Blade Runner 2049 Spoilers from post 444

JP Liz V1 · 16-04-2015 11:20pm

Ryan Gosling in talks to join http://variety.com/2015/film/news/ryan-gosling-to-star-in-blade-runner-sequel-1201474022/

Skerries · 16-04-2015 11:59pm

Is he going to play a replicant? Or will he be...
...
...
...
A real human being?

TherapyBoy · 17-04-2015 1:07am

..and a real hero

crybaby · 17-04-2015 9:12am

So if he wasn't mean to be a replicant then what was the point of the unicorn scene?

Nalz · 17-04-2015 9:46am

crybaby wrote: »

So if he wasn't mean to be a replicant then what was the point of the unicorn scene?

Where did you see he wont be a replicant?

Skerries · 17-04-2015 12:35pm

crybaby is talking about Deckard

Skerries · 17-04-2015 12:36pm

crybaby wrote: »

So if he wasn't mean to be a replicant then what was the point of the unicorn scene?

that scene was only put back in for the final cut

shazzerman · 17-04-2015 1:36pm

That unicorn scene is a disturbing element in the film; Scott unwisely put it in to pander to the cult of Is-He-Isn't-He-A-Replicant that a lot of viewers - who were not paying attention to the actual film - got all het up about back in the day. If Deckard is a replicant the film is a fraud.

Skerries · 17-04-2015 1:59pm

Is Deckard a Replicant?

Is Deckard a Replicant?

This question causes the most debate among 'Blade Runner' fans. The different versions of 'Blade Runner' support this notion to differing degrees. One might argue that in the 1982 theatrical release, Deckard is not a replicant but in 'Blade Runner Dirctors Cut', he is. This is mainly due to the addition of the 'Unicorn dream'.

In the book 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep' Decker is human. He takes the Voight-Kampff test and passes it, because he is not totally sure himself.

In the film it is less clear. Ridley Scott wanted to make it deliberately ambiguous. Ridley Scott himself has stated that although he made it appear either way, he also intentionally introduced enough evidence to support the notion, and (as far as he is concerned), Deckard is a replicant.

Ford and Ridley argued on set over whether the audience should be told that Deckard was a replicant. It could be that this very ambiguity, and the questions that it raises that is at the heart of the film's enduring popularity.

There is no definitive answer, but I've collected together all the various clues from different sources:

The case FOR

- Ridley Scott and Harrison Ford have stated that Deckard was meant to be a replicant. In Details magazine (US) October 1992 Ford says:
"Blade Runner was not one of my favorite films. I tangled with Ridley. The biggest problem was that at the end, he wanted the audience to find out that Deckard was a replicant. I fought that because I felt the audience needed somebody to cheer for."

- The shooting script had a voice-over where Deckard says, "I new it on the roof that night. We were brothers, Roy Batty and I!"

- Gaff knew that Deckard dreamt of a unicorn, and places a unicorn origami outside his room, therefore Gaff knew what dreams that Deckard had been implanted with. (Blade Runner Directors Cut only)

- Replicants have a penchant for photographs, because it gives them a tie to their non-existent past. Deckard's flat is packed with photos, and none of them are recent or in colour. Despite her memories, Rachael needed a photo as an emotional cushion. Likewise, Deckard would need photos, despite his memory implants. Rachael plays the piano, and Deckard has a piano in his flat.

- Gaff tells him "You've done a man's job, sir!". Early drafts of the script have him then add: "But are you sure you are man? It's hard to be sure who's who around here."

- Only a replicant could survive the beatings that Deckard takes, and then struggle up the side of a building with two dislocated fingers.

- Bryant's threat "If you're not a cop, you're little people" might be an allusion to Deckard being created solely for police work.

- Deckard's eyes glow (yellow-orange) when he is washing the blood out of his mouth in his bathroom, and when he tells Rachael that he wouldn't go after her, "but someone would". Deckard is standing behind Rachael, and he's out of focus.

