Please No, Not a Blade Runner Sequel

bowman9991 submitted a story that ought to make even the most stone-hearted amongst you cry. He says "Travis Wright, one of the writers behind Eagle Eye, has been working on a sequel to Ridley Scott's Sci-Fi classic Blade Runner. Script proposals have explored the nature of the off-world colonies, what happens to the Tyrell Corporation in the wake of its founder's death, and what would become of Rachel. Travis said he intends to write a script 'with or without anyone's blessings.' Director Ridley Scott appears interested in a sequel too. At Comic-Con in 2007 Ridley said, 'If you have any scripts, you know where to send them.' It's doubtful he'll have time anytime soon though. He's already stated his next two science fiction films will be an adaptation of Aldous Huxley's Brave New Word with Leonardo DiCaprio and an adaptation of Joe Haldeman's The Forever War."

Comments

I've got a better idea

[elrous0]

How about you devote all the energy, time, and effort that you would have put into doing yet another ill-advised sequel or remake into writing something ORIGINAL? Who knows, you may actually produce the next Memento, Reservoir Dogs, or Slumdog Millionaire. At the very least, you'll be able to sleep at night. Do you really want to die being best known as the "asshole who wrote that god-awful sequel to Blade Runner"?

And, on a related note, if you're a filmmaker and have ever thought to yourself "Hey, I bet a remake of 'It's a Wonderful Life' starring Ice Cube and some sassy kids would be great!" please, dear God, stay out of Hollywood.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you really want to die being best known as the "asshole who wrote that god-awful sequel to Blade Runner"?

Depends on how many million I made off that movie.

Myself, I'll wait for the Final Ultimate Director's Cut Armageddon Release of this one.

Re:I've got a better idea

[eldavojohn]

Who knows, you may actually produce the next Memento, Reservoir Dogs, or Slumdog Millionaire.

You list three good original movies but I counter that there is so much more to them than just needed money to make. Look at the directors/writers: Christopher Nolan, Quentin Tarantino & Danny Boyle respectively. Now look at those three directors/writers names and notice how they rarely--if ever--attach themselves to bad projects. I think the three movies you listed were kind of like pet projects of these directors and there's not a lot of these great movies laying around just waiting to receive funding with the vision that these three movies you listed had.

You think you have a better idea but these studios have one directive: make money. And that's what they'll do & they'll do it better than you would. This isn't art, this is business. You aren't going to be taken seriously if you point Resevoir Dogs that made $147,839 on opening weekend in the states or Momento that made $235,488 on opening weekend in the states. Those amounts of money are a blip on the radar to what a franchise name makes them within three days.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Scrameustache]

yet another ill-advised sequel or remake into writing something ORIGINAL? Who knows, you may actually produce the next Memento, Reservoir Dogs

Reservoir Dogs is a remake of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_on_Fire_(1987_film)

Re:I've got a better idea

[Lumpy]

nobody in hollywierd can write anything original. The past 2 years and the next 4 will be full of remakes. Cripes they are starting remakes at the point that it's getting ridiculous.

I'm betting that we will probably see a remake of Star wars 3,4,5 within 10 years.

Everything fresh I have seen is coming from Indie people. The films that were at Sundance and the other film festivals that are NOT studio entries were fantastic.

But no, Hollywierd wont make anything new, If they can remake it or do a sequel they'll do that.

I just hate the idea of seeing ET, and Howard the Duck remade.

but I know they are currently tossing around the idea to remake close encounters, a buddy of mine at one of the big efx houses was asked about it.

Re:I've got a better idea

[cvd6262]

Or "rebooting" existing franchises....

Let's see, Bond? Check. Batman? Check. Star Trek? Check(1)? Friday 13th? Check. Am I forgetting anything?

(1) Yeah, more of a prequel than a reboot, but watch: The cannon will be altered by this installment.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Opportunist]

Think that's worse than making stupid sequels of movies that weren't good in the first place, aka "cinema of the 90s"?

Re:I've got a better idea

[DrOct]

Slumdog Millionaire was based on a book. That's not a knock against the movie (it was great), or against the idea of basing movies on books, some of the best movies ever made have been based on books, but it does kind of undermine your "ORIGINAL" thing. Also, others have pointed out that Reservoir Dogs was a remake (though I had no idea that was the case until I read the comments so I can't really fault you for that, as I'd have likely made the same mistake). But quibbling aside, I do agree with your general point, it would be nice to see more new ideas, and fewer sequels and remakes coming out of hollywood.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Cowmonaut]

Oh come off it. Sure both are about a gang of thieves and a jewelery heist with an undercover cop, just like Cloverfield and Godzilla are just movies of a town getting destroyed. If you've watched both Reservoir Dogs and City on Fire you won't come close to confusing the two. The way the stories are told are completely different and an important part of why the film is good.

Some scenes are pretty much the same as well in the movies, just like the car chase at the end of Death Proof was straight out of Vanishing Point. Not really a knock off, but you can see where it came from. Tarrantino isn't alone in doing that either.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Cowmonaut]

At least in the case of Batman there are multiple incarnations of it already so it makes some sense. Aside from the two Batman Movies with Michale Keaton, the style wasn't really that dark gothic many fans enjoy. This time around they're going the Dark Knight approach, which is a version of Batman I very much enjoy.

Have to say I loved Batman: The Animated Series more than most though. Watched that as a kid and going back and watching it now, its a lot darker than I remember and pretty good actually.

Re:I've got a better idea

[blahplusplus]

"How about you devote all the energy, time, and effort that you would have put into doing yet another ill-advised sequel or remake into writing something ORIGINAL?"

Most of what is original isn't if you looked hard enough and had enough time. There are only so many themes that have wide enough commercial or financial appeal to a general audience. Where you can see this a lot is in video games: Early video games were much more original then later ones. People I think tend to forget that the expense of doing original stuff at the quality people today expect is a large part of the problem. That and lots of great stuff fails financially, lets face it, most people have average tastes. The further away you get from the average the smaller your audience because it is less widely appealing. Let's not also forget the marketing (or lack thereof) for many original works.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

While not at all a remake, the 'big' idea from Memento was done three years earlier by Tom Tykwer (from Lola Rennt fame) in Winterslafer

(guy with no short term memory has to write everything down to remember it)

Re:I've got a better idea

[zodwallopp]

Or even take an OLD idea and do it, like Ender's Game... something not a squeal for crying out loud. OK, say you're stuck on doing a sequel... then do something that is out of left field. F. Paul Wilson's 'The Keep' is part of a five book horror series. The next book is called 'The Tomb' and is based around a very unique and incredibly movie friendly character called Repairman Jack. He's such an interesting character that they've done 6 spin off novels of him, two decades after the last publication of 'The Tomb'. (shakes fist at Hollywood)

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

If you've got a business to run, it doesn't matter if you are selling cat piss in an aerosol can, if people buy it and you make a profit it is your prime directive from the market to make that profit, unless you can make more profit doing something else.

Unfortunately, familiarity sells, thus explaining McDonalds - better to get a meal you know is familiar crap that at least didn't kill you last time than to risk getting something unfamiliar that might be worse.

You would think people would behave differently when selecting entertainment, but they don't.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Hassman]

Slumdog isn't original. It is a formulaic predictable plot. I think I've seen a few of those movies. :)

Also Momento was adapted from a short story, it was not an original script:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memento_Mori_(short_story)

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

But the new Batman movies are excellent.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Sobrique]

Hey, at least if you make sequels of bad films, you don't have to live up to much in the way of expectations :)

Re:I've got a better idea

[Gilmoure]

Star Trek is turning into a Shakespeare kind of production. Within 50 years, they'll be discussing who's Kirk or Spock is better and then Trouble With Tribbles will be performed in the park every 4th of July.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, if you wanna get technical, it isn't. Tarantino never secured the rights, so he just shamelessly ripped it off instead.

Re:I've got a better idea

[elrous0]

Bah, Tykwer just stole the idea from "Clean Slate".

Re:I've got a better idea

[CFTM]

That's just how it is with big studios. They're mostly public companies at this point anyhow, and that means you have suits making business decisions not creative people making creative decisions. Truth is, the Studios have positioned themselves to be something of a niche, which is a bit ironic. They're the only one who are going to be able to serve up the $300 million summer blockbusters, but we're going to see less and less of these and more and more stuff moving to the internet.

If you want to produce work that is artistically rewarding for yourself, it is very easy to do today. It doesn't cost you more $2000 in equipment and then your elbow grease. Hopefully, some people start putting some quality shit up on YouTube soon, it's just a matter of time...

Re:I've got a better idea

[Big Hairy Ian]

The quality of originality is remembering what you hear but forgetting where you heard it

Was that Socrates or Aristotle who said that? :)

Re:I've got a better idea

[Justtaint]

Reservoir Dogs opened in a whopping 19 theaters making that a respectable $7781 per theater. Memento opened in 11 theaters, making $21,408 per theater. Your point is still valid since neither movie was ever wide released (Memento made it into 531 theaters, RD only 61), but to only point to opening weekend numbers is almost meaningless. As a recent example, Gran Torino only made $271,720 on opening weekend, but has gone on to gross over $100M. Just because a movie opens in limited release does not mean it won't end up making money.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

And that's why business sucks. Everything: including science, law, medicine, art, politics, education, takes a back seat to money-making. The consequence being crummy laws, art, education, and masses of people who can't get medical care. It's a wonderful thing!

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously haven't actually seen City On Fire, but are passing on bullshit you heard somewhere. The two movies are completely different. The only similarities is the dress style, and the very last few scenes of the movie which are similar to the last few scenes of Reserver Dogs. Other than that City of Fire has a whole beginning middle and ending that has nothing in common with Reservoir Dog's plot.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Hognoxious]

People I think tend to forget that the expense of doing original stuff at the quality people today expect is a large part of the problem.

I don't see the cost savings in remaking "War of the Worlds" or "The Day the Earth Stood Still" compared to adapting any of the many excellent SciFi books that have never been filmed.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Pope]

Well, to truly appreciate Shakespeare, you really need to hear it in the original Klingon.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

The cannon will be altered by this installment.

What caliber is it now?

Re:I've got a better idea

[jtev]

OOOH, and even better, the sequals have nothing to do with the original story in the case of Ender's game. So you can have a beloved(?) character in an utterly new situation for the next two movies, and then milk it for three more by following a supporting character. Maybe even 4, like the author did with the books.

Re:I've got a better idea

[philspear]

Who knows, you may actually produce the next Memento, Reservoir Dogs, or Slumdog Millionaire.

Thanks man! You've just given me ideas for my next three movies, Memento 2, Reservoir Dogs 2, and Slumdog Millionaire 2!

Re:I've got a better idea

[Enderandrew]

And Quentin Tarantino plagiarized Pulp Fiction.

On one hand, he is a fine director and deserves praise as such. On the other hand, he is an egotistical prick who is convinced he is the greatest director on earth who said, and I quote, "I want to have sex with my movies."

So I feel obligated to knock him off his high perch.

Re:I've got a better idea

[lymond01]

As you get older, less and less is original. "Original" work is generally (as the initial poster and then the child posts pointed out) something you haven't heard of yet. Stick around for a few decades and you'll realize just about every song you hear, every movie you see, every book you read, you have heard, seen, and read before in some fashion.

But don't give up hope: there may be no original plots, but a story is all in the telling, and THAT can be original.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Chris Mattern]

(1) Yeah, more of a prequel than a reboot, but watch: The cannon will be altered by this installment.

But the Enterprise doesn't have cannon. Maybe they'll alter the photon torpedoes instead.

Re:I've got a better idea

[hesiod]

It doesn't cost you more $2000 in equipment and then your elbow grease.

Sure, as long as you:
* have no Hi-def widescreen
* don't want multiple shots of the same scene
* use low-quality audio
* use non-pirated software
* have no CG effects
* don't include computer costs
* don't pay anyone
* consider working time worth nothing

That $2000 will cover a single halfway-decent camera.

Re:I've got a better idea

[ColdWetDog]

It doesn't cost you more $2000 in equipment and then your elbow grease. Hopefully, some people start putting some quality shit up on YouTube soon, it's just a matter of time...

I thought we killed the million-monkey concept years ago.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Or "rebooting" existing franchises....

Let's see, Bond? Check. Batman? Check. Star Trek? Check(1)? Friday 13th? Check. Am I forgetting anything?

Superman? Superman is a double dipper, folks were so underwhelmed by the reboot, there are discussions of rebooting the reboot...

Re:I've got a better idea

[DiegoBravo]

Note that doing another version doesn't harms the original, in the same way as the "official sequels" do. For example, if somebody does a new silly version of Batman (there are already several) with a totally different cast, then despite being Batman, it will never damage the current saga of Christopher Nolan. So I go for a new Blade Runner, better with the less involvement of the original people.

But doing a Blade Runner II, with the same director, producers, or even an older H. Ford, has the potential to trash the original version the same way Matrix 2/3 did to Matrix. Matrix, despite good, is a film that you really don't want to *think* about.

Re:I've got a better idea

[ThousandStars]

How about you devote all the energy, time, and effort that you would have put into doing yet another ill-advised sequel or remake into writing something ORIGINAL?

The New Yorker answers that, as I discuss in a blog post on Why are so many movies awful?. The New Yorker story isn't easily excerpted, but it is very much worth reading.

Re:I've got a better idea

[elrous0]

I think it's being a bit nitpicky to say that Memento wasn't original, considering that the short story it was based on was unpublished and written by the screenplay's co-writer (and brother of the director). That's sort of like Billy Bob Thornton being forced into the "Best Adapted Screenplay" category for Sling Blade instead of "Best Original Screenplay," even though the stage production and short that Sling Blade was "adapted" from were just early incarnations of the story created entirely by Thornton himself.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Yeah. Right. Then explain why they were about to put Slumgdog Millionaires out to pasture on DVD until word got out that it was getting serious Oscar attention?

Your post is the typical ignorant apology for Business As Usual we hear sheeple bleat every other day.

Your theory leads to hive mind and idiocracy, as one never goes broke underestimating the intelligence or the taste of the average american.

The entertainment industry is one of the single greatest blocks to genuine human progress.

RS

Re:I've got a better idea

[elrous0]

The great thing about a follow-up to Memento is that it would be equally effective as either a prequel or sequel. It wouldn't really matter either way.

Re:I've got a better idea

[orielbean]

Robot Chicken = Wrath of Khan as Opera. YESS

Re:I've got a better idea

[Enderandrew]

Ahem, the guy who wrote that short story wrote the movie. That is the director's brother. He was adapting his own work into another medium.

Given that Nolan wrote both, he can be seen as creating something original.

Jonathon Nolan also wrote the screenplay for The Prestige (adapting someone else's novel, but a fucking fantastic adaptation none the less) and the screenplay for The Dark Knight, which pulls from several comic story lines for inspiration, but could be seen as an original story arch.

Picking on Nolan is picking on the wrong writer.

Re:I've got a better idea

[geobeck]

...Trouble With Tribbles will be performed in the park every 4th of July.

Doesn't Shatner... already... dothis?

Re:I've got a better idea

[Bemopolis]

To beam or not to beam; that is the question:
Whether 'tis Dagger of the Mind to suffer
The photon torpedoes of Outrageous Okona,
Or to take arms against a sea of Tribbles,
And by transporting, send them?

(Parody ended due to low serum caffeine levels.)

Re:I've got a better idea

[Mister Whirly]

The entertainment business and "genuine human progress" are hardly related. Great films are fun, but don't advance society in significant ways. (And this is coming from someone who spent a year or so in school as a wanna be filmmaker.)

Re:I've got a better idea

[sorak]

This isn't art, this is business.

Excellent point. If you want something artistic and original, go see an indie film. If you want something high budget, with mainstream appeal, go see "Blade Runner 2: Wrath of the Electric Sheep".

Re:I've got a better idea

[CFTM]

Like CG and hi-def are a requisite for creating art? I don't think so, it may be your requirement for viewership but that's a different issue altogether. There are plenty of hi-quality films that utilize little-to-no CG and frankly basic CG is doable on a desktop computer. Am I going to be able to render a highly complex scene? Of course not but that isn't within the scope of my aspirations at the moment, and don't take my word on any of this. But I think Robert Rodriquez is a bit more credible than me. If you happen to own the collectors edition of Sin City there are some great interviews with Mr. Rodriguez talking about his career and his approach, and he argues that aspiring filmmakers have access to every tool they need to make high quality films.

You don't need multiple cameras to do multiple angles on a single shot, you just need to do the scene multiple times. Does it open the door to continuity errors? Of course it does, but continuity errors are always going to be something to contend with so what's it really matter? The consumer level software is not prohibitively expensive and both Vegas and i Movie will put together a film, and with some options. It ain't studio work, but if your editor is talented it still looks good. Vegas costs next to nothing and is used in production houses for certain areas of work. You don't need top of the line equipment to create quality, you need top of the line equipment to make a studio picture but studio pictures rarely are for anything but entertainment.

And I can get a camera right now for $1200 that is considered, among idie film makers to be a very good camera. I can then go get the other equipment I need for the other $800. I'm not saying these prices are for new equipment but the used market is there...

Re:I've got a better idea

[zippthorne]

Star Trek doesn't have cannon.

Or canon, for that matter, thanks in part to their "brilliant" decision to let the body puppets think they can direct.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Cormacus]

There are no more original stories. They have already all been told.

Prove me wrong.

Re:I've got a better idea

[phulegart]

honestly, I'm fine with this. Trek has always been good solid entertainment. It isn't history... it isn't science... it's Entertainment.

Re:I've got a better idea

[roskakori]

Reservoir Dogs is a remake of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_on_Fire_(1987_film)

According to the IMDB FAQ there seems to be some disagreement on this:

Is this film a remake?
[...] [T]here are clear similarities. Both films deal with a robbery, and feature a warehouse rendez-vous spot, a climactic Mexican stand-off, and the relationship between a veteran thief and an undercover cop, but Lung fu fong wan deals mostly with events leading to the robbery, while Reservoir Dogs is famously about the aftermath of an unseen heist gone wrong. [...] There are similar elements between the two films, but much of what makes Reservoir Dogs a classic - pacing, style, and some famous plot twists - is not present in Lung fu fong wan. Nevertheless, the debate has continued among some film fans.

Personally I can't think of any Tarantino movie I'd call "original" though some of them I find reasonably amusing.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

And, on a related note, if you're a filmmaker and have ever thought to yourself "Hey, I bet a remake of 'It's a Wonderful Life' starring Ice Cube and some sassy kids would be great!" please, dear God, stay out of Hollywood.

Sweet Fucking Jesus, you had to go and say that out loud didn't you.........

Re:I've got a better idea

[Wandering Wombat]

Get off my thread.

Re:I've got a better idea

[rhyder128k]

People blame Hollywood, but really it's the audience that's a fault. If people were lining up in sufficient quantity to watch excellent and original films, they'd concentrate on making those instead of pure crap. The truth is that all but about 10% of people are morons who want bread and circuses and nothing else.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Kozar_The_Malignant]

Sure, as long as you:
* have no Hi-def widescreen
* don't want multiple shots of the same scene
* use low-quality audio
* use non-pirated software
* have no CG effects
* don't include computer costs
* don't pay anyone
* consider working time worth nothing

That $2000 will cover a single halfway-decent camera.

So, you're talking about making the pr0n then? Some folks seem to make pretty good money at that. Not sure that the "don't pay anyone" apples though.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'm betting that we will probably see a remake of Star wars 3,4,5 within 10 years."

You mean 4,5,6 right? Sigh.... kid's these days.

Re:I've got a better idea

[StikyPad]

Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Battlestar Galactica. Dukes of Haazard. Scooby Doo. Star Wars. Starsky & Hutch. Dr. Whom (every 2-8 years). Superman (also every X years between TV and film). The Incredible Hulk. The Mideast Peace Process. Moonlighting.

Ok, one of those isn't (intentionally) entertainment, and that last one is just wishful thinking. Oh Moonlighting!

Re:I've got a better idea

[Lars T.]

Hey, Roddenberry was a big Shakespeare fan, and he picked Shatner and Stewart for being classical Shakespearean actors. The many quotes and even excerpt plays are no coincidence either.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Has anyone else noticed how [quentin tarrantino] they rarely--if ever--attach[s] to bad projects. Well, apart from Pulp Fiction he has been pretty much a complete disaster at the box office and the critics have been only too happy to point out that his (apparent) early potential has been completely unrealised.

I wouldn't go out of my way to watch movies from the other two directors but i did see The Beach (Boyle.) It was a complete and utter disaster, universally panned- am i wrong on this?

Now Nolan is the one responsible for Batman Begins - the idiot lost me when he introduced Ninjas into the story, right at the start i'm afraid. Just like the sequel it was unnecessary and a very weak/overlong movie, likely to please only the more feeble-minded audience members.

Sorry to make you look stupid but Boyle's latest project is a remake of the Prisoner! we'll see how that goes!!!!

You see although i rather like the authoritative tone with which you deliver your message I'm afraid you're quite wrong in what you've said.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Opportunist]

It still amazes me to no end how the crappy sequel of a crappy movie could be a blockbuster. People go to the first and it's bad. The only reason they don't leave early is that the store they wanted to go afterwards isn't open and it's raining. Then the sequel comes out. And suddenly everyone thinks "hey, it's just GOTTA be better than the first!"?

Explain that to me!

Re:I've got a better idea

[cayenne8]

"Do you really want to die being best known as the "asshole who wrote that god-awful sequel to Blade Runner"? "

Am I one of the few people that thinks the original movie Blade Runner wasn't all that great to begin with?

I mean, I like Harrison Ford. I like Philip K. Dick stories.....I've enjoyed the directors other projects.

I just didn't get much out of this movie. I think I've seen a directors cut too...but, extra footage...unicorns or something, just didn't make it any better for me. I don't see any ominous themes...twists, etc....none of the stuff that sends so many Slashdot readers into a sci-fi geek tizzy.

Maybe I should watch it again.....

Maybe I should read the book/story in original form....maybe that would help me to 'get it'.

Re:I've got a better idea

[philspear]

Well thanks, you just gave away the big suprise. The whole movie you think it's a prequel, but then at the end, suprise! it's actually a sequel, the guy just forgot about the events of the first movie.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Gilmoure]

Kenneth Branaugh as Kirk?

Sweet!

Re:I've got a better idea

[EvolutionsPeak]

A movie doesn't need a completely original plot to be an original movie. I think Tarantino is much more famous for his unique style of directing than for his writing.

