Do we need a sequel to Blade Runner?

[Koko Ricky]

Ridley Scott has confirmed that Blade Runner 2 is more than just a rumor. The script is nearly (if not completely) finished and Harrison Ford is likely to return as Rick Deckard. If you didn't already know--and why would you?--Blade Runner is seriously one of my favorite films of all freaking time. It's a beautiful, self-contained slab of sci-fi noir cinema that did not call for a sequel. And yet, here is the original director, anxious to return to that world. Is this a good thing? I don't know.

James Cameron did a wonderful job with Terminator 2, although its kid-friendly appeal and much less badass incarnation of Arnold was a reminder of how much darker (and better, overall) the first film was. Not that Cameron had lost his touch, but it suggested that the sequel, however awesome, was ultimately unnecessary.

Ridley may have lost his touch. Prometheus is not terrible, but it doesn't come anywhere close to matching the meditative suspense, the pure horror, the mesmerizing awesomeness of Alien. Even the soundtrack was boring. It was visually spectacular, but its characters are folks we couldn't possibly care about. Like so many sci-fi horrors, they continually make bafflingly stupid decisions--remember that they are supposed to be professionals, whereas the crew of Alien were blue collar workers who had no idea how to handle the situation. Prometheus could have been a profound, brilliant film, but ended up being mostly lukewarm, even if it is worth watching again. I'm worried BR2 may suffer the same fate. Thoughts?

[geekmarine]

Blade Runner was just such an incredibly well-done film, it's hard to imagine a sequel being necessary at all. The universe was very well fleshed-out, but the story was very self-contained. How do I put it? Every good film, in my opinion, doesn't just tell a story, but creates a universe wherein it's clear more stories exist within that universe. Also, every good film answers some questions but leaves you with more, it makes you think. Blade Runner does both, but in such a way that any further examination of the universe, or answering of other questions, almost seems to defeat the purpose. We're left with just enough information to make us really ponder. What does it mean to be human? How did the world get to be the way it was? Should we embrace unfettered progress, or do we need checks and balances to ensure that progress doesn't advance beyond our ability to control it? What about the rights of artificial life forms we create? You could go on and on debating the various issues that Blade Runner raises.

The problem as I see it is, either you just go out and deliberately answer those questions for the audience, defeating the purpose of the first movie, or you answer nothing, but that means you're providing nothing new to the audience, and so why bother? Now, there is the possibility that you could answer some questions but raise new ones, but that can be incredibly difficult to pull off successfully. The failure of Prometheus, in my opinion, besides the fact that every single person in that film acted like a moron, was that while it answered old questions while raising new ones, it was handled very poorly, so that the answers we got were dumb and the new questions introduced were even dumber. There was nothing deep or profound, nothing that made us think. Though with Prometheus, I do feel that part of the problem was hiring Damon Lindelof as the writer, since the fundamental problems with Prometheus very much similar to my fundamental problems with Lost - you have a mystery that gets solved with an incredibly stupid answer, which leads to an even dumber mystery, without really painting any kind of clear picture of the universe in which your story exists.

[Phml]

Still not convinced we needed the first movie.

Enter "hurr durr yor just a hipster with yor bookz", because god forbid anyone dare think the written word can sometimes be more interesting than moving pictures, even though we're all here on a forum instead of doing the whole youtube replies shebang.

Or that other favorite retort, "but Philip K. Dick said himself the movie was better!". So what? Being the author of a work of art doesn't make you the final authority on the way it should be enjoyed.

[Kontra Kommando]

If it sucks, we can always dismiss it in our hearts and minds, as other squeals that were terrible.

examples, the first 3 star wars episodes; everything after terminator 2; every Jaws sequel; American Psycho 2; Rocky IV; Alien Resurrection; Jason X; the 4th Indian Jones movie; Land of the Dead; Diary of the Dead; so on and so on. Those movies never happened in my world.

[dew]

Phml said:

Still not convinced we needed the first movie.

Damn, you're edgy enough to be the hero of the sequel. I'm a huge Dick fan (yea, yea) and I enjoyed both the book and the movie. They're entirely different and I don't feel the need to compare them religiously. The novel was actually pretty fast-paced for a Dick book, so perhaps Scott toning the pace down a bit was perfectly faithful to Dick's entire work, heh. The settings were lovely and the departures from the book plot were all done in taste.

