Does anyone who isn't directly involved with this movie actually want it to happen?
>>69211801
I don't even like the first movie, so I couldn't care less about this.
Yes there's always people who fall for nostalgia reboots because they have something on which to build their expectations/hype on
How the hell are they even going to explain that a replicant appears to be thirty years older than when he was first made?
>>69212393
Replicants are supposedly almost entirely organic, in the movie at least:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replicant#Organic_or_mechanical.3F
>In May 2012, Ridley Scott confirmed that the replicants were biological in nature, and contrasted them to the androids in the Alien series. "Roy Batty was an evolved... He wasn't an engine. If I cut him open, there wasn't metal, he was grown... and then within twenty years you get the first bill not passed in the Senate where they applied for replication of animals, sheep and goats and cattle and animals and they turned it down, but if you can do that, then you can do human beings. If you go deeper into it and say 'Yeah, but if you are going to grow a human being, does he start that big and I've got to see him through everything?' I don't want to answer the question, because of course he does... Ash in Alien had nothing to do with Roy Batty, because Roy Batty is more humanoid, whereas Ash was more metal".
>>69213113
Right. But they don't age, and they have a very short lifespan. Roy Batty looked the same when he died of natural causes as he did when he was first imprinted. Unless they do some amazing work with makeup and CG, there's no way that they can excuse the fact that Deckard has aged considerably since he was imprinted.
>>69213226
It was never stated that replicants can't age. They are just genetically engineered humans albeit developed ex-utero. Think of the axlotl tanks in Dune.
As for the four-year lifespan, that was genetically engineered into them, too. It evidently caused some sort of shut down in their internal systems. Without that, they would still age and die although they would live decades as naturally born humans do.
>>69213401
Yes, but the guy that designed the replicants told Roy that he can't give them more time, even when he had a gun to his head.
>>69213492
Can't give them more time once they've been created with a fixed lifespan, yes.
>>69213563
Goddammit. You're right.
Fucking fuck. This shit is really going to happen, isn't it?
>>69213586
Worst thing is I'm almost guaranteed to go see it, even if it drives me nuts.
>>69213627
Same. I'm going to be grinding my teeth the entire time.
>>69211854
>always people who fall for nostalgia reboots
Makes me sick that I'm going to have to be dealing with an endless cycle of 80s-90s era cash-grab reboots for the rest of my life.
Harrison Ford is rumoured to return, right? Why does he even bother with acting. He doesn't look to give a shit in anything he does.
villenueve is GOAT so yes.
>>69213723
He's confirmed to be returning.
>>69213723
It's surprising - I thought he hated the movie
>>69211801
Allegedly Harrison Ford said it's the best script he ever read and if it's actually true it's pretty high praise considering that Harrison Ford is a cynical cunt who hates most movies he played in
>>69213836
>>69213763
>>69213723
Seriously, FUCK Harrison Ford. He single-handedly ruined Ender's Game, and he's made no secret of the fact he hated Blade Runner. But like the Jew he is, he'll turn up to collect a paycheck and ruin another movie with his "I don't give a fuck" ""acting"". Why can't he just die?
>>69214566
Harrison Ford is a patrician to be honest.
Villenueve and whoever the fuck wrote the script (can't remember the name) is kino-noir.
>>69214688
But Deckard is one of the roles he actually liked
>>69214688
what? he was good in Enders game. I actually enjoyed the movie, fairly solid adaption of an exceptional book. And the butthurt from faggkts regarding card is always hilarious
>>69211849
Yet you were the first reply on a thread about it. Bravo.
>>69214724
Not really. He constantly argued with Ridley during filming, and he was forced to record that awful voice over because the audience response in early test screenings was bad.
>>69211849
How very cool and contrarian of you, to not like a movie that's nearly universally revered. You must have a large penis and a great job, too.
If they bring back Vangelis I might be interested, but until then I don't know. I really enjoyed the first and I hoped this isn't just another case of a souless cash grab.
>>69215154
But Harrison Ford was right in that case. Ridley made tons of retarded decisions during the filming and after the release of Blade Runner. That doesn't mean that he hates the role or the movie. It's pretty well-known that he never really liked playing Han Solo and preferred Deckard
>>69215242
he seems pretty depressed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K0kiYSStZM
>>69215448
I thought the voice over was a studio decision, not Ridley's?
I don't want it to happen.
It's a product of it's time. This will be shiny and neat and no doubt, the music uninspired and it's world flat.
We also live in a time when reboots and resurgences of films from the past decades are influenced by the internet and this modern 'nerd' culture which is alive today.
This just will not work, look at how bland EVERYTHING from major studios is today.
This will have to sell massively and for it to do so, it'll have to go the way of Marvel, DC, Star Wars and every other block buster released today and with few exceptions, they are all bland.
Part of Blade Runner's charm is when it was made, how it was made and it's legacy. This sequel is completely unwarranted.
>>69215943
>knowing nothing about the creators of the movie yet spouting edgy fedora shit regardless
nice meme
>>69215962
I do know about the creators of the movie. I enjoyed Prisoners, Sicario and Enemy. Ridley, worryingly, has lost his flare and does forgettable films now.
Hampton Fancher returning, fine, but he's not exactly John Lennon being brought back from the dead to form the Beatles again. Blade Runner is lauded for it's script, it's the world, aesthetic, themes, music, quaint performances that stand out - the script is your average cop hunting bad guys routine.
Ryan Gosling will be interesting in a BR setting, provided isn't playing 'Le handsome quiet and dangerous man.' for the whole film.
As I said, the music was a massive part but as I also previously said, the music was off a different time. Sci-fi films made today have such bland music, in fact a lot of big budget films do. Is Vangelis even returning? I sure hope if he is the music isn't given some modern day twist for shits.
>>69213677
>Same. I'm going to be grinding my teeth the entire time.
Get a grip. It's fucking entertainment.
>>69216283
>is NOT lauded for it's script
>>69215697
>I thought the voice over was a studio decision, not Ridley's?
Correct.
Ridley's cut has no VO.
>>69214566
Harrison Ford sold out a long time ago. He's not honest about quality at all any more. He told Shia however-you-spell-his-last name to shut up about Indy 4 being shit, and said he was a stupid kid and whatever.
>>69211801
I want it because of who are involved
>>69211801
The talent behind it should be enough to get anyone excited. With the people involved it doesn't seem like it will go the route >>69215943 is saying.
I'm not saying it'll be good, but I do think it'll be far more interesting and less of a cheap reboot the masses like some people think it'll be.
>>69216283
you seem to just be complaining for the sake of it.
this isn't like the total recall remake m8.
>>69216536
I take it you haven't seen Episode 7?
Harrison Ford was the worst part of the movie. His wooden acting ruined every scene he was in.
>>69216830
I thought Ford did a pretty fine job with Han Solo.