Re:I've got a better idea

[twosmokes]

Tarrantino isn't alone in doing that either.

Sure. But the fact that the first example that popped into your head was another Tarantino movie leads me to believe that he's more guilty than most.
/snarkiness

I enjoy most of Tarantino's movies. I feel that his strength isn't in making wholly original movies, but taking movies and ideas we're familiar with and tacking on some good dialogue and wrapping the whole thing around interesting plot devices. I just don't think Tarantino should be brought up when discussing originality. But I don't mean that in a bad way.

Re:I've got a better idea

[cayenne8]

"Yeah. Right. Then explain why they were about to put Slumgdog Millionaires out to pasture on DVD until word got out that it was getting serious Oscar attention? "

Hmm...well, from the previews, and what little bit I've heard about the movie...doesn't sound very interesting.

No explosions at all that I could see....

:)

But seriously...it doesn't look that interesting. I read a bit about the movie in wikipedia, it appears to happen in Mumbai (somewhere in India I guess)...and it says that about 1/3 of the dialong is in Hindi...I guess that mean subtitles. ick.

I dunno...just doesn't seem like anything I can relate to. I don't know or care what Bollywood is, I'm not interested in a movie where 1/3 of the dialog is in a language I don't know, and I don't relate much to Hindu-muslim stuff, all of which seem to have importance in this movie.

Even if this thing wins Oscars...I don't imagine that many people in the US will go out of their way to see it. I guess it will be out on DVD soon.

Re:I've got a better idea

[S-100]

Shoulda told that to the people that made The Preacher's Wife with Denzel Washington, or the latest Honeymooners remake.

Re:I've got a better idea

[rgviza]

Blade Runner made $4,749 average per theater opening weekend, which in inflated dollars (as of 1992 when Reservoir Dogs opened) is $6899.50, less than Quentin Tarantino's pet project, per theatre.

However it went on to gross 32m over it's lifetime (domestically), but cost 14m to make. At release it was considered a spectacular failure.

Theater by theater RD was more profitable. I don't believe that the idea that Ridley Scott would make this his pet project and do it right is very far fetched at all. The bar is set pretty damn high though... The effects STILL look good, the acting was great, and the music is out of this world. It's a stunning, hypnotic film. I have the director's cut and still watch it periodically.

One of the most beautiful movies ever made... I have the feeling that the only way a sequel would get made is if Ridley Scott financed it. No studio in their right mind would touch it, as is often the case with the most worthwhile movies.

-Viz

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks man! You've just given me ideas for my next three movies, Memento 2, Reservoir Dogs 2, and Slumdog Millionaire 2!

I think you might want to work on Memento 0 instead.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Lars T.]

People I think tend to forget that the expense of doing original stuff at the quality people today expect is a large part of the problem.

I don't see the cost savings in remaking "War of the Worlds" or "The Day the Earth Stood Still" compared to adapting any of the many excellent SciFi books that have never been filmed.

Well, at least for "War of the Worlds" the copyright has run out - saves a couple of millions. Gee, and you though the end of copyrights didn't have its downsides.

Re:I've got a better idea

[naoursla]

"Hey, I bet a remake of 'It's a Wonderful Life' starring Ice Cube and some sassy kids would be great!"

Do you mind if I pitch this at my next meeting?

Re:I've got a better idea

[hesiod]

What else is there?

Re:I've got a better idea

[Apostata]

Not only that, but the Mr. Blue, Mr. Orange, etc. shtick is lifted directly from "The Taking of Pelham 123".

Treating "originality" as a sacred goal is a one-way ticket to getting nothing accomplished. This isn't to say that we should be openly plagiarizing, but that a narrow-minded focus on originality itself will only lead to frustration.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Mateo_LeFou]

"This isn't art, this is business"

Many of us think that is a bad thing. Which is the point, here.

Re:I've got a better idea

[OrangeTide]

It's a well done SF and has an interesting dark tone to it. Obviously nothing can be universally loved. But this film got a lot of things right, acting, costumes, scenes, camera, lighting, story, etc. The film has a lot of atmosphere to it, even if it is the simple formula of hero confronts villain at the end.

Re:I've got a better idea

[shurikt]

Wow. I've never seen that many words used to say "I don't know what I'm talking about" before.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Giving people what they want is less important than giving them what you want. Thanks for clearing that up for us, sheep.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Bassman59]

Blade Runner made $4,749 average per theater opening weekend, which in inflated dollars (as of 1992 when Reservoir Dogs opened) is $6899.50, less than Quentin Tarantino's pet project, per theatre.

However it went on to gross 32m over it's lifetime (domestically), but cost 14m to make. At release it was considered a spectacular failure.

It was a failure because the studio chopped it up and destroyed it.

-a

Re:I've got a better idea

[MichaelSmith]

One of the most beautiful movies ever made... I have the feeling that the only way a sequel would get made is if Ridley Scott financed it. No studio in their right mind would touch it, as is often the case with the most worthwhile movies.

-Viz

Well they let Peter Hyams make 2010.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Bassman59]

Not only that, but the Mr. Blue, Mr. Orange, etc. shtick is lifted directly from "The Taking of Pelham 123".

Which is being remade, coincidentally with Ridley Scott's brother Tony at the helm!

Re:I've got a better idea

[DinDaddy]

OK, I have been to a LOT of circuses. And they weren't selling bread at any of them. Unless you count churros.

Re:I've got a better idea

[mattack2]

Terminator 3 was made without James Cameron and IMHO, was an entertaining movie that continued the story in an interesting way. I avoided it for a long time for this same kind of reason -- not made by the originator, but eventually watched it on DVD and liked it. (Not as much as the previous two, but still very entertaining.)

There's also "Terminator Salvation" coming out this year and oh my god Terminator 5 already scheduled for 2011. We can't know how good these are of course.

I also think that the Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles TV show has been very entertaining.

So it's not *impossible* that this could be a good sequel.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Pound shit down your throat and die.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Stormwatch]

and frankly basic CG is doable on a desktop computer.

Reminds me of an interesting story. An episode of Diagnosis Murder needed a scene of a motorcycle crash, but the budget was not enough for a location shot... so Dick Van Dyke went home, turned on his Amiga, and did the crash in CG.

Re:I've got a better idea

[CFTM]

Thanks for the link, great read!

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

But seriously...it doesn't look that interesting. I read a bit about the movie in wikipedia, it appears to happen in Mumbai (somewhere in India I guess)...and it says that about 1/3 of the dialong is in Hindi...I guess that mean subtitles. ick.

Ah. You must be American :)

I have never been able to understand how people can have no interest in stuff outside of their own country. It's where the most interesting stuff IS. Seriously dude, you're missing out...

Re:I've got a better idea

[elrous0]

Of course, it's probably best known for its visual style and cyberpunk setting. But, for me, the movie's underlying question of "What truly makes someone a human?" is the most interesting part. The Roy Batty character seems at first to be just the traditional bad guy. But, by the end, you come to realize that his ultimate goal is simply to assert his own humanity. He and his group are just trying to claim the things that humans take for granted (a long life, freedom, etc.) because they feel that they deserve them. That's a pretty powerful character arc.

Re:I've got a better idea

[elrous0]

Must...you...slasdotters....be...pittedagainsteachother?

Re:I've got a better idea

[squiggleslash]

Terminator 3 is an entertaining movie, but it's not a particularly intelligent movie, which is what people are referring to when they worry about Blade Runner II being "not good."

The issue with Blade Runner is that Blade Runner itself is, well, staggeringly good. Frighteningly good. There are few films before or since that have tackled the issues Blade Runner did with as much success. T3 followed an OK movie, T2, which kind of touched upon issues of anthropomorphism but (Wait? I spelt that correctly on the first go? That doesn't make sense. Maybe Firefox screwed up. Sometimes the spell checker doesn't work. kdjdjd. Nope, that has a wavey red line underneath it. As does "wavey" and "spelt", interestingly enough. Hmmm. Anthropomorphism. How did I do that? My spelling is attrocious, er, attrocous, atrotious, er really really bad.)

What was I saying? Yeah, T2 touched upon some interesting questions about anthropomorphism but it was almost an afterthought. So T3 following T2 wasn't a giant slap in the face towards those who loved it. Blade Runner goes right into the heart of the debate about collective inhumanity. Following it with an action movie set near the Tannhauser gate would be like making a sequel to "To Kill a Mockingbird" where Atticus Finch, having moved to Germany, is on the run from Nazis and has to prove himself innocent of a crime he didn't commit.

Re:I've got a better idea

[elrous0]

I want 5 points on the back end and it's yours.

Re:I've got a better idea

[cayenne8]

"Ah. You must be American :)

I have never been able to understand how people can have no interest in stuff outside of their own country. It's where the most interesting stuff IS. Seriously dude, you're missing out..."

Yep...I'm an American, and I'll readily admit, that when watching Jeopardy, geography is not my longsuit. We never really covered it that much in school. We just did the states, and that was about it.

Honestly, this country is so big...there is plenty going on here to keep me occupied just trying to keep up with it. Unlike the EU, where you're countries are small and close togetherm we are not used to interacting or driving easily to another country. If you don't get that kind of exposure growing up, you really do kind of live in an isolated world. I rarely hear much going on outside the US, and I've never really had much need to do so. I get most of my international exposure really here on Slashdot.

But really, I've got more than enough to keep my attention occupied here in the US. Until another country is starting to try to blow us up or deprive the US of something, I really don't see much a need to pay attention to them. It is a big world, have fun.

If I intend to travel somewhere....well, then I'll start looking for information on the place, try to learn a little of the language (if not English), and get ready to go, but, for the most part in my life there really isn't much a call to go outside the US. If I want tropical, I can hit the Keys, if I want to ski, I go to CO, if I want good beer......I make it myself.

:)

Re:I've got a better idea

[elrous0]

I'm writing an original story about a slashdotter who posts a wise-ass challenge on a message forum, never realizing that the guy he's challenging is slowly sneaking up behind him with a baseball bat. I call it "HERE'S Something You Haven't Seen Before, Buddy!" Brian Grazer and Ron Howard are producing.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks man! You've just given me ideas for my next three movies, Memento 2, Reservoir Dogs 2, and Slumdog Millionaire 2!

PSSSH Name them right. The Memento Chronicles, Reservoir Dogs: The Beginning, and The Next Slumdog Millionaire.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

The expression is "Bread and Circuses", not "Bread at Circuses" or "Bread in Circuses". It refers to the two disparate things that the Roman emperors provided to the citizens to pacify them.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Emperor Zombie]

Wait, kill the concept?

Anyone want to buy a million monkey-sized coffins?

Re:I've got a better idea

[forkazoo]

Myself, I'll wait for the Final Ultimate Director's Cut Armageddon Release of this one.

Personally, I'm saving up for the Blade Runner Alpha Turbo EX World Fighting Champion Edition.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Jurily]

but to only point to opening weekend numbers is almost meaningless.

Oh, it's meaningful alright, but it doesn't measure how good the movie is. It measures the marketing.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's not. It's an original that riffs on the last few minutes of CoF.

Re:I've got a better idea

[nog_lorp]

Honestly, you really shouldn't dismiss something based on the fact you don't know anything about it.

I have not seen this movie, but I have heard great things about it. First, from my mom, who is apt to like any boring artsy foreign film (although I like a certain number of those myself). Then, from kids in my dorm. As in, frat kids. So, I really think you are wrong about the lack of appeal here.

As for Mumbai, it is an incredibly important port city with 13 million in population. It is the highest population city in the world, and has twice the population density of New York City.

Re:I've got a better idea

[khellendros1984]

I like it for a few reasons. One is its vision for the future. It looks grungy and plausible..."lived in". Then there's the cognitive dissonance in Ford's character, i.e. that he both recognizes the replicants as thinking, intelligent beings, but still feels that he has to take them out. And when he finds out what the girl is, as well....I guess I like seeing how people (even fictional characters) deal with moral ambiguity.

Re:I've got a better idea

[ObiWonKanblomi]

Who knows, you may actually produce the next Memento, Reservoir Dogs, or Slumdog Millionaire.

I hate to punch another hole in your comment, but it looks like even Slumdog Millionare is an adaptation of a book called Q and A.

Re:I've got a better idea

[PriceIke]

> Terminator 3 was made without James Cameron and IMHO, was an entertaining movie that continued the story in an interesting way. I avoided it for a long time for this same kind of reason -- not made by the originator, but eventually watched it on DVD and liked it. (Not as much as the previous two, but still very entertaining.)

Indiana Jones 4 was made by the series originators and was a monumental embarrassment, and a huge blemish on the Indy Jones franchise. As much as I loved Blade Runner--it inspired my fantasies as well as my nightmares throughout my childhood--it needs to be left alone. Some films, nay, MOST films just don't need sequels.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

OK. Apart from the roads, wine, irrigation, sanitation, medicine, public order and public health, what have the Romans ever given us?

Re:I've got a better idea

[PriceIke]

That's the funniest idea for a sequel title I've ever seen in my life.

Re:I've got a better idea

[caitsith01]

T3 followed an OK movie, T2

Bzzzzt... movie snob alert.

T2 was an action movie. But it was a GREAT action movie, one of the best ever. It may not be an 'intelligent' as Blade Runner (the latter of which is one of my favourite movies of all time) but in terms of its genre it was largely unsurpassed until at least The Matrix.

Otherwise I agree with your post 100%. Although that To Kill a Mockingbird sequel sounds great, can I suggest Vin Diesel for the role of Atticus? I also have a title lined up for you: "2: Killa Mockingbird".

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Jesus, I think I just caught nerd.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Falconhell]

Ah, yes Vanising point, the best car chase movie ever. Havent heard of it for years. The only US made movie where they resisited the temptation for a happy bloody ending-if you havent seen it, do yourself a favour.

Gotta love the Daytona charger!

Re:I've got a better idea

[caitsith01]

This is only true if you boil plots (or songs) down to a few basic elements. The same would apply in any area of life - oh, the automobile isn't new, it's just a fancy version of the horse and cart.

I would be intrigued to hear which previous works are the prototypes for:

- Blade Runner itself
- The novels of Thomas Pynchon
- The novels of Brett Easton Ellis
- The (post-folk) music of Bob Dylan, say, 1963-70
- The music of the Beatles from Sergeant Pepper's onwards

Unless you boil Blade Runner, to pick one of the above, down to something as trite as "a cop chases a group of dangerous criminals and finds his job ethically challenging" then I don't think you can legitimately say it wasn't original to some degree.

Everything fictional incorporates some elements of reality, and is invariably influenced by what went before. But it is just wrong to say that everything has been done before.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Falconhell]

How about F. Paul Wilsons 'The Healer', great book!

I have not seen much of his other work unfotunately!

An excellent author!

Re:I've got a better idea

[Falconhell]

Weren't they both Alcoholics?

  I seem to recall that Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle, and Socrates himself was permantley pissed. (-:

Re:I've got a better idea

[squiggleslash]

In the context I was talking of, T2 was an OK movie. It was an action movie rather than a thoughtful movie, though it went half way with the latter (at least in the director's cut) in exploring anthropomorphism. That's all I meant.

I loved the DC FWIW. One of my favorite HD DVDs.

Re:I've got a better idea

[squiggleslash]

Oh, and I had Steven Seagal in mind for Atticus...

Re:I've got a better idea

[eyegone]

Temple of Doom and Last Crusade were a huge blemish on the Raiders of the Lost Ark franchise, so what's your point?

Re:I've got a better idea

[Culture20]

Mumbai is the renamed Bombay, which I'm sure you've heard of.

Re:I've got a better idea

[caitsith01]

Understood.

I like the way the special edition of T2 adds significantly to the 'self-realisation' elements of the story, i.e. the machine learning more about human emotion and human social interactions (like the scene where he's learning to smile, for example).

I also like how the T1000 gradually deteriorates towards the end, such as when his morphing ability starts becoming difficult to control - it's really adds something to the story that this 'invincible' machine is mortal too, and we even see the first signs of confusion as this dawns on him.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Bandraginus]

Honestly, this country is so big...there is plenty going on here to keep me occupied just trying to keep up with it. Unlike the EU, where you're countries are small and close togetherm we are not used to interacting or driving easily to another country. If you don't get that kind of exposure growing up, you really do kind of live in an isolated world. I rarely hear much going on outside the US, and I've never really had much need to do so.

This has nothing to do with geography. Australia is even more isolated that the US and also has no exposure to "driving easily to another country" yet Aussies are one of the more well-traveled people in the world. At least US citizens *can* drive to Mexico or Canada.

I suspect it has more to do with a culture of fear and oppression. You are not encouraged to explore the world... you are taught to fear it and you had better stay at home and be a good little consumer.

Re:I've got a better idea

[martinX]

It was heavy sci-fi. It's never going to have mass appeal. Star Wars, OTOH, was a western with space ships. Replace "bang bang" with "pew pew" and you've got a sure-fire winner.

I actually prefer the chopped up version with Ford's narration. He has such a great voice, it's like getting Morgan Freeman to do narration over Shawshank Redemption.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Scrameustache]

Note that doing another version doesn't harms the original, in the same way as the "official sequels" do. For example, if somebody does a new silly version of Batman (there are already several) with a totally different cast, then despite being Batman, it will never damage the current saga of Christopher Nolan.

If I were you I'd think about how long it took for Batman to get away from the 60s incarnation. Burton tried, but Shoemacher brought it back again,, and it took a few more years before Nolan could make something good again (and superhero movies had to make a whole lot of millions before they let him).

Re:I've got a better idea

[Scrameustache]

Reservoir Dogs is a remake of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_on_Fire_(1987_film)

According to the IMDB FAQ there seems to be some disagreement on this

I'd say "reimagining" rather than "remake", much like Planet of the Apes.
Except that the reimagined version of the first is better than the original, and the latters' sucks monkey ass.

Re:I've got a better idea

[mattack2]

I don't see the cost savings in remaking "War of the Worlds" or "The Day the Earth Stood Still" compared to adapting any of the many excellent SciFi books that have never been filmed.

It's not *directly* a cost savings, but a remake of or sequel to an existing movie has a "built in audience." Either the same people who watched the original movie(s), or possibly the next generation.

So spending $80 million or whatever on a movie that is likely to get at least a decent amount of people seeing it regardless, or some "new" idea (even if simply an existing book that hadn't yet been made into a movie), I can unfortunately see how they choose to do what they do. As I said in another thread, the Terminator-derived TV show has been very entertaining (but is coming back on the death day of Friday), and while I'm not a regular viewer, the new "Doctor Who" and "Battlestar Galactica" shows have been very successful. Yes, this is a very small sampling of the tons of remakes... but presumably the producers think they'll be another one of the successful remakes.

Re:I've got a better idea

[enoz]

Slumdog Millionaire was had to find in a Cinema until it won Golden Globe. Now it has multiple sessions per day to sellout audiences.

It's easy to blame Sheeple, but it is also important to consider the effect that MASSIVE PR BUDGETS can have on the financial success of a movie.

Re:I've got a better idea

[lavaface]

Quite frankly, you don't know what you're talking about. You can get a decent camera for $1200. If what you want to do is shoot a short film in daylight with limited dialog, using props you have on hand, without paying anybody, then yeah -- I guess you can do that. If you need lights, or a boom mic, or plan on paying even a nominal amount of money for the people who help you (food?), you will find out that even cheap film projects are expensive. Clerks cost $27,000. Rodriguez is celebrated for making a film for just $7,000 by casting his extended family. Believe me, as someone who has helped several friends bring they're film projects to life ( for free) I know that the costs are greater than what you imagine.

Re:I've got a better idea

[CFTM]

All the equipment mentioned costs little to rent, I know this from first hand experience. You're not the only person with experience, and I spoke as someone who just finished a project and I wasn't merely helping friends. It was my project. So thanks for adding your two cents worth.

Re:I've got a better idea

[cayenne8]

"I suspect it has more to do with a culture of fear and oppression. You are not encouraged to explore the world... you are taught to fear it and you had better stay at home and be a good little consumer."

Well, not so much in the past. I've traveled to Europe (France and England), and Mexico, the caribbean..etc.

But with the current world situation...I am a little afraid of travelling and having some muslim out there blow something up around me, etc....and lately, the murders and kidnapping in MX bothers me...so, I don't see much a need to travel outside the US or the US territories in the Caribbean. I don't really have to....TONS of places to go here in the US.

Re:I've got a better idea

[cayenne8]

Ah..ok. I have heard of Bombay.

When did they change the name and why?

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombay#Etymology 1996

Re:I've got a better idea

[electrons_are_brave]

A contributing factor may be the length of annual leave of Australian's versus US. I get 7.3 weeks a year (5 weeks annual, 1.3 weeks long service and 1 week paid shut-down). I met someone who held an equivilant position to me in the US who got TWO weeks annual leave per year, and they told me this was pretty standard. If this is true, then people in the US probably stick closer to home for their hols.

Re:I've got a better idea

[electrons_are_brave]

Aggh! I wrote Australian's not Australians. Must be the heat wave.

Re:I've got a better idea

[electrons_are_brave]

"Blade Runner 2: Wrath of the Electric Sheep". They're baaaa!

Re:I've got a better idea

[Meski]

BladeRunner Forever.

Re:I've got a better idea

[vuffi_raa]

the book wouldn't help you get it, the book is a totally different thing from the movie...

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Your post is the typical ignorant apology for Business As Usual we hear sheeple bleat every other day.

For the love of god, please stop using that word.

Re:I've got a better idea

[DiegoBravo]

I don't agree... If it took a long time for people to "forget" the funny Batman tv show, is because no serious attempts were made in a totally different direction, maybe until Burton. For the same reason, I'm yet waiting to see another serious version of spiderman :):):)

So, I don't have any fear about another Blade Runner... if turns to be bad (which is the most probable), it would be just totally forgotten. But a bad Blade Runner II, with the good old Harrison ford, would be pretty bad for the original classic "reputation".

Re:I've got a better idea

[mjwx]

Who knows, you may actually produce the next Memento, Reservoir Dogs, or Slumdog Millionaire.

And there in lies the problem. Movie producers are so desperate to produce the next Memento or Reservoir Dogs that they can do little else but copy them.