That said, I'd rather not see any new Scott movies at all. After the gigantic fiasco called Prometheus, I lost faith in him. He already created some massive stinkers before (Kingdom of Heaven, Robin Hood), but stomping on his own legacy was a new low. I also don't believe they've come up with a plot worth the name.

[Dragonsbrethren]

It's one of my favorite movies and I can't blame anyone for wanting to go back to that universe. I don't think there's much sequel potential, though. I guess I'd be willing to give one a shot, I mean, the game was pretty damn good (outside of some questionable gamey stuff). Just hope they don't modernize the setting at all -- I want my dystopian 80s future.

[geekmarine]

Good sir, I must take umbrage, UMBRAGE I say, at the mere suggestion that we did not need a first Blade Runner movie. There is sooooo much more to a movie than the basic story. There's the cinematography, the acting, the lighting, the music, the dialog, etc... that make a movie so much more than the sum of its parts. Thus, I find it senseless to compare a movie against a book and simply say that one is better than the other, so one is not needed. Blade Runner is a goddamn work of art, beautifully ugly and dripping with atmosphere. There are concepts and thoughts and feelings that simply could not be conveyed through any other means but film. Maybe the book has a story that's a million times better - I don't know, and frankly, I don't care. That's irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the artistry of the film itself. Blade Runner stands on its own as an incredible movie.

Admittedly, this is all just personal opinion, but the point I was trying to make is, I find it unnecessary and unproductive, in this case, to compare the movie to the book. As a film, it's a masterpiece that stands on its own, regardless of the quality of the book it was based on. The qualities of one do not diminish the qualities of the other.

[Springy]

I am going to go with a no. We don't need a sequel as much as I like Mr Scott as a director I can't see there being anything to extend upon. The Terminator didn't need a sequel either, even if it did need a sequel they could have at least put some effort into it before releasing that pile of shit known as "Judgement Day", which was basically a reverse of the original story.

[Koko Ricky]

Terminator 2 is a pile of shit? That's a bit harsh. Granted, it doesn't compare to the original. It's softer, it's a bit too long, Edward Furlong is annoying and seeing Arnold say things like "Chill out, dickwad" is cringe worthy. But it's (mostly) consistent with the chronology of the original, Linda Hamilton made an amazing transformation as Sarah Connor 2.0 and the both the effects and the performance of the T-1000 is unforgettable. But I see where you're coming from. The way the first film ended--Sarah riding off into the distance while a storm forms--is so perfect, the story literally ends right then and there and anything else could only be inferior. However, I maintain that it is an excellent sequel, however family friendly it is.

Getting back to Blade Runner...I've read the book, and thought it was great. I really enjoy Dick's work. But I honestly like the film more. There are some really novel concepts from the novel that would have been interesting to explore, but, as has been mentioned, books and films are such different mediums that comparing them is a waste of time unless the film is very close to the source material. Blade Runner is, in some ways, as different from Dick's novel as night and day.

I'm not exactly looking forward to the sequel. I'm excited, sure, because I want to see what comes of it, but I'm simultaneously dreading the outcome. Call me a cynic, but too many of today's Hollywood films have this sterile, unimaginative aesthetic to them, in everything from costuming and set pieces to performances and soundtrack, that make the viewing experience kind of dull. Then there's the numerous sci-fi sequels and remakes from the last five years: Total Recall, The Thing, Robocop, Dredd, Terminator: Salvation, etc. How many of these will be considered classics in a decade? Likely none.

[dew]

Yo, I agree with most of your post, but don't you dare to diss Dredd. Karl Urban's chin is godly. No, it is God.

[Phml]

I'm a huge Dick fan (yea, yea) and I enjoyed both the book and the movie.

Right. Being a fan makes you the final authority, obviously making anyone with a different opinion an edgy hipster.

See, the thing with arguments is that once they're refuted you need to find *stronger* points, not weaker ones.

[dew]

Phml said:

Right. Being a fan makes you the final authority, obviously making anyone with a different opinion an edgy hipster.

See, the thing with arguments is that once they're refuted you need to find *stronger* points, not weaker ones.

You're not even trying to argue about anything regarding the book or the movie, you are just taking this to some pretentious meta-level with your tryhard douche cynical observations about... fans? Authors? Who the fuck are you anyways? A jaded, hateful version of Maes? Certainly not an authority on anything, yet you carry yourself like one when you pass snide yet somewhat vague judgements.

You're a fucking hater, that's what you are. Chip on your shoulder?

