid but had been captured and reprogrammed by someone...

< Message edited by funkyfenbah -- 22/8/2011 11:41:57 PM >

(in reply to Marwood)
Post #: 13
RE: BladeRunner II - 23/8/2011 11:16:34 AM   
pete_traynor


Posts: 3010
Joined: 28/11/2006
From: Balboa Towers, Balboa Island, CA
quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood


quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

In response to elephantboy's question about the validity of a sequel/prequel; with the current technology available and the increased ability to explore the potential of a replicant's ability, both physically and mentally could be pretty spectacular...as long as it's not too overthetop, I'm sure the menace of a superdroid(s) could bring out a superb cat and mouse adventure... the only problems could be poor casting and scripting, but if done right could spawn dramatic and action gems...


Just as long as the tech isn't abused to have them leaping around like Spider-Man....

I liked how their abilities were shown in the original, they're more intelligent, faster, stronger, more agile (on the whole) but not superhuman and that fits the context of why they were created according to the film's story - they're just tougher so they can do dangerous jobs that would put humans at significant risk.

However Rachel (and possibly Deckard) was supposed to be the next step - a Replicant that could more easily pass for human and aside from intelligence appeared to have the same frailties we do as a result. Of course we don't really know what her physical abilities or potential were so I'm just speculating.

I wasn't really thinking of a variation on a theme of spiderman but something akin to a six million dollar man type version... add to that the intelligence and persona of hannibal lechter and you're looking at a fun character... the android may have been used as a military droid but had been captured and reprogrammed by someone...


I personally never thought of them as ‘androids’ or cyborgs or mechanical in any way. I always believed they were basically created using enhanced biological components, such as the eyes were see Chew working on in his laboratory. I always imagined cloned and enhanced organs and body parts, assembled into a human form that was heightened in both intelligence and physical capability. There was nothing in the film that pointed to them being mechanical. Anyone here read the book? Was their physical makeup discussed?

< Message edited by pete_traynor -- 23/8/2011 11:17:23 AM >


_____________________________

EXTREMELY LIMITED 1/1 FILM DIRECTOR HAND DRAWN ORIGINALS COMING SOON - http://lomierart.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 14
RE: BladeRunner II - 23/8/2011 11:34:11 PM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: pete_traynor

quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood


quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

In response to elephantboy's question about the validity of a sequel/prequel; with the current technology available and the increased ability to explore the potential of a replicant's ability, both physically and mentally could be pretty spectacular...as long as it's not too overthetop, I'm sure the menace of a superdroid(s) could bring out a superb cat and mouse adventure... the only problems could be poor casting and scripting, but if done right could spawn dramatic and action gems...


Just as long as the tech isn't abused to have them leaping around like Spider-Man....

I liked how their abilities were shown in the original, they're more intelligent, faster, stronger, more agile (on the whole) but not superhuman and that fits the context of why they were created according to the film's story - they're just tougher so they can do dangerous jobs that would put humans at significant risk.

However Rachel (and possibly Deckard) was supposed to be the next step - a Replicant that could more easily pass for human and aside from intelligence appeared to have the same frailties we do as a result. Of course we don't really know what her physical abilities or potential were so I'm just speculating.

I wasn't really thinking of a variation on a theme of spiderman but something akin to a six million dollar man type version... add to that the intelligence and persona of hannibal lechter and you're looking at a fun character... the android may have been used as a military droid but had been captured and reprogrammed by someone...


I personally never thought of them as ‘androids’ or cyborgs or mechanical in any way. I always believed they were basically created using enhanced biological components, such as the eyes were see Chew working on in his laboratory. I always imagined cloned and enhanced organs and body parts, assembled into a human form that was heightened in both intelligence and physical capability. There was nothing in the film that pointed to them being mechanical. Anyone here read the book? Was their physical makeup discussed?

how do pete... I'm not too sure whether the title of the original book was metaphorical or not but it was called 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep'... I'm pretty sure there was a reason behind it but anyway, I just thought that by opening up the world of replicants with advanced technology, it could maybe heighten the action experience whilst retaining the human qualities shared between batty and deckard.