- Roy knew Deckard's name, yet he was never told it. Some speculate that Deckard might have been part of Roy's off-world rebellion, but was captured by the police and used to hunt down the others. In that case, Bryant is including Deckard among the five escaped replicants.

- When Batty saves him from falling off the building he lifts him up by the arm saying "kinship!" implying that Deckard is a replicant just like Roy Batty and Batty knows this.

- Inspector Bryant calls Deckard out of retirement, saying that the Nexus-6 replicants are too dangerous, and that Deckard is the only one who can handle them.
Bryant: I need ya, Deck. This is a bad one, the worst yet. I need the old blade runner, I need your magic. I need the best.

- The police would not risk a human to hunt four powerful replicants, particularly since replicants were designed for such dangerous work. Of course Deckard would have to think he was human or he might not be willing to hunt down other replicants.

- Gaff seems to follow Deckard everywhere -- he is at the scene of all the Replicant retirings almost immediately. Gaff is always with Deckard when the chief is around. This suggests that Gaff is the real BR, and that Deckard is only a tool Gaff uses for the dirty work.

- Rachael tearfully asks Deckard if he has ever taken the Voight-Kampff test himself. Deckard does not respond.

The case AGAINST

- A major point of the film was to show Deckard (The Common Man) the value of life. "What's it like to live in fear?" If all the main characters are replicants, the contrast between humans and replicants is lost.

- Rachael had an implanted unicorn dream and Deckard's reverie in Blade Runner Directors Cut was a result of having seen her implants. Gaff may have seen Rachael's implants at the same time Deckard did, perhaps while they were at Tyrell's.

- Could you trust a replicant to kill other replicants? Why did the police trust Deckard?

- Having Deckard as a replicant implies a conspiracy between the police and Tyrell.

- Replicants were outlawed on Earth and it seems unlikely that a replicant would have an ex-wife.

- If Deckard was a replicant designed to be a Blade Runner, why would they give him bad memories of the police force? Wouldn't it be more effective if he were loyal and happy about his work?

- Deckard was not a replicant in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, although he has another Blade Runner test him at one point just to be sure. All the bounty hunters in the book question whether they are Replicants themselves.

- Ridley Scott said that the Replicants eyes did not really glow, it was simply a 'cinematic technique', so if it is not an important characteristic of a Replicant, it isn't important that Deckards eyes glow either.

shazzerman · 17-04-2015 2:05pm

All very well, but if Deckard is a replicant - as we must lean towards because of the unwise insertion of one brief scene - then the film is all the lesser for it, and not the rich treatise on the philosophy of humanity it is when all the film's strongest elements leave us in no doubt that Deckard is human.

Adamantium · 17-04-2015 8:57pm

I always thought Deckard discovered humanity in a future world where such gentle things as love, intimacy and connection were slowly ground out of a person until they forgot they ever existed. The replicants were almost childlike, curious and more like what modern humans are like. More human than human essentially. I think that's why Deckard as a human works better, as the replicants were like what "old humanity" used to be like, and he's on the secret or awakening by the end, when that dove flies away , it a ".....fcuk" moment of acceptance

I think its an even more relevant theme/film than it was in 1982. Timeless for the modern age. And we have all the versions.

Tony EH · 17-04-2015 9:53pm

Skerries wrote: »

Is Deckard a Replicant?

The case FOR

- Ridley Scott and Harrison Ford have stated that Deckard was meant to be a replicant. In Details magazine (US) October 1992 Ford says:
"Blade Runner was not one of my favorite films. I tangled with Ridley. The biggest problem was that at the end, he wanted the audience to find out that Deckard was a replicant. I fought that because I felt the audience needed somebody to cheer for."

This only means that Scott was trying to shoehorn this "Deckard is a replicant" thing into the film, while filming. Nobody else was on board.

- The shooting script had a voice-over where Deckard says, "I new it on the roof that night. We were brothers, Roy Batty and I!"