[Phml]

Stop hyperventilating. I said I'm not personally convinced we needed the first movie, not that this movie shouldn't exist nor that anyone who liked it is stupid.

Why you have to freak out so bad because a single person dislikes something you like might be a testament to your insecurity if you weren't so shitty at concealing your Phml rageboners.

[dew]

Phml said:

Stop hyperventilating. I said I'm not personally convinced we needed the first movie, not that this movie shouldn't exist nor that anyone who liked it is stupid.

And that's, like, your opinion, man. I don't agree with you, but that's not why I'm yelling at you.

Why you have to freak out so bad because a single person dislikes something you like might be a testament to your insecurity if you weren't so shitty at concealing your Phml rageboners.

And now you're twisting the point. You said you disliked the movie, but then you had a snide remark about me liking the book? What the fuck is wrong with you? You're contrarian just for the sake of it! This goes far beyond you disliking things. You are so obviously fishing for this shit, so I'm giving it to you.

[Phml]

Say what now? This sounds as stupid as that other time I made a long post starting with "for single player specifically I feel this applies:" and you bursted in yelling "omg u noob shit faggot ass cunt dirt maggot this is not true for multiplayer".

I like the book. I haven't made any snide comment about anyone liking the book. I have definitely made a snide comment about you thinking your fan status somehow made your opinion more valid to the point you were qualified to dismiss mine as being edgy. You reading comprehension noob shit faggot ass cunt dirt maggot.

[geo]

Phml said:

Still not convinced we needed the first movie.

Correct.

There have been other variations of Blade Runner.

Its so adorable Ridley Scott is redoing all of his 30 year old movies. 20 more years and we'll get that Gladiator sequel we want.

Someone is making a Prometheus sequel.

[Mánibranðr System]

Phml said:

Say what now? This sounds as stupid as that other time I made a long post starting with "for single player specifically I feel this applies:" and you bursted in yelling "omg u noob shit faggot ass cunt dirt maggot this is not true for multiplayer".

I like the book. I haven't made any snide comment about anyone liking the book. I have definitely made a snide comment about you thinking your fan status somehow made your opinion more valid to the point you were qualified to dismiss mine as being edgy. You reading comprehension noob shit faggot ass cunt dirt maggot.

Weren't you in that other thread the other day accusing me of name-calling? Yeah, so much for not being a hypocrite.

[Nomad]

If Blade Runner gets a sequel, I hope we get a sequel to Soldier as well. Especially if it stars Kurt Russel.

[Technician]

I'm all for it if it doesn't star grandpa Ford. We don't need Deckard walking about scowling and being grumpy the whole movie.

Also, Should the new future city be littered with Arabic or Chinese writing? The Japanese failed to conquer us.

[Snakes]

I think there are people out there who riot of they saw an old Deckard.

[geo]

Will Steve Harvey play the gameshow host?

Will we get Smash TV 2?

[Aliotroph?]

Technician said:

Also, Should the new future city be littered with Arabic or Chinese writing? The Japanese failed to conquer us.

I'd go with Chinese. Deckard was already into the Tsingtao in the first one.

I loved the film. I can understand why people don't like the film. The plot is kind of simple and gets basic things wrong, like the number of replicants Deckard is supposed to be hunting. Not everybody wants to watch a movie like that just to soak in the atmosphere and the way that atmosphere fits with the somewhat recycled sci-fi concepts.

I didn't like it when I was a kid, but the imagery stuck with me anyway. When I rewatched it I liked it enough to track down every edition I could find and compare. The theatrical version with the voice-overs is annoying.

I'd like another one just to see more people living in that beautifully craptastic world.

[Merry Widow]

If they make another, hopte it is just as good as the first.

[Avoozl]

I've never seen Blade Runner but I'm tempted to go watch it now.

[Merry Widow]

Avoozl said:

I've never seen Blade Runner but I'm tempted to go watch it now.

While I liked it very much, it did have a few boring parts. If you choose to watch it, l hope you do enjoy it. The book "Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep" that Bladerunner is based on was pretty decent too.

[Belial]

GoatLord said:

Then there's the numerous sci-fi sequels and remakes from the last five years: Total Recall, The Thing, Robocop, Dredd, Terminator: Salvation, etc. How many of these will be considered classics in a decade? Likely none.

The new Tron is pretty good though.

Avoozl said:

I've never seen Blade Runner but I'm tempted to go watch it now.

Make sure you get the final final director's cut whatever edition.

