› ›

Blade Runner 2049/Blade Runner 2099 Live-Action Sequel Series Discussion

24567…36

Comments

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    All of them, my friend. Let the ambiguity reign supreme. I can't for the life of me imagine where they'd take the story from here.
    The first movie was so full of thought provoking questions, and the (partial) answers were the stuff of deepest philosophy.
    Any continuation cannot possibly sharpen the focus of or expand the meaning of the first film, only devolve into
    A) a battle for freedom! YEA fight scenes!
    or
    B) an escape to some kind of enlightened sanctuary! YEA chase scenes!
    or
    C) a handoff to new characters who must stay strong in the struggle even in the face of their own pain & loss! YEA darkstuff!

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    All of them, my friend. Let the ambiguity reign supreme. I can't for the life of me imagine where they'd take the story from here.
    The first movie was so full of thought provoking questions, and the (partial) answers were the stuff of deepest philosophy.
    Any continuation cannot possibly sharpen the focus of or expand the meaning of the first film, only devolve into
    A) a battle for freedom! YEA fight scenes!
    or
    B) an escape to some kind of enlightened sanctuary! YEA chase scenes!
    or
    C) a hand-off to new characters who must stay strong in the struggle even in the face of their own pain & loss! YEA darkstuff!

  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    In any case, the perfect legacy of Blade Runner will suffer. That's for sure.

    If anything they should do a remake based on Blade Runner, that way you can ignore it if it's crap like Total Recall and Dredd.

    Although I admit liking Dredd to some extend. Karl Urban is just so cool in anything.
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    Remaining open minded, Blade Runner is a work of art. Do I think they need to make another? No. They never needed to make a prequel to John Carpenters great The Thing. The prequel was good and respected one of the greatest films in its genre. Respect Blade runner, the sequel could be good.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    Remaining open minded, Blade Runner is a work of art. Do I think they need to make another? No. They never needed to make a prequel to John Carpenters great The Thing. The prequel was good and respected one of the greatest films in its genre. Respect Blade runner, the sequel could be good.
    Anything's possible. I'm open to it doing something I don't expect....
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    chrisisall wrote: »
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    Remaining open minded, Blade Runner is a work of art. Do I think they need to make another? No. They never needed to make a prequel to John Carpenters great The Thing. The prequel was good and respected one of the greatest films in its genre. Respect Blade runner, the sequel could be good.
    Anything's possible. I'm open to it doing something I don't expect....
    If its relevent and adds something to the world created, ill be interested. If anything the cast intrigues me, Hollywood should reinvigorate Trancers and Jack Deth, so much potential there.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    Hollywood should reinvigorate Trancers and Jack Deth, so much potential there.
    Ho, no way. They were great in their time (I own them), but Tim Thomerson IS Jack Deth. Accept no substitutes.
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    edited April 2016 Posts: 6,432
    chrisisall wrote: »
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    Hollywood should reinvigorate Trancers and Jack Deth, so much potential there.
    Ho, no way. They were great in their time (I own them), but Tim Thomerson IS Jack Deth. Accept no substitutes.

    Love those films, is Tim still alive

    ;) Think Trancers was Helen Hunts debut. The first film is classic.
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    For some reason I got Cliff Robertson and Tim Thomerson mixed up. [-(
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    Dry hair's for squids.
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    Frying will work.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    Frying will work.
    Don't make me use the long second...

  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    Use the long second, how long does it last :P
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    Use the long second, how long does it last :P
    Long enough to send your consciousness back to Lost Angeles.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited April 2016 Posts: 17,687
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    Hollywood should reinvigorate Trancers and Jack Deth, so much potential there.
    Ho, no way. They were great in their time (I own them), but Tim Thomerson IS Jack Deth. Accept no substitutes.

    Love those films, is Tim still alive

    ;) Think Trancers was Helen Hunts debut. The first film is classic.
    Damn you F&I, you just MADE me order the new Blu Rays of 1 & 2..... AND the DVD of the short never-released mid-sequel Trancers: City of Lost Angels (released in 2013, filmed in 1988, 30 minutes). I thank you man!
    b-(
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited April 2016 Posts: 4,043
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    Remaining open minded, Blade Runner is a work of art. Do I think they need to make another? No. They never needed to make a prequel to John Carpenters great The Thing. The prequel was good and respected one of the greatest films in its genre. Respect Blade runner, the sequel could be good.

    The Thing prequel was shocking and utterly unnecessary, the CG bit in the ship at the end was embarassing beyond belief.

