Blade Runner Sequels and Prequels Happening

bowman9991 writes "The iconic science fiction film Blade Runner, based on Philip K. Dick's book and directed by Ridley Scott, will be followed up with sequels and prequels soon. Alcon Entertainment is in final discussions to secure film, TV and franchise rights. They are in the early stages of sorting out how to proceed and were not sure if Ridley Scott would be involved."

Comments

That's it, I quit humanity

[elrous0]

You know, I was watching one of the behind-the-scenes extras on the "Get Low" DVD the other day. For those who haven't seen it, "Get Low" is a quiet little movie--low-budget, not a lot of hoopla. But it has a suprisingly powerful screenplay and great performances from Robert Duvall and Bill Murray. Anyway, the producer points out that, even with a very powerful script and great leads attached, it still took over 8 years to get the movie made. He explained that Hollywood has become so fixated on sequels, prequels, franchises, remakes, and comic-book/TV adaptations that getting funding even for a small-budget *original* film, with no potential for a sequel or merchandising, has become a nightmare. Hollywood may celebrate these kinds of movies at Oscar time, but getting a studio to put up even a relatively trivial amount of money for them is almost impossible unless you can attach some hot A-list leads.

And that is why we're treated to a stream of endless rapes of once-great franchises/TV shows/comic books. It's why a 60-year-old Harrison Ford is running around fighting fucking aliens with a bullwhip looking for a goddamn crystal skull, while Steven Spielberg is off-camera bathing in a pile of cash. It's why we get sequels to 25-year-old R-rated franchises with PG-13 ratings and once-great stars just there to collect a paycheck (yep, I'm looking at you Bruce Willis). It's why everyone who has produced even a mediocre comic book superhero has Hollywood fawning over them, while great original scripts go right into the trash bin.

And now it's why we're going to get a shitty PG-13 action-oriented prequel/sequel to one of the great adult science fiction films of all time. It's something no one asked for. It will tarnish the original. And it will suck. But all Hollywood hears is "sequel" and so it's getting the green light.

Re:That's it, I quit humanity

[Damek]

And people keep paying for them. I keep reading how Hollywood is "fixated" on this stuff or has some sort of problem, but people keep buying what they're selling.

Also, this stuff doesn't tarnish anything. Robocop's still a great movie. The original Star Wars films are still.. well, what they were. The Lord of the Rings books are still great books. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep wasn't tarnished by Blade Runner. I should know, I read the book far too late, twenty years after I started reading sci-fi and ten years after I saw Blade Runner. Dune wasn't tarnished by any of its film adaptations, and for me, the Lynch wasn't tarnished by the so-so SyFy versions. And Herbert's novels weren't tarnished by his kin's prequel novels.

People like to revisit the places they've been before, with a little variation. You may as well complain, "why do genre novelists write so many series?" I have no freaking clue. But people buy them.

Now, what I'd like to see is a film adaptation of The Demolished Man or The Stars My Destination by Bester. Also, any of MacLeod's or Reynolds' work, but then that would be a bit difficult...

Re:That's it, I quit humanity

[Seumas]

Editing your content and story to be consumable by little kids isn't the recipe for a good movie, either.

Yippee ki-yay [ . . . ] . . . !

What ????

[gstoddart]

Sequels and Prequels of Blade Runner, and Ridley Scott may or may not be involved???

So, they're going to make generic sci-fi movies that loosely relate to Blade Runner, and that none of the fans of the original will care about seeing ... and people who didn't like/didn't see the original won't care about seeing.

Who do they expect to be watching this? They better have damned good screen plays for this, or they're throwing money down a hole trying to capitalize on the legacy of a good movie only to find out they don't have an audience.

This has all the potential to become a complete flop. I'll stick with my director's cut of the original unless I hear some really compelling reasons that this isn't going to be crap.

Re:What ????

[MrNemesis]

Even with great scripts, I doubt the production design would be up to much. Never before and never since had a I seen a sci-fi universe brought to life with such confidence, style and scope - and that in itself was a crucial part of the Blade Runner story. Awesome vision from Scott plus Trumbull and team at the absolute peak of their powers, and one of the last epic films to make extensive use of models before the CGI revolution kicked in.

Heck, when was the last time you saw a film that was even as well *lit* as Blade Runner?

Making a film as artistically distinct as Blade Runner appears to be a dead art. Or rather a type of art that no-one is willing to finance. Not that I'm saying Blade Runner was all about the effects, it wasn't, but damn if they didn't almost singlehandedly define the visuals of the genre for a generation to come.

Chances of requels/prequels/sequels/bleaquels having the same effect? Nil.