Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies

Ridley Scott To Direct New Blade Runner Movie 288

Posted by Unknown Lamer from the deckard-shot-first dept.
In his first accepted submission, fwarren writes "Alcon Entertainment, best known for the movie The Blind Side, purchased the rights to Blade Runner earlier this year. The next order of business? Hire Ridley Scott. Scott has signed on to make a new Blade Runner movie. At this point it is not known whether it will be a sequel or a prequel. With no script or writer at this point, I think it is safe to say it will be a roller coaster ride for the next few years."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ridley Scott To Direct New Blade Runner Movie More

Ridley Scott To Direct New Blade Runner Movie

Comments Filter:

  • If it was anyone other than Ridley Scott (Score:5, Funny)

    by jd2112 ( 1535857 ) on Thursday August 18, 2011 @11:01PM (#37137788)
    I would advocate pummeling the director to within an inch of their life. For Ridley Scott I would ask politely to reconsider before pummeling.

    • The news that Michael Bay was making it... (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      nearly sent me into screaming fits. You know, with Shea and Will Smith and other luminaries in staring roles.

      • Yeah, a movie in which the characters just sit there staring would be a little dull. Can't imagine Will Smith sitting still for very long though. ;)

    • I would advocate pummeling the director to within an inch of their life. For Ridley Scott I would ask politely to reconsider before pummeling.

      What if Ridley Scott hands it off to James Cameron? Sequels do not always go horribly wrong. :-)

      Hint: imdb Alien and Aliens

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mjwx ( 966435 )

        What if Ridley Scott hands it off to James Cameron?

        Celine Dion may find more work.

        Titanic, never Cameron, never again.

      • this is the only part that starts to make sense (not Cameron necessarily), but think of the difference between Alien and Aliens, now imagine the difference between Blade Runner (set on dystopian Earth) and Blade Runners (set in Tannhauser gate with lots of warrior replicants as semi-heroes instead of being the bad guys).

    • I would advocate pummeling the director to within an inch of their life. For Ridley Scott I would ask politely to reconsider before pummeling.

      Yeah. I cringed when I first heard about a new Blade Runner movie... But then I heard it was Ridley Scott... And now I'm just kind of confused.

      Ridley Scott generally does good work. I can't think of a whole lot of movies he's done that I didn't enjoy. So that's definitely a step in the right direction.

      And Blade Runner was certainly an interesting movie... Fairly complex world... I could easily see more stories being told in that setting...

      But I just don't know where they'd go with the actual Blade Ru

  • when are they gonna re-make star wars? (Score:5, Funny)

    by decora ( 1710862 ) on Thursday August 18, 2011 @11:03PM (#37137810) Journal

    man that was a good movie. with the little guy talking about 'meesa no jibber jabber', so great - a classic film. but think about how much they could improve it with modern special effects like computer graphics and realistic animation.

    • David Lynch (Score:4, Interesting)

      by MrEricSir ( 398214 ) on Thursday August 18, 2011 @11:17PM (#37137876) Homepage

      I'd watch it if David Lynch remade Star Wars. It would just be a bunch of creepy synth music, incomprehensible dialog, and scenes with people and aliens standing around not saying anything.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by arth1 ( 260657 )

        But boy, would he get the pinkish orange atmosphere of Naboo down pat!

      • incomprehensible dialog, and scenes with people and aliens standing around not saying anything.

        George Lucas already did that - they're called the prequels.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Torodung ( 31985 )

        And Darth Vader would be sucking on Nitrous Oxide. Actually, that scene with the robot factory in Episode Two stole a few things from Eraserhead.

    • Oh yes, that's what Blade Runner needs - a HUGE cg budget and an even thinner plot. Did I mention a HUGE cg budget?

      Throwing a HUGE cg budget is Hollywood's answer to everything.

      • Don't forget unecessary 3D. It wouldn't be a modern remake without lots of people holding everyday items meaningfully towards camera, running at the camera or exploding in the direction of the camera. I'll put my money right now on seeing at least one scene where Tyrell Corp's owl flies at the camera.

    • man that was a good movie. with the little guy talking about 'meesa no jibber jabber', so great - a classic film

      Has the day really arrived that when someone says "Star Wars" people think of episode 1 first?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by RoboRay ( 735839 )

        There is no Episode I. It's just IV, V, and VI. Period.

        And really, I'd prefer just IV, V and the Tatooine portion of VI.

        • And really, I'd prefer just IV, V and the Tatooine portion of VI.

          Yes. Right up to - but not including - the ridiculously stupid and wasteful Boba Fett death scene.