(in reply to pete_traynor)
Post #: 15
RE: BladeRunner II - 24/8/2011 1:04:33 AM   
rich


Posts: 4998
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Neo Kobe
Problems with this idea:
1) Ridley hasn't made anything as good as Blade Runner in a long time
2) Blade Runner didn't gross well on release, it's a cult movie. Studio execs will never agree to repeat that, it will be watered down
3) The above. It needs to be said that many people just don't understand or dont "get" the movie: any sequel-remake-spinoff will be "accessible"


_____________________________

Meanwhile...

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 16
RE: BladeRunner II - 24/8/2011 9:32:49 AM   
Drew_231

 

Posts: 880
Joined: 7/5/2008
quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah


quote:

ORIGINAL: pete_traynor

quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood


quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

In response to elephantboy's question about the validity of a sequel/prequel; with the current technology available and the increased ability to explore the potential of a replicant's ability, both physically and mentally could be pretty spectacular...as long as it's not too overthetop, I'm sure the menace of a superdroid(s) could bring out a superb cat and mouse adventure... the only problems could be poor casting and scripting, but if done right could spawn dramatic and action gems...


Just as long as the tech isn't abused to have them leaping around like Spider-Man....

I liked how their abilities were shown in the original, they're more intelligent, faster, stronger, more agile (on the whole) but not superhuman and that fits the context of why they were created according to the film's story - they're just tougher so they can do dangerous jobs that would put humans at significant risk.

However Rachel (and possibly Deckard) was supposed to be the next step - a Replicant that could more easily pass for human and aside from intelligence appeared to have the same frailties we do as a result. Of course we don't really know what her physical abilities or potential were so I'm just speculating.

I wasn't really thinking of a variation on a theme of spiderman but something akin to a six million dollar man type version... add to that the intelligence and persona of hannibal lechter and you're looking at a fun character... the android may have been used as a military droid but had been captured and reprogrammed by someone...


I personally never thought of them as 'androids' or cyborgs or mechanical in any way. I always believed they were basically created using enhanced biological components, such as the eyes were see Chew working on in his laboratory. I always imagined cloned and enhanced organs and body parts, assembled into a human form that was heightened in both intelligence and physical capability. There was nothing in the film that pointed to them being mechanical. Anyone here read the book? Was their physical makeup discussed?

how do pete... I'm not too sure whether the title of the original book was metaphorical or not but it was called 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep'... I'm pretty sure there was a reason behind it but anyway, I just thought that by opening up the world of replicants with advanced technology, it could maybe heighten the action experience whilst retaining the human qualities shared between batty and deckard.



Maybe not entirely relevant, but in the Blade Runner game from a couple of yeas back, they stated that they had to do a bone marrow test to see whether the retired subject had actually been a replicant
Which fits in with the idea of them being organic in compound

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 17
RE: BladeRunner II - 24/8/2011 1:18:07 PM   
Marwood

 

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah


quote:

ORIGINAL: pete_traynor

quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood


quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

In response to elephantboy's question about the validity of a sequel/prequel; with the current technology available and the increased ability to explore the potential of a replicant's ability, both physically and mentally could be pretty spectacular...as long as it's not too overthetop, I'm sure the menace of a superdroid(s) could bring out a superb cat and mouse adventure... the only problems could be poor casting and scripting, but if done right could spawn dramatic and action gems...


Just as long as the tech isn't abused to have them leaping around like Spider-Man....

I liked how their abilities were shown in the original, they're more intelligent, faster, stronger, more agile (on the whole) but not superhuman and that fits the context of why they were created according to the film's story - they're just tougher so they can do dangerous jobs that would put humans at significant risk.

However Rachel (and possibly Deckard) was supposed to be the next step - a Replicant that could more easily pass for human and aside from intelligence appeared to have the same frailties we do as a result. Of course we don't really know what her physical abilities or potential were so I'm just speculating.

I wasn't really thinking of a variation on a theme of spiderman but something akin to a six million dollar man type version... add to that the intelligence and persona of hannibal lechter and you're looking at a fun character... the android may have been used as a military droid but had been captured and reprogrammed by someone...