    I don't see how it respected it at all, if it had have respected it wouldn't have bothered, that film doesn't need a prequel or a sequel. If you are looking for examples to defend the action you need to pick a better example than that garbage.

    The pedigree of who is involved in BR2 gives the impression it will be more than just some pointless cash in but there is no guarantee. I'm glad Ridley isn't directing because I haven't seen a film from him that I've enjoyed since American Gangster.

    Villeneuve and Deakins give me the best hope for this that and the quality of the cast.

  • stun_harvestingstun_harvesting
    edited April 2016 Posts: 337
    It was good but strangely not as popular as it could be - apparently most of its fame was gained by students studying English (in comparison to Frankenstein) or film. I can't really see a sequel coming in.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    I can't help being curious about this. I can understand how some of you would be opposed to it. Honestly, I felt the same way when it was first announced. There is potential for some good to come out of it, even if the whole thing seems unnecessary. We'll see. Mark me down as cautiously optimistic.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,249
    I really liked the ambiguity of the first one; the more I think of a sequel, the more pessimistic I am about it. Not writing it off quite yet, but I just highly doubt it will successfully expand upon the first one.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,447
    @Shardlake, not sure if you know this, but the most disappointing part about 'The Thing' prequel is that it was shot (from what I can surmise, "almost") entirely using practical effects and anamatronics, much like the legendary Carpenter version. However, a couple of months from release, they felt it was necessary to defecate atop all of that work by adding CGI to everything, ruining one of the biggest reasons why the 80's version is so damn good.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,447
    I'm ashamed to say that the only footage I've seen from the 50's version is whatever we see the kids watching on TV in Carpenter's 'Halloween.'
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I'm ashamed to say that the only footage I've seen from the 50's version is whatever we see the kids watching on TV in Carpenter's 'Halloween.'
    Wet noodle time....
    [-(
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I find it superior to Carpenter's remake, but I can enjoy that one too.

    I bet it is. Didn t like the Carpenter version, but the original looks great.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,447
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I find it superior to Carpenter's remake, but I can enjoy that one too.

    I bet it is. Didn t like the Carpenter version, but the original looks great.

    Loathes Brosnan's Bond, doesn't care for Carpenter's 'The Thing'; we WILL find a movie that we agree on.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Like Blade Runner?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited April 2016 Posts: 40,447
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Like Blade Runner?

    Just now read your comments on the first page, so yes, this counts! Favorite version of the film, if any?

    I'm also curious as to how they'll handle the fate of Deckard, as I've heard plenty of different theories over the years from Ford and Scott himself, and since there are quite a few different versions of the movie, this could go a couple of different ways.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Like Blade Runner?

    Just now read your comments on the first page, so yes, this counts! Favorite version of the film, if any?

    I think my favourite version is the one I first saw back in the 80s with the Ford narration, but it also definitely works without it.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,447
    Ashamed to say that I have yet to see all the versions, and I always manage to get the version I enjoy the most confused with the others; I either prefer the Director's Cut or the Final Cut, and I think it's the latter. It's the one that ends with the elevator doors closing, contains the unicorn dream sequence when he's at the piano, etc.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @Shardlake, not sure if you know this, but the most disappointing part about 'The Thing' prequel is that it was shot (from what I can surmise, "almost") entirely using practical effects and anamatronics, much like the legendary Carpenter version. However, a couple of months from release, they felt it was necessary to defecate atop all of that work by adding CGI to everything, ruining one of the biggest reasons why the 80's version is so damn good.

    @Creasy47 I was aware of that, a part of me wanted it to be good and a part said leave it alone but when I heard they'd substituted the practical effects with C.G.I I knew it was the final nail in the coffin for this film.

    As for Hawks 50's version I think it's a quite quaint version but men a suit films never did it for me and it's got nothing to do with the original novel.

    I personally think this is Carpenters best film, to think some critics just said the EFX are just there to shock, criticism of this film was not favourable at the time of release despite now it's rightly regarded by many as a masterpiece.

    The EFX enhance the film they don't take you out of it, Bottin's efforts a sickening and memorable but they serve the story aren't just there to shock.

    Carpenter & Cundy give the film a sense of unease, it really gets under your skin. The cast are excellent, a great ensemble despite Russell emerging more as the film goes on.

    Not forgetting Moriconnie's score, not one of his best but the simplicity of it is just right.

    I can't really praise this film enough, only Alien betters it in my book.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,447
    'The Thing' and 'Blade Runner' are alike in that they were met with mediocre/negative reviews, and then went on to become classics with a large fan base supporting them.
Sign In or Register to comment.