  • No Respect (Score:4, Insightful)

    by AvderTheTerrible ( 1960234 ) on Thursday August 18, 2011 @11:13PM (#37137856)
    It seems like Hollywood just can't be content to let a good work stand on its own. Sooner or later everything good has to get either a sequel, prequel, or remake. It's just disrespectful, in my opinion, to works that are actually good and stand the test of time on their own. Not everything has to be turned into a cash cow.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tloh ( 451585 )

      Cheer up, sport! There are a few things in Hollywood worth looking forward to. I'm been anticipating Cameron's "Battle Angel" adaptation for many years now. Ever since I saw this computer rendered action sequence [youtube.com] years ago, I've wondered how awesome a feature length adaptation would be. With the production work of "Avatar" as the proving ground for what he needs to shoot the movie, I've got high expectations! Incidentally, the original manga that "Battle Angel" is based on was heavily influenced by t

    • Not everything has to be turned into a cash cow.

      <Hollywood producer>Yes. Yes it does.</Hollywood producer>

    • If so, there'd be a remake of "Citizen Kane" built around Murdoch's life.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Grismar ( 840501 )

      Unlike the Star Wars situation, nobody sofar seems to be intent on modifying the original Blade Runner at an attempt to substitute it. Making a prequel or sequel doesn't modify the original in any meaningful way, although having the same director on does muddy the water somewhat. Quite frankly I would have preferred another director picking up this project for exactly that reason.

      Also, http://xkcd.com/566/ [xkcd.com] (in particular the bottom strip, of course)

    • I, for one, liked the Tron sequel.

      I also liked The Dark Knight.

      The Toby Maguire reboot of Spiderman was enjoyable.

      In the immortal words of the big DV, "I find your lack of Faith Disturbing"

      How many bad Ridley Scott movies have there been? I'm going to try keep a positive outlook on this one.

      • I'll give you Dark Knight (although I thought it was about 45 minutes too long, they should have done Harvey as a separate movie and not tried to bundle him in with Joker), and I haven't seen the new Tron, but the reboot of Spiderman was so stale that we're already seeing another reboot a scant ten years later.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by delt0r ( 999393 )
      You are free to not watch them. Just think if these movies passed into the public domain as was originally intended, how many crap sequels, remakes, recuts there would be. And over all we would *not* be worse off.

    • and romeo and juliet... it had been done hundreds of times before!

  • Total Recall 2070 (Score:5, Informative)

    by ChrisKnight ( 16039 ) on Thursday August 18, 2011 @11:15PM (#37137870) Homepage

    It was short lived, but Total Recall 2070 was set in a hybrid Phillip K Dick universe that combined Blade Runner and Total Recall. It took place 20 years after the events of Blade Runner, kept a fair chunk of the aesthetic, and was pretty damn cool. It was a shame it only survived one season.

    https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Total_Recall_2070 [wikimedia.org]

    • Hey, thanks, I hadn't heard of it...

    • wow

      i have fond memories of that show

      and i thought i was the only person that watched it

      there's a whole universe of this weird syndicated content on late night american tv produced in some strange land that i've pieced together is referred to as canada

      i've also admired davinci's inquest, about police politics in vancouver

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Da_Vinci's_Inquest [wikipedia.org]

      and regenesis, about a molecular biologist

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReGenesis [wikipedia.org]

      is canada some sort of unincorporated american territory somewh

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by porl ( 932021 )

        regenesis was brilliant. i thought the last series fell away a little, but still one of the best shows of it's kind

      • Canada is the Architect of the manifest destiny which will engulf North America, adding 50 new provinces and numerous territories to our glorious nation.

        • good! a canadian with a sense of humor. i admire your country, but it's so easy to pull the arrogant american routine and get a canadian foaming at the mouth. thank you sir, for not taking the flamebait ;-)

      • You definitely weren't the only one watching it. :)

        Total Recall 2070 was half the reason I bought a Tivo. It ran after-hours, along with The Crow: Stairway to Heaven. (Another short lived show that deserved to survive longer.) I missed a pair of episodes one week, and the next day I went out and bought a Tivo. Sadly, the Tivo outlasted them both.

  • It depens on Harrison Ford (Score:3)

    by sinan ( 10073 ) <sinan@bozuk.org> on Thursday August 18, 2011 @11:21PM (#37137894) Homepage

    If he is getting older, it should be a sequel, if on the other hand he is getting younger, then it should be a prequel.

    • Is Harrison Ford getting older? Has anyone confirmed this?