This doesn't mean anything really. It certainly isn't "a case for". It just means that Deckard felt a certain affinity to Batty at that moment. In fact most of the audience feels an affinity to Roy Batty during his "I've seen things that you people wouldn't believe" speech. It doesn't mean they're robots. Also, at that moment when Batty saves Deckard, he comes to realise that all life ends and that importance of experience and the imparting of memory/information is paramount to the existence of one entity. Both Deckard and Batty have reached a certain brotherly understanding between themselves at that point.

- Gaff knew that Deckard dreamt of a unicorn, and places a unicorn origami outside his room, therefore Gaff knew what dreams that Deckard had been implanted with. (Blade Runner Directors Cut only)

It's not explicit that Gaff knew anything, or that the unicorn dream was something from Deckard's past or Rachael's. Both Deckard and other Blade Runners had been checking over her files. The unicorn implant could have been mentioned there.

Either way, there is nothing explicit about the unicorn dream that was, again, shoehorned into the film while shooting.

- Replicants have a penchant for photographs, because it gives them a tie to their non-existent past. Deckard's flat is packed with photos, and none of them are recent or in colour. Despite her memories, Rachael needed a photo as an emotional cushion. Likewise, Deckard would need photos, despite his memory implants. Rachael plays the piano, and Deckard has a piano in his flat.

Humans have a penchant for photos too. Everybody's house has photos.

- Gaff tells him "You've done a man's job, sir!". Early drafts of the script have him then add: "But are you sure you are man? It's hard to be sure who's who around here."

Again, that's not explicitly saying that Deckard is a robot. The first part is simply saying "Good man job well done." The second part is absent from film entirely, but ties in with the character from teh book, who felt that he was becoming more and more like the robots he was killing and was worrying about killing a human by mistake.

- Only a replicant could survive the beatings that Deckard takes, and then struggle up the side of a building with two dislocated fingers.

This is untrue and in fact Deckard is close to getting defeated at EVERY juncture by the replicants he's chasing, but for the intervention of other characters. Also, why sent a demonstrably weaker robot after strong ones? That is such an awful idea, it beggars belief.

- Bryant's threat "If you're not a cop, you're little people" might be an allusion to Deckard being created solely for police work.

Might. But, more than likely, it means that the police can make life very difficult for a civilian if Deckard chooses not to comply with Bryant's demands. Besides, if Deckard is a replicant, that requires that the entire police force and Tyrell are in on some massive conspiracy of sorts. It's silly. Interestingly enough, M. Emmet Walsh who played Bryant has said that there was never any discussion on whether Deckard was a replicant and appeared to think that the idea was ridiculous.

- Deckard's eyes glow (yellow-orange) when he is washing the blood out of his mouth in his bathroom, and when he tells Rachael that he wouldn't go after her, "but someone would". Deckard is standing behind Rachael, and he's out of focus.

Not in the original cut, as far as I can remember. Plus, if glowing eyes is an indication of being a robot, why the hell bother with the Voight-Kampf test? Again, that is simply ridiculous beyond belief.

- Roy knew Deckard's name, yet he was never told it. Some speculate that Deckard might have been part of Roy's off-world rebellion, but was captured by the police and used to hunt down the others. In that case, Bryant is including Deckard among the five escaped replicants.

Again, this is silly. If this was the case, then why didn't Roy not make a more explicit reference to it later in the film? Plus, if they were both replicants a and knew, why did Roy say "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe."

- When Batty saves him from falling off the building he lifts him up by the arm saying "kinship!" implying that Deckard is a replicant just like Roy Batty and Batty knows this.

See the point above, regarding the same scene.

- Inspector Bryant calls Deckard out of retirement, saying that the Nexus-6 replicants are too dangerous, and that Deckard is the only one who can handle them.
Bryant: I need ya, Deck. This is a bad one, the worst yet. I need the old blade runner, I need your magic. I need the best.

"I need the OLD blade runner..."

Replicants don't get old.

Bryant is simply stating that he wants his best man on the job. A man that had clearly become tired of killing robots for a living.