What you must remember is the truly great films were never the "next" of anything, they were the first and could stand on their own merits without needing to be compared to movies that they were based on. So to recap, I don't want the "next" Memento or the "next" Reservoir Dogs, I've already seen all of these, I want produces to make another "first" of something. Unfortunately US movie producers cant create original idea's and are afraid of doing so. Original idea's in hollywood are almost a punishable offence these days.

Re:I've got a better idea

[mqduck]

Explain to me how having a low budget restricts you from using pirated software.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Bonobo_Unknown]

One of the most beautiful movies ever made... I have the feeling that the only way a sequel would get made is if Ridley Scott financed it. No studio in their right mind would touch it, as is often the case with the most worthwhile movies.

-Viz

Blade Runner wasn't a movie, it's a audiovisual coffee table book ;-)

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Talk about nuking the fridge...

Re:I've got a better idea

[dangitman]

And I can get a camera right now for $1200 that is considered, among idie film makers to be a very good camera.

No. It's not anywhere near a decent camera, even in indie circles.

I can then go get the other equipment I need for the other $800.

So, you've paid for your equipment. Now how are you going to fund all the other costs with your $2000 budget?

Re:I've got a better idea

[Phoghat]

O F**k No! Blade Runner has been one of my favorite films since it came out. I've watched it so many times I've lost count. It's almost like a Shakespearian play in that every time I watch it I find some small nuance. Some scenes are just golden; when Decker finds the origami of the swan on the floor is just one small example. So, lease god no. Don't ruin the experience.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Jaruzel]

I've recently just watched Indy 4, and I (and my partner) thought it was quite good; It retained the humour of 1 and 3, and had a fairly silly but fun plotline ...

But then again, we also watched The Mummy 3 that weekend too, so maybe that affected our viewpoint somewhat.... :/

-Jar

Re:I've got a better idea

[6foothobbit]

You know, I always thought that the unicorn dreams and the origami unicorn at the end suggested that Harrison Ford's character was an android too. How else could that guy know what he was dreaming about.

Re:I've got a better idea

[vikstar]

the movie's underlying question of "What truly makes someone a human?"

The one biggest flaw in the movie was the robot wanting to die to be classified closer to a living organism. Humans want to live forever (at least the smart and happy ones do), and just because my toaster breaks doesn't mean that it is one step closer to being a human. Many movies have taken on this theme, which is just pure crap.

Re:I've got a better idea

[ancienthart]

Your post reminded me of a pretty hilarious quote, just can't remember the author.
"Just keep in mind that every person who uses the phrase 'sheeple' was told it by somebody else"

Re:I've got a better idea

[CFTM]

Stop drinking your hater aid. I finished up a project in November as specified and it's just about to go live. I have no pretension of mastery, but everything I said is a reflection of first hand experience.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Enterprise (NX-01) had pulse cannons.

Re:I've got a better idea

[gnick]

Aside from the two Batman Movies with Michale Keaton, the style wasn't really that dark gothic many fans enjoy.

Watch the first full-length Batman movie followed up by the first Michael Keaton flick. It looks plenty dark in comparison.

Re:I've got a better idea

[dangitman]

You think I'm being a "hater"? No, I'm just being realistic. What kind of production are we talking here? You only spent $2000 on equipment, and there were no further costs, not even gas to drive you to the location?

Re:I've got a better idea

[CFTM]

Touche sir, you are correct there are tons of costs that aren't necessarily on the surface, such as licensing music etc and it does get real expensive real fast. My production isn't spectacular, but it looks pretty good and I'm ok with loading it online for the world to see. My only point was that don't let cost get in the way of what you want to do, because frankly no one gives you opportunities and truthfully I'm a bit defensive given that I'm about to go live with my project...so sorry for being a dick.

Re:I've got a better idea

[tm2b]

"People just liked it better that way."

Re:I've got a better idea

[lymond01]

I can't find parallels of any of those myself, but I'm guessing if you talk to someone considerably older than myself, he's probably read a book that is very similar to one of those.

Music has some originality. Classical, Big Band, Rock and Roll, Rap...you could call each of those "original" genres, but I'm not sure they're anything but "original for their time", which is kind of my point. Not saying there was a 15th century version of Elvis, but tribal drums to a rhythm are nothing new. Old Gaelic music was akin to what you hear in many classical pieces. Rap is poetry to music -- extempo has been around a long time.

Re:I've got a better idea

[dangitman]

Ahhh, no problem. I often play the role of dick. And I also think low-budget productions are great, but it's a relative term.

Re:I've got a better idea

[mfnickster]

I just didn't get much out of this movie. I think I've seen a directors cut too...but, extra footage...unicorns or something, just didn't make it any better for me. I don't see any ominous themes...twists, etc....none of the stuff that sends so many Slashdot readers into a sci-fi geek tizzy.

I guess the important question is when did you see it? When it came out? On video years later?

Ridley Scott (with the help of Mobius and Syd Mead, et al.) created a future world that was really unlike anything seen in previous SF films; it was film noir in a dystopian future-retro setting. Remember that a lot of the stuff that has now become cliché in SF movies was done first in Blade Runner.

Re:I've got a better idea

[mfnickster]

The aqueduct?

Re:I've got a better idea

[pedro1948]

Hey now, Blade Runner was taken from a Phillip K. Dick story. A lot of other movies are based on Dick's writing. Instead of a sequel, probably badly written, why not take another of Dick's books like The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch or Through a Scanner Darkly and at least base the movie around quality writing. Dick has been my all time favorite Sci Fi writer for over 40 years, even though most people have never heard of him unless they've seen his name in movie credits.

Re:I've got a better idea

[Hognoxious]

I'm not disagreeing with what you say. I think you're right. I'm disagreeing, or rather disappointed, with how it is.

To me the "built in audience" buzzphrase is code for "people who'll pay up just to see if it really is shit or not, and once we've got their money, who cares?"

[Obligatory Car Analogy] Could you imagine making a replica Ford Pinto, and people buying it just to see if it really does turn into a fireball at the slightest bump? [/OCA]

Re:I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks man! You've just given me ideas for my next three movies, Memento 2, Reservoir Dogs 2, and Slumdog Millionaire 2!

And the next installment will be: Mementoes, Lake Dogs, Slumdog Billionaire.

Re:I've got a better idea

[CFTM]

I ran my mouth and thanks for accepting my apology. Time for me to back it up eh?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPvlGfa0V78&feature=channel_page

There are production issues with this episode, sound and some continuity and it's a byproduct of small crew and small funds. Another episode, which came out much better is coming out in another week. Honest criticism welcome.

Name's Alex.

Hold still please...

[concoursrider]

If you don't blink as you read this, you just might be a replicant.

Re:Hold still please...

[elrous0]

Let me tell you about my mother.

Re:Hold still please...

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me tell you about YOUR MOM!!!11!

Sure, why not?

[Psmylie]

"Travis Wright, one of the writers behind Eagle Eye, has been working on a sequel to Ridley Scott's Sci-Fi classic Blade Runner."

Go ahead. I write fanfics, too.

Re:Sure, why not?

[Apparition-X]

Aye. And while I know nothing about your writing skills, I am absolutely confident that you would do better than Travis Wright, based upon his work from Eagle Eye. Eagle Eye was a giant steaming pile of garbage with virtually nothing to recommend it in any respect. The dialogue was terrible, and the plot worse. Travis Wright should be locked up and never allowed access to a pen, computer, pencil, crayons, or anything else that he might use to right with ever again.

Re:Sure, why not?

[Anonymous Coward]

Surely you're overlooking the merit of Travis Wright and Uwe Boll's new film, Bible II, the Return of JC. "Jesus is back, and he's pissed!" A resurrected muscular dope-smoking son of god fights the Romans for marijuana rights in this thrilling tale of justice and revenge. Featuring cameos by Pam Anderson, Angelina Jolie, and Amy Winehouse as the Emperor's daughter. Featuring enough special effects to overcome the utter lack of directing ability. Also stars Keanu Reaves as God.

Re:Sure, why not?

[pisto_grih]

You seem to be having trouble righting with your computer, why not donate it to Travis?

Re:Sure, why not?

[Hognoxious]

or anything else that he might use to right with ever again.

His set square?

Re:Sure, why not?

[Apparition-X]

Well, I am not trying to get work as a screenwriter in Hollywood, am I? Grammar Nazis.

Re:Sure, why not?

[Nathrael]

Actually, I'd be very, very glad if someone did that movie. Just imagine how well suited it is for a good old MST session.

Re:Sure, why not?

[Psmylie]

Slashdot Reply Rule #1: Never pass up the opportunity to be funny at someone else's expense

:P

Re:Sure, why not?

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to be having trouble righting with your computer, why not donate it to Travis?

sometimes I have trouble lefting, but I work it out

Re:Sure, why not?

[enoz]

I thought rule #1 was: Never mention Kuro5hin?

I'm curious to see whether I get Off-topic or Troll for this.

Are you sure ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Please don't spoil original !

Re:Are you sure ?

[elrous0]

Bah, don't worry. I'm sure Keanu will do a fine job as Decker.

Re:Are you sure ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Decker

Deckard

Re:Are you sure ?

[Tony Hoyle]

Oh god.. don't give them ideas.

Re:Are you sure ?

[glwtta]

Bah, don't worry. I'm sure Keanu will do a fine job as Decker.

At first, your post made me cry on the inside, but come to think of it, he probably would. He's got that whole "is he or isn't he a robot" vibe down - he's been doing it in every movie he's ever been in, it would finally make sense here.

Also: Deckard

Re:Are you sure ?

[blind biker]

Why not have Kuchner in that role? Dude!? That would be rad!

Re:Are you sure ?

[jbezorg]

Are you crazy? The movie would be nothing more than Deckard stopping Replicants with well placed trash cans.

Batty: Proud of yourself, little man?
Batty: This is for Zhora!
Batty: This is for Pris!
Deckard: Trash can... remember a trash can!
Batty: Trash can? What are you talking about...

Re:Are you sure ?

[dubbreak]

And then Harrison Ford can play Johnny in the Johnny Mnemonic sequel?

I'm not fully opposed to a sequel of Blade Runner (though I am adamantly opposed to a sequel of Johnny Mnemonic). Yes it has a huge probability of going horribly wrong, but if it had Harrison as the lead at least it would stand a chance. Find some look alike for the girl replicant (replicants don't age) and give it a shot. It could be interesting. Of course if Deckard was actually a replicant, then using Harrison wouldn't make much sense...

Bah, fuck it. I changed my mind. No way it could be good. It's been too long and the original is too much of a cult classic for anything to stand up to it now. It's bloody 2009! Why didn't you try this in the 90's? Now it will just sully everyone's memories of how good the original was and possibly ruin a bunch of film careers.

Re:Are you sure ?

[blandthrax]

Keanu? Shia LaBeouf has my vote.

Re:Are you sure ?

[Enderandrew]

See him as an alien in The Day the Earth Stood Still. Same thing going on.

Re:Are you sure ?

[gEvil (beta)]

(though I am adamantly opposed to a sequel of Johnny Mnemonic)

I absolutely agree. You shouldn't mess with perfection.

Re:Are you sure ?

[bigstrat2003]

Now it will just sully everyone's memories of how good the original was...

I have never understood this mentality a bit. You know what I do when I don't like some follow-up to a book/movie/whatever I like? I ignore it. It doesn't ruin the original for me in any way. Seriously, is someone putting a gun to your head and forcing you to watch the sequel you don't like? Just ignore it if you hate it!

Re:Are you sure ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoa.

Re:Are you sure ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you crazy? The movie would be nothing more than Deckard stopping Replicants with well placed trash cans.

Batty: Proud of yourself, little man? Batty: This is for Zhora! Batty: This is for Pris! Deckard: Trash can... remember a trash can! Batty: Trash can? What are you talking about...

a true LOL post!

Re:Are you sure ?

[SweetDrake]

Forget Keanu. It's been a while since Will Smith last ruined some big sci-fi classic.

Re:Are you sure ?

[Moekandu]

(though I am adamantly opposed to a sequel of Johnny Mnemonic)

Um, you don't want anyone to do Neuromancer?

Re:Are you sure ?

[syousef]

Bah, don't worry. I'm sure Keanu will do a fine job as Decker.

And here's a picture of him getting ready for his upcoming role or should that be roll:
http://www.photoshoppix.com/modules/coppermine/albums/userpics/10002/keanu_reeves.jpg

Re:Are you sure ?

[Noginbump]

But he can carry 80 Gigs of data in his head...

Re:Are you sure ?

[jbezorg]

*plays air guitar*

Brave New World...

[Cornwallis]

Leonardo Dicaprio in Brave New World? Great. I can't wait to see him running around on screen yelling "I'm the king of the world! Shit! Shit! Where's my soma?!?"

Re:Brave New World...

[MRe_nl]

SPOILER ALERT: Leonardo diCaprio (sp?) IS Soma.

Re:Brave New World...

[Opportunist]

Not quite. He can make me snooze and he can make me apathetic, but so far he failed to make me happy.

Thinking about it, maybe he could star in a remake of Soylent Green. I'm sure he'd be great in the name part.

Re:Brave New World...

[I cant believe its n]

"It was as if my brain went into protective mode and shut down to prevent damage." - Titanic survivor (the movie)

Re:Brave New World...

[PinkyDead]

What was wrong with "Demolition Man"?

Besides the obvious.

Re:Brave New World...

[Draek]

You know, if you had only seen Natalie Portman on the Star Wars prequels, you may also be tempted to think she's an horrible actress whose only claim to fame is a pretty face. A shitty director can make *anyone* look idiotic, and James Cameron isn't much better than our dear mr. Lucas.

Re:Brave New World...

[illegalcortex]

Yeah, cause that's like totally what he did in The Departed. It's in one of the hard to find deleted scenes.

Super Suck

[Irish_Samurai]

Without a Phillip K. Dick story to bastardize, this script could go into turbo-shitty land really fast.

Re:Super Suck

[Anonymous Coward]

It's been a while since I've read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, but even years later I remember the book and the movie as completely different animals, so to speak. The movie departs from the book so much, in fact, that to me it's really an original creation and the book still has yet to be made into a movie. In that sense, being outraged by Ridley's interest in making a sequel to his own movie is like being outraged by Dick deciding to write a sequel to one of his own books (which he fell just short of doing--he tended to repeat himself quite a lot, often revisiting the same themes and ideas again and again).

As for a sequel, there is plenty of untapped material in the original book to fill at least another movie (the emphasis on pets, Deckard's domestic life, Mercerism and the empathy box, Buster Friendly, the mood machine thing, etc). Forget about sequels for a minute, how about a "reboot"?

Blade Runner's universe and mythology is so rich and dearly loved by generations of geeks, that surprisingly often they are able to come up with some very compelling ideas of their own when they are called upon to embellish it. I recall being absolutely enthralled by Westwood's loving and insightful graphical adventure game for the PC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_(1997_video_game)), and K. W. Jeter's "Edge of Human" was diabolically clever in its plot structure and attention to detail (several of its key plot points were structured around mysterious script glitches in the original cut of the movie, such as Bryant's mention of a 6th replicant).

I don't necessarily trust some random crank I've never heard of out in the fandom to produce a worthy script, but I certainly trust Ridley Scott to hold out as long as it takes for the right script to come along, and do the Blade Runner universe justice.

Re:Super Suck

[Anonymous Coward]

There's large chunks of Dick's novel missing from the film. Mercerism isn't mentioned at all, the importance of mechanical animals is barely touched on, Deckard's relationship with the Replicants is altered. Granted, the underlying theme of what makes one human exists in both book and film, but that is a recurring theme in many of Dick's writings.

That said, anyone that makes a sequel to one of the greatest films of the Twentieth Century should burn in Hell.

Net a sequel?

[Seakip18]

I don't understand...are they fighting in an arena? Are they fishing for sequels? I'm confused. Unless Taco didn't have the 20 seconds to double check the headline for a typo.

Re:Net a sequel?

[kalirion]

They're obviously going for the ultimate cyberpunk by merging it with a Neuromancer sequel.

Re:Net a sequel?

[68kmac]

Unless Taco didn't have the 20 seconds to double check the headline for a typo.

... or the summary, for that matter. Say, what is this "Brave New Word" book mentioned there?

Highlander

[whisper_jeff]

Please take a lesson from Highlander: there can be only one.

Re:Highlander

[0racle]

So you want to see 4 really shitty sequels and maybe a shitty TV series?

Re:Highlander

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey now... Duncan may not have been Conner, but he was decent.

As for the movies... no comment.

Re:Highlander

[drb_chimaera]

Or at the very least the Matrix - There should be only one :)

Re:Highlander

[estarriol]

The TV series (after 1.5 seasons) was very far from shitty - it was better than anything bar the first 70 minutes or so of the only Highlander film. In other words, the TV series is really damn good.

Re:Highlander

[Gilmoure]

The one cool thing about Kevin Costner; refuses to ever do a sequel. Wish others in Hwoodland did that.

Re:Highlander

[illegalcortex]

Luckily for Kevin, no one has ever asked him to do a sequel.

(I kid, I kid. I'm actually one of the few people who enjoy his movies.)

Re:Highlander

[Gilmoure]

I liked Bull Durham, Tin Cup, and Dances with Hooves. Can't really see anyone trying to do a sequel to any of them but with Hollywood, never count out the stupidity.

Re:Highlander

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah then he just went and made "original" bad films.

Re:Highlander

[bigstrat2003]

Nah, the Matrix sequels were damn good, I honestly have no idea what anyone is bitching about. I'm guessing it's because I didn't see the first until the second came out, so I didn't have 4 years to build up impossible hopes in my mind.

Re:Highlander

[Roger W Moore]

Correction: we all wish there had only been one.

Re:Highlander

[radarjamer]

Please take a lesson from Highlander: there can be only one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highlander_2

Re:Highlander

[Foobar of Borg]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highlander_2

LIES!!! This is an ugly rumor started by people who believe extra-terrestrial reptilian humanoids really run the world. There was no Highlander 2 or 3, or anything else. Really. There wasn't! [sobs uncontrollably]

Re:Highlander

[Steve001]

Foobar of Borg wrote and included with a post:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highlander_2

LIES!!! This is an ugly rumor started by people who believe extra-terrestrial reptilian humanoids really run the world. There was no Highlander 2 or 3, or anything else. Really. There wasn't! [sobs uncontrollably]

Sounds like part of the plot of Martian Successor Nadesico (where Earth is at war with an enemy called "the Jovian Lizards").

Heinlein, please?

[R2.0]

Since Scott has a track record of putting out decent science fiction cinema, could we PLEASE get him to do some Heinlein? Or, if that's not "percussive" enough, some Niven-Pournelle? A shortened version of A Mote in God's Eye should have enough bang-bang to keep the kiddies happy, and cool aliens that turn from "advanced peaceful society" to "Freakish monster hoards" by the end.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[$RANDOMLUSER]

For Niven-Pournelle, give me a movie version of Lucifer's Hammer. Comet hits Earth, doesn't destroy the world, just civilization - you know, two weeks of no deliveries to your local grocery store or gas station. As they say, hilarity ensues.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[kalirion]

Careful, if you ask for Heinlein you'll just get The Puppet Masters starring Tom Cruise.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[Hognoxious]

Seconded. I'd give both my right hands to see good CGI Moties.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[Anonymous Coward]

Might I suggest the Rama trilogy by AC Clark. Granted there was a movie listed as made in IMDB but it's not been released (or finished?).

Re:Heinlein, please?

[fermion]

He has a lot of good books, but it would be hard for hollywood to make them into a two hour film. Short stories are better.

His later works could be made indie of hollywood. Job, A comedy of manner comes to mind. Friday would sell tickets, or To Sail Beyond the Sunset. Some action, compressible.

I think we are all waiting for A Stranger in a Strange Land miniseries.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[phorest]

I JUST got that message from Amazon today:

Hello from Amazon.com.
We're writing about the order you placed on January 27 2009 08:31 PST (Order# 003-4511132-3261008).
Delivery of your package has been delayed due to weather or a natural disaster. UPS will deliver the package as soon as possible. We apologize for this unavoidable delay and appreciate your patience. The items listed below are included in this shipment (Tracking Id '1Z415@@@@@@@@@@@'):

Re:Heinlein, please?

[SQL Error]

He has a lot of good books, but it would be hard for hollywood to make them into a two hour film. Short stories are better.

Have Spacesuit, Will Travel could work, or The Door into Summer. Or Glory Road. Include the nude beach scene with Star at the beginning and you've sold it to your audience already.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[nicodoggie]

Yep, a Heinlein movie would be great! They should make Stranger in a Strange Land. The orgies would be epic!

Re:Heinlein, please?

[Deltaspectre]

On one hand, they could be ridiculously amazing CGI

On the other hand, they could be crappy costumes...

On the gripping hand, they could be leftover muppets

Re:Heinlein, please?

[icebrain]

YES!!!

Let's do Starship Troopers correctly, with the powered armor, drops, and (most importantly) keeping the same thought-provoking message as the book. I actually did storyboards of the opening sequence once; I can see it perfectly in my head...

Let's do The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, too. And Mote would be great, as would Scalzi's Old Man's War (though this one more just for fun).

Re:Heinlein, please?

[Gilmoure]

Naw, Footfall! I wanna' see Michael take off and fry alien baby elephant ass!

Or Ringworld. It's a straightforward enough story (crash land, have to escape, fights and sex scenes) with great SF graphic scenes. Is something majority of population could 'get' without straining a brain cell.

I can also see C. J. Cherryh's Foreigner series being a long arc tv show like B5 or Firefly.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[drb_chimaera]

While a truly excellent book I don't think it would suit a movie - way *way* too much would have to be cut out to make it work. What I would love to see is it turned into a standard 24-episode TV series.

Of course the problem then is that if it was successful you'd farce the prospect of someone trying to write a follow-up *shudder*

As has been mentioned elsewhere, short stories would probably be a better place to look for inspiration for a movie, and in keeping with that I would humbly put forward Inconstant Moon for consideration

Re:Heinlein, please?

[R2.0]

The scripts for the follow ups could be based on the Ringworld sequels - they may be a lower grade of SF, but they are a damned sight better than what gets accepted for scripts these days.

I'd like to see Niven's short stories done up Twilight Zone style, but that kind of anthology TV hasn't worked in many years.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[R2.0]

I believe you mean "with Donald Sutherland".http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111003/

Re:Heinlein, please?

[drb_chimaera]

Ah sorry, I was replying to the suggestion of Lucifer's Hammer - when I started typing my response there were no replies, by the time I posted there were a couple. Apologies for the lack of clarity.