I personally never thought of them as ‘androids’ or cyborgs or mechanical in any way. I always believed they were basically created using enhanced biological components, such as the eyes were see Chew working on in his laboratory. I always imagined cloned and enhanced organs and body parts, assembled into a human form that was heightened in both intelligence and physical capability. There was nothing in the film that pointed to them being mechanical. Anyone here read the book? Was their physical makeup discussed?

how do pete... I'm not too sure whether the title of the original book was metaphorical or not but it was called 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep'... I'm pretty sure there was a reason behind it but anyway, I just thought that by opening up the world of replicants with advanced technology, it could maybe heighten the action experience whilst retaining the human qualities shared between batty and deckard.



It was because Deckard is saving money to buy a pet sheep, in the book's world animals are pretty much extinct (owl reference in the film, animal trading in the PC game) and good fakes cost a load of money. At one point in the novel Deckard's identity as a human is in question and since (again an idea in the film) Replicants don't have any affinity for "living creatures" outside of humans his desire to own a pet is something that raises the question of whether that's a barrier that has been cracked in the android development or if he is definitely human.

Been a while since I read the novel but I'm also pretty sure Replicants were always organic machines too rather than flesh covered robots ala Terminator. Admittedly the terminators organic covering can bleed etc. but thinking to the film at least you never saw exposed metal, circuits etc on the dead Replicants; Deckard didn't just go for a particular kill spot either: Leon was shot through the head (by Rachel), Zorra in the back and Priss through the torso. Mortal areas for both people and the Reps whereas being actual robotic machines you think certain areas like that would be better protected as part of the design (reinforced)....unless Blade Runner's have special weapons. Overthinking.

Anyway, organic or otherwise there's nothing to say Nexus 8 or beyond couldn't be developed further to have more dramatic difference in physical abilities. Considering Batty ran rings around Deckard the idea of further advanced Replicants could offer some great sequences. Or they could take it too far, that's my concern.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 18
RE: BladeRunner II - 24/8/2011 2:50:39 PM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010
quote:

ORIGINAL: rich

Problems with this idea:
1) Ridley hasn't made anything as good as Blade Runner in a long time
2) Blade Runner didn't gross well on release, it's a cult movie. Studio execs will never agree to repeat that, it will be watered down
3) The above. It needs to be said that many people just don't understand or dont "get" the movie: any sequel-remake-spinoff will be "accessible"


How do rich... all points taken, in this day of reboots (startrek etc), it would be fun to watch the old cat&mouse thriller taken to another place. The first Bladerunner was visually stunning yet maybe too bleak at times. I've not seen the film for a while but what I remember was that it could have had more variety in its pacing. It served the purpose of the film well but it's always refreshing to have periods of adrenaline, pathos and humour...As far as not getting the film, I don't think the film really opened up emotionally to the ambiguities of the subtext regarding deckards true nature....As far as i could gather with people I talk to; they either took the story at face value and went along with the ride or were bored shitless...me personally, enjoyed the little nuances regarding deckards fixation with his past(mirroring Rachel's memory implants) but can relate to the need for the film to be lightened up a little... anyway, I don't care if he (Scott) abandons the roots of the past film as long as he produces a fun(SPEED like, not spooflike), thought provoking action film with rounded characters that you care about...

< Message edited by funkyfenbah -- 24/8/2011 2:55:56 PM >

(in reply to rich)
Post #: 19
RE: BladeRunner II - 24/8/2011 3:04:15 PM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drew_231

quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah


quote:

ORIGINAL: pete_traynor

quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood


quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

In response to elephantboy's question about the validity of a sequel/prequel; with the current technology available and the increased ability to explore the potential of a replicant's ability, both physically and mentally could be pretty spectacular...as long as it's not too overthetop, I'm sure the menace of a superdroid(s) could bring out a superb cat and mouse adventure... the only problems could be poor casting and scripting, but if done right could spawn dramatic and action gems...


Just as long as the tech isn't abused to have them leaping around like Spider-Man....

I liked how their abilities were shown in the original, they're more intelligent, faster, stronger, more agile (on the whole) but not superhuman and that fits the context of why they were created according to the film's story - they're just tougher so they can do dangerous jobs that would put humans at significant risk.