- The police would not risk a human to hunt four powerful replicants, particularly since replicants were designed for such dangerous work. Of course Deckard would have to think he was human or he might not be willing to hunt down other replicants.

Blade runners are human and they hunt and kill replicants all the time and again, this requires that some sort of hoaky conspiracy is afoot within the police force. Besides, they wouldn't have to program Deckard to think he was a human, they could simply program him to do whatever the hell they wanted him to. It doesn't make sense.

- Gaff seems to follow Deckard everywhere -- he is at the scene of all the Replicant retirings almost immediately. Gaff is always with Deckard when the chief is around. This suggests that Gaff is the real BR, and that Deckard is only a tool Gaff uses for the dirty work.

This means nothing.

- Rachael tearfully asks Deckard if he has ever taken the Voight-Kampff test himself. Deckard does not respond.

Why would a human take the Voight-Kampf test. In the book he does, because he feels that he is becoming colder and is questioning he humanity at one point. But he easily passes it. This is the angle that probably gave Scott the "Deckard is a replicant" idea, but it's an idea that is ill-thought out and absolutely doesn't work with the rest of the film as it falls over to even the slightest of scrutiny. Both Scott and some fans want Deckard to be a robot because they think it adds a layer of mystery to a film that it a pretty empty experience for most viewers. But, it falls flat on its face if one looks too hard at it and ends up being silly.

Every point in the case for can be countered quite easily. But, if people want Deckard to be a replicant, then off they go. But, to me, the idea doesn't make any real sense and in fact would make for a lesser film imho.

Anyway, with the sequel on the cards and Harrison Ford on board, we'll soon know. But, as I said earlier in the thread, I cannot think of a more stupid idea than having an OAP robot.

Nalz · 18-04-2015 12:45am

Tony EH wrote: »

Every point in the case for can be countered quite easily. But, if people want Deckard to be a replicant, then off they go. But, to me, the idea doesn't make any real sense and in fact would make for a lesser film imho.

Anyway, with the sequel on the cards and Harrison Ford on board, we'll soon know. But, as I said earlier in the thread, I cannot think of a more stupid idea than having an OAP robot.

Why are people so against Deckard being a replicant? You can interpret the first film excluding the directors cut unicorn scene... Anything that comes after that does not ruin the film. It does not make it a lesser film, not uunless you make it that way for yourself!

Skerries · 18-04-2015 3:42am

I also read this which I like but ultimately disregard

Deckard is Gaff. If you think about it, it makes complete sense. Who is Gaff anyway? I propose that he was the best Blade Runner in the business before he got injured and acquired his limp, possibly even going after the replicants in the film. He's right up there in the cop ranks and appears to be close to Police Chief Bryant, the same relationship Deckard re-assumes when he's hauled in at the start of the film.
Deckard isn't even allowed to fly his own police car. Pretty much every time he needs to go somewhere, Gaff has to drive him. He's a real dick about it too, he doesn't talk to him or even acknowledge his presence. He just chauffeurs him around with that resentful scowl on his face. How come Deckard isn't flying himself around?
Another element of depth on this point comes in the design of Deckard's car. This was designed by the legendary Syd Mead who noted during the design phase that Deckard's car was for ground-only transport and had the vertical take-off flight systems removed. This is why the vehicle is a bit of a mess and has some panels missing and parts of the chassais exposed. Somebody has made sure that Deckard's car has had it's wings clipped. He's being kept under at least some sort of control.
Right through the film, Gaff shows complete contempt for Deckard. Right at the start when he approaches him eating those delicious looking noodles, his way of saying "hello" is by hitting him on the arm with his cane. All the way through he's basically a massive prick to him. The relationship makes sense - this whole endeavour of using a robot to hunt robots is experimental. If Deckard has Gaff's memories and skills than who better to keep a close eye on him to assess how things are going? And how much would Gaff hate doing this? The more Deckard succeeds, the more reason Gaff has to hate him. He's everything Gaff once was and serves as a painfull reminder.
On top of all of this we have the oragami. All throughout the film Gaff appears to know what Deckard is thinking. When he's getting the original brief from Bryant about how hard the job is going to be, Gaff makes an origami chicken and puts it on the desk because he knows Deckard is scared. He knows this because he would be intimidated by the job himself. Later, when discussing a visit with Rachael, Gaff makes the little matchstick man with a boner. He does this because he's already visited Tyrell and met Rachael and knows that Deckard's going to fancy her.
Then we have the one that can't really be interpreted any other way. The unicorn. Gaff knows about Deckard's recurring dream. How else could this be the case unless he also has the same dream?
Gaff says something very telling to Deckard near the end of the film. He lands on the roof right after the climactic fight which means presumably he was overhead observing the whole time, letting them get on with it to see how things played out instead of stepping in and helping. As he lands, he walks up to Deckard smiling and says "You've done a man's job". Coming from Gaff, this is the ultimate compliment. He has accepted him as his equal.