In saying that I'd be all for a Ringworld movie or series too - so long as it was left in the hands of someone other than the usual gibbering idiots that get SF movies these days. As you say, the two sequels would be equally suitable for use as followup material.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[mcgrew]

IMO a movie version of A Mote in God's Eye, if done well, would make an even better movie than the book, parts of which I thought were a little slow.

I'd like to see someone do some Asimov without horribly fucking it up. Somebody did Nightfall and it sucked so bad I thought I was in a hurricane named Hoover. I, Robot bore no resemblance whatever to the books (I, Robot and The Rest of the Robots). Bicentennial man wan't all that bad, but it wasn't all that good either.

I want to see the Foundation trilogy (all ninety seven volumes ;). Forward the Foundation would make a GREAT action flick, what with Hari's twisting and his son's big knives, the gardner assasinating the emperor, etc. Who would you cast as Seldon? As Demerzeel?

Re:Heinlein, please?

[Mr. Foogle]

One problem with a Ringworld movie is that hordes of the clueless would assume it was ripped off from Halo.

But .. yes. Seeing Ringworld on the big screen would be awesome. And Kzin!

Re:Heinlein, please?

[meringuoid]

In saying that I'd be all for a Ringworld movie or series too - so long as it was left in the hands of someone other than the usual gibbering idiots that get SF movies these days. As you say, the two sequels would be equally suitable for use as followup material.

Three sequels. Unfortunately.

You've really got three big problems with a Ringworld adaptation. First off, you need to make a convincing kzin. You don't want Speaker-to-Animals to look like he's about to announce how grrrrrrrrreat a breakfast cereal is. That's going to be difficult. Second, you need to make a convincing puppeteer. If you thought a kzin was going to be difficult, now you're really up against it. Third, if you're going to go on to the sequels, you need to get the audience to accept that all hominidae are descended from space monsters even though the other mammals apparently aren't - and you've got to explain all about the Pak lifecycle and tree-of-life and how they're so psychotically devoted to their descendants, all without the audience getting bored.

Oh, and another problem with the sequels: good luck filming a rishathra scene without everyone either laughing or threatening to firebomb the film studios.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[MichaelSmith]

Careful, if you ask for Heinlein you'll just get The Puppet Masters starring Tom Cruise.

Couldn't be worse than the last Puppet Masters movie.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[DinDaddy]

THen we'd have to listen to an illiterate chorus of how they stole the idea from Halo.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[MichaelSmith]

Or Ringworld. It's a straightforward enough story (crash land, have to escape, fights and sex scenes) with great SF graphic scenes. Is something majority of population could 'get' without straining a brain cell.

Ummm maybe. You need a good team to turn an SF book into a movie. Books contain a lot of background and explanation which can be really hard to incorporate into a movie script. Ringworld had a lot of background in other known space stories and readers who were confused could always go back and read them.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[Gilmoure]

Hah!

Re:Heinlein, please?

[Joe Tie.]

I want a ringworld movie! I was just reminded a few weeks back that the sci-fi channel was supposed to make a miniseries of it. Long enough back that it seems yet another case of a ringworld deal falling through.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[MichaelSmith]

Friday could almost be the Blade Runner sequel. I certainly consider it cyberpunk.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[MichaelSmith]

Have Spacesuit, Will Travel is almost coming into its own. It is set about now and could easily be slanted to a modern environmentalist theme.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress could be epic but I wouldn't want to run the risk of a misfire. It would be hard to get right.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[MichaelSmith]

IMO a movie version of A Mote in God's Eye

I fear that the bits left in would just look like Star Trek.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[Gilmoure]

Ideally, it'd be 2 almost 2hour long movies, similar to the extended LotR movies. But not a sciffy channel mini-series. Please, God, not that!

Re:Heinlein, please?

[AaronLawrence]

I actually think that would be a fairly dull movie in some ways. If done like 2001, very slow and thoughtful, it would be good, but nobody is going to make it like that these days.

Re:Heinlein, please?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or Ursula Le Guin, always wanted to see Left Hand of Darkness, particularly the change from one sex to the other :)

too lazy to create yet another account...

Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[onion2k]

I don't get the whole "this sequel is terrible, it shouldn't have been made!" thing. You don't have to watch it. The fact it's been made doesn't affect the original in any way whatsoever. Chill out.

Besides, there's an outside chance it could be really good. The Bladerunner idea is a great starting point.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Aladrin]

They're under the (mistaken) assumption that the author would write something they would like, instead, if they didn't write this.

They're pretty much totally wrong, of course. If there was something better they could do, they'd already be working on it.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[ubrgeek]

I disagree. For folks that have a passion about a world created by a movie, then a crappy sequel taints that world. For some of the examples that have been posted, having a sequel to Highlander (even with the esteemed Mario Van Peeples *ugh*) ruined the story by shredding the conclusion of the first. "There can be only one, except for this other guy, so make that two. Yeah, only two. Unless we jump to the future, if that's cool?" The fourth Indiana Jones was so terrible, I refuse to accept the stories as anything more than a trillogy. Some movies are as good as they are because of how they end. A sequel - in the case of a story that wasn't designed to be multiple episodes (see "Rings, Lord of the") seems to eliminate the important element of Conclusion that completes the first movie. Exactly what would a sequel to Close Encounters of the Third Kind bring us?

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[isecore]

The fact it's been made doesn't affect the original in any way whatsoever. Chill out.

Except that it's mere existence will taint the original. We who haven't seen a godawful sequel will still have to content with all the zombies out there running around shouting things like "the second one was soooo much better".

If there's only one movie, it will stand on it's own. As soon as a classic movie is turned into a franchise, then the quality and what made the movie a classic will disappear - no matter if you ignore it or not. It'll get turned into yet another money-machine where Hollywood chops off it's own heads in order to make a profit.

Besides, there's an outside chance it could be really good.

No, it'll be a crappy FX-driven horrorshow without any of the gravitas of the original. Just look at the crap that a majority of studios spew out. That's what we'll get. Even if Ridley himself directs it (doubtful) it'll still be a cardboard cutout in comparison.

I mean, I still cringe at the fact that there exist book-sequels to the movie. Much less would I want an actual movie-sequel to it.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[neoform]

I think it's more about soiling the memory of something good.

It's kinda like when you meet a hot girl, you hit it off, then your friend tells you she has a penis.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Lumpy]

dude... did you even watch Doom, how about Judge Dredd?

People committed suicide in the theaters over how bad those movies were.

Riots in the streets for 12 days, total dead was 15,000 opening weekend alone.

Do you really want that shitty of a movie to happen again?

DO YOU?!!?!?!

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Rary]

For folks that have a passion about a world created by a movie, then a crappy sequel taints that world.

Which takes us right back to the GP's original point: "You don't have to watch it."

The Highlander sequels did nothing to ruin the original classic for me, because I never saw them, and never will.

So, here's my advice. When/If the movie comes out, wait until everyone else has seen it so you can get some reviews, then decide whether or not you will go see it based on those reviews. If everyone says it sucks and "taints the world" of the original, then stay away from the theatre.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Covert Penguin]

I don't get the whole "this sequel is terrible, it shouldn't have been made!" thing. You don't have to watch it. The fact it's been made doesn't affect the original in any way whatsoever. Chill out.

You obviously don't have a 10 year old son whose appreciation for Star Wars or Indiana Jones has been irreparably damaged by his having watched what should have never been a 4th installment in the franchise before seeing the original.

Besides, there's an outside chance it could be really good. The Bladerunner idea is a great starting point.

Let me tell you about my mother...

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly what would a sequel to Close Encounters of the Third Kind bring us?

- Cooler looking aliens.
- The return of Richard Dreyfuss? Maybe crazier this time.
- A reason why they visited.
- The answer to everyone's question... WTF was that red dot spaceship and WTF piloted it?
- Another cool alien theme music.
- Muppets.
- scantily clad women in space.
- cooler looking, scantily clad Muppets. In space.
- more money?

The possibilities are endless.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[mlwmohawk]

The fact it's been made doesn't affect the original in any way whatsoever.

I completely disagree. 100%

Look at "The Day The Earth Stood Still" I am a fan of the original and think the new one sucked more than anyone will admit.

The Earth "standing still" was a warning, not a conclusion. If they had the power to make the earth "stand still" why, in the new one, would the aliens choose to kill all the humans first? The new one just sucked. The plot changes made to make it a "green" message made it stupid.

The original was written and acted by the "A" list of their time. The sequel was done by the "C" list of our time.

It "taints" the artistry and message of the first.

I can go on, "Time Machine," "War of the Worlds," etc. I can just bet that the new "Star Trek" movie is going to KILL any hope of a return to an optimistic and philosophical "Star Trek."

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Darundal]

I'll agree that the first one sucked bad (although the majority of that was in the second half of the film, which seemed more like a hastily cobbled together amalgam of things instead of, you know, a well thought out progression), but in this one making the Earth "stand still" was more a side effect of what it took to stop Gort, it wasn't the intent of the alien's to deprive Earth of modern technology.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Darundal]

Not first, remake. Sorry, that is what I get for not using the preview button.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[nurb432]

The sequel to 2001 is another good example of why you don't want to do this.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[mlwmohawk]

but in this one making the Earth "stand still" was more a side effect of what it took to stop Gort, it wasn't the intent of the alien's to deprive Earth of modern technology.

I think you misunderstand the plot. The plot was to save the earth from man's horrible horrible ways. Their first solution was to just kill us. Then, after Klatu decides, maybe, we should be allowed to live, he just renders our technology useless.

Even if the "stood still" is an artifact of stopping GORT, it still means it would have been possible to render our technology useless to begin with.

Either way, the movie was stupid. The moment John Cleese debates Klatu about being on the precipice, I know that intellectual lightweights were behind this one. To assume an advanced race would merely overlook this obvious point is just stupid, and heralded in the rest of the stupidity that was this steaming pile of drek.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[ciderVisor]

Look at "The Day The Earth Stood Still" I am a fan of the original and think the new one sucked more than anyone will admit.

Oh, I'll admit that until the cows come home. Jeeeeeeeez, it was bad. BAD. Badbadbadbadbadbadbad.

I can go on, "Time Machine," "War of the Worlds," etc.

I saw WotW for the first time on t'telly the other night and I thought it was great; Certainly good enough to exist along with the original. The camera investigating the cellar bit was well creepy.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[mewshi_nya]

Speaking from experience?

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

For folks that have a passion about a world created by a movie, then a crappy sequel taints that world.

Exactly: The Matrix, Star Wars.

Both "tainted" by the sequels.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Kingrames]

"The fact it's been made doesn't affect the original in any way whatsoever."

Uwe Boll.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[16K Ram Pack]

It just depends. Some sequels really work because they are like new stories with the same characters, or add something based on where the last film finished.

While The Godfather has a satisfactory conclusion, the sequel works brilliantly. Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, Aliens and T2 likewise. I also quite like Predator II, despite it having little relevant to Predator.

But a lot of sequels are made for reasons of nothing but money, and often do things like mess around with the "universe" of the story.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[kentrel]

Which is why everyone who remakes a Shakespeare play is a total hack, right? If they were any good they wouldn't bother directing yet another adaptation of his work, they'd be writing something original. Right?

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[TheSambassador]

Which takes us right back to the GP's original point: "You don't have to watch it."

But you kinda do.

Everyone holds out hope that the sequel MIGHT be good. The fact that it's related to a story you loved will be enough to at least make you download it to check it out. You can't KNOW that it'll be awful until you see it (though you can have a pretty good gut feeling).

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[bennomatic]

Hear hear! If there's a SlashFilmMakers site out there, I'll bet that in their "Your Rights Online", there's an article about how the geeks on /. want to limit their right to free expression.

I would, however, suggest that there might be a nice way for "me, too!" filmmakers to make it clear that they are simply building on others' work, so that nobody is fooled into thinking that some lost work of PKD has been found and turned into a movie.

I figure the prequel was already made... AI: Artificial Intelligence. And yes, it was one of the worst movies EVAR.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Rary]

You can't KNOW that it'll be awful until you see it (though you can have a pretty good gut feeling).

Then you have no one to blame but yourself for not listening to your gut.

Honestly, if you're so enamoured with a movie that another movie can impact your enjoyment of that first movie, then don't take the chance.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[BlueParrot]

Awwww, come on. Judge Dredd was hilarious. As a sci-fi, sure it was shit, but consider it a comedy and it's not that bad. Then again, that holds for most of Stallone's acting...

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is somewhat incorrect and intolerant reasoning. Do you have any idea on how many crappy movies have been made from brilliant books? Does that mean we would have to forbid this as well?

Every time a book I love is made into a movie, I wait for the reviews to appear and then decide whether or not to watch the adaptation. I choose not to see the movie if I get the impression that seeing it will taint my idea of how the book should look like. And when I go see the movie anyway I am fully aware that it could taint my original idea but it does not take my love for the book away or reduces it in any way (even if the movie is a total abomination).

Get it? If we would have followed your advice we'd never have seen the original Blade Runner in the first place because chances would have been big that it had been a crappy movie to begin with! Luckily for all of us that there are people willing to take the risk to create an adaptation, a sequel or a re-imagination without whom we would have never seen the original BladeRunner or Heath's stellar performance in Dark Knight.

To repeat: "You don't have to watch it."

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[xant]

There are only two Indiana Jones movies. What is this "Temple" people keep mentioning?

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Zebedeu]

You're right.

You should never take chances. It's safer that way.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Right! Like that douche Akira Kurosawa (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050613/).

And that Leonard Bernstein, too (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055614/).

And even that anonymous git who did http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0147800/

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[bigstrat2003]

The fourth Indiana Jones was so terrible, I refuse to accept the stories as anything more than a trilogy.

Exactly! Not the bit about the fourth movie, I thought the movie was on-par with the originals (worse than 1&3, better than 2)... but you have hit on exactly what's required. You need to pretend the thing you like doesn't exist. It's not hard. No one has any excuse to claim that something "ruined the original" for them, because you can just ignore it. This idea that one work can somehow taint another, separate work is absurd.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[LandDolphin]

Except that it's mere existence will taint the original. We who haven't seen a godawful sequel will still have to content with all the zombies out there running around shouting things like "the second one was soooo much better".

So my ability to like or dislike a movie has the power to taint a movie for you? Kind of cool to know I have that kind of power over you.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[binary paladin]

I dealt with this intelligently after seeing the 3rd Matrix movie: I let my friends see the sequels to Pirates of the Caribbean and tell me what they thought. The negative reaction was enough for me to say, "All right, we'll pretend those never happened and enjoy the first one on a stand alone basis."

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Thumper_SVX]

Exactly what would a sequel to Close Encounters of the Third Kind bring us?

Cocoon?

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Thumper_SVX]

Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, Aliens and T2 likewise. I also quite like Predator II, despite it having little relevant to Predator.

I agree with all of these... except that in some of those cases those sequels begat Alien:Resurrection, Alien vs. Predator and the Sarah Connor Chronicles. Of course, this just proves your later point... ;)

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me tell you about my mother...

So Danzig is Brion James?

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Darundal]

I didn't misunderstand the plot. The GORT-killer EMP was something they only thought to use to stop GORT. Plus, it wasn't save the Earth from man's wicked ways, it was can man change, and then if no, save the Earth from man's wicked ways. We have no idea what Klaatu would have done if that Chinese guy hadn't told GORT that humanity couldn't change. Klaatu's actions show either an amazing display of functional fixedness or a belief that if humanity can't change, then taking away it's technology now would be useless because when we manage to regain it we would still be as destructive as when he arrived.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Chris Burke]

You're right.

You should never take chances. It's safer that way.

If you're so sensitive that watching a bad movie will actually damage your love for a different movie, and this is actually painful for you... Then yeah. You should probably not take many chances in life, due to insufficient stomach for the most pathetic of consequences.

There is nothing Blade Runner 2 can do that will reduce my enjoyment of Blade Runner. I pity anyone who can't say that.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[neoform]

Riots in the streets for 12 days, total dead was 15,000 opening weekend alone.

That sounds like the makings of a good movie.. when does that come out?

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[HTH NE1]

Aliens vs. Replicants?

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Roger W Moore]

If everyone says it sucks and "taints the world" of the original, then stay away from the theatre.

That still means that some poor bastard has had the original destroyed for them just to save you. Had the film never been made then nobody would have had to suffer.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[stephencrane]

The main reason to discourage the creation of poor-quality sequels is the risk you run of a better-quality sequel or related story not being made in the future. For instance, let's take Starship Troopers. (Please.) As much as I love my "Rico, you know what to do!" inside-jokes, it was a pretty crappy movie. Not a Judge Dredd-grade Superfund site, but pretty bad. Not only did it suck the oxygen out of any room that might be used to discuss another version with a stronger story, it also reduced the chances of any other sci-fi large-scale infantry story ever being made into a good movie. _Armor_ by John Steakley will likely never be made into a movie, partially because of Starship Troopers and partially because Carpenter (and the studio) fucked up _Vampires_. Arguably, _Armor_ is a better source for a thoughtful movie script than _Starship Troopers_, even though _Armor_ was essentially the same plot. We're much less likely to know now, and for that I blame the film _Starship Troopers_. (I also blame Verhoeven, but he's forgiven because he also made _Flesh and Blood_ and _Robocop_.)

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[PotatoFiend]

It's kinda like when you meet a hot girl, you hit it off, then your friend tells you she has a penis.

Bonus?

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Johnny Mnemonic]

No, it's more like learning that her sister has a penis.

As long as you don't fuck her sister [go to the second movie], it shouldn't really matter.

I haven't ever seen the third Matrix. I don't plan to. My experience of the first two remain unchanged. The experience of the first two have only been changed for people that didn't take that advice, and went and saw the third one.

Furthermore, the only way to stop crap movies from being made is to not go to them. It's the only power we have, so exercise it.

Well, I suppose you could torrent and distribute it. If the MPAA is accurate, that does them even more damage.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

While Highlander II was a bad movie, it's not because it was a sequel. It was simply bad. You want good Highlander content? Try the television series, which had some excellent content. Now that's a worthy continuation in the same world.

And believe it or not, I almost liked the cartoon. Almost.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[pyro_peter_911]

It's kinda like when you meet a hot girl, you hit it off, then your friend tells you she has a penis.

It was a Rocky Horror Picture Show party. I was appropriately dressed and you were seriously drunk.

Peter

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[LihTox]

Just think of bad movie sequels as being ridiculously expensive, overexposed fanfiction.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only does it often hurt that individuals view of the series/title, but it can hurt the reputation of that title.

The matrix was an incredible movie, and by itself it is beautiful, though most people associate that movie with the two sequels that followed and now view it as mediocre at best.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Trillian_1138]

It's kinda like when you meet a hot girl, you hit it off, then your friend tells you she has a penis.

Always with the trans-bashing. (Not you specifically, although who knows, but society in general.)

As a girl with a penis (who would like to think of herself as hot, but won't presume to assume she is) I can't even begin to tell you how amazing it makes me feel to be a member of the one group that's completely open-season for bashing. You'd never get away with nigger jokes, much of popular culture has become hesitant using 'gay' as an insult, but make a joke about a tranny and it's instant hilarity.

The Colbert Report, How I Met Your Mother, almost every news report involving a trans person, everything surrounding Thomas Beattie... Rarely is there the slightest hesitation in trans-bashing.

So please, on behalf on trans men and women everywhere, use a little discretion. Whether or not you intended it, your post just heightened and strengthened all the doubts I have about myself and how others view me. It hurt, in a very real and substantial way that I wish I could just shrug off, but can't. I know I'll never be the picture-perfect ideal of femininity, but neither will 99% of the 'real' women out there. Please don't contribute to the hate that's out there, because it does affect people.

-Trillian

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Franklin Brauner]

The Highlander sequels did nothing to ruin the original classic for me, because I never saw them, and never will.

What kind of a geek are you?! Highlander 2: The Renegade Version, on laserdisc, is an orgiastic experience. Mulcahy, who was the director of the first Highlander, made a very interesting film out of the sequel -- with grand operatic moments, terrific action scenes -- and brought an interesting evolution to the Highlander mythology. You owe it to yourself to not be such a fundamentalist and at least investigate the sequel. It's a good time.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Trees. And probably better phones...........

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[MichaelSmith]

The sequel to 2001 is another good example of why you don't want to do this.

I am in two minds about this. 2001 had its own little world, created by Kubruck. 2010 had to be in a different world because it was a more conventional film. I don't think anything from 2010 feeds back to my impression of 2001. They are too different.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Zebedeu]

I was making a more general point, but ok.

Still I agree with the point about bad sequels ruining a story. For example, Star Wars ep. 1 was pretty good (I hope I don't get crucified for saying this). Not excellent, but good.

Now I've been a fan of Star Wars ever since I watched the first three episodes as a child. I'd imagine having a lightsaber and fighting the evil sith on cool places like the top of a bridge, and stuff like that.

When I saw Jar Jar I thought it was stupid, but so were the Ewoks, that's ok, maybe Lucas wants to appeal to children.

But when he introduced the stuff with the midichlorians I was a bit pissed. It kind of ruined the mysticism of the star wars lore right there. I wasn't completely mad, it was nothing that a light dose of healthy denial couldn't solve, but still I was pissed that the universe I had come to love since I was a child was being disrespected so callously.

And that's the problem. It's like Tolkien stopping Lord of the Rings one chapter short and having everyone breaking into a happy dance with Sauron as the uncoordinated comic relief -- it puts the whole story you were enjoying in a crappy perspective.

Yeah, you can just ignore the movie altogether, but that would be like not reading the last chapter of LOTR. I won't stop doing something because I'm afraid of a possible disappointment, and in any case, for me curiosity will always kill the cat.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[neoform]

There's no hate here, but if someone has a penis and is dressed and acting like a woman, that's deceptive. You can't blame someone for having a negative reaction when, without a word, you're already lying to someone who's interested in you.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently enthusiasm is a foreign concept to you. Some people care about things past their immediate and fleeting utility, imagine that.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[SwabTheDeck]

Exactly what would a sequel to Close Encounters of the Third Kind bring us?