    • edward james olmos, rutger hauer, crazy sean young, daryl hannah, joe turkel... heck get vangelis to write a new score

      brion james died unfortunately (leon)

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by MsGeek ( 162936 )

        James Hong is also still around. And I met both Hong and Joseph Turkel at San Diego Comic-Con in 2007. Hong was getting a lot of love not just for Dr. Chew, but also for that immortal dude he played in "Big Trouble In Little China." But Turkel was barely visited, so we got to talk. Politics, Blade Runner, Old Hollywood, and other cool subjects. He signed an 8 x 10. I paid for it, because he was donating his share of the money to Doctors Without Borders, a truly deserving cause. He asked me "OK, what Tyrell

        • "if you only you could see what i've seen, with your eyes"

          best line in the movie

          james hong cameo in Blade Runner 2: Electric Doggie Doo please

    • Re:It depens on Harrison Ford (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Gadget_Guy ( 627405 ) * on Thursday August 18, 2011 @11:52PM (#37138066)

      If he is getting older, then the Deckard is not a replicant. That solves that debate.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Nexus7 ( 2919 )

        Ah yes, Deckard, replicant or not. Wouldn't we like to know that one.

  • If we have a Blade Runner sequel (Score:3)

    by sphere ( 27305 ) on Thursday August 18, 2011 @11:21PM (#37137898) Homepage Journal

    I suggest that Scott lay the groundwork for "VALIS: Electric Boogaloo."

  • Of course.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by owlnation ( 858981 ) on Thursday August 18, 2011 @11:27PM (#37137926)
    Deckard shoots first in this one.
  • Of the first one



    Haha get it

    • Of the first one
      Haha get it

      The first one was a box office flop and got generally unfavorable reviews. Get your facts straight. It stayed around as a cult film, and over time, especially with the release of the Director's Cut, the critics came around, and it made enough money in total to justify the sequel.

      And, yes I get it. They are androids BTW, not replicants.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mwvdlee ( 775178 )

        Perhaps the "Haha get it" was meant for both the "replicate" as well as the "success" parts?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tloh ( 451585 )

      Well, if Ridley Scott is successful, the only way to tell the two films apart would be to apply the Voight-Kampff test [wikipedia.org].

      • Well, if Ridley Scott is successful, the only way to tell the two films apart would be to apply the Voight-Kampff test [wikipedia.org].

        Yes, but how many questions would it take?

        • Yes, but how many questions would it take?

          None - just monitor the viewer's pupil dilation, heart rate, skin resistance during the movie.

          If its the typical modern blockbuster with loads of flash effects and action but no soul, it'll be flatline.

  • That's it, I give up.

  • Bittorrent is competiton. (Score:4, Funny)

    by grumling ( 94709 ) on Thursday August 18, 2011 @11:56PM (#37138098) Homepage

    Kind of ironic that they crack down on illegal copies then continue to copy themselves.

  • writers (Score:3)

    by spongman ( 182339 ) on Friday August 19, 2011 @12:18AM (#37138210)

    why does everything sci-fi have to be a remake, re-imagining, sequel or prequel?

    seriously, aren't there any writers in Hollywood with imaginations any more, or even the chops to do a decent book adaptation?

    • Re:writers (Score:5, Informative)

      by KikassAssassin ( 318149 ) on Friday August 19, 2011 @12:55AM (#37138334)

      It's not the writers. There are lots of writers in Hollywood who would love to write original stories, and original film ideas get pitched all the time. The suits at the studios often just don't want to take the risk with something new and original because sequels and remakes come with built-in name recognition and are a safer way to ensure a film will make money. Writers have to make a living, so they take whatever jobs they can get, and often that means writing tired, unoriginal sequels and remakes because those are the only jobs available.

  • How does that work? 2019 is only 8 years away at this point. I think it's pretty clear we're not going to have any flying cars by then.

  • more to come (Score:5, Funny)

    by bigdavex ( 155746 ) on Friday August 19, 2011 @12:42AM (#37138296)

    I can't wait for Blade Runner vs. Alien.

  • Again? (Score:3)

    by fireteller2 ( 712795 ) * on Friday August 19, 2011 @12:44AM (#37138308) Homepage

    I remember after finishing on 5th element I interviewed with The Mill in london. They PROMISED me that if I would just sign up I'd be working on "Millennium" the working title for Blade Runner II. I thought that would be cool so I said sure, but when they offered me less then a living wage to live in London, I had to pass.

    Nice to see that ploy still works.

  • ...then later on they can make sequels.

    Nothing more horrible about movies than 20-40 year old sequels, it simply won't match.
    Max 5 years timespan between sequels!

  • Seriously though, this is GOOD news.

    Ridley Scott is a master. Alien, Blade Runner, Gladiator, Black Hawk Down, American Gangster, Matchstick Men...all come to mind as great films over his long career.

