Walken, I think, has stated that he will not turn down a role if he has the time and you have the money
Christopher Lee has a similar deal, though I think travel has to be limited because of his age
He speaks to that in another quote.
I don't choose that much. I just sort of take what's there. I don't have much else to do. I don't have a lot of hobbies. I don't play golf. I don't have any children. Things that occupy people's time. I just try to take jobs. I basically work so much because I'm lazy.
0
Options
BusterKNegativity is Boring Cynicism is Cowardice Registered Userregular
I love Blade Runner passionately. But I don't really get how anyone can be anxious about this announcement. If this film ends up sucking horribly, I can still go back and enjoy Blade Runner just as much as I do now. If for some reason a shitty sequel/prequel's existence keeps you from continuing to enjoy the film you loved, I'd have to say the problem rests squarely with you and not the sequel.
Because a movie that is original did not get made so that this possibly atrocity could.
Well the guy who voiced (now dead) Peter Venkman also voiced Garfield in the cartoon, so it makes sense to get Bill Murray to voice Garfield in the movie.
One element that likely won't be in the new "Blade Runner" is Harrison Ford, who in the original played the lead, retired LAPD officer Rick Deckard.
"In no way do I speak for Ridley Scott," Kosove said. "But if you're asking me will this movie have anything to do with Harrison Ford, the answer is no. This is a total reinvention, and in my mind that means doing everything fresh, including casting."
He got the clean easy back shot by dumb luck. It's the only reason he survives the movie.
Look, he knows what the targets look like. He knows that, if it comes to a fistfight, he's screwed because they're killer robots. He's got a license to shoot on sight. That's how he should do it. See the target, ice the target, cover it up so the other Replicants don't know what's going down, repeat. Nice and simple.
Instead, he gets into a fistfight with every single one, and relies on dumb luck not to get killed. Every time.
To be a great bladerunner he only has to be better than the other guys doing it, not be a flawless badass. It's portrayed as a hard fucking job: it's an infrequent task to practice because most replicants are off world, there's a lot of procedure and paperwork limiting bladerunners' actions in hostile situations, evaluations have to be performed, the other guy we see doing the job gets shot, the replicants are superhuman in many physical and mental capacities, Zhora was a member of political murder squad, and many of Deckard's problems are underscored by how he deals with the female replicants throughout the movie.
yeah but he isn't saved through his skill just being good enough. he's just absurdly lucky that sometimes replicants spazz out and decide now would be a good time to start acrobatics i guess? it seemed pretty clumsy to have him get saved that way.
Man, this isn't hard to parse out if you paid any attention to the film. When Bryant drags Deckard back he tells him blatantly, "this is a bad one Deck, the worst yet." He explains that Holden was good, but he wasn't good enough. Deckard's the best. He just also happens to be facing some very advanced replicants. The fact that they toy around with him speaks more to their arrogance, showing ironically how human the replicants are themselves in spite of being so much more intelligent and physically superior (aside from their abbreviated lifespan). If you didn't really enjoy the film then I can get why you wouldn't really pay attention to these things that are clearly spelled out or strongly implied in the film, but that doesn't mean he was a terrible cop. They brought him back because they needed the best because Bryant knew these replicants were going to be particularly tough. Deckard is definitely no hero. And that's the point. He's a slob, he's antisocial, he doesn't know how to deal with women. He's a fucking schmuck who happens to be good at killing replicants, who then runs into some particularly intelligent and tough replicants. The film would have been stupid if he'd been some inhuman, mythical badass. It would have lost it's narrative power and tension.
0
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
They should have just sent that oragami-making wizard after the replicants.
0
Options
Garlic Breadi'm a bitch i'm a bitch i'm a bitch i'm aRegistered User, Disagreeableregular
In regards to sequels/remakes and junk, many works are rich enough in their setting that I salivate over the prospect of more stuff. Like how the bring it on universe established a hyper-real bubbly world where cheerleading is king, and I wanna revisit that world over and over, hence my love of all the sequels. It should be a compliment to the creators that I wanna see more. I realize that's also the justification for fan/slashfiction, but whatevs
Seriously
I never have a problem with remakes or sequels. I love seeing different takes on things, and pretty much every time I see something I think of what else it could be
Blade Runner is to me in my adult life what Star Wars was for me as child. The best damned work of sci-fi and therefore best thing ever. I only saw it about a year back, though. Ethics prof. walked in at the end of the year and chucked it on. Sure, relevant to the course, but I'm pretty sure he just wanted to watch a great sci-fi. He wanted to put on RoboCop even, but didn't think people would "get it".
I don't know if a new Blade Runner can work, visually for me. A lot of the visual quality adds to the atmosphere for me. Watching the movie it's clear it was done in the era it was in... every decade has a noticeable quality to the filming. A physical quality because of the techniques of the times and the available technology. It's why a lot of modern movies don't visually work for me. I just don't know if that opening sequence or the shutting-blinds scenes could be replicated with modern techniques/technology.