However Rachel (and possibly Deckard) was supposed to be the next step - a Replicant that could more easily pass for human and aside from intelligence appeared to have the same frailties we do as a result. Of course we don't really know what her physical abilities or potential were so I'm just speculating.

I wasn't really thinking of a variation on a theme of spiderman but something akin to a six million dollar man type version... add to that the intelligence and persona of hannibal lechter and you're looking at a fun character... the android may have been used as a military droid but had been captured and reprogrammed by someone...


I personally never thought of them as 'androids' or cyborgs or mechanical in any way. I always believed they were basically created using enhanced biological components, such as the eyes were see Chew working on in his laboratory. I always imagined cloned and enhanced organs and body parts, assembled into a human form that was heightened in both intelligence and physical capability. There was nothing in the film that pointed to them being mechanical. Anyone here read the book? Was their physical makeup discussed?

how do pete... I'm not too sure whether the title of the original book was metaphorical or not but it was called 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep'... I'm pretty sure there was a reason behind it but anyway, I just thought that by opening up the world of replicants with advanced technology, it could maybe heighten the action experience whilst retaining the human qualities shared between batty and deckard.



Maybe not entirely relevant, but in the Blade Runner game from a couple of yeas back, they stated that they had to do a bone marrow test to see whether the retired subject had actually been a replicant
Which fits in with the idea of them being organic in compound


How do drew, ya got me there... The mention of the mechanical progression of replicant manufacturing was merely an ends to a means... all that matters is that the replicant's presence in any future films would pose a greater threat within the context of the film... devising more elaborate strategies to overcome the foe would make the film less predictable and more involving(possibly)... it does get me excited though( easily excitable I may be but there you go)

(in reply to Drew_231)
Post #: 20
RE: BladeRunner II - 28/8/2011 7:05:49 PM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010
whipped out the final cut, it's been a while since I seen it... forgot how good Harrison Ford was... I hope they get Karl Urban as lead Blade... his role as McCoy was genius and experience in Lord of Rings should aid his cause...

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 21
RE: BladeRunner II - 29/8/2011 8:27:56 PM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: funkyfenbah

Just wondering who could provide an appropriate soundtrack.... Vangelis or ????????

a collaboration between John Williams and Michael Giacchino sounds good to me... hey Ridley sign em up!!!
An while they're at it, Johnny, Michael get JJ and George Lucas together an' make STAR WARS VII: Rise Of The Sith...
an no this isn't a piss take on Transformers...

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 22
RE: BladeRunner II - 22/9/2011 5:40:02 PM   
Hungrymark

 

Posts: 50
Joined: 13/2/2006
quote:

ORIGINAL: rich

Problems with this idea:
1) Ridley hasn't made anything as good as Blade Runner in a long time
2) Blade Runner didn't gross well on release, it's a cult movie. Studio execs will never agree to repeat that, it will be watered down
3) The above. It needs to be said that many people just don't understand or dont "get" the movie: any sequel-remake-spinoff will be "accessible"



Blade Runner didn't gross well on release but I think it has garnered enough of a fanbase since to justify making a film that is not too diminished in its scope. Whether they do so or not is another matter...

(in reply to rich)
Post #: 23
RE: BladeRunner II - 22/9/2011 9:38:48 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1894
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
True, Blade Runner didn't do very well on initial release. But people didn't know what they were walking into and were unprepared for the slow nature of the film, etc.

It would be insane to make a movie making judgements based on initial receipts instead of a sequel to a film that has a THIRTY YEAR history of becoming more and more appreciated, valued and loved.

What's more, films featuring 'tortured heroes' are much more commonplace in mainstream film than they were when BR first came out. And if BATMAN can be brought to the screen with the level of darkness and creeping dark mood that it has in recent years, I'm pretty sure Blade Runner, with, I repeat THIRTY YEARS worth of people discovering and rediscovering it can be made with integrity.

That said, what I am about to say will probably be considered heresy...

I don't think the story should be massively different structurally from the first one, given that that alternating between the work of the Blade Runner and the parts featuring Replicants are what helped create the mood of buld up to the final payoff.