So that's my Blade Runner theory, that Deckard is actually Gaff. Might go and watch it again now.

Nalz · 18-04-2015 10:28am

Deep!

pixelburp · 18-04-2015 1:16pm

Wow, I've never heard that "Deckerd is a clone of Gaff" theory before, that's actually pretty cool and believable based on the little moments mentioned. No one ever notices Gaff but yeah he's always in the background, being a bit weird and a bit of an ass.

That's what I love about films like Blade Runner, you bring whatever theory you please to it because events are rendered with an enticing ambiguity that invites speculation. A sequel can only destroy that line of debate and discussion because It'll have to choose one oath or another, ultimately annoying most fans

bnt · 21-05-2015 12:32am

Anyway - in the latest news, cinematographer Roger Deakins is on board:

Here's all we do know: Harrison Ford has already been confirmed to return as Rick Deckard, and the story takes place decades after the events of the original Blade Runner, which was actually set in the year 2019. Word is that Ryan Gosling has also been cast in the lead role, but nothing is confirmed on that front yet. Production won't start until the summer of 2016. Denis Villeneuve is directing from a script by Hampton Fancher, co-writer of the original Blade Runner, with Green Lantern writer Michael Green contributing as well. And finally, Roger Deakins will be cinematographer.

Nalz · 11-09-2015 10:18am

Is there a set or rough date for this?

JP Liz V1 · 19-11-2015 1:59pm

http://collider.com/ryan-gosling-blade-runner-2-nice-guys/

Gosling confirmed

Duggy747 · 19-11-2015 2:50pm

Scott has given how the movie will start which was a rejected piece from the 1st film:

“We decided to start the film off with the original starting block of the original film. We always loved the idea of a dystopian universe, and we start off at what I describe as a ‘factory farm’ – what would be a flat land with farming. Wyoming. Flat, not rolling – you can see for 20 miles. No fences, just plowed, dry dirt. Turn around and you see a massive tree, just dead, but the tree is being supported and kept alive by wires that are holding the tree up. It’s a bit like Grapes of Wrath, there’s dust, and the tree is still standing. By that tree is a traditional, Grapes of Wrath-type white cottage with a porch. Behind it at a distance of two miles, in the twilight, is this massive combine harvester that’s fertilizing this ground. You’ve got 16 Klieg lights on the front, and this combine is four times the size of this cottage.

And now a spinner [a flying car] comes flying in, creating dust. Of course, traditionally chased by a dog that barks, the doors open, a guy gets out and there you’ve got Rick Deckard. He walks in the cottage, opens the door, sits down, smells stew, sits down and waits for the guy to pull up to the house to arrive. The guy’s seen him, so the guy pulls the combine behind the cottage and it towers three stories above it, and the man climbs down from a ladder – a big man. He steps onto the balcony and he goes to Harrison’s side. The cottage actually [creaks]; this guy’s got to be 350 pounds. I’m not going to say anything else – you’ll have to go see the movie.”

emo72 · 03-04-2016 11:40pm

robin wright and bautista(sp?) cast. due to start filming soon. dont ask for a link. i heard it on the radio folks.

edit....ah shucks heres something to click

http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/672851-dave-bautista-teases-blade-runner-2-casting

conorhal · 04-04-2016 3:59pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Wow, I've never heard that "Deckerd is a clone of Gaff" theory before, that's actually pretty cool and believable based on the little moments mentioned. No one ever notices Gaff but yeah he's always in the background, being a bit weird and a bit of an ass.