I suppose that depends on what kind of math you're using. Possibilities:

Close Encounters of the Third Kind 2
Close Encounters of the Third Kind Part Deux (the aliens speak French)
Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind
Close Encounters of the Sixth Kind (not listed on the Hynek scale, but I think that's where the alien species gives you hyperdrive technology in exchange for a date with your mother)

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Trillian_1138]

First, I appreciate you taking the time to respond, and I'm sorry if I came off a little strong. Whether or not to disclose one's status as trans is a very difficult and contentious issue in the trans community. On the one hand, there's something similar to your point of view: "Whether you like it or not, people will feel deceived if they find out you have a penis and you're presenting as a woman (or a vagina and you're presenting as a man)". And, on the other end of the spectrum there are trans people who have a very different attitude: "It's not my responsibility, as someone who is trans, to cater to and attempt to manage the assumptions, biases, and sexual insecurities of others."

The issue I still have with your reply:

There's no hate here, but if someone has a penis and is dressed and acting like a woman, that's deceptive. You can't blame someone for having a negative reaction when, without a word, you're already lying to someone who's interested in you.

is the narrow definition of 'woman.' I completely agree that 'has a penis' doesn't fit most people's ideas of what it means to be a woman, but neither does a host of other characteristics many 'real' women have and don't feel required to disclose. Gender is much more complicated than most people assume, and related to much more than what's between your legs.

I guess, for myself, I come down somewhere in the middle of the two extremes. I completely agree with you that, if I date without disclosing my status as trans, I'll run into people who will feel deceived. However, I don't know that I agree it's deceptive. That is, I think I have a practical obligation to disclose my status as trans to avoid potential hardship, heartbreak, and (to go to the ugly extreme) being killed. But I don't agree that I have a moral obligation, or that not disclosing my status as trans is deceptive, or that calling myself a woman is "lying."

So, again, I really appreciate you being willing to engage in a discussion, rather than just being mean. But I'd ask you not to use language like "deceptive" or "lying" when describing trans women (or men, although the issue is usually bigger around trans women) for the same reasons I said before: it dismisses my ability to self-identify, and holds to a narrow and idealized definition of gender that most people can't actually meet.

-Trillian

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Omestes]

Relax, I don't care. Really, not one bit.

I'm not going to alter my language or humor for your benefit. If your ego feels weakened, that is your problem not mine. Relax, get over it. People are morons, people are intolerant of difference, etc... I'm sure there is a whole group of people who hate me lurking out there somewhere, but I don't care. I like myself. If you don't, then you really can't blame others. You can't expect people to go out of their way just for your benefit.

There is no real harm, since we all decided to let things affect us. Thus affect is a choice, and rests on our individual shoulders.

If you don't like the way someone speaks, who cares? Ignore them, walk away, punch them in the face.

But then again this is coming from someone who calls his gay friends "fags", and his multi-ethnic friends whatever the offensive racial slang is of the day (who return the favor).

We're all too damn sensitive.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Trillian_1138]

Thanks for responding. I think, on the one hand, you're right: we're all too damn sensitive, and I (and most people) need to take a chill pill and not pay attention to language/culture that they find offensive.

That said, I think it's naive to say that there's no real harm, and we all decide to let things affect us. Certainly, to a point, that's true. And I'm making an effort not to let every little trans joke get to me because, again, you're right - I can't expect people to go out of their way for my benefit.

But I think it's naive to say we have total control over what gets to us, or that words can't cause real damage. I grew up with societal reinforcement at a familial level and a cultural level that it's OK to be black or white, a man or a woman, Jew or Christian, gay or straight (to a lesser extent), etc. Certainly, there were those who pushed exclusion/bigotry/hatred, but generally it's easier to find culture saying it's OK to be any religion or whatnot.

It's much more difficult to find culture saying it's OK to be trans.

So I will certainly try to have thicker skin (as perhaps we all should) but I would ask you to use discretion when a joke or analogy might hurt someone's feelings.

-Trillian

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly what would a sequel to Close Encounters of the Third Kind bring us?

A Fourth kind?

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Chris Burke]

I was making a more general point, but ok.

Sure, but the GP wasn't.

Yeah, you can just ignore the movie altogether, but that would be like not reading the last chapter of LOTR. I won't stop doing something because I'm afraid of a possible disappointment, and in any case, for me curiosity will always kill the cat.

Huh? If you stop reading before the last chapter of a book, then you haven't finished the book. When the credits roll, the movie is over and done. The next movie that you're comparing to the last chapter doesn't even exist yet!

Did you stop watching Star War movies after finishing the original trilogy? I don't imagine what else you could have done, since there weren't any more for another 16 years; the end always seems like a good place to finish for me. It stood on its own for all that time.

See, if the last chapter of LotR was really a dance party (the movie was close, minus Sauron :P), that would be a bad book and it would have always been bad. Yet the actual book was good. This is when someone else comes along later, someone who half the time isn't even the same person as who made the original (or is but has been rendered retarded by pride, isolation, and wealth), and tacks on a dance-party ending to the sequel, how does that affect the original work?

But I guess it does somehow. So you can't avoid seeing the movie even though you're sure it will be terrible because of curiosity or a need to "finish" something that was done until the new thing came out, and when it is terrible it ruins everything you've seen before. That seems very sad and self-destructive to me. I'm glad I don't think that way.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

no, the guy who writes "Romeo and Juliet 2: Capulets Out For Justice!" is a total hack. Not necessarily a director who reinvents a play, which by the way, is a living piece of art, unlike film...however, more to the point is that most of the time, that director *is* a hack.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Zebedeu]

I'm not arguing it destroys everything that came before, but it puts it in a crappy perspective.

For example, now when you see the Star Wars original trilogy (IV, V and VI) you hear these guys talking about the force, and the mysticism is ruined. You can't take that back.

It doesn't ruin the movie altogether, but it does crappify it, even if just a little bit.

Not that I like the original trilogy anymore -- I tried seeing it again a few years ago and that Luke guy is unbearable. I was just using it as an example.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, basically agreed. Saw it in the cinema and I was seriously disappointed, especially at the removal of helmet / appalling ending, but it's not THAT bad when watched again in the right mindset, i.e. drunk / stoned. Definitely a missed opportunity, though.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Rary]

Just a note on the Star Wars point: the prequels don't even remotely fit in with the original trilogy. If you watch the original trilogy, absolutely every single piece of dialogue that even vaguely references "the past" (ie. events that would later be detailed in the prequels) is blatantly contradicted in the prequels. It's like George Lucas had never even seen the original movies when he decided to make the prequels.

As a result, I tend to view the two sets of trilogies as similar stories, but not actually related. The prequels haven't ruined the originals, because they aren't, in my mind at least, a part of the same story.

But then again, I do still love the original trilogy. In fact, I just watched it again a few weeks ago with my girlfriend, who was seeing it for the first time ever.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[sakari]

Doom was surprisingly good for a franchise movie. Although it really didn't capture any of the Doom mood, but anyway, for a no-brainer action movie it was good.

And the FPS sequence was something different, I liked it.

Judge Dredd on the other hand .. WTF! The Judge takes off his helmet in the first 5 minutes or something.

Re:Ignore it if you don't want to watch it.

[Steve001]

Chris Burke wrote and included with a post:

You're right.

You should never take chances. It's safer that way.

If you're so sensitive that watching a bad movie will actually damage your love for a different movie, and this is actually painful for you... Then yeah. You should probably not take many chances in life, due to insufficient stomach for the most pathetic of consequences.

There is nothing Blade Runner 2 can do that will reduce my enjoyment of Blade Runner. I pity anyone who can't say that.

There is also the chance that the sequel might be better than the previous movie. Compare Star Trek - The Motion Picture to Star Trek II - The Wrath Of Khan, for me the sequel was much better than its predecessor. It is much the same with the rest of even-numbered Star Trek movies.

I think that one reason sequels are sometimes not good is they rehash much of what they thought made the original work, rather than making the new story work on its own merits. For me, I will take a chance of a sequel and hope that it is at least good. If its bad, I can hope that its so bad its good.

Forever War..

[Sporkinum]

I guess we can thank GW for starting the forever war.

But seriously, I hope they don't fuck it up. One of my favorites!

Re:Forever War..

[dargaud]

Haldeman's Forever War is one of my favorite too. For those interested, it's been already adapted into a truly excellent comic book by belgian artist Marvano, and there's an english version of it.

Re:Forever War..

[Quiet_Desperation]

I guess we can thank GW...

Shhhh. There, there, it's over. He's gone. Let it go... let it go...

As long as this is going to suck...

[Corpuscavernosa]

... let's just go big and get Uwe Boll in on it.

Re:As long as this is going to suck...

[Opportunist]

Quite seriously. If I ever happen to run that guy over with my car, the skid marks will be behind the body. Because I have to stop to make sure I hit him right.

What about a prequel?

[The Yuckinator]

I think this is a terrible idea. The original story didn't really lend itself to a sequel, and given that the whole "electric sheep" aspect of the book wasn't really dealt with in the movie (at least not in any sort of enlightening detail) I'd much prefer to see a prequel that examined the society from the story.

I was very dissapointed that the movie didn't even touch on Mercerism, which is a central theme in the novel, and I think would make for an engaging angle in a screenplay. Deckard's desire for a live animal, the Owls at Tyrell, the electric sheep he bought and kept on the roof of his building, trying to convince his neighbour that it was real.... There's so much more that could have been explored that got cut from the first movie (not that I didn't like it). I think a prequel that dealt with the world surrounding the events in the original Blade Runner would be a much more entertaining story than having some hack gin up a 'sequel' for no other reason than putting bums in seats.

Re:What about a prequel?

[SilverJets]

Sequel or prequel won't matter. What you are looking for in a sci-fi movie doesn't exist. That's the big difference between true science fiction and what hollywood calls science fiction. You will never see true science fiction on the big screen because the average, movie going, lobotomized, audience member wouldn't understand what they were watching.

Re:What about a prequel?

[mlwmohawk]

What you are looking for in a sci-fi movie doesn't exist. That's the big difference between true science fiction and what hollywood calls science fiction.

I mostly agree, but occasionally some get through...

2001 & 2010
Blade Runner
Soldier
Alien
Predator
Total Recall
Terminator
6th Day

With varying degrees of hollywoodization, these are good "sci-fi."

To a lesser degree, Minority Report and Paycheck.

Then on T.V. sometimes one is surprised by cyclic rehashing of "Outer Limits" or "Twilight Zone."

If you need a sci-fi fix, find "The Man From Earth" by Jerome Bixby.

Re:What about a prequel?

[mcgrew]

You could have said the same thing about LOTR, and you would have been wrong there, too. I can point to a lot of excellent SF movies that actually makes one think, Total Recall comes to mind off the top of my head.

Re:What about a prequel?

[SilverJets]

Yeah, you're right. Total Recall made me think. It made me think "Why'd I pay to see this campy crap?"

Re:What about a prequel?

[SilverJets]

The average movie audience member isn't there to think. They are there to be entertained. If it has sex, defiance of authority, and explosions it will be a hit at the box office.

Hollywood isn't interested in making movies that make people think. Making people think doesn't bring in big profits.

Re:What about a prequel?

[SilverJets]

I should have written "isn't made any more" rather than "doesn't exist". My mistake. Yes they exist, but you have to go back a bit to find them.'

"Logan's Run" and "THX-1138" come to mind.

From your list I would agree with 2001, Blade Runner, and Alien. 2010 not so much. But the rest are just further examples of what Hollywood calls sci-fi. Don't get me wrong they're entertaining, but my response to the OP about what he was looking for still pretty much stands.

Re:What about a prequel?

[mlwmohawk]

From your list I would agree with 2001, Blade Runner, and Alien. 2010 not so much. But the rest are just further examples of what Hollywood calls sci-fi. Don't get me wrong they're entertaining, but my response to the OP about what he was looking for still pretty much stands.

Actually, I was very careful creating that list.

I'll accept Predator was borderline, but it was a very good social commentary on violence and technology.

The original "Terminator" was quintessential sci-fi. Unfortunately they cut the scene where the building in which they kill the terminator was shown to be cyberdyne.

I defy anyone to point out where the rest of the list is lacking. Each stand on their own as science fiction -- where the potential impact of science or scientific discovery is explored in literature.

6th day, cloning.
2001, artificial intelligence
Blade Runner, artificial humans
Soldier, the dehumanizing effects of battlefield conditioning as originated in worled war II, and brought to its logical extremes.
Alien, the exploitation of alien life forms and the corporate disregard of people.
Predator, it was sci-fi like, and fun, so its on my list.
Total Recall, the ability to implant memories and the potential misuse.

Re:What about a prequel?

[Anonymous Coward]

Another idiot who thinks he's so much smarter than everyone else.

Robert Heinlein

[taozilla]

I for one would love to see a big screen adaptation of Revolt in 2100 or Methuselah's Children. I think that Revolt would have special significance for all the Alex Jones followers!

I Don't Even Care Anymore

[eldavojohn]

Please No, Net a Blade Runner Sequel

Who cares at this point, really?

Disclaimers: I'm not an economist, I love Philip K. Dick & I could care less for Blade Runner the movie.

I see it as there being finite number of movies Hollywood has the money to make each year. I'd rather see a Blade Runner Sequel than the fourth or fifth Austin Powers movie (can you believe that Myers is on contract to make two more?) so why not? I mean, like the article says, the novel is out there, it's not like if they transform that story into a movie or make their own script it's going to affect my perception of the original Blade Runner or Philip K. Dick novel. What the article fails to mention is there are actually four Blade Runner novels ( Blade Runner 3: Replicant Night (1996), Blade Runner 4: Eye and Talon (2000)). Go ahead, turn them all into movies, you know the fans will reward you for it with piles of cash. It's better than Legally Blonde: Supreme Court Captain!

I think there have been other movies based on this novel--what of Spielberg's AI? Was that not a butchered version of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? also? I don't see this as quite cut and dried as CmdrTaco ("don't-ruin-perfect?"--I would hardly call any of this material perfect). I mean, I bitch and moan about movies like Snakes on a Plane & The Transporter 8 as I read great novels by great sci-fi writers like Philip K. Dick's The Man in the High Castle (which, although controversial, I opine would make a fine movie)--why not use these great stories that are already out there to allow good directors to create (potentially) great films?

I like to watch original movies from Warner Independent Pictures and Fox Searchlight Pictures but the public and I seem to disagree about where the money in Hollywood should be spent so why do I care that they rehash old crap and dilute brand names when that's how the market rewards them? Can you be critical of them making money? Is that not why they're in that business? Whore yourselves out for all I care, I'm not going to watch it unless there's a Rifftrax for it.

And let's not forget that there are good examples of this actually working out there like The Shining, The Shawshank Redemption, The Lord of the Rings, even Batman Begins & The Dark Knight grossly overshadow Batman Forever & Batman & Robin.

So I ask you, why do you care? You aren't forced to see the movie and if you do, it's going to give you something you love and cherish the most: something to bitch vindictively about.

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[elrous0]

Actually, I would MUCH rather them make "Legally Blonde 5: In Her 30's, Tits Starting to Drag Now" than "Blade Runner 2." Why? Because a sequel can actually tarnish an original, that's why. It's easy to forget the genuine creepiness of a movie like "A Nightmare on Elm Street" when it's buried under a ton of awful sequels--turning the once-intimidating Freddy Krueger into little more than a glorified stand-up comedian. It's easy to forget that "Friday the 13th" was actually a pretty clever twist on "Halloween" (spoiler alert: it's a slasher movie where the legendary killer turns out not to have been the villain), because it gets lost in the morass of paint-by-numbers sequels.

In the case of a movie like "Legally Blonde," who gives a shit if it gets a crappy sequel? You can't tarnish a turd. But in the case of a classic, why sully it with a terrible sequel? Do you really want to see a "Highlander 2" turn your beloved immortals into mere aliens?

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[PotatoFarmer]

I think there have been other movies based on this novel--what of Spielberg's AI? Was that not a butchered version of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? also?

AI was based on a Brian Aldiss story - Super-Toys Last All Summer Long

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[Isao]

Was that not a butchered version of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?

I believe it was based on Super-Toys Last All Summer Long by Brian Aldiss, though I can understand how a viewer might believe it was based on a PKD story.

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[Tipa]

... and it had about as much to do with its parent story as "Blade Runner" did to "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?".

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[Andy_R]

I would be really disappointed if KW Jeter's "Bladrerunner 2: The Edge of Human" was made into a film, not because I think the original movie shouldn't be desecrated, but because PK Dick's protege Jeter has written some truly excellent books, and this isn't one of them.

"Dr Adder" would make an stunning movie. "The Glass Hammer" would make an great movie, and if Ridley Scott really wanted a challenge then there's the amazing "Farewell Horizontal".

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[gad_zuki!]

> Go ahead, turn them all into movies, you know the fans will reward you for it with piles of cash. It's better than Legally Blonde: Supreme Court Captain!

The solution to crap isnt more crap in the genre you like, its actually less crap overall. Thanks for playing "lets stop stupidity with more stupidity!"

>you know the fans will reward you for it with piles of cash.

This says a lot about science fiction fans. They'll give cash not if the product is quality, but if it involves robots or sexy aliens. The idea that sci-fi fans are any smarter or more discriminating than Legally Blonde fans is laughable.

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[eav]

The books I would like to see made into a movie are the lensman series, now I don't think E.E. Smith was a particularly good writer, and the series is definitely as chauvinistic in every way as the period was, but for sheer scope and grandeur they are hard to top. With a good script writer they would make an awesome translation to screen. While not a great writer there was noting wrong with Smiths ideas, certainly the lensman series is better plotted, with better ideas, than the Star Wars series.

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[bigstrat2003]

Because a sequel can actually tarnish an original, that's why.

No it can't! The only way it has power over you is if you let it. If you choose to let something ruin the original for you, that's your own damn fault. Where the hell do people come up with this idiotic idea that something can mystically tarnish the original?

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[NitroWolf]

quote?I think there have been other movies based on this novel--what of Spielberg's AI? Was that not a butchered version of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? also?/quote?

AI was the worst movie ever made. I have never come out of a theater more disappointed or disgusted. I want those two hours of my life back. Spielberg OWES ME TWO FUCKING HOURS!

AI is the movie to judge all bad movies by.

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[vux984]

AI was based on a Brian Aldiss story - Super-Toys Last All Summer Long

And it would be hard to miss the Pinocchio theme.

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[geekoid]

I get the same thing if I talk abiout a Pink Floyed remix by Eric Prydz.

"Yuo've ruined Pink FLowyd!!! AAAAhhhh. That right, all your albums were stolen last night and replaced with the remix...you twit.

People get emotional attached to something like a movie or music and it's all down hill from there.

Re:I Don't Even Care Anymore

[Anonymous Coward]

I could care less for Blade Runner the movie

So... You care about it?

Already done.

[Stone Rhino]

It was already done: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldier_(film)

It was written by David Peoples, who co-wrote the script for Blade Runner. By his own admission, he considers Soldier to be a "sidequel"/spiritual successor to Blade Runner.[1] It also obliquely references various elements of stories written by Philip K. Dick (who wrote the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, on which Blade Runner is based), or film adaptations thereof.

Re:Already done.

[drinkypoo]

If this new movie bears twice as much relation to Blade Runner as Soldier did (fine movie, btw) then it can hardly do any harm to the original (even in our memories.)

Just leave it be

[sircastor]

Blade Runner was a great movie. It's reputation and storyline ought to be left alone. If you want to write a story, it shouldn't be dependent on the world that it's set in. Fundamentally, if the story is sound it will function in whatever world you set it in. You don't need to put it in the world of Blade Runner.

"NET" a Blade Runner Sequel

[Anonymous Coward]

To those people who have tagged this "typoinheadline" you are wrong. Obviously, the Slashdot editors know that the name of this sequel is called "Net" and in that context, the headline makes perfect sense.
Or maybe, because "Please no" was right before... maybe they meant the Russian word for "no".... "Nyet"?

Net a Blade Runner Sequel

[wiredog]

Net a Blade Runner Sequel? huh? Is "Net" the name of the proposed movie? Odd, if so.

Re:Net a Blade Runner Sequel

[Anonymous Coward]

Cool. Where can I net this Blade Runner sequel?

Re:Net a Blade Runner Sequel

[Anonymous Coward]

Sandra Bullock is a replicant.

I think

[0vi_king]

I think there is only one man who can handle the delicate balance of the needs of a sequel for the science fiction classic that is Blade Runner, he is the man with no name....uhh...

Paul W. S. Anderson..!

What about an EMS recombination?

[scourfish]

We've already tried it - ethyl, methane, sulfinate as an alkalating agent and potent script treatment; it created a plothole so lethal the script was dead before it even left the table.

Re:What about an EMS recombination?

[Minwee]

We've already tried it - ethyl, methane, sulfinate as an alkalating agent and potent script treatment; it created a plothole so lethal the script was dead before it even left the table.

And yet Michael Bay is still on board to direct it.

Re:What about an EMS recombination?

[Sabathius]

Then a repressor plot-point; that would block the operating cinematographer.

Don't panic!

[Hognoxious]

Calm down, everybody. There's no evidence that George Lucas will be involved.

Re:Don't panic!

[Anonymous Coward]

Calm down, everybody. There's no evidence that George Lucas will be involved.

George Lucas directing Keanu Reeves, what could be worse!

Gaff

[DrugCheese]

I've always been interested in the Gaff character.

Like .. how does he make those wonderful origami? oy!

Also he has one of the best quotes from the movie, from any movie.

Re:Gaff

[jo_ham]

He learned to fold origami on Caprica.

Re:Gaff

[Anonymous Coward]

haha

Where can I get the VO DVD?

[professorguy]

I'm a huge P.K. Dick fan. I've read most everything he wrote (not all his work is great, but there are plenty of gems).

And I'm a huge Scott fan. When I saw Alien in its theatrical release, it changed my life--I was stunned by its greatness.

But I have to say that "Blade Runner" needs the Voice Over. The director's cut requires help--the heavy editing and VO were desperation moves, but correct ones.

I consider myself a cinema buff, not a member of the great unwashed with no sci-fi exposure for context. So save your flames. Regardless if you agree or not, I prefer the original version. So how do I get the version with VO on DVD?

Re:Where can I get the VO DVD?

[Darundal]

If you honestly want that, you can get the four disc collectors edition off of Amazon for $23, which has every cut save for the workprint cut. Don't take this as a flamepost, but can I ask how you feel the narration helped? I was more than able to follow what was happening without the narration.

Re:Where can I get the VO DVD?