Additionally, I wouldn't mind if all speculation about whether Deckard is a replicant or not is finally put to be, thusly:

The main character walks through the neon lit, rains soaked streets to a stall where he sits and orders noodles. Before he has a chance to tuck in properly, he is accosted by a police type, and there is a conversation that involves the stall owner saying

"He say you Brade Runner"

And the main character being taken in to return to work reluctantly...

The name of the character: Rick Deckard...

Rick Deckard is a standard 'hunter killer' Replicant set of implanted memories/personality type, brought online whenever there is a messy Replicant problem to deal with. The first desire he has, upon being 'incepted' is to go and buy noodles from a particular stall. He is, as part of the routine taken from there to have a terse conversation with his old boss about not being a Blade Runner any more, then briefed for his mission.

He goes on his mission. WE know he is a replicant. HE doesn't. Some of the old BR themes are automatically in play just by having the story begin this way. His character type and mannerisms will be familiar from the first film, his mission will be familiar. He has a different visual appearance to the previous model so that people who may have seen the previous model don't become confused/start rumours.But because we know 'Deckard' is just an android who dreams of electric sheep (because he has been made that way) a slightly different story is being told, but with enough familiarity for the story to totally belong in the same world as the previous one..

And depending on the nature of the quarry, who may well be similar to the previous quarry (they are designed to be off world workers, so their 'types' wont necessarily be too variable), a different central theme can be explored. BR has already explored the point at which created servants 'become sentient/human' so there is a little sense repeating that. But a protagonist who believes himself to be human, Replicants who have been inspired by the efforts of Batty, who has become a legend among Reps, and the existential crisis waiting for the hero who believes himself to be human when he finds out (perhaps by way of hints gleefully dropped by his quarry who wants to start a wider rebellion againsts their creators, and sifting of security footage evidence revelaing to Deckard that the person in the footage going after replicants is also called Deckard) and then the conflict between perhaps joining the Replicants and doing his job can provide some good, slow burning screen imagery, with the necessary ambivalence between black and white goodie baddie/turf to make it a thoughtful rather than slam bang action movie, with the world of the story being moved forwards by increments, rather than radical reinvention.

And I suggest that Karl Urban isn't the right man for the role. I'm not kidding about this...I suggest the world weariness of the face seen in the rain should belong to...Josh Hartnett.

The graphic deaths of the Replicants Deckard hunts down can build on the melancholia of the last film by presenting each one as a tragedy, reacted to ambivalently at first by Deckard, then gradually taking on the tragedy of these deaths in his reaction, ready for his discovery that he has been 'killing his own' kind. And by the time he encounters the leader of his quarry, he is as desperate as them in his knowledge that he was created to serve and as limited in lifespan as them.

The big choice for Deckard, will he behave as the human he previously believed himself to be, or join with the Replicant leader and be responsible for many more deaths, as part of a Replicant plan to recolonise earth with themselves, make a home of a planet that is becoming too harsh an environment for their creators, with only the lingering dregs of the gene pool, too poor to to leave remaining of the human race (who, despite basically being doomed, will fight for whatever life they are able to have, because, well, alive is alive, in whatever circumstances you happen to be).

And there will be an eerie, empty sadness, in seeing the Replicant who believes himself to be human behaving and acting and living exactly as the previous Deckard did, adding an implicit, unspoken condemnation of the cruelty of the creators making such puppets of their servants to the events of the film, and feeding into the drama of 'will Deckard join the Replican t revenge on such heartless creators).



< Message edited by jobloffski -- 22/9/2011 9:48:52 PM >


_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to Hungrymark)
Post #: 24
RE: BladeRunner II - 22/9/2011 11:07:03 PM   
max314


Posts: 2744
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: London
I love the original Blade Runner. I love everything about it. Which is why I don't want its style repeated.

Instead, I want a sequel that's basically "Blade Runner + A Plot that Twists and Turns Faster than a Hong Kong Hooker".

In other words, get Chris Nolan to do some of the plotting. He loves that shit.

_____________________________

MAX

Laying the 314 on your candy ass.

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 25
RE: BladeRunner II - 22/9/2011 11:54:40 PM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

True, Blade Runner didn't do very well on initial release. But people didn't know what they were walking into and were unprepared for the slow nature of the film, etc.

It would be insane to make a movie making judgements based on initial receipts instead of a sequel to a film that has a THIRTY YEAR history of becoming more and more appreciated, valued and loved.