[Springy]

GoatLord said:

Terminator 2 is a pile of shit? That's a bit harsh. Granted, it doesn't compare to the original.

It is nowhere near as good. I would however, prefer to watch that than the sequel to Predator which would have been a better example for the point I was trying to make. Predator 2 is one of the few films I had to turn off part way through. I still think that the second Terminator was pretty shit though and is a decent example of a film that most definitely didn't need a sequel but got one anyway that was pretty mediocre.

[dew]

Phml said:

Say what now? This sounds as stupid as that other time I made a long post starting with "for single player specifically I feel this applies:" and you bursted in yelling "omg u noob shit faggot ass cunt dirt maggot this is not true for multiplayer".

This genuinely intrigued me, so I started digging. You must be talking about this thread, no other post of mine with "phml" in it seems to fit the description. You did not preface your post(s) with what you claim and you actually reacted to Maes, who is known to take both SP and DM into account. You mentioned fighting against monsters in your second paragraph after making some crazy sweeping assumptions in the first. I got angered by your smug, authoritative way of saying "there's no way this can be useful with skill like mine", so I provided one with macho theatrics. However I most certainly never bashed you for your homosexuality, that would be crass and disgusting. This is the second time this month someone brings up a year+ old grudge stemming from a post of mine that scarred their souls for life. And both of them actually didn't contain any nasty direct insults, just scorching contempt, heh. Must take note, mmm.

By the way, I use autoaim in Zdoom & co. so I don't have to look all the way down and see the horrifying paperthin sprites of monsters from a wrong angle. My magical aimbot breaks the 4th wall less than seeing that comedy.

I like the book. I haven't made any snide comment about anyone liking the book. I have definitely made a snide comment about you thinking your fan status somehow made your opinion more valid to the point you were qualified to dismiss mine as being edgy. You reading comprehension noob shit faggot ass cunt dirt maggot.

Reading comprehension, eh? I did not dismiss your opinion on the movie's quality, I joked about your provocative implication that the movie shouldn't even exist. It's certainly not that bad. Then I make my case as a fan of both the movie and the book in a fairly calm manner, not establishing superiority over anyone. I would've gladly discussed about Dick's books with you, because I find his entire work strangely fascinating, but you already went meta and even claimed victory over me in a dispute that didn't even start yet. Also I'm sad you have to bash me for my homosexuality, that's uncalled for.

[DeathevokatioN]

Modern Hollywood has become a cashcow anti movie industry that can't even make good stand alone movies anymore, so what we're going to end up with is something that's drowning in a sea of uninspired mediocrity (at best). Attaching "Blade Runner" onto the movie plus a dramatic cgi trailer is really all they'll need to do, because that's literally all they need to make for it to rake in $$$. It would've been better to see a sequel done maybe 2-3 years after the original was done... because that was before Hollywood had such a strong monopoly which afforded them to make lifeless, unprovoking, sterile movies that borrow too much off better movies without offering enough new substance.

Plus the cyber punk 80's vision of what the future would hold had a lot more charm to it than what I've seen in newer sci fi movies and would emphasize a lot more smaller details and have more special eccentric and quirky touches, back then people were very fascinated in what the future would hold for us and you can feel it in the original Blade Runner, Alien series, Star Wars, Akira, Terminator, Total Recall, Escape from New York and a lot that I'm forgetting right now... modern sci movies have lost that feeling of fascination and wonder and take less risks and as a result you end up with something that's unprovoking from an established director who isn't hungry to push any boundries anymore because he's already made his masterpiece back in the 80's and has found a comfortable formula to compare his movie against.

Also, I'm guessing the soundtrack will be ultimately forgettable as well, because apparently somewhere along the lines music evolved.

So, basically, you're getting a giant "no" from me. :P

Sorry for coming accross so cynical, but I guess whatever though, time for me to go take my tin foil hat off and put my "nostalgia goggles" back on and go watch something that's old within the safety of my cave, because it's pizza movie night. :P

[doomgargoyle]

Kontra Kommando said:

If it sucks, we can always dismiss it in our hearts and minds, as other squeals that were terrible.

examples, the first 3 star wars episodes; everything after terminator 2; every Jaws sequel; American Psycho 2; Rocky IV; Alien Resurrection; Jason X; the 4th Indian Jones movie; Land of the Dead; Diary of the Dead; so on and so on. Those movies never happened in my world.

I want to see a movie called Indian Jones.