Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ridley Scott to direct new Blade Runner entry

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ridley Scott to direct new Blade Runner entry

    It's official.

    Press Release

    LOS ANGELES, CA, AUGUST 18, 2011—Three-time Oscar-nominated director Ridley Scott is set to helm a follow up to his own ground-breaking 1982 science fiction classic “Blade Runner” for Warner Bros-based financing and production company Alcon Entertainment (“The Blind Side,” “The Book of Eli”).

    Alcon co-founders and co-Chief Executive Officers Broderick Johnson and Andrew Kosove will produce with Bud Yorkin and Cynthia Sikes Yorkin, along with Ridley Scott. Frank Giustra and Tim Gamble, CEO’s of Thunderbird Films, will serve as executive producers.

    The filmmakers have not yet revealed whether the theatrical project will be a prequel or sequel to the renowned original.

    Alcon and Yorkin recently announced that they are partnering to produce “Blade Runner” theatrical sequels and prequels, in addition to all television and interactive productions.

    The original film, which has been singled out as the greatest science-fiction film of all time by a majority of genre publications, was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant.” The film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry in 1993 and is frequently taught in university courses. In 2007, it was named the 2nd most visually influential film of all time by the Visual Effects Society.

    State Kosove and Johnson: “It would be a gross understatement to say that we are elated Ridley Scott will shepherd this iconic story into a new, exciting direction. We are huge fans of Ridley’s and of the original ‘Blade Runner.’ This is once in a lifetime project for us.”

    Scott is represented by David Wirtschafter at WME and David Nochinson at Ziffren Brittenham.

    Released by Warner Bros. almost 30 years ago, “Blade Runner” was adapted by Hampton Fancher and David Peoples from Philip K. Dick’s groundbreaking novel “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” and directed by Scott following his landmark “Alien.” The film was nominated for two Academy Awards (Best Visual Effects, and Best Art Direction). Following the filming of “Blade Runner,” the first of Philip K. Dick’s works to be adapted into a film, many other of Dick’s works were likewise adapted, including “Total Recall,” “A Scanner Darkly,” “Minority Report,” “Paycheck,” and the recent “The Adjustment Bureau,” among others.
    sigpic

  • #2
    Yeah...I don't think a sequel is needed.

    Scotts abilities as a director have actually gotten worse with time. I don't think he even knows how to tell a really good story anymore.

    I think 'Hannibal' and 'Robin Hood' are good examples of that.

    Comment


    • #3
      I like Hannibal, wasn't like the book sure but it wasn't a bad movie. Hannibal Rising, now that was a bad movie.

      Anyway i'll believe this when something more tangible than a flimsy press release is shown. Given this has been talked about for years it's no real surprise to see it being talked about again. I'd far rather it be a sequel or prequel than a remake so at least if this finally materializes they're starting in the right direction

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Wrathborne View Post
        I think 'Hannibal' and 'Robin Hood' are good examples of that.
        Word. He always was a hit/miss director for me and let's be honest his latest movies sucked.
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          All I can say is that more Blade Runner is better than nothing, and if Ridley can bring back the same vibe from the first film, even if it's a small fragment, then I'm even more for it.

          EDIT: This is also the perfect time for Vangelis to rise from the ashes again, and get other new blood on the music team, and really compose something that is awe to the ears. Theres many things that can go right with this film, and yet many things that can go very bad.
          Last edited by Zombie Fred; 08-18-2011, 03:20 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            I forget - I know they were Blade Runner books set in the movieverse, but did Philip K Dick ever write a sequel to the original book?

            Still, all the reason I need to go and see if I can re-watch the original...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
              I forget - I know they were Blade Runner books set in the movieverse, but did Philip K Dick ever write a sequel to the original book?

              Still, all the reason I need to go and see if I can re-watch the original...
              I don't believe so. It's a shame he died the same year Blade Runner was released as well, such a brilliant writer.

              Also, wait for it...

              Who here believes Deckard was a replicant? I personally don't think he was, Ridley Scott said he is and Harrison Ford strongly disagrees.
              Last edited by REmaster; 08-19-2011, 08:23 AM.
              "One can only match, move by move, the machinations of fate... and thus defy the tyrannous stars."
              Resident Evil/Castlevania/ Silent Hill/Onimusha/Tekken /Dark Souls

              Comment


              • #8
                I don't think he is, but he might be. I don't make the story here. I think its more interesting seeing a human love a android than a android love another android. Just my opinion of course.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by nemesiswontdie View Post
                  I don't think he is, but he might be. I don't make the story here. I think its more interesting seeing a human rape a android than a android rape another android. Just my opinion of course.
                  Fixed.

                  Yeah, I detest that scene for so many reasons but at the same time it's powerful and telling of Deckard's character. See thing is, he transends anti-hero, he's not heroic in the least. I believe Deckard is a classic villain, hunting down beings who just want freedom, but he's given the protagonist role. We're seeing things from his sick, sad perspective. Which is so godamn interesting and why I find this movie amazing.(aside from a few pacing issues)

                  As for if he's a replicant or not, well to me it'd be a nice twist if he was, but then his emotional hollowness isn't nearly as interesting.
                  Last edited by Inferno04; 08-19-2011, 03:39 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Yea, I think he actually has less emotion then an android lol. For some reason, I never liked Deckard's narration, probably because it's just so flat, boring and well, emotionless. Also, I just stumbled upon this today and I know I'm probably the last person on earth to realize this :/

                    Bryan Fury = Roy Batty

                    Last edited by REmaster; 08-20-2011, 02:49 AM.
                    "One can only match, move by move, the machinations of fate... and thus defy the tyrannous stars."
                    Resident Evil/Castlevania/ Silent Hill/Onimusha/Tekken /Dark Souls

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Philip k dick is a genius, I got the impression from the book that he was definitely an android.

                      don't really know what to think about a prequel or sequel maybe a more true to the book version would be better.

                      reading the man in the high castle again, its a hell of a book.

                      If you like sci fi do yourself a favour and read the short story "Shell Game" its the last short story in a compilation called "The book of Philip k Dick" It is the best piece of sci fi that I have ever read. Check it out it should be made into a movie.

                      also never thought it was rape, machines are made to do stuff for humans.
                      Last edited by jimmyjoejangles; 08-20-2011, 12:51 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Well atleast Ridley Scott is directing it instead of some new talent.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Is nothing sacred? Apparently not.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Chimera View Post
                            Is nothing sacred? Apparently not.
                            What is your avatar?
                            I'm looking for Resident Evil 3.5 (BioHazard 4 "Progenitor" and "Hallucination"-"Hookman" Version) or scans, articles! Resident Evil 1.5 release info = http://www.bioflames.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3328

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              It's the purge of 1982 man, this is messed up I mean seriously,

                              Tron, Conan, The Thing, Dark Crystal even Poltergeist was remade in all but name for Insidious. And now Super 8 is a love letter to everything Spielberg who gave us E.T. in what year . . . 1982.

                              I need to go lie down . . .

                              Sidenote: I believe Deckard is a human. The story isn't as powerful if he's a replicant . . .
                              Last edited by Rancid Cheese; 08-22-2011, 07:17 PM.
                              sigpic

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X