[Urban Garlic]

Not sure if you need to do this to get it, but if you get the "Blade Runner Five-disk Ultimate Collector's Edition" (yes, that's really what it's called, and yes, I have it), it includes the original US theatrical release, with the voice-over.

I was never sure about the voice-over, myself. I saw that version first, in theatres, back in the day, and I thought the voice-over was annoying, a bit too "Magnum P.I.", clubbing me with context. When I saw the "director's cut" later on, I liked it better, but of course, I had already seen the first one, so I knew the context. It's easy to imagine that if you see the "director's cut" first, it'd be pretty confusing.

I do think there needs to be less voice-over, particularly towards the end. By that time, the context is established, and the awesome visuals really do work better on their own.

IMHO, obviously.

Re:Where can I get the VO DVD?

[Nylar4]

The Voice over edition is included on the 4 or 5 disc set of the Blade Runner Final Cut DVD http://www.amazon.com/Blade-Runner-Four-Disc-Collectors-Harrison/dp/B000UBMSB8/ref=tag_dpp_lp_edpp_ttl_ex

Re:Where can I get the VO DVD?

[Hognoxious]

Presumably you've seen it with the voiceover so you know what it says. In which case, why not read it out yourself? Why do I have to do all the thinking round here?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

there ARE authorized sequel books though

[Oo.et.oO]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_2:_The_Edge_of_Human

Re:there ARE authorized sequel books though

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_2:_The_Edge_of_Human

Except that wasn't "authorized" by Dick. The original story was complete as written, at least as much as you can call any Dick story 'complete'. The whole point of many of his stories is that you DON'T know for sure.

As for the idea of making a movie from "Brave New World", it can't be done without ruining the story, or being classified as Child Porn.
Exactly how do they plan on filming the "little children engaged in their erotic games" ?

Re:there ARE authorized sequel books though

[Anonymous Coward]

There's already been a film adaptation of Brave New World, starring Leonard Nimoy.

If my memory serves it was awful, but not quite as awful as Hollywood could make it.

Re:there ARE authorized sequel books though

[Anonymous Coward]

Philip K. Dick was poor. He "authorized" anything he could get paid for. Why do you think his stories get butchered in film so often?

Re:there ARE authorized sequel books though

[Anonymous Coward]

As for the idea of making a movie from "Brave New World", it can't be done without ruining the story, or being classified as Child Porn. Exactly how do they plan on filming the "little children engaged in their erotic games" ?

*fap fap fap*

Re:there ARE authorized sequel books though

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, you must be new to Hollywood. If you suggest something like that that is not made out of FAIL then they kick you out, so keep quite and keep dating the hopefuls with the nice implants.

Re:there ARE authorized sequel books though

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Rutger Hauer is right for his roll.
2. Harrison Ford is right for his roll.
3. Story is good.

3 strikes! You are out of Hollywood!

Re:there ARE authorized sequel books though

[Anonymous Coward]

Philip K. Dick died in 1982. That "authorized sequel book" was published in 1995. If you know anything about the complexities of PKD's family life, you should know that "authorization" from his survivors or estate most certainly does not imply authorization by PKD. Dick refused to write or permit to be written a novelization of the film Blade Runner. So NO, there ARE NO authorized sequel books, only books that claim to be authorized sequel books.

Oh, was it authorized by the company that made Blade Runner? Doesn't count.

Re:there ARE authorized sequel books though

[Scrameustache]

Exactly how do they plan on filming the "little children engaged in their erotic games" ?

You show kids, then you show adults talking about children and their sexuality.

Recommendation

[Fnord666]

one of the writers behind Eagle Eye

They say this like it's a positive recommendation or something. It's not.

Re:Recommendation

[NitroWolf]

one of the writers behind Eagle Eye

They say this like it's a positive recommendation or something. It's not.

No shit - that was the first thing I thought as well. Eagle Eye was absolutely horrible. Why would you want to be associated with that?

or a prequel?

[gbjbaanb]

In fact, lets go the whole hog and make a Prequel.

We can have an early prototype replicant, maybe with big ears and a lisp; a hot chick - playing the original Sean Young; an evil corporate manager who subverts the original scientists and managers, betraying them to turn a humanitarian Tyrell company into a defence contractor-corporation with a production line consisting solely of pleasure units and soldiers; and it wouldn't be complete without a ton of modern, glossy CGI effects - no dark shadows and definitely no smoking!

It'd be a huge box-office hit.

What could possibly go wrong?!?!!?

Donning the old Zen-Master stuff

[Opportunist]

To disperse some wisdom.

You see, grasshopper, story is like tea leaves. When you have good tea leaves, you will have good tea. You take tea leaves, you take hot water, and you have good tea. You have wonderful tea. You savour tea, and you like tea so much that you think, you want more tea. So you take the leaves out of the water and save them, then you bring hot water again and you pour it over the tea leaves. But alas, no good tea. It tastes stale and bland. The flavor all gone.

If you want another cup of tea, you have to find new tea leaves. Using the old one will only give you bland, tasteless and generally worthless tea.

Re:Donning the old Zen-Master stuff

[marquis111]

You could try replicating the tea, but, alas, that just results in something that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea.

=============
You should see what it looks like from over HERE.

Re:Donning the old Zen-Master stuff

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Yes, but if you take the best tea leaves and boil them in a combination of mud, propylene glycol, and poo, it doesn't matter how good the leaves are - you still have a toxic stinky mess.

Re:Donning the old Zen-Master stuff

[Opportunist]

*bows*

Indeed, wisdom can be found in those words. Knowing how to make tea is just as important as good leaves, or the best leaves go to waste for he does not know how to treat them right.

To phrase it differently, should you have the opportunity to make tea with Uwe Boll, make sure you pour the steaming water on his lap, so at least we shall be spared with another generation of crappy movies.

Re:Donning the old Zen-Master stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless you drink certain types of oolong, at which time you can drink the tea again and again from the same leaves and it takes quite a while before it gets worse. Ten Ren's 913 comes to mind. Bit touristy and expensive but still quite good. Of course if you go to the tea growers yourself and pick up what the locals drink there you're bound to go beyond the tourist stuff in terms of quality but let's face it; who's going to dig that deep for tea?

Short stories...

[Kindaian]

The universe of Blade Runner is ripe for a short stories sequel... ;)

Which companies will die this time?

[jgeiger]

Can we have the MPAA and the RIAA do some product placement please?

Bladerunner is untouchable!

[Vethraxx]

Having run motion picture film for 20 years, I have to say that the film Bladerunner is untouchable. There should never be a sequel made or a remake. The fact that there was even "The Final Cut" smacks of herecy. Not to mention the removal of Deckard's internal monologue in "The Director's Cut". The books written by K.W. Jeter are a shining example of why fan authors or fan directors should not be given the chance to taint the mythos created by the movie. If there is to be a sequel, let Rigley Scott kill his own creation. Just leave the Holly of Hollies alone.

Re:Bladerunner is untouchable!

[morgan_greywolf]

Having run motion picture film for 20 years,

You've been working in the projector room for 20 years? Damn. That sucks! ;)

*ducking*

Re:Bladerunner is untouchable!

[paimin]

Dude, working at Blockbuster doesn't count.

A spinoff might work, a sequel will WRECK IT!

[plasmacutter]

I'm sorry hollywood, but the tanking economy and your new-low in cowardice do not excuse you going on an all out rampage against scifi classics.

Sequel = BAD,

A proposal

[Hal_Porter]

I have written screenplays for a trilogy of Blade Runner sequels based on the novels by K W Jetter. I made a few changes though, Deckard has a wise cracking CGI robot sheep sidekick to lighten the mood.

If you all PayPal me a total of $1million dollars I won't send them to Uwe Boll.

Re:A proposal

[Darundal]

Damnit, I say we get a fund going on the off chance that this guy isn't a scammer, because what he is threatening is worse than losing a million bucks.

this is the only sequel I need:

[Trent Hawkins]

The only necessary continuation to Blade Runner is BGC

Too much to handle

[chord.wav]

I don't know you guys but I have just knew about this Bladerunner sequel and Leo "I'm the king of the world" DiCaprio doing Brave New World in the same post.
Too much for me to handle in a single day... I'm going offline until tomorrow.

without flaw

[noshellswill]

The phrase "without flaw" comes to mind when I think of BLADE RUNNER. But, people are not movies.

The Forever War, hooray...

[estarriol]

...that *could* actually make a great movie, but more importantly would get more people to read the book (which is my introductory Sci-Fi text I kept waving a fantasy types who dismiss Sci-Fi as "not their thing").

Re:The Forever War, hooray...

[weiserfireman]

My fear is that a movie adaptation of The Forever War will be a god-awful as the movie adaptation of Starship Troopers.

Re:The Forever War, hooray...

[estarriol]

That would have a certain form of symmetry, I suppose. Personally, I trust Ridley Scott, who seems to make his Sci-Fi films out of purest awesome.

Scripts sent to...

[furby076]

At Comic-Con in 2007 Ridley said, "If you have any scripts, you know where to send them...

...the trash can.

Maybe authorized, but not good.

[FlameWise]

I read that and it's rubbish. Wouldn't touch it again. You'll beg for it to end.

A good thing

[Corson]

Ridley Scott has rejected the idea in the past. If he is now willing to make a Blade Runner sequel IMO that is good news. It would be too much, I guess, to hope seeing Harrison Ford or Sean Young play in the sequel but I keep my fingers crossed. Blade Runner was and is my favorite movie.

DiCaprio ...

[thrillseeker]

... as long as by the end of the movie he is a pale blue icicle, slowly sinking down into the deep blue sea, then I'll watch it with a smile on my face

Re:DiCaprio ...

[JonJ]

Or gets shot. Either way, if DiCaprio dies, I'm watching the movie.

More interested in Cameron's Avatar & Battle A

[majorme]

I don't believe he is capable of making proper sci-fi movie. OK, Alien was great but then again Aliens and Alien: Resurrection are far better Alien movies.

Also, I never liked Blade Runner. It's dull.

James Cameron is the right man for this kind of job.

Kurt Russel -- Soldier

[mlwmohawk]

The movie Soldier is an amazing movie. Not that it is perfect, by any means, but Kurt Russel has about 12 spoken lines, but carries the whole movie by body language and facial expressions.

I am a closet Kurt Russel fan, and wish, in a better world, he got better parts. His acting is cartoonish because he gets cartoonish parts.

Similarly, I was joking with my son a few weeks ago about the movie "Tropic Thunder" and Robert Downey Jr. It is a awesome that Robert Downey has such a screwed up personal life, it means his talent and ability are relegated to "fun" movies like "Iron Man" and "Tropic Thunder" as opposed to boring movies like "Chocolat," "Cider House Rules," or "The Ice Storm." :-)

Re:Kurt Russel -- Soldier

[Anonymous Coward]

Correction; Kurt Russel's performance was amazing, elevating to memorable an otherwise appallingly bad and disposable Road Warrior rip-off. I always felt sorry for him for the obvious passion he brought to the role, the rest of that travesty is so far beneath it.

Re:Kurt Russel -- Soldier

[mlwmohawk]

Correction; Kurt Russel's performance was amazing, elevating to memorable an otherwise appallingly bad and disposable Road Warrior rip-off.

The movie itself was pretty good sci-fi. The romance was useless, but the "super soldier" training, and progression to actual breeding, was a very good theme.

Alien is already a movie in the same universe

[FlameWise]

... only space bound, or at least so Ridley Scott himself suggests in the DVD commentary.

Too bad Hollywood so loves respinning the old yarn instead of doing another bold movie altogether.

Fuck it.

[hack slash]

Let's turn it into a tv series instead, cos everyone knows tv spin-offs from films always work...

I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[blind biker]

I have given up hope to see any worthwhile SF movie, in this century. After the 70's, they have been progressively dumbed down. One of my favourite SF movies was "The Andromeda strain", from 1970 (IIRC, won't bother checking with IMDB). It was good, hard-ish SF without unnecessary drama and NO brainfarts. Then they decided to remake it as a two-part mini series last year, and obviously, they HAD TO dumb it down. Because we all know that people today are dumber than they were 30+ years ago... right? I don't hope to see such underrated gems as was "Logan's run", "Demon seed", "2001: A space odyssey" etc.

I blame the "Star Wars" saga for this. Oh, I can hear a rumble, as if a billion slashdotters rose up in horror (I have some karma to burn), but that's what I believe: "Star Wars" had little to do with SF - it should be called a costume western - and it didn't make your neurons work. But it was grand, it had interesting special effects. In brief, it was entertaining without taxing your brain. Just like any James Bond movie does. And the producers of Star Wars made gobs of money, and so, that became the blueprint for future SF movies - make them dumb and entertaining.

So today we only have pseudo-SF movies, like "Minority Report", "Battlestar Galactica" and so forth (boy, am I going to be modded down today!) but whenever someone tries to make a movie even slightly intellectually challenging, like "A.I." he/she gets vilified and suffers dismal box-office failure.

So, fuck the movie industry and fuck the dumb audience. I have no hope for a good SF movie anymore. I'll stick to books - Stephen Baxter and others are still churning good, brain-stimulating hard-SF worth my time.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[plasmacutter]

but A.I. did suck.

The ending was a massive digression and the premise, while dark, was not brought to the levels of, say, elfen lied, which did a much better job of portraying a dark, dissociated view of human corruption.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[blind biker]

"A.I." stirred in me an ocean of questions about consciousness, the self and sentience. Many of the conclusions and doubts I have today, have their roots in the thoughts that the movie has induced in me. Maybe it could have been better - and the short story by Aldiss is also great, but it has a different "bent" than the movie. BOTH are worthwhile, in my opinion. And we all know that opinions are like hemorrhoids, as every asshole has them, including me and you - but alas, the situation is similar to the "Blade runner" movie WRT the Philip K. Dick story/novel ("Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?"). Both are great, but they are different. They are different art forms, too, so it's a bit like comparing apples to oranges, but I feel that the Dick novel is a dark masterpiece, and if you don't feel slightly nauseated but glad to have read such a deep, thought-provoking SF, you have not appreciated it completely. Still, I also like the movie.

But these are just my opinions, and any asshole has a few, as we all know.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[Quiet_Desperation]

I was with you right up until you said "Stephen Baxter". ;-) Although I did like the one about the ship that got stranded in the universe with the higher force of gravity.

Maybe you just need to explore some independent films or imports.

Ever seen "Primer?" It's a small SF film about time travel made on a budget of about $12,000 and has a fairly convoluted plot. The filmmaker created a flow chart on the film's web site to diagram the time loops.

How about "Man From Earth?" It's a small film about a man revealing to some colleges that he is actually 14,000 years old, and their varied reactions to the news. The whole thing takes place in a single room.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gYh8W1-TF6_9OH_mztG9ssaZY2pwD95QSTDO0

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[Anonymous Coward]

...intellectually challenging, like "A.I." ...

Umm... did you actually SEE A.I.?
I'm betting the original story it was based on was interesting intellectually, but the movie completely destroyed the thinking points by giving the robots emotions and personality. The whole point of scenes like the circus was that the androids were just mindless machines doing what they were told, which made the boy stand out... but I feel that was completely lost in the movie. And don't even get me started about the ending... Stupid Kuprick....

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[DeadChobi]

SF movies haven't been getting dumbed down, they've been moving into social sciences. BSG contained a lot of sociological and psychological ideas, like that even humans in the same social group will fight over resources, that people are very good at holding grudges, that people will lay down for a year in order to survive for much longer. These were interesting as a foray into social science, but they lack the rigorous construction of hard science.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[Abcd1234]

but A.I. did suck.

Only because of that fucking ending. If that damn kid just froze at the bottom of the ocean, followed by a fade to black, I think the movie would've been much better. As it stands, it leaves a sickly saccharine aftertaste that made me want to gag when I saw it...

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[roman_mir]

Agree with you on most part, except on AI - that movie really turned out to be quite disappointing. And it wasn't even the story or the actors. The plot was simply uninteresting and old old old old.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[NitroWolf]

So today we only have pseudo-SF movies, like "Minority Report", "Battlestar Galactica" and so forth (boy, am I going to be modded down today!) but whenever someone tries to make a movie even slightly intellectually challenging, like "A.I." he/she gets vilified and suffers dismal box-office failure.

Did you just seriously say AI was intellectually challenging? There was nothing "intellectually challenging" about AI. It was simply the worst SF movie ever made, and that's saying a lot. In fact, it was SF in name only - you talk about costume western that is Star Wars (and I don't necessarily disagree) - AI is nothing more than fluffy drama tear jerker that tried WAYYY too hard with ridiculously unbelievable characters, plot holes from here to the moon and horrible ... absolutely HORRIBLE acting. There was absolutely NOTHING redeeming about AI, and the fact that you hold it up as something to be admired (intellectually challenging? Seriously?) leads me to believe you have absolutely no idea what good SF is. Your credibility in that department is pretty much shot.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[Enoxice]

Oddly enough, I just watched BOTH those movies for the first time last night!

They are both very good, but I wish Primer explored the interactions between and motivations of Abe and Aaron (and their various incarnations) a little bit better.

I hear Time Crimes (a spanish movie) is pretty good, I'm going to seek it out tonight.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[blind biker]

Oh yes, "Primer" is an excellent SF, though it doesn't quite have the tastiness of, say, "The Andromeda strain", but yeah, hard SF, and the ONLY time-travel movie that made sense, ever made. "Primer" is pretty unique, I have to say. I just didn't enjoy the production of it, very much. The actors did a great job, but the pace got either too slow or too fast (missing elements) at times.

And yes, I have also seen "Man from Earth". Another excellent movie, but is it SF? I, personally, think it's not. It's a bit like "K-Pax" or what the hell was the title. I'll give you that it leans more towards SF than K-Pax, but it just didn't tingle my SF-taste buds.

I am torn between friendly shaking your hand for finding two excellent movies (I am quite fond of both), and kicking your stupid ass for not liking Stephen Baxter. I guess I'll do the former, to spread love and peace, I guess.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Primer was a pretty good SF movie. Hard science, speculative plot. No spaceships, explosions, robots, or girls in saran wrap spacesuits. That's probably why you have never heard of it.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[Quiet_Desperation]

OK, the XeeLee *are* pretty cool. :) I didn't hate the books, I just wasn't terribly excited about them.

Yeah, I'd call Man From Earth an SF film. It postulates (well, implies thanks to the biologist) a mutation that grants immortality. No magic was involved. Speculative fiction?

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[Anonymous Coward]

Judging by the number of self-proclaimed intelligent people who utterly failed to grasp the ending of A.I., yes, it was intellectually challenging.

Even if it did have many other serious flaws.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[Microlith]

the premise, while dark, was not brought to the levels of, say, elfen lied, which did a much better job of portraying a dark, dissociated view of human corruption.

I don't belive it... someone trying to put Elfen Lied on an intellectual level with what would have been a Stanley Kubrick film.

Wow, just... wow. The only thing Elfen Lied is good for is the visceral rush guro fans get when they see characters torn to bits. That's it. Seriously.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[plasmacutter]

the premise, while dark, was not brought to the levels of, say, elfen lied, which did a much better job of portraying a dark, dissociated view of human corruption.

I don't belive it... someone trying to put Elfen Lied on an intellectual level with what would have been a Stanley Kubrick film.

Wow, just... wow. The only thing Elfen Lied is good for is the visceral rush guro fans get when they see characters torn to bits. That's it. Seriously.

Sounds like someone got touched in a naughty place by violent movies when they were younger.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[mqduck]

I blame the "Star Wars" saga for this.

In case you didn't know, many, many people blame Star Wars for the crappy state of movies of all genres today. Wikipedia:

Along with Jaws, Star Wars started the tradition of the summer blockbuster movie in the entertainment industry, where movies open on a lot of screens at the same time and profitable franchises are important. It created the model for the major movie trilogy and showed that merchandising rights on a movie could generate more money than the movie itself did.

Of course, it's commercialism that really made the movie industry the way it is today, not Star Wars, but Lucas has the dubious honor of having been the catalyst.

(Personal note: the childhood memory of mine that makes Star Wars kinda special to me is not so much the movies themselves, but going on the Star Wars ride at Disneyland not long after I saw it for the first time.)

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[blind biker]

Yeah, I've watched it. Excellent hard SF, and the ONLY good time-travel movie ever made. Sadly.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[blind biker]

Thanks. It's good to know I'm not completely alone.

Yes, commercialism in a broad sense - and it would be interesting to analyze how it has affected the intellect of the generations growing up from the 70s onwards.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate you for saying that.
I hate you even more for being right in almost everything you said.
But, since I am over 30 I'm not too mad. :-)

I would love to see some William Gibson or Neal Stephenson in the movies as well...

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[NitroWolf]

Judging by the number of self-proclaimed intelligent people who utterly failed to grasp the ending of A.I., yes, it was intellectually challenging.

Even if it did have many other serious flaws.

If by intellectually challenging, you mean "Why won't this square peg fit in this round hole?" then I agree with you. If you are implying anything more complicated than that, then you are completely insane.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[mqduck]

I asked a question further down in the comments for this article but received no replies. Perhaps you could help me:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1107129&cid=26650135

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[Microlith]

Article past freshness!

Sounds like someone got touched in a naughty place by violent movies when they were younger.

LOL no, I'm just calling out Elfen Lied out for what it is: A bad show with no redeeming features. All it has is the gore, and for some reason that gives it lots of fans.

There's no accounting for taste, as they say.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[blind biker]

Watch "Dark City".

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[plasmacutter]

Article past freshness!

Sounds like someone got touched in a naughty place by violent movies when they were younger.

LOL no, I'm just calling out Elfen Lied out for what it is: A bad show with no redeeming features. All it has is the gore, and for some reason that gives it lots of fans.

There's no accounting for taste, as they say.

There are studies out there which show the most incompetent people believe themselves to be utmost experts.

So, how does it feel to be an "expert" film critic?

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[verbalcontract]

I'd check out Sunshine by Danny Boyle. The plot's pretty tight while still paying surprising attention to scientific detail. The last third of the movie is noticeably weaker than the first two-thirds, but it's still a pretty good effort.

Re:I'm not worried: I just don't give a fuck.

[DarkEmpath]

Dude, if I had the mod-points, I would have modded you down, but not for any of the reasons you stated in your post.

I don't hope to see such underrated gems as was "Logan's run", "Demon seed", "2001: A space odyssey" etc.