That's what I love about films like Blade Runner, you bring whatever theory you please to it because events are rendered with an enticing ambiguity that invites speculation. A sequel can only destroy that line of debate and discussion because It'll have to choose one oath or another, ultimately annoying most fans

I hadn't heard it before, but I'd considered the possibility myself. If you were creating a replicant bounty hunter, where would you go for the memories that would best instil a talent for the job if not the memories of the best blade runner in the business? How else could Gaff have known about Deckard’s dreams?

There is some amazing bonus material on the definitive edition collectors DVD. I guess 20yrs distance allows everybody to be honest about the film and where it succeeds or fails.
The production was pure chaos it seems. The documentary has storyboards for the original 'farm opening' and also details for scenes that sadly went un-filmed due to budget restraints, most interesting I thought was the fact that Tyrell was also a replecant. There was supposed to be scene with Batty discovering his mausoleum after killing his double, real Tyrell was long dead, he’s been cryogenically frozen but had rather embarrassingly died in a power outage.
There were quite a few elements that would have made the film a bit more coherent and the plot less obtuse but the time and money pressures put the kibosh on them.

Technocentral · 04-04-2016 11:03pm

Its a pity Ridley isn't directing it himself, never heard of the director.

Skerries · 12-06-2016 11:30am

today is Zhora's incept date

Ipso · 13-06-2016 5:40am

Technocentral wrote: »

Its a pity Ridley isn't directing it himself, never heard of the director.

Check out Prisoners and Sicario.

conorhal · 13-06-2016 11:39am

Skerries wrote: »

today is Zhora's incept date

So, apart from flying cars and hoverboards, I can now add 'no sexy replicant sexbots' to the reasons why this century continues to dissapoint.

Frank Bullitt · 16-06-2016 6:17pm

But at least you can buy a Nexus 6 though!

thegreengoblin · 17-07-2016 6:21pm

Some concept art...cannot wait to see this on a giant screen!

http://www.gamesradar.com/blade-runner-2-concept-art-shows-a-beautifully-bleak-future-los-angeles/?utm_content=buffer01aef&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer_tftw

pixelburp · 17-07-2016 7:51pm

Forgot all about this; still a bit baffled it's going ahead, but the concept art is undeniably cool looking (though it nearly always does compared to the final product ), the background behind this LA sounds intriguing too.

emo72 · 17-07-2016 8:18pm

is vangelis still recording music? long shot that he'd be involved anyway. Ana de Armas playing the rachel character perhaps?

https://www.google.ie/search?q=Ana+de+Armas&rlz=1C1LENN_enIE502IE502&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjg-8K2m_vNAhWMI8AKHTT8AjYQ_AUICCgB&biw=1366&bih=705

Pickpocket · 18-07-2016 3:25pm

Technocentral wrote: »

Its a pity Ridley isn't directing it himself, never heard of the director.

The Martian was a return to form but his five films previous to that were Body of Lies, Robin Hood, Prometheus, The Counsellor and Exodus: Gods and Kings. Turkeys, the lot of 'em.

Personally, I'm relieved he's not directing.

emo72 · 18-07-2016 3:54pm

I'm glad Scott isn't directing too. His quality has dipped the last few years. He always had no interest in making a follow up, so why the interest now? He is looking for a sure fire hit perhaps? The new director looks top notch. I was totally hyped for Prometheus but was stung there.

Frank Bullitt · 20-07-2016 5:06pm

I'm quietly looking forward to this.