What's more, films featuring 'tortured heroes' are much more commonplace in mainstream film than they were when BR first came out. And if BATMAN can be brought to the screen with the level of darkness and creeping dark mood that it has in recent years, I'm pretty sure Blade Runner, with, I repeat THIRTY YEARS worth of people discovering and rediscovering it can be made with integrity.

That said, what I am about to say will probably be considered heresy...

I don't think the story should be massively different structurally from the first one, given that that alternating between the work of the Blade Runner and the parts featuring Replicants are what helped create the mood of buld up to the final payoff.

Additionally, I wouldn't mind if all speculation about whether Deckard is a replicant or not is finally put to be, thusly:

The main character walks through the neon lit, rains soaked streets to a stall where he sits and orders noodles. Before he has a chance to tuck in properly, he is accosted by a police type, and there is a conversation that involves the stall owner saying

"He say you Brade Runner"

And the main character being taken in to return to work reluctantly...

The name of the character: Rick Deckard...

Rick Deckard is a standard 'hunter killer' Replicant set of implanted memories/personality type, brought online whenever there is a messy Replicant problem to deal with. The first desire he has, upon being 'incepted' is to go and buy noodles from a particular stall. He is, as part of the routine taken from there to have a terse conversation with his old boss about not being a Blade Runner any more, then briefed for his mission.

He goes on his mission. WE know he is a replicant. HE doesn't. Some of the old BR themes are automatically in play just by having the story begin this way. His character type and mannerisms will be familiar from the first film, his mission will be familiar. He has a different visual appearance to the previous model so that people who may have seen the previous model don't become confused/start rumours.But because we know 'Deckard' is just an android who dreams of electric sheep (because he has been made that way) a slightly different story is being told, but with enough familiarity for the story to totally belong in the same world as the previous one..

And depending on the nature of the quarry, who may well be similar to the previous quarry (they are designed to be off world workers, so their 'types' wont necessarily be too variable), a different central theme can be explored. BR has already explored the point at which created servants 'become sentient/human' so there is a little sense repeating that. But a protagonist who believes himself to be human, Replicants who have been inspired by the efforts of Batty, who has become a legend among Reps, and the existential crisis waiting for the hero who believes himself to be human when he finds out (perhaps by way of hints gleefully dropped by his quarry who wants to start a wider rebellion againsts their creators, and sifting of security footage evidence revelaing to Deckard that the person in the footage going after replicants is also called Deckard) and then the conflict between perhaps joining the Replicants and doing his job can provide some good, slow burning screen imagery, with the necessary ambivalence between black and white goodie baddie/turf to make it a thoughtful rather than slam bang action movie, with the world of the story being moved forwards by increments, rather than radical reinvention.

And I suggest that Karl Urban isn't the right man for the role. I'm not kidding about this...I suggest the world weariness of the face seen in the rain should belong to...Josh Hartnett.

The graphic deaths of the Replicants Deckard hunts down can build on the melancholia of the last film by presenting each one as a tragedy, reacted to ambivalently at first by Deckard, then gradually taking on the tragedy of these deaths in his reaction, ready for his discovery that he has been 'killing his own' kind. And by the time he encounters the leader of his quarry, he is as desperate as them in his knowledge that he was created to serve and as limited in lifespan as them.

The big choice for Deckard, will he behave as the human he previously believed himself to be, or join with the Replicant leader and be responsible for many more deaths, as part of a Replicant plan to recolonise earth with themselves, make a home of a planet that is becoming too harsh an environment for their creators, with only the lingering dregs of the gene pool, too poor to to leave remaining of the human race (who, despite basically being doomed, will fight for whatever life they are able to have, because, well, alive is alive, in whatever circumstances you happen to be).

And there will be an eerie, empty sadness, in seeing the Replicant who believes himself to be human behaving and acting and living exactly as the previous Deckard did, adding an implicit, unspoken condemnation of the cruelty of the creators making such puppets of their servants to the events of the film, and feeding into the drama of 'will Deckard join the Replican t revenge on such heartless creators).



jeeze man... ya should stop watchin eastenders

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 26
RE: BladeRunner II - 22/9/2011 11:55:53 PM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: max314

I love the original Blade Runner. I love everything about it. Which is why I don't want its style repeated.