How can you possibly think 2001 is underrated? It's been used as the benchmark for SciFi for decades. It's one of the most overhyped movies of all time. And Demon Seed? If you're talking about that boring-as-batshit movie where a computer gives birth to a baby, then it's impossible to underrate it, it was that bad. (I do agree that Logan's Run was underrated, though.)

There is good SciFi around, but you won't find it if you only look for big name movies by people like Spielberg. Mainstream SciFi is made for a mainstream audience. Of course it's going to have a lowest-common-denominator approach. Let the majority have it's Idol and Big Brother. Those that want more can find it. (Unfortunately on eMule and Torrents more often than not, as there's no decent distribution model for the long tail in movies.)

Its 15 years too late.

[nurb432]

If it was done soon after the first, it might have been good, even great. But the magic that made BR what it was is long gone. It needs to be left alone.

Please, don't ruin another classic.

J _ _ J _ _ B _ _ _ _

[Hognoxious]

If there was something better they could do, they'd already be working on it.

Assuming the writer's definition of better is the same as the fans'. I can disprove that fallacy in three words.

Think of it as fan fiction...

[Mr_Icon]

... and don't go to watch it.

*shrug*

There are worse things to come.

[ChienAndalu]

So I ask you, why do you care? You aren't forced to see the movie and if you do, it's going to give you something you love and cherish the most: something to bitch vindictively about.

You say this now.

May I introduce you to director Jospeh Kahn, and his impressive achievements, including a number of Britney Spears video clips and the movie "Torque".

Now watch closely what his latest project is.

Re:There are worse things to come.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear God, no... Nooooo!

Re:There are worse things to come.

[Hognoxious]

KAAAAAAAHN!.

Somebody had to.

Re:There are worse things to come.

[DinDaddy]

Kaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhnn!!!!

Pretend the above is all caps. Stupid filter.

Ack!

[neowolf]

I'd be much more concerned about a "Brave New Word with Leonardo DiCaprio" than a sequel to Blade Runner. Gag!

I've actually always thought a sequel to Blade Runner IF DONE RIGHT could be really cool. I suppose it is just because I watched the director's cut again last week.

Don't call it Blade Runner!!

[nicodoggie]

They don't have to taint a classic just because they ran out of ideas, they could just base it off the premise, change names and release it as something else.

no.

[hideouspenguinboy]

I hate this, and I wish that it would die. Bladerunner is epic to me - I remember being totally blown away seeing the opening sequence on a big screen at a local art museum for the first time. Follow that up by an actual science fiction story with only the merest tinges of the space adventure genre - it's an amazing movie that is best encapsulated without a sequel. That's the whole freakin' point! Is he 'human' or isn't he? and why? The questions don't need answered because they can't be answered directly. stupid hollywood.

I can see it before my eyes ...

[meist3r]

Shia LaBeouf as Rick Deckard
Mylie Cyrus as Rachael
Steve Carrell as Roy Batty
Michael Myers as Bryant

Shot by Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer. Soundtrack by The Jonas Brothers.

Re:I can see it before my eyes ...

[GPLDAN]

And a CGI animated Pris.

Re:I can see it before my eyes ...

[EvolutionsPeak]

On the upside, there is a small chance that the studio will collapse while they're all inside and the world's average talent will raise by 10%.

Re:I can see it before my eyes ...

[Dogtanian]

Michael Myers as Bryant

Michael Myers from Halloween? Sounds great!

They could get Jason from the Friday the 13th movies to play Gaff.

Advancement in visual technology.

[Anonymous Coward]

At least now with our current abilities on special effects we can see things we might not believe. Like: Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. Or watch C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.

Stuck here in the middle with you

[goombah99]

So does Chow Yung fat, do a little macbre dance to "clowns to the left, jokers to the right"? That would be interesting.

Re:Stuck here in the middle with you

[Chess Piece Face]

Chow Yung Fat's character became Mr. Orange (the cop), not Mr. Blonde.

Re:Stuck here in the middle with you

[Scrameustache]

So does Chow Yung fat, do a little macbre dance to "clowns to the left, jokers to the right"? That would be interesting.

I saw it about... wow, ten years ago. I seem to remember talking about the fact that it lacked the mind-fucking quality that Dogs had. So I'll say no.

By all means, make a sequel.

[DeadTOm]

At this point they've sucked dry and destroyed every other movie I came to love growing up, what difference will one more make? Really, what is one more giant, steaming turd on the pile?

NOOOO....

[Anonymous Coward]

Blade Runner meets the unibomber. Shudder.

Re:NOOOO....

[Tetsujin]

Blade Runner meets the unibomber. Shudder.

"Unabomber"...

The Best Quote from the Movie

[starglider29a]

...is in the voiceover at the end. Which Ridley dropped.

"...Rachel was special. No termination date. We didn't know how long we'd have together. Who does?"

Guess who is doing Neuromancer.

[ChienAndalu]

This guy is doing Neuromancer.

Re:Guess who is doing Neuromancer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Kaaaaaahhhhhnnnnnn!!!!

(I know, the 'a' and the 'h' are in the wrong o

Re:Guess who is doing Neuromancer.

[Anonymous Coward]

KAAAAHN!

Re:Guess who is doing Neuromancer.

[Terminus32]

I'm more excited about seeing movie adaptations of Gibson's Neuromancer & Huxley's Brave New World to be honest.

Re:Guess who is doing Neuromancer.

[Holi]

great Britney's director gets to ruin a mediocre but original plot.

Please Oh No!

[Anonymous Coward]

NOT a wretched sequel to the "Blade Runner" abortion of Philip K. Dick's best book.

The Hollywoodization of "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" excised all but one concept in the book: the protagonist hunts androids (oh no! let's call them "replicants"!). A depopulated Earth devastated by radiation... nah, let's make it OVERpopulated! Psychopathic androids with a parallel police department... nah, let's make the android leader a witness for antiwar sentiment! Mercer... Mercer? WTF, we can't make sense out of a Dickian "fake fake" Messiah! Write that suckah outa tha script!

And of course, Deckard CAN'T be married... he has to fly off into the sunset with the (android) girl!

Forever War?

[desertfish]

Wow, I disliked that book. Maybe some modern treatment in a film will improve the story. The interminable gay sex ought to be interesting, at least.

Re:Forever War?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, I disliked that book.

Obligatory: FUCK YOU, SIR!

Considering how many consider

[Shivetya]

the theater version to not be the best version how can we say this new movie would somehow affect the original when we don't agree which that is?

I actually liked the follow on novel exploring the involvement of the real Rachel and the end of the Tyrol corporation.

Oh hell yes

[rtrickey]

I've been wanting someone to do Forever War, well, forever. I'd rather someone *else* do it, but hey, I'll take it.

Terminator...

[Joe the Lesser]

Terminator II was 100 times better than Terminator I, but Terminator III was 100 times worse.

What does this mean? It's all about the script, not the material.

Re:Terminator...

[Anonymous Coward]

Cameron intended Terminator to be two movies. His story wasn't complete until Sarah and John took down Skynet.

The third movie tried to add to the story, even though the story was done, and failed miserably.

So... I guess the lesson is don't make a sequel to make a sequel. Make one if it's needed.

Re:Terminator...

[Anonymous Coward]

Terminator II was 100 times better than Terminator I

It absolutely was not!

I remember watching T1 when it came out and thinking 'wow' what a great film.

T2 was just fancy CGI graphics and 'more of the same' better script? please! Sarah connor was unconvincing and slightly OTT in T2.

T2 served no purpose at all and had it never been written nothing would have been lost, whereas T3 at least tied all the loops together even if it had become a bit of tired franchise by then.

Re:Terminator...

[Zardoz44]

It means sometimes you need to rinse the leaves before brewing. Sometimes, you can brew the same leaves many times without losing flavour. Tea analogy was a joke. Don't read too much into it.

Blade Runner occurred in 2019 - only 10 years away

[peter303]

It was 40 years when they wrote the screenplay.
Not bad guesses for some things.

Even more reboots

[Enderandrew]

Nightmare on Elm Street
Karate Kid
Candyman
GI Joe
Pink Panther
Street Fighter (not that there was much of a franchise to begin with)
Tron (this project has waffled between reboot and sequel, but is now being called Tr2n)
Terminator Salvation (technically a sequel, but one that isn't recognizing T3 as canon, and recast everyone to start a new franchise)
Land of the Lost
Fame
The Stepfather
Astro Boy
Sherlock Holmes
Hellraiser
Superman
Catwoman (a failed reboot, but a reboot none the less)

Sadly, I'm probably forgetting more reboots.

Re:Even more reboots

[Enderandrew]

And I just read today that they signed a new deal for an A-Team reboot, and a Tomb Raider reboot.

Re:Even more reboots

[Eponymous Bastard]

I'm still waiting for RoboCop.

At least as a guest in The Sarah Connor Chronicles....

Re:Even more reboots

[Enderandrew]

Last I heard, Darren Aranofsky has been in talks for a RoboCop movie, but there were differing reports from the producers on whether or not it would be a sequel or reboot.

Re:Even more reboots

[Steve001]

Enderandrew wrote:

Nightmare on Elm Street
Karate Kid
Candyman
GI Joe
Pink Panther
Street Fighter (not that there was much of a franchise to begin with)
Tron (this project has waffled between reboot and sequel, but is now being called Tr2n)
Terminator Salvation (technically a sequel, but one that isn't recognizing T3 as canon, and recast everyone to start a new franchise)
Land of the Lost
Fame
The Stepfather
Astro Boy
Sherlock Holmes
Hellraiser
Superman
Catwoman (a failed reboot, but a reboot none the less)

Sadly, I'm probably forgetting more reboots.

With TRON, I think it is more likely to be a reboot instead of a sequel since there have been two sequels already. The first, called TRON 2.0 was a video game that was a direct sequel to the movie. Recently, there was a comic book series called TRON that was a sequel to both the movie and the video game and continued the story.

With Astro Boy, the 1980s series was more of a retelling of the story from the 1960s series (which was based on the original manga), rather than a sequel or a reboot and allowed for better animation than the original series. The 2000s series, on the other hand, was a reboot of the story with vastly improved animation and with large changes from the original animated series (such as Dr. Tenma now being an actual villain unlike in the previous series). With the move to the large screen I think the movie version of Astro Boy will be another reboot (to make allowances for the limited screen time).

Re:Even more reboots

[Enderandrew]

After posting the list, I then also remembered the recent Hulk reboot, which was only a few years after the previous reboot.

Re:Even more reboots

[Anonymous Coward]

When was Street Fighter rebooted?

Are you talking about Street Fighter 4? I thought that took place between 2 and 3.

Sure, there have been quite a few annoying retcons, but as far as I know the series has never been rebooted.

Re:Even more reboots

[Scrameustache]

Terminator Salvation (technically a sequel, but one that isn't recognizing T3 as canon, and recast everyone to start a new franchise)

Really? GOOD!
T3 sucked so bad. So, so bad.

DUP!

[DarthVain]

What I wrote 2 days ago still holds true today.

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1104643&cid=26611749

A cool twist on Rachel

[jackspenn]

Since Rachel should in not age, I think it would be interesting if they used a CGI version based on the original actress.

Ender's Game

[Enderandrew]

I keep hearing how a studio won't sign off on a movie that involves so many young actors, involves kids killing kids, involves arguably no adult leads, and in many ways is unfilmable. Try getting little kids to do the Battle School stunts.

However, the solution is so simple. Hire Robert Zemekis, who has done dark, mature material (see Beowulf) and family material (see Back to the Future, Polar Express, Roger Rabitt). He could find the right tone.

Even better, he is a special effects genius who has been perfecting mo-cap. In many scenes in watching Beowulf I forgot it was animated because it look so realistic, which was a big jump from Polar Express, and I imagine he will only get better with the technique.

With mo-cap, he can use older, better actors to play all the kid parts, but animate them to be age appropriate for the roles, do the Battle School stunts properly, etc. Also animated violence on kids is different from filmed violence on kids.

Not to mention the Fantasy Game sequences, the buggers, the space battles, etc.

This movie is crying out for mo-cap and animation.

Instead I read that Orson Scott Card rewrote the script to focus on Mazer Rackham as an adult lead, which is fucking stupid.

Card and Zemeckis need to do mo-cap Ender's Game, yesterday.

It would be Harry Potter meets Star Wars and do 400 mil domestic. Count on it.

Re:Ender's Game

[JWW]

I like the way you think. You should take this post and post it as a comment on Card's Rhino Times column http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/ . This is a great idea.

Re:Ender's Game

[Anonymous Coward]

And as much as I love Ender's Game every time I reread it, I think Speaker for the Dead is even better.

Heresy! Speaker was decent, but the ending was obvious by halfway through the book. Xenocide and CotM showed such a rapid decline that I couldn't be bothered to read further sequels. In contrast, Ender's Game provided much better insights into the human condition, while still being a wonderful juvenile/action novel.

Re:Ender's Game

[iron spartan]

I'm just terrified that the execs won't get the point of Ender's Game, and will make all sorts of stupid changes to increase its market appeal, there by destroying the story.

I still think that everyone involved with the Starship Troopers movie should be burned at the stake as a warning to others.

Ender's Game

[Enderandrew]

The concept of Ender and the Battle School was a short story. The concept for Speaker of the Dead, and what became books 2-3-4 in the Ender Saga were a much deeper concept, however he couldn't make it work. An editor suggested taking the character from the short story and using it for his Speaker concept. To do so, he then rewrote Ender's Game as a novel to serve as a prequel to set up Speaker, Xenocide and eventually Children of the Mind (though things were supposed to be wrapped up in Xenocide, but spilled over due to length).

To that extent, Ender's Game is to the rest of the series what the Hobbit is to Lord of the Rings.

And as much as I love Ender's Game every time I reread it, I think Speaker for the Dead is even better.

Battlefield Earth Sequel is Also Needed

[Anonymous Coward]

Could you please write a sequel to Battlefield Earth first.

THE PIRATE!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

heh.

You know where to send them...

[pedantic bore]

My guess is that what he meant was "Please don't send them to me."

Makes you wonder

[Hoi Polloi]

If a sequal gets made and no one goes to watch it, did it ever exist?

Om...om...

Is Manhattan in the house?

[Tetsujin]

And that's why business sucks. Everything: including science, law, medicine, art, politics, education, takes a back seat to money-making.

Except, of course, for super disco breakin'.

The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly was a sequel...

[davide marney]

Ain't nothing wrong with doing a sequel. "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" was the third movie in a trilogy, and was by far the best. It often takes several passes through a creative landscape before all the elements find their place and the whole thing jells.

Sequels don't have to have the same characters or plot. It can be enough to just take the basic idea and feel of the first movie, and run with it in a new direction.

For example, I'd love to see someone explore the idea of replication much deeper. What if Replicants weren't time-limited, but made perpetual instead? What if memory could be captured and re-implanted in one generation of Replicant after another, so that consciousness would span several lifetimes/bodies? What if anyone could make a copy of themselves, on demand? Say you want to try what it feels like to jump out of an airplane -- without a parachute. Do you make a replica, and then toss yourself?

A sequel doesn't have to be bad....

IIRC, Deckard was a replicant

[Ralph Spoilsport]

and an older model than Rachel. So, IIRC, he shouldn't have survived much beyond his job taking out Roy and his crew.

Re:IIRC, Deckard was a replicant

[Tony Hoyle]

It's never explicitly stated.. and even if he was the script suggests he was a newer model newer - Rachel was a prototype for giving replicants memories, but Deckard also had memories.. which makes him newer.

I Like The Idea, If Done Well

[Nom du Keyboard]

I like the idea, and believe it can be done well. A whole universe was created here, yet only a single story ever told in it. I feel it's a bit bigger place than that. I've made an investment in learning about how this universe works and a few more dividends on that investment would be well worthwhile.

What I WOULDN'T want to see ever is just a Blade Runner remake. I have yet to see a remake that I consider better than the original movie.

Do Replicants Dream of Replicant Sheep?

[SoloJon]

The first question that comes to mind, is what would the film be about? I know they're thinking of storylines about Tyrell Corp, etc, but what would the story ultimately be trying to communicate? Blade Runner is kind of a landmark film (and novel) because it examines what makes us human, and it looks at transhumanism from the perspective of the self-aware "androids". What more can you say on the subject without reiterating what was covered in the first film, is the question they should be asking themselves, not "gee, what would Tyrell Corp do if Tyrell was killed?" Exploring those other areas may be interesting, but more from the perspective of a backdrop of a larger story that you're trying to tell. Oh well, the world is (sometimes) fucked and we're in it. Nuff said.

I suppose the only thing I have to thank this

[Big Hairy Ian]

thread for is I now have that beautiful Sax music from the closing title rattling about in my head :)

Even better...

[rickb928]

A prequel.

I seen it before, works pretty good...

Our Forever War

[Zolodoco]

I'm really looking forward to The Forever War. I've never watched a novel-based movie that matches the experience of actually reading the novel, but I read it several years ago and will probably be able to watch it without constantly making the comparison. Ironically I found the book in an airman barracks on Prince Sultan Air Base back in early 2001.

Re:Our Forever War

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never watched a novel-based movie that matches the experience of actually reading the novel...

Try "The Maltese Falcon".

A PLANET where APES evolved from NEM?

[Tetsujin]

It doesn't cost you more $2000 in equipment and then your elbow grease. Hopefully, some people start putting some quality shit up on YouTube soon, it's just a matter of time...

I thought we killed the million-monkey concept years ago.

It seems to all hinge on whether there's a handful of artists who really care about the quality of their work, within that mob of video-bloggers, whiny bitches, and folks who post just any old thing - and whether people manage to find that quality work out of that giant pile of output...

Hollywood is in a slump, so ignore them...

[Simonetta]

These endless idiotic sequels are an indication that Hollywood is in a creative slump, not unlike the one in the late 1960's. The creative types have run dry and are grasping at straws.

    Do them a favor. Ignore them. Refuse to take them seriously. If you want the next Memento, Reservoir Dogs, or Slumdog Millionaire, do it yourself with ultra-cheap equipment. Do a five minute key scene from your favorite sci-fi book, and post it on YouTube.

if you're a filmmaker and have ever thought to yourself "Hey, I bet a remake of 'It's a Wonderful Life' starring Ice Cube and some sassy kids would be great!" please, dear God, stay out of Hollywood.

    This is wrong thinking because it assumes that Hollywood still has validity. Of course hacks with vile ideas are going to go to Hollywood. And yes, they will get $100 million to make another truly stupid movie. And yes of course the so-called critics will proclaim it 'edgy, bordering on greatness... an exciting new approach to a well-loved story'.

    Ignore them. Use all your intellect and energy to pretend that they don't exist. Don't even bother to put them down. Hollywood is a state of mind, put it out of your mind and it will cease to exist.

    I was a total movie addict. I used to go see everything. It took about ten years for me, but I have reached the point where I wouldn't even imagine going to a first-run movie anymore from Hollywood. I've already seen whatever movie that Hollywood makes, even the ones that they haven't made yet.

    Go to the library and get some free DVDs of older movies. Older can mean anything from the 1980s to the 1930s. The Hollywood stars of today are second-rate reincarnations of the stars of the past. The same faces and character types keep reappearing every 40-50 years. Discover Cary Grant, Glenn Ford, Bogart, Errol Flynn, Edward G. Robinson, Leslie Howard, William Powell. Today's actresses are precocious children compared to Rita Hayworth, Marlene Dietrich, Kate Hepburn, Myra Loy, Louise Brooks, Ingrid Bergman, and hundreds of forgotten other women stars.

Berserker

[camperdave]

I second Moon is a Harsh Mistress, although it could very easily be done poorly. Poul Anderson's The Longest Voyage might make for an interesting movie. For some lighter fare, how about some Berserker movies? Or some Dragonriders of Pern? Or

Re:Berserker

[Anonymous Coward]

Boat of a Million Years as a miniseries.

Orgy Porgy!!!!

[Giant Electronic Bra]

Come on, who can wait? lolol

Costner HATE sequels!

[Tetsujin]

The one cool thing about Kevin Costner; refuses to ever do a sequel. Wish others in Hwoodland did that.

And thus, despite huge demand, we are spared from sequels to Waterworld, The Postman, or The Bodyguard...

I hope they don't fuck the "Forever War" like ...

[rthille]

I hope the don't fuck the "Forever War" like they did Starship Troopers. I swear, they turned the moral/political stuff in that book 180 degrees...

Re:The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly was a sequel.

[Anomalyst]

What if anyone could make a copy of themselves, on demand? Say you want to try what it feels like to jump out of an airplane -- without a parachute. Do you make a replica, and then toss yourself?

Check out David Brin's "Kiln People" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiln_People Can't say I liked the ending much, but the story and the questions it raises were definitely worth the time spent reading.

Oh, have some faith!

[Giant Electronic Bra]

I mean the poor man has just had to absolutely prostitute himself to get a good project!

i wouldn't trust that site

[markandrew]

how much credence do i give to the information on this (sffmedia) site?

Ridley Scott, director of the science fiction masterwork Blade Runner, hasn't made a science fiction movie since Alien in 1979

I don't even know what the name for that kind of sentence is. Apart from "stupid".

Oh but often

[Giant Electronic Bra]

The second infusion is the best!

Re:Oh but often

[Wain13001]

sounds like you steep too long or at the wrong temperature, or both.

Re:Oh but often

[Giant Electronic Bra]

LOL, it is normal practice to make multiple infusions with green tea. Especially Japanese teas, but true for either one.

Ridley Scott

[dokhebi]

Brave New World has been done. Give it a rest.

The Forever War sounds promising. Now I need to go read it...

Shameless plug: The LASFS Library has this and other good SF books. If your in LA, stop by and take a look. Meetings are on Thursday starting at 8:10 PM.

Just my $0.02 worth.

Where's Don LaFontaine when you need him?

[Tetsujin]

Yep, a Heinlein movie would be great! They should make Stranger in a Strange Land. The orgies would be epic!

In a world alien to man...
"We've lost contact with the Envoy!"
The child of human explorers...
(voice distorted by radio)"Repeat, we have found a survivor!"
Is an alien.
"Damnit, man, you don't understand! He - is - a - Martian!"

(cue wild drum beat, footage of Mike jumping around on Martian rocks like an ape through the trees - hovercars diving through clouds - Jill punching out a guard in Bethesda)

Douglas: That young man's claim to Mars will be MINE!
Jubal: THAT YOUNG MAN IS UNDER MY PROTECTION!

(beat... black screen, fade in)

Berquist: You're coming with me...

