Blade Runner 2049 (Denis Villeneuve)

[Dukefrukem]

What?!

[Morris Schæffer]

Huh, now it seems that Ford is in talks to appear in this reinmagstrucpreqseqreboot thing.

http://twitchfilm.com/news/2012/02/b...ade-runner.php

[Dukefrukem]

So has Scott confirmed that this is a go? or is this all talk still? It sounds like that article is saying this is definitely his next project.

[Ezee E]

So has Scott confirmed that this is a go? or is this all talk still? It sounds like that article is saying this is definitely his next project.

Rumor has it he may direct a spec script from Cormac McCarthy next instead.

LINK

a lawyer who thinks he can make a little money from the drug trade without getting sucked into it. Of course it turns out to be a bad decision, and the protagonist must find a way out of the situation alive. "Since McCarthy himself wrote the script, we get his own muscular prose directly, with its sexual obsessions," said producer Steve Schwartz (The Road). "It’s a masculine world into which, unusually, two women intrude to play leading roles. McCarthy’s wit and humor in the dialogue make the nightmare even scarier. This may be one of McCarthy’s most disturbing and powerful works."

[Ezee E]

The Counselor looks to be the next Scott movie. Fassbender casted as the lead with a starting time in May.

[Dukefrukem]

To take place 'some years' after 1982 original

The forthcoming "Blade Runner" pic will be a sequel that takes place "some years" after the original cult classic, producers announced Thursday.
They also confirmed what director Ridley Scott has been saying for weeks: "Blade Runner" writer Hampton Fancher is in talks to help develop the project.

Alcon Entertainment announced in early March that it had secured film, TV and ancillary franchise rights to produce prequels and sequels (no "reboots" allowed) to "Blade Runner," but producers weren't certain how they would re-approach the 1982 thriller starring Harrison Ford.

Announcement from producers Alcon Entertainment, Scott Free and Bud Yorkin contained no further details as to the project such as which characters might return. But it noted that Scott and his "Blade Runner" collaborator Fancher oringally conceived of "Blade Runner" as the first in a series of films incorporating the themes and characters featured in Philip K. Dick's novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" from which "Blade Runner" was adapted.

"Circumstances, however, took Scott into other directions and the project never advanced," it added.

Fancher followed "Blade Runner" with the screenplays "The Mighty Quinn" (1989) and "The Minus Man" (1999). Scott will produce with Alcon co-founders and co-CEOs Broderick Johnson and Andrew Kosove as well as Bud Yorkin and Cynthia Sikes Yorkin.

Kosove and Johnson said in a statement: "It is a perfect opportunity to reunite Ridley with Hampton on this new project, one in fact inspired by their own personal collaboration, a classic of cinema if there ever was one."

In the original film Rutger Hauer played the leader of a group of escaped "replicants" -- genetically engineered androids used for work on Earth's off-world colonies -- who are hiding out in 2019 Los Angeles. Harrison Ford's character is a "blade runner,'' a policeman who kills replicants when necessary.

Alcon fully finances its films and has an output deal with Warner Bros., which distributed the original "Blade Runner."

Fancher is repped by APA and attorney Matt Saver.

[Dukefrukem]

“It’s written and it’s damn good,” Scott says of the Blade Runner sequel. “Of course it involves Harrison, who is a survivor after all these years—despite the accident,” he says with a laugh (referring, no doubt, to Ford’s Star Wars injury). “So yes, that will happen.”

:|

[Dukefrukem]

Denis Villeneuve to direct.

I really don't want this movie made.

[Skitch]

I do. If it blows, I'll delete from memory.

[EvilShoe]

I'm not sure why they're making this either, but at least Scott isn't directing.

[Spun Lepton]

*sigh*

[Ivan Drago]

In my mind, this doesn't exist.

The ending of the director's cut is fucking PERFECT with its ambiguity.

[max314]

The ending of the director's cut is fucking PERFECT with its ambiguity.

The ending seemed pretty unambiguous to me.

Deckard daydreams about unicorns. Gaff makes him a unicorn.

The only question is:



"Is Deckard a repli-can? Or a repli-can't?"