Instead, I want a sequel that's basically "Blade Runner + A Plot that Twists and Turns Faster than a Hong Kong Hooker".

In other words, get Chris Nolan to do some of the plotting. He loves that shit.

mmm!!!!

(in reply to max314)
Post #: 27
RE: BladeRunner II - 23/9/2011 12:00:02 AM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1894
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
If a sequel isn't stylistically reminiscent of the first one, almost everything about what makes the first film great will have to be ignored in order for the sequel to be made. Slow pacing,acing, laconic levels of exposition, lingering moody moments, not all of which hit home first time and indeed the extent to which particular moments leap out at you varying every time the film is seen, the film being one that even if you love it, you still have to be in the mood for, etc. All the things in fact, which made the film box office poison at first have become the things that have been revealed to be the things that totally define it.

Without an attempt to aim for majesty, there can only be a travesty. Upping the pace/length of the action moments at most should be the only sop to 'modernity. Visual realism violence wise is more acceptable these days, and perhaps this is an area where the notion of Replicants as things/vermin can be contrasted with how they are, by all standards that can be applied, alive.

A ferociously paced Blade runner seems to me to be a non-starter. It should be as 'out of place' compared to other contemporary sci-fi as it was first time round. Made as well as it can be made, and unlike Replicants, built to last.

And Nolan films, from one, to the next, in terms of incident, theme, tone, etc are ABSOLUTELY built around the psychology of the main character, with every incident and line feeding into the creation of a film that visualises that psychology. Which is why despite the fears of some fools the next Superman will be too much like Batman, it wont because the psychology of Superman will be at its core. And if Nolan had any involvment with a new Blade Runner, whether it would be pacy or slow moving would depend entirely on the story/lead character traits. It is not a given that Nolan would make a pacier BR, because if the lead character was frenetic, the film would be and vice versa.

Blade Runner without room for the viewer to wonder as the film moves along slowly would be pointless because the plot is not the point. To follow that with a plot (ie achievment of the mission) centred film would make it just a film about someone employed to kill a bunch of people.





< Message edited by jobloffski -- 23/9/2011 12:13:11 AM >


_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to max314)
Post #: 28
RE: BladeRunner II - 23/9/2011 12:15:28 AM   
funkyfenbah

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 27/6/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

If a sequel isn't stylistically reminiscent of the first one, almost everything about what makes the first film great will have to be ignored in order for the sequel to be made. Slow pacing,acing, laconic levels of exposition, lingering moody moments, not all of which hit home first time and indeed the extent to which particular moments leap out at you varying every time the film is seen, the film being one that even if you love it, you still have to be in the mood for, etc. All the things in fact, which made the film box office poison at first have become the things that have been revealed to be the things that totally define it.

Without an attempt to aim for majesty, there can only be a travesty. Upping the pace/length of the action moments at most should be the only sop to 'modernity. Visual realism violence wise is more acceptable these days, and perhaps this is an area where the notion of Replicants as things/vermin can be contrasted with how they are, by all standards that can be applied, alive.

A ferociously paced Blade runner seems to me to be a non-starter. It should be as 'out of place' compared to other contemporary sci-fi as it was first time round. Made as well as it can be made, and unlike Replicants, built to last.



eh man, I like to experience the explosion of a 100m sprint final, but it's also interesting to know the motivations of the sprinter.... does he like to sprint 24 hours a day or does he like to listen to a violin concerto based on the fact that his mother listened to it before becoming crippled due to a car crash on the way to hospital, in order to deliver him.... life takes many twists and turns and varies in intensity... why can't movies reflect this instead of following a set template...?

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 29
RE: BladeRunner II - 23/9/2011 12:36:21 AM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1894
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
That sounds much more like eastenders than what I said dude. I think even if people don't actually like my suggestion on any level, most would at least recognise that the suggestion is rooted in aspects of Blade Runner, emphasising the cruel nature of the creators of the replicants, from the point of view of the replicants. Sci fi as exploration of the nature of humanity itself. Not Eastenders.

_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to funkyfenbah)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films >> BladeRunner II Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.187