http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2011/03/03/blade-runner-sequels-and-prequels-are-on-the-way/

At first I thought Ridley Scott was desperate enough to re-tread old ground (something I'd not have expected), but then I read the article and I see what looks like the same interview I read for the Hitchhiker's Guide and Transformers ~different guys same awful intentions. Tron2 made money, so now we get a Blade Runner2 followup.

Based on Hitchhiker and Tron:Legacy as a reference what Hollywood makes these days, I am not at all looking forward to this if it gets off the ground.

I saw Blade Runner for the 1st time a few weeks ago and I know some will hate for saying this but I honestly didn't find it that great :shrug: I was a bit bored honestly and although I do admit the setting was good I felt the story was silly and ended without a proper end and was just out of the blue...

Yes, everything new is dreadful, it'd be so much better if we'd been born in the 80s

The 80's were dreadful , but they had a few good gems come out of them.

My concern is that these days all you usually get is a formula McAction flick ~of the kind parodied in films that show people watching a film... Come to think of it... (terrible movie too) Last Action Hero.

Why do you think we never make anything new? Your on to us. :batman:

The first Tron was terrible. The second Tron was terrible.

The first Blade Runner was nothin' special. The Second Blade Runner will be nothin' special.

:tops:

Next thing you know you will be saying that about Red Dawn and Footloose.

They were like Fallout in a way... to truly appreciate it, you had to know the culture and concerns of the day. Tron was made in an age where few had home computers, it also had some odd luck to it... that Flicker in the lights was an accident ~they shot the film out of sequence with the film cans. Blade runner was based on the book 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep'. It was said to be a brutal [film shoot] experience (for the cast & crew). Rutger Hauer wrote those last lines said on the rooftop as an ad-lib earlier that day.

I went to sleep watching it too ~doesn't mean I didn't like it, or have seen better made since. :shrug: (though the prospect is something to look forward to)

Nonsense, Red Dawn was a great movie. It was unrealistic, but it was a fun action movie and incredibly suspenseful.

I have not seen Footloose and therefore cannot say whether I liked it or not.

I would cut "footloose" if you want my advise.

(I preferred Steel Dawn to Red Dawn :laugh:)

---

It just seems that modern media are returning to whatever classics that made money and remaking them in a destructively incompatible way for a new audience. Where the new viewers don't get the intended experience, and the past viewers don't get the improved medium technology available to modern film making.

I understand that it changed the way movies were made, that does not mean that the movie itself was anything special. Revolutionary films can be great because they are original, but they should not be considered to be the greatest of all time just for being unique. Think of it like a computer, the first one made revolutionized our culture, but that does mean that it is a good computer.

I would agree... but its a typo.

Films are not considered the greatest of all time once they are surpassed... but there are exceptions ~Will the best silent film ever be surpassed? (I don't think "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph6GIWOCiO8" counts... Its in a class by itself.)

Oops, it appears I have made a typo.

I would have to say no, silent films are pretty much stuck in time unless some director wants to revisit them seein' as today they would be considered unique.

Mel Brooks already did. :laugh:

Yes. :trophy: :trophy:

*That just means "really good!" not 2 out of 5

Blade Runner was an awesome movie. Did any of you even see the directors cut?

:shrug:
My dad is obsessed with Bladerunner, he has the special edition on BluRay blah blah, honestly it's not that great of a film IMO. I've watched it 3 times in my life and I honestly do not care for it.

Just because WB is in negotiations for the rights, doesnt mean its going to get made. With that said, I never really liked Blade-Runner. Huge Sci Fi fan, but it just wasn't very good IMO.

I have to agree. I'm a sci-fi fanatic, and I just wasn't that impressed.

We need a Toxic Avenger or Swamp Thing remake.

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is better than it's film adaptation, in my opinion, but I do still like Blade Runner, and don't want some terrible follow-up to it. That's not saying it's impossible to make good films now, or that Blade Runner is only good because it was made back then. I just don't have much faith that the reason for this proposed follow-up is anything other than money.

its an ok movie as far as the storyline was concerned. now the special effects, especially the backgrounds were phenomonal and i dare say better than many movies made today 30 years later. i saw it for the first time back in the 90s and had to double to check to make sure it was made in 1981. i put it in the category of star wars and aliens in movies that did something far and above what was normal for their contemporaries.

I'm not entirely convinced this is a good thing. Blade Runner needs neither a prequel nor a sequel. Just... leave it alone and - here's a crazy idea - come up with an original idea instead.

And to all you scifi fans who say they don't like Blade Runner, go and sit in the naughty corner and come back when you've realised the error of your ways.

Why is it such a great movie then? I absolutely love its visuals and cyberpunk/noir city backdrop. But I don't get why it's one of the best other then that. For me it's like Metropolis (some of the best visuals ever) just without the great story.

This. I love the setting and the visuals were amazing back then but I find the story quite boring :shrug:

I've watched most of Bladerunner, long ago. It put me to sleep. It was boring as [censored].