It would be cool to have a prequel that follows the replicants journey throughout the galaxy before coming to Earth while viewing all those wonderful things.
And with today's CGI technology. It isn't all that hard.
Walken, I think, has stated that he will not turn down a role if he has the time and you have the money
Christopher Lee has a similar deal, though I think travel has to be limited because of his age
He speaks to that in another quote.
I don't choose that much. I just sort of take what's there. I don't have much else to do. I don't have a lot of hobbies. I don't play golf. I don't have any children. Things that occupy people's time. I just try to take jobs. I basically work so much because I'm lazy.
They should have just sent that oragami-making wizard after the replicants.
Well, he used to be good at it.
But after he lost his ship and the woman he loved, well, he went off to live in the woods. Lost the instinct for it.
Seriously I love Blade Runner and everything, but in the background of Robot Hunters and Space Ships you have a Wizard making origami and being all mystical.
Man, this isn't hard to parse out if you paid any attention to the film. When Bryant drags Deckard back he tells him blatantly, "this is a bad one Deck, the worst yet." He explains that Holden was good, but he wasn't good enough. Deckard's the best. He just also happens to be facing some very advanced replicants. The fact that they toy around with him speaks more to their arrogance, showing ironically how human the replicants are themselves in spite of being so much more intelligent and physically superior (aside from their abbreviated lifespan). If you didn't really enjoy the film then I can get why you wouldn't really pay attention to these things that are clearly spelled out or strongly implied in the film, but that doesn't mean he was a terrible cop. They brought him back because they needed the best because Bryant knew these replicants were going to be particularly tough. Deckard is definitely no hero. And that's the point. He's a slob, he's antisocial, he doesn't know how to deal with women. He's a fucking schmuck who happens to be good at killing replicants, who then runs into some particularly intelligent and tough replicants. The film would have been stupid if he'd been some inhuman, mythical badass. It would have lost it's narrative power and tension.
i liked the film, i just thought it's a funny point. and i know all the points you raised already. why is your back up?
I just saw the theatrical release with a bunch of friends like two weeks ago.
They didn't want to watch the final or international theatrical cuts because of too many boobies and too much blood.
It also hasn't aged as well as we'd like.
Why would anyone ever want less boobies and blood?
I DON'T KNOW!
We were going to see the final cut right after to compare it, but we all really lost interest. Not even the promise of boobies and blood was enough.
I can confirm that the Final Cut is much, much better. And also holds up a whole lot better.
Posts
He speaks to that in another quote.
Amazon Wishlist: http://www.amazon.com/BusterK/wishlist/3JPEKJGX9G54I/ref=cm_wl_search_bin_1
Because a movie that is original did not get made so that this possibly atrocity could.
"this possible atrocity"
so if something has even a small chance of being less than good it should never be made?
The world won't go out with a bang, but with a blade runner 2.
like dich said, fitting avatar for that post
If you told me "Ridley Scott is making a Robin Hood movie" I would have thought it was going to be amazing but whoooops
however, if they had stuck to the original script it would have been much more interesting and probably better
basically we know nothing about this movie other than the fact that it exists so freaking out over how it is going to ruin everything forever is silly
also
yeah but he isn't saved through his skill just being good enough. he's just absurdly lucky that sometimes replicants spazz out and decide now would be a good time to start acrobatics i guess? it seemed pretty clumsy to have him get saved that way.
i think chia made the point in jest but...
8->
Seriously
I never have a problem with remakes or sequels. I love seeing different takes on things, and pretty much every time I see something I think of what else it could be
I don't know if a new Blade Runner can work, visually for me. A lot of the visual quality adds to the atmosphere for me. Watching the movie it's clear it was done in the era it was in... every decade has a noticeable quality to the filming. A physical quality because of the techniques of the times and the available technology. It's why a lot of modern movies don't visually work for me. I just don't know if that opening sequence or the shutting-blinds scenes could be replicated with modern techniques/technology.
This is almost what I want from a prequel. Marco9 got to it before I did, though. They tried that. Sort of.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldier_%28film%29
And with today's CGI technology. It isn't all that hard.
didnt yall see soldier
aahahahahahahahahahahaha
I regret nothing.
Dear satan I wish for this or maybe some of this....oh and I'm a medium or a large.
If he's bored he should try cooking, like this dude here:
Dear satan I wish for this or maybe some of this....oh and I'm a medium or a large.
David Thewlis needs to act more
Well, he used to be good at it.
But after he lost his ship and the woman he loved, well, he went off to live in the woods. Lost the instinct for it.
Why I fear the ocean.
https://www.paypal.me/hobnailtaylor
Seriously I love Blade Runner and everything, but in the background of Robot Hunters and Space Ships you have a Wizard making origami and being all mystical.
All I wanted was one, little fireball spell cast.
gaff's are for hiding your junk
i liked the film, i just thought it's a funny point. and i know all the points you raised already. why is your back up?
I can confirm that the Final Cut is much, much better. And also holds up a whole lot better.