    I recall Scott's comments on the Alien Quadrilogy DVD set, basically saying that there was no need for a "director's cut" of Alien because he was perfectly happy with the original.

    So I really don't think he would screw up a new Blade Runner film.

    It is impossible for a new film to compare to the first...Blade Ru

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by skine ( 1524819 )

      Don't forget Robin Hood, where it was Mr. Scott's decision to rewrite it into the standard folklore, with big battles and Higgins boats.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Builder ( 103701 )

      I'd love to see altered carbon but I doubt we will because of actor egos. How do you convince the cast that while the character is the same (lead protagonist), you need multiple actors to play it, so no single actor gets the screen throughout ?

  • I'm getting a sense that this is going to be a digital event. It will either be an extraordinary masterpiece of cinema, considering the power a great director has today to fulfill a vision, or it will be the worst mind-numbing, steaming heap of CGI dung to ever grace celluloid. The best or worst of this is that it will almost certainly glory or stench in 3D.

    • Inception - that was original, but they only let Nolan make it cos of all the cash Batman had raked in. On the other hand if Ridley Scot says "I'm making X" then will the studios simply front the cash? I like to think so, and that's a good sign.

  • Film noire, please. No "international" version, just start with enough boobs and blood in the first place. No Harrison Ford, though? Really? Let's hope the story (if any) follows the idiotic Deckard-is-a-Skinjob like Rachel and Roy-Priss's boy comes down from Tannhauser Gate to discuss eugenics with Deckard-Rachel's twin girls. Rise of the planet of the grapes of wrath.

  • Honestly what the hell is with Hollyweird. The greed there is just amazing and they seem to have a difficult time accepting anything really original but they'll throw money at a garbage sequel like nobody's business!

    Maybe Hollywood needs to go up in flames too...

  • As long as... (Score:3)

    by Coppit ( 2441 ) on Friday August 19, 2011 @07:38AM (#37140254) Homepage

    As long as Harrison Ford doesn't run around like he's 25 in the movie. In fact, he should step aside for some new young talented actor. Like.... Um.... Shia LaBeouf? Crap. Now I know why he was in crystal skull.

    • Well, if they cast Nathan Fillion as Deckard and Summer Glau as Rachael they'll have all the Browncoats turn up to see it.

  • I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Script drafts on fire in Sunset Bouleverd production meetings. I watched C-movies glitter in the dark in a 3D multiplex. And all those remakes will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die.

  • or Deckard vs. Indiana Jones
    or all three together.

  • It *will* suck (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tekrat ( 242117 ) on Friday August 19, 2011 @09:40AM (#37141614) Homepage Journal

    I have studied Blade Runner. You'd need a mighty fine, mind-blowing script to even come near to the original. Mind you, half of what Made Blade Runner so good was, what was NOT said, as what was implied. The dialog in the film is terse, tight, and very carefully worded. It's like a Phillip Glass composition, in that there's only in there what needs to be in there and nothing more. Seriously go back and look at it, and then think about what's the undertone behind each line in the film.

    Like a film noir detective movie, everyone is a suspect, and everyone is hiding some secret. It's not cut and dry, but layered.

    Hollywood doesn't know how to do a film like that anymore. Now it's cartoon characters and explosions, and everything is at face value, spoon-fed to the audience.

    Then there's the look of the film. With the exception of Fritz Lang's Metropolis, *nothing* looked like Blade Runner. The film is so groundbreaking is this respect, I don't even know where to begin. Did you ever even hear the word "Dystopian" before Blade Runner? It literally *invented* cyberpunk -- there's no doubt that Gibson was influenced by the film when he wrote his novels in the way he describes BAMA or Chiba.

    A new film would have to be above-board exceptional. Script, Characters, Cast, Visuals, Music, Director. When Blade Runner was made, everyone involved was at the top of their game. It's rare to get such a talented crew in one place at one time. Think about the names involved in that production, Scott, Mead, Ford, Hauer, Vangellis, Fancher -- I mean, this crew was kind of a magical occurrence of talent that doesn't happen often.

    I have a friend who just doesn't "get" this film. He says it's about a guy who has to kill a bunch of replicants who are going to die anyhow. And yes, if you're watching the surface of the film, it's a pointless exercise, after all, if they are going to die soon, why bother shooting them?

    But that's not what the film is *about*. Just ask Rob Zombie, who's most famous song is about Blade Runner. Blade Runner is a deep, deep film. It's an abyss in a Nietzsche-esque sense.

    It's not likely to be "replicated" or topped, or sequel'ed. All another film based in that universe is going to do is remind us of how brilliant the original was.

Slashdot Top Deals

BLISS is ignorance.

Close