Its critical that the soundtrack is on point. Critical.

Sad Professor · 20-07-2016 7:41pm

Any word on the composer actually? I'm guessing Jóhann Jóhannsson.

Frank Bullitt · 21-07-2016 8:06pm

Sad Professor wrote: »

Any word on the composer actually? I'm guessing Jóhann Jóhannsson.

Haven't heard anything yet, hopefully they don't do something dumb like Daft Punk.

Vangelis is still doing some bits, it would be magic if he did it again.

JP Liz V1 · 18-08-2016 11:10pm

Jared Leto also has joined

homerun_homer · 19-08-2016 10:00am

Ipso wrote: »

Check out Prisoners and Sicario.

More so, check out Enemy. It's a film he made before Prisoners that came out after Prisoners. It's brilliant.

pixelburp · 19-08-2016 11:47am

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Jared Leto also has joined

Hopefully just a bit part, because my tolerance for that actor really nose-dived after Suicide Squad & his 'method' acting.

Nalz · 19-08-2016 2:58pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Hopefully just a bit part, because my tolerance for that actor really nose-dived after Suicide Squad & his 'method' acting.

You could kinda scratch that film as they just showed the out takes it seemed. An excellent film was in there that just didn't come out..... at all.

Snix

homerun_homer · 19-08-2016 3:59pm

Nalz wrote: »

You could kinda scratch that film as they just showed the out takes it seemed. An excellent film was in there that just didn't come out..... at all.

Snix

I don't know about that. I'd rant but there's a whole other thread for that.

Nalz · 19-08-2016 7:43pm

homerun_homer wrote: »

I don't know about that. I'd rant but there's a whole other thread for that.

True. I'm just saying it could have been an 8/10 but ended up a 4/10

brianregan09 · 20-08-2016 3:08pm

Just watched the orginal last night for the 1st time ever , Really enjoyed it can't wait for the sequel Rutgur Hauer was amazing

ScottScott · 23-08-2016 12:02pm

The "Tears in rain" final monologue IMHO is some of the best lines in cinema history. Remain on the same high level could be a very challenging task.

thegreengoblin · 25-08-2016 10:09pm

Sad Professor wrote: »

Any word on the composer actually? I'm guessing Jóhann Jóhannsson.

You guessed correctly...

http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/25/12630674/johann-johannson-composer-blade-runner-2-sequel-score

pixelburp · 06-10-2016 6:37pm

So the title for the sequel has been announced; it'll be called ... ... 'Blade Runner 2049'. So least that's the setting covered - 30 years after the first film.

thegreengoblin · 15-12-2016 12:07am

Trailer on the way!

http://www.scified.com/news/blade-runner-2049-trailer-runtime-release-date-announced

Mr E · 19-12-2016 4:45pm

Teaser Trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDscTTE-P-k

pixelburp · 19-12-2016 4:54pm

Lightning fast Mr. E

I've shared my misgivings in the first page of this thread, and still maintain them, but I won't deny that trailer got me quite excited! Denis Villeneuve has quickly become a director to take seriously & his presence is at least a sign they're taking the sequel a little seriously. Villeneuve now also has the kudos and clout to (hopefully) not be brow-beaten into making concessions for the studio.

Slydice · 19-12-2016 5:04pm

Oh my!

That looks good. Feels right? ... right? Kinda?

Is that supposed to be Mars? Is Earth turning into Mars? Is the writing on the windows of the 'Vintage Casino' Korean? I don't know languages from the area but I've seen that Korean seems to have more circular shapes like those in their.. Hanja is it?

Slydice · 19-12-2016 5:06pm

It kinda answers the big question from the first film right? Looks like he's being hunted? That makes him a replicant right? Maybe? Is it a red herring? How is he still alive though, replicants ain't supposed to live long are they? Maybe he's different?

Blade Runner 2049 **Spoilers from post 444**

Comments

Blade Runner 2049 Spoilers from post 444