(beat... black screen, fade in)

Mike (snarling): I... GROK... WRONGNESS!

Stranger In A Strange Land... Rated R.

Mod Parent Up

[SlashDotDotDot]

People must be warned.

Hah

[prbt]

In your opinion... (of course).

I loved T1, thought T2 was a bunch of overblown tiresome crap, and really enjoyed T3.

For me, it was T2 that stunk up the place.

Re:Hah

[Chris Burke]

In your opinion... (of course).

I loved T1, thought T2 was a bunch of overblown tiresome crap, and really enjoyed T3.

For me, it was T2 that stunk up the place.

Well yeah, obviously it's all opinion. And I can see both ways, thinking T1 was better than T2, or that T2 was better than T1.

But thinking that T3 was better than either of them?! That just smacks of poor taste.

Re:Hah

[prbt]

But thinking that T3 was better than either of them?! That just smacks of poor taste.

Well, er, thanks. For me, T2 was just completely over-cooked and pompous (ditto 'True Lies', which I also detested). T3 had its flaws, but it was gone before it could leave a sour taste, plus it had a cool (for Hollywood) ending.

Re:Hah

[Anonymous Coward]

Thinking any them important is bad taste. T2 however was a Cameron solo circle jerk, vile at a human level and further proof of his joy at making people suffer on screen.

Re:Hah

[Chris Burke]

T3 was T2 with the volume turned up on everything and the only interesting character removed. In T2 even Awnuld had character development, T3 had zero for anybody. Hell, John actually managed to regress during T3 to being a whinier loser than he was at the start of T2, and at least then he had the excuse of being 13. Claire Danes was nothing but a name for the bill; there was no reason for her character to even be in the movie. Other than that, it was a giant rip-off of T2. That's what I don't get, everything there is not to like in T2 is in T3, only louder and dumber, and with plenty of additional flaws besides.

The only redeeming feature of T3 is the amazing crane chase scene with real destruction in an era where every big-budget action movie was doing everything with CGI. That was refreshing, at least.

I'd almost give it the ending, since they had the guts to end it on a downer. But since it immediately followed the incredibly lame "i'll appeal to the brainwashed person's inner self" cliche only on an already-had-to-be-brainwashed-to-be-good machine it was hard to take it seriously. And when John picked up the mic in the command center, there was zero reason to think anyone on the other end would be interested in having him as their leader.

Or Terminator 3 killing T2's ending

[Anonymous Coward]

T3 wasn't a terrible movie. But what it DID to that was terrible was ruin the rather excellent and thought-provoking ending that T2 gave the movies.

At the end of T2, you had "the Terminator future happened because in a future where the terminators were created, they went back in time and left enough to ensure the terminators could be created". A causal loop.

And a causal loop is one of the ways that time travel in "hard" science fiction is dealt with.

Nice, gives a real-life reason for how that could *really* have happened (one reason why LotR was such a good book was it had a lot that seemed it *really* could have happened, rather than the story itself). And that ending also allows you to speculate on what if... with that ending.

T3 then made it "Look it WILL happen and there's FUCK ALL you can do to stop it".

Killing the rather neat, interesting and thought-provoking ending of T2 just so they could get another effing sequel.

Great. Thanks.

If they wanted one, they could have just done what a lot of graphic novels do with alternate timeline stories: put the story in a future where it really DID happen, and leave the future of the "real world" unsaid.

It also allows you to make the movie somewhat timeless, especially if you put in real-life alternate future pasts (e.g. a future where Iraq did have nukes and fired them off in GW2). That then tells everyone "this isn't *our* future, just one possible one. See also Steam Punk novels for the idea. Helps an awful lot with setting your story in a universe where that story is believable.

Re:Or Terminator 3 killing T2's ending

[Wraithlyn]

But what [T3] DID to that was terrible was ruin the rather excellent and thought-provoking ending that T2 gave the movies.

Well that's your opinion (and I know it's shared by many others) but I will respectfully disagree.

In T2, it is revealed that CyberDyne created SkyNet thanks to a chip from the future. This is a paradox. The "first time around", there would be no chip from the future, because CyberDyne hadn't created that future yet, because they hadn't received the chip, etc etc.

In T3, they elegantly resolved this paradox, by showing you how it WOULD have happened, "the first time around"... Connor becomes involved with the daughter of the guy responsible for SkyNet. That's how he learned about SkyNet, and how he survived the holocaust and was in a position to start organizing the resistance, originally, before all that tedious mucking about with time travel. Everything makes perfect sense now.

T3 then made it "Look it WILL happen and there's FUCK ALL you can do to stop it".

Nonsense. Just because Arnie said "It is inevitable" doesn't make it Absolute Fact. It's a frakin robot programmed by an evil AI, not the ultimate arbiter of cosmic wisdom. They got to the military base a few minutes too late to stop SkyNet from being switched on, that could have gone entirely differently.

So to sum up, you CAN change the future, and they did just that in T2... they prevented the whole "CyberDyne reverse-engineers chip from future" scenario.

Unfortunately, that was just a "shortcut" to accelerate the ORIGINAL development of SkyNet, which was by the military.

THAT scenario (military activates SkyNet) could be prevented too. They just simply didn't succeed.

So I don't feel like it took away from T2 at all, in fact I feel T3 enhanced and fleshed out the original story.

Plus, that truck chase was really cool. ;)

Obligatory

[doug141]

can you believe that Myers is on contract to make two more?

YEAH, Baby, YEAH!

What would PKD Do?

[corso64]

Umm, correct me if I'm wrong, isn't K.W. Jeter the officially authorized writer by P.K.D. and his daughter Isa, to continue the Blade Runner franchise? Since he's written several sequels, why doesn't this screenwriter collaborate with K.W. Jeter, and PKD's daughter, Isa, to come up with something consistent? Then again, that much forethought may have slipped past all of the enthusiasm and good intentions - doh!

Can't Wait

[Mister_Stoopid]

Under most circumstances I'm no fan of unnecessary sequels and I'd love to see Hollywood actually come up with an original movie. That said, I hope they do make Blade Runner 2, just so I can screw with people who think BR is the OMG BEST FILM EVER. I can't wait to go up to some pretentious English major and say "Bladerunner was a pretty good movie, but I thought Bladerunner 2: Electric Sheep Boogaloo was way better." It'll be a riot!

Re:Can't Wait

[DocHoncho]

Hear hear!

That's why I enjoyed the new Star Wars movies. It was as if I could hear a million souls cry out in anguish. Delicious.

In all honesty, anyone who puts so much of their being into a movie deserves to have their whole world brought crumbling down by a terrible sequel.

Eagle Eye

[nEoN nOoDlE]

I'm surprised with all this hating on the very idea of a sequel, without even mentioning that the writer wrote Eagle Eye - the biggest horse shit of a sci-fi movie made in the last decade.

Idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey guys, I have this great Idea for a different sequel while on the subject.

Think "It's a Wonderful Life" Except with Ice Cube and a bunch of sassy brats for the kids.

I'll call it

It's a Wonderful Life In the Hood

Niven, Please

[h.ross.perot]

How about "Protector". There's a story with teeth... Please No more bad remakes \ sequels..

Re:Niven, Please

[RoboRay]

As much as I love Protector, I don't think it would work well as a movie... Space battles where every maneuver takes years to complete isn't very exciting to watch.

Re:Niven, Please

[jamstar7]

"Protector" would be a good movie.

Even better, though, "A Gift From Earth"

Seems to me like this is

[Anonymous Coward]

Caddyshack 2, the sci-fi version!

Re:The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly was a sequel.

[Anonymous Coward]

The sequel you're talking about was the horrible Schwarzenegger film, The 6th Day. And that movie is crap in comparison to Blade Runner

That;s not so bad

[geekoid]

I think 'Sequel' my be the wrong way to think about this. Generally it refers to the continuing of a story.
Think of it as a different story, just set in the same universe.

The Dekker story is done, but there is a lot of potential in the universe they created.

Just like I would like to see some movies set in the 'Star Wars' universe.
I mean, there is an opportunity there to retell the Yojimbo and Zatoichi stories.

Uwe Boll

[dazedNconfuzed]

Depends on how many million I made off that movie.

Uwe? is that you?

Re:The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly was a sequel.

[Anonymous Coward]

The GBU was not a sequel. It was the third in a series of Westerns made by Leoni. They share none of the same characters or events. The only things that all three have in common are Eastwood and Leoni. "The man-with-no-name" moniker was invented to promote the movies in the US.

Re:The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly was a sequel.

[aesirmd]

What if memory could be captured and re-implanted in one generation of Replicant after another, so that consciousness would span several lifetimes/bodies?

Have you read the Frank Herbert Dune books? Bene Tleilaxu and the axlotl tanks; Gholas with preserved memories. It's used as a plot device through the "God Emperor of Dune", and really comes together as you're supposing in "Dune: Chapterhouse". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bene_Tleilax

I actually liked the sequels

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that there are sequels to Blade Runner already, right? The books "The Edge of Human" and "Replicant Night" were pretty good I thought. I wouldn't mind seeing a movie based off the 2nd book.

Re:I actually liked the sequels

[elrous0]

Sorry, I don't read fanfic.

Could be worse.

[stonedcat]

He could be making a sequel to WhoS Your Caddy....

Re:The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly was a sequel.

[Anonymous Coward]

So you want a movie version of Kiln People?

Do It In-Universe but Not a Sequel

[SpectreBlofeld]

I, for one, wouldn't at all mind a new story set in the Blade Runner universe, so long as it's not an actual sequel to the events of the film.

I was a big fan of 'Total Recall 2070', a short-run TV series that was based on a mishmash of Philip K. Dick's works, and was one of the best invocations of the cyberpunk aesthetic that I've seen on screen. What was amusing was that people who didn't know Blade Runner was itself inspired by Dick's 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?' were calling the show a Blade Runner ripoff at the time. If the show had been called 'Blade Runner', it wouldn't have tainted the original movie in any way because the plot was unrelated (and people wouldn't have been calling it a ripoff). The show was about a detective investigating android-related cases and misappropriation of memory-altering technology by megacorporations. A perpetual twilight, giant monolithic skyscrapers, and a multicultural high-tech low-life was the aesthetic it shared with Blade Runner and that's one I wouldn't mind seeing revisited.

lol, nice clipping

[Mateo_LeFou]

In the thread your title got cut off to
"Reservoir Dogs is a remake of http://en.wikipedia.org/"

Now *that would be an awesome movie.

Catchy title..

[Mateo_LeFou]

"Slumdog Billionaire"

Starring Daniel Radcliffe as Bill Gates

Perhaps this would be the first film where

[Lerc]

...they use product placement as a threat.

Bad sequels are a good thing...

[TiggertheMad]

...They attract the crappy writers and keep them busy so they cannot pollute good original works when the Hollywood suits want to do a quick rewrite of a good screenplay.

They are a 'crappy writer' flypaper...

Arrrgh!

[Benfea]

Would it be immoral if we nuked Hollywood in an effort to prevent this movie from being made?

Brave new word?

[grikdog]

What brave new word was that? Soma? Whatever, I hope they shoot the film in Lego animatronics, like Star Wars.

Hunt the Zipper?

[myowntrueself]

Brave New World has been done. Give it a rest.

A Brave New World movie? Did it have the scene with a bunch of children being taught how to play erotic games like 'hunt the zipper'?

Now that would be radical in this day and age...

Um...

[Franklin Brauner]

You list three good original movies but I counter that there is so much more to them than just needed money to make. Look at the directors/writers: Christopher Nolan, Quentin Tarantino & Danny Boyle respectively. Now look at those three directors/writers names and notice how they rarely--if ever--attach themselves to bad projects."

You mean like The Beach, or Four Rooms?

Ick

[Anonymous Coward]

I've stopped seeing sequels to movies I like. After the terrible experience with the Star Wars "prequels", the second and third Matrix movies, the Highlander sequels, and any Alien movie after Aliens, I decided that the small possibility that I'll actually enjoy the sequel is far outweighed by the considerable likelihood that I'll hate the sequel so much that I'll no longer be able to enjoy the original(s).

Immanuel Kant's Opus Postumum

[mosel-saar-ruwer]

there can be only one

"There can only be one" is quite literally the second-to-last sentence which Kant ever wrote, in his so-called "Opus Postumum" [Kant was insistent that polytheism is impossible, and that there can only possibly be one God].

Anyway, I read that comment at Slashdot today just an hour or two before I got to the end of Opus Postumum.

Weird.

"Children of Men"

[kutuz_off]

The brush with which you're painting the picture is too broad. Prepare to see lists of films that people consider good and brain-stimulating. I'll start this off with "Children of Men" from 2006.

Re:"Children of Men"

[FuckTheModerators]

CoM's alright. Unless, that is, YOU'VE READ THE FUCKING BOOK!!! The pablum-ified dumbed-down over-actioned Hollywood bullshit of the movie was just sad compared to that.

I know. Different art form, different piece of work, all that stuff. The book's great and after reading it the movie was kinda meh.

Is a Good Blade Runner Sequel Possible?

[TomRC]

What would it take to make a good (or even great) Blade Runner sequel?

The original became a cult hit mainly because (a) it had an interesting, well textured setting (b) it projected a very clear style or mood that fit well with (c) an interesting moral question about what makes one "human" that is ultimately left up to the viewer, (d) while including enough action directly related to the question to keep it interesting on first viewing.

I think a good sequel would need to (a) replicate and build on the setting (b) choose a DIFFERENT question, or perhaps deeper examination of the original moral question to examine; and (c) fit the style/mood to that examination - and of course (d) driving it all with some cool action scenes.

Forget the off-world colonies - it's far more interesting to look at how alien Earth would have become, to our eyes. The original looked at an organic mix of decaying remnants of today's cities threaded and overshadowed by ultra-tech future stuff, and invaded by "foreigners" (apparently many natives having moved on to the off-world colonies?) OK, what is happening elsewhere? We saw a city apparently sapped by climate turned hot and wet - global warming has run amuk.

How's that affecting the rest of the country/world? Drought-ruined farm lands? Chicago by an empty Great Lakes basin (water mostly diverted to the new agricultural band across Canada, just a few big pipelines running to the city), surrounded by dusty desert, maybe growing food in towers? Ice age in Europe? London flooded? Expanding seas flooded the Mediterranean and turned lots of cities into Venice equivalents (and sunk Venice itself)? But now a dam is built across the Straits of Gibraltar - generating power as water is let in to replace evaporation, but not letting the sea fall to it's old levels? Has there been a mini-nuke-war in the middle east or maybe Pakistan-India? Those sorts of things would be interesting to look at. (And the nuke war assumption, shown in a few quick scenes, might serve as a warning to today's bickering countries with nukes or ambitions.) Instead of sitting in one city, the sequel should get out and around the world.

What interesting moral question might be examined? How about a serious re-examination of Hollywood's constant droning "it's good to age and die" formula? Perhaps the hero is struggling to put together enough money to replace his failing synth-organs, even as he moves through the richest and poorest levels of society? How about effectively immortal wealthy parents who keep their kids "young and innocent" - a 43 year old kid that looks 7 leading a secret life while playing a role to keep the parents happily self-deceived? Hmm - that edges on "What is adulthood? What is perversion? Is it more perverse to "force" someone to be a child forever, or for that "child" to behave as the adult they mentally are? [It doesn't have to turn the movie into child-porn - create a scenario in which a "straight-adult" hero is tempted but resists out of old-fashioned moral scruples he's not sure really apply any more - controversial enough.]

Maybe have the hero be someone arriving back from the off-world colonies, so we see this strange new world through his eyes - the tech is mostly not strange to him, but the culture would appear involuted and perverted, coming from a more straight-forward off-world culture where kids grow up fast because they're needed.

Re:Is a Good Blade Runner Sequel Possible?

[vell0cet]

I would like to see a theme about death. Perhaps something along the lines of the importance of death and how the lack of it affects people/society. Or how in the world of Blade Runner, it could be determined that death is only for the poor and genetically engineered.

Get your face out of your palms

[w0mprat]

LOTR was the proverbial Good fantasy film.

I'm excited by the possibility that we may see, out of holywood, an actual Proverbial Good Sci-Fi Film -- as was the original Blade Runner and films like 2001: A Space Oddessy.

It may happen.

Re:Get your face out of your palms

[Vintermann]

Yes, LOTR was a good fantasy film (except the mount doom finale, which was simply embarrassing), but not in the way Blade Runner is good SF. The plot of Blade Runner is hardly related to the book, except a couple of character names and concepts.

Clones degrade like photocopied chain letters

[deanston]

Lack of originality never stopped Hollywood (i.e. any corporation) from doing a project. I suspect this derivative will be as good as the financial package type.

Re:The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly was a sequel.

[Groghunter]

you're right. If this is the 1960s. It also helps to be Sergio Leone, and to be making movies in spain, not hollywood. I mean, the same actors are playing different roles in all three of the Dollars trilogy, that would never fly in today's industry. Take, for instance, this Neuromancer movie that is in pre-production. IF, it makes money, and they decide they want to make a sequel, the first thing the studio execs will say is "What do you mean "Count Zero" doesn't have Case in it? Excuse us while we hire some screenwriters to fix that."

Re:Exactly what would a sequel to Close Encounters

[Anonymous Coward]

A Fourth Kind?

Re:The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly was a sequel.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oops - it's been done more or less:
Kiln People by David Brin
http://www.amazon.com/Kiln-People-Books-David-Brin/dp/0765342618

Stranger in a Strage Land

[agoliveira]

Stranger in a Strage Land

Re:Stranger in a Strange Land

[agoliveira]

Sorry, for some reason my post was totally messed.
Instead of messing around with well established classics like Blade Runner, why not to try and create another one? Stranger in a Strange Land would be good bet IMHO.

Already 3 books written by KW Jeter

[kn0tw0rk]

There are 3 decent books that were written by KW Jeter that are a good way to extend the movie.

I'd get links to them if I werent busy/distrated by other things.

REALLY?

[Vivika]

Is there NOTHING original left in Hollywood? It is bad enough 2008 was The Year of Remakes and Sequels...

The ideas

[AaronLawrence]

To quickly summarise why this proposal so far entirely misses the point of Bladerunner:

the nature of the off-world colonies

Totally irrelevant

what happens to the Tyrell Corporation in the wake of its founder's death

Mostly irrelevant, and not interesting

and what would become of Rachel.

We already know this, in fact, this is explained in one of the most famous lines of BR.

I think Blade Runner made some very interesting suggestions to the origins of Harrison Ford's character

No kidding. This is only, you know, the entire point of the movie.

addressing the idea of immortality

What? No. Simply wrong. This is actually contrary to the point of Bladerunner.
So in conclusion, none of the ideas are very interesting, most are pointless, and some would actually damage the original ideas. Another genius move from Hollywood. The fact is seems to be the personal project of a relatively new screenwriter is a little bizarre, like me deciding to write a sequel to War and Peace.

And of course

[Chuck Chunder]

"Why didn't they invest more of the effects budget on the three breasted woman?"

Re:The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly was a sequel.

[winwar]

"What if Replicants weren't time-limited, but made perpetual instead?"

Gee, I seem to remember a TV show with something similar. It's on the SciFi channel. I think it has a race called the Cylons....

why don't they use the book?

[vuffi_raa]

I really liked the blade runner sequel novel- it tried to bridge the phillip k dick, strange drug induced story with the movie and did a decent job at that, they should use it if they are going to make another movie rather than make up some silly story

Please NO!

[shackman2019]

Blade Runner is the most amazing movie ever. That being said Alien was really good, Legend you can take it as it is and judge it for yourself. Other than that there is no reason to trust Ridley Scotts judgment. Don't let him ruin what he managed to do well at one point in time...or at least make it made for TV so nobody knows about it

Info

[mqduck]

So, like, having never been a sci-fi geek or terribly fond of movies in general, I haven't seem Blade Runner or, most likely, any other movie you'd name off the top of your head. But I'm trying to go back and educate myself a bit. I figure this is as good a place as any to ask what good, intelligent sci-fi films I should see.

To give you some idea what I'm looking for, I just watched "The Day the Earth Stood Still" (which was rather courageous in its subtle criticism of the Cold War) and thought it was great. I liked the concept behind the first Terminator movie but was left wondering why the sequel was so popular. I certainly think 2001 is great. Oh, and Metropolis!

So yeah, if you could recommend just a few (since I almost never watch movies), which would you choose?

Not a remake.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's certainly not a remake, unless we're using an extremely loose definition. There are prominent scenes which are influenced by (and some say lifted from) the Ringo Lam film, but it'd certainly be a stretch to call Reservoir Dogs a remake of City on Fire -- no more so than it is a remake of Kubrick's The Killing. Have you actually seen City on Fire?

In fact, according to your Wikipedia source, Reservoir Dogs "borrows several key plot elements and scenes" from City on Fire. That alone does not define a film remake.

If we're using Wikipedia as a prime source for information these days, this is how a remake is defined there: "The term "remake" is generally used in reference to a movie which uses an earlier movie as the main source material, rather than in reference to a second, later movie based on the same source."

A sequel can be original.

[jotaeleemeese]

Goodfather 2

Enough said.

Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

... as long as Keanu Reeves is not in the movie (ok, maybe as "android with face paralysis #2")...
One bad sci-fi movie is better than No sci-fi movie at all or Another Rocky sequel.

Blade Runner Seq?

[Anonymous Coward]

Truly End Of Times type stuff. :-\

They Released Two Book Sequels

[psych0fred]

I actually started reading the first sequel but it was so horrible I couldn't finish it. It was a sequel to both the PK Dick book and the Blade Runner movie, and it included plot points that are also being discussed in this article for a movie sequel. In the book sequel Decker has Rachel in hibernation/turned off for long periods of time to preserve her batteries/lifespan and if I remember correctly Roy Batty is back and teams up with him. Like I said, horrible.

Alan E Nourse wrote The Bladerunner

[Anonymous Coward]

which was optioned by the same company. They never liked the story but liked the title so they used it for the film as it was more marketable than "Do androids Dream of Electric Sheep?"

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd love to see a Blade Runner sequel based on the detective-replicant plot, but instead of replicants i would like to see genetic-modified humans (only rich people could have access to that). Genetic-modified humans would be stronger and nearly inmortal. The problem is one of them is a bad guy. Then Deckard has to find him and fight him. Sorry for my english. I hope you understood what i meant.