[transmogrifier]

I think they should just recut the original once every three or four years and just leave it at that.

[Irish]

The ending of the director's cut is fucking PERFECT with its ambiguity.

The ending seemed pretty unambiguous to me.

Deckard daydreams about unicorns. Gaff makes him a unicorn.

The problem I have with the film's ambiguity is that it wasn't intetional. They started production with a half-formed script and changed it on the fly, which is why the original cut has so many weird errors.

I've never bought Scott's explanation about anything around this film's story, because that story is a colossal mess. It still is, despite multiple cuts and more reshaping twenty years after the fact.

As for the origami: Gaff always creates it in the moment, as a commentary as to whatever is occurring in-scene (a chicken, a man with an erection, etc).

The unicorn scrap makes more sense in the original cut-- Gaff went to Deckard's apartment, saw Rachel, and left a calling card. The unicorn is a commentary on Rachel's status. She's unique in the world, almost magical.

I've always found the idea that Deckard is a replicant to be almost offensive. It strips away the last vestiges of PKD's story, undercuts a big theme in the movie, and makes the entire story less dramatic. A film about robots who are more empathetic than their human oppressors might resonate. A movie about a bunch of those same robots chasing each other is meaningless.

As a reveal in the last 5 seconds of runtime, it's useless. If we go with that interpretation, it changes nothing about anything we've just seen. In fact, it makes the whole film feel more shallow. Deckard as a replicant is a Kaiser Sozse level of dumb twist.

[megladon8]

In the DC of the film, he is most certainly a replicant. And it's the better version of one of the best films ever made.

Some days it is still my #1.

[Raiders]

The problem I have with the film's ambiguity is that it wasn't intetional. They started production with a half-formed script and changed it on the fly, which is why the original cut has so many weird errors.

I've never bought Scott's explanation about anything around this film's story, because that story is a colossal mess. It still is, despite multiple cuts and more reshaping twenty years after the fact.

As for the origami: Gaff always creates it in the moment, as a commentary as to whatever is occurring in-scene (a chicken, a man with an erection, etc).

The unicorn scrap makes more sense in the original cut-- Gaff went to Deckard's apartment, saw Rachel, and left a calling card. The unicorn is a commentary on Rachel's status. She's unique in the world, almost magical.

I've always found the idea that Deckard is a replicant to be almost offensive. It strips away the last vestiges of PKD's story, undercuts a big theme in the movie, and makes the entire story less dramatic. A film about robots who are more empathetic than their human oppressors might resonate. A movie about a bunch of those same robots chasing each other is meaningless.

As a reveal in the last 5 seconds of runtime, it's useless. If we go with that interpretation, it changes nothing about anything we've just seen. In fact, it makes the whole film feel more shallow. Deckard as a replicant is a Kaiser Sozse level of dumb twist.

Man, I don't perfectly agree with you too often, but absolutely. The film ONLY works if Deckard is human. But really, the ambiguity is the film's mortal weakness... Deckard isn't even human enough for the film to properly define any form of humanity. That we could believe Deckard is either just shows that Scott didn't really understand what he was trying to illustrate.

[Morris Schæffer]

Roger goddamn Deakins is lensing this!!

edit: which i suppose was to be expected since he did villeneuves last two films.

[Ivan Drago]

Roger goddamn Deakins is lensing this!!

edit: which i suppose was to be expected since he did villeneuves last two films.

I wasn't going to see this with Villeneuve or Ryan Gosling attached.

Now I have to see it.

[Morris Schæffer]

Robin Wright is on board.

[Skitch]

After The Congress (which more MCers need to see, dammit), I am on board with all things Robin Wright.

[transmogrifier]

Villeneuve is a fine director who is a slave to the script...give him something good to work with, he'll knock it out of the park. Otherwise....

[Morris Schæffer]

Robin Wright is on board.

And so is Dave Bautista.

[number8]

Wow geez I feel dumb. He posted on his Facebook the other day that a big announcement is coming soon while holding an origami unicorn and I didn't make the connection.

[Morris Schæffer]

Now an October 2017 release!