The long overdue _Blade Runner_ thread

We were promised offworld colonies by 2019.

Everything I liked about this, I liked in 1983 (or whenever I first saw the VHS).

I'd like to believe that the characters reprising Roy, Pris, Rachael et al in aren't so transparent. I'm trusting in you, Villeneuve.

Else, we're doomed to a rainy, replicant-ridden LA for the next installment in 2051.

looks cool but mostly makes me want to rewatch the first one and call it a day

time to die

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe . . . Lego Transformer Wars 3: Rise of the Silver Guardians -- Origins Pt 1 . . .

(Adam OTM)

I'd go see Lego Blade Runner

BLEGO Runner, actually

http://i.imgur.com/8qGbDNf.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/vm6hVC7.jpg

No thread for BR2049?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BUozYf9w0Y

So per the headline

http://ew.com/movies/2017/07/13/blade-runner-2049-ryan-gosling-harrison-ford-photos/

Ryan Gosling still wonders if Blade Runner 2049 might just be an elaborate episode of Punk’d

Based on some of the photos later in the feature, *I'm* wondering that.

i like the one where ryan and harrison are running away from an elaborate pile of dangerous mousetraps

“The yellow is something I can’t talk about, but…it’s a very important color.”

🤔

I will eat kale if this turns out to be a good film.

Everything — the sets, the lights, the props, the vehicles — they are all saying something about our future

Which is why they decided at least one speaking part had to be played by somebody cosplaying as Abby from NCIS.

“The yellow is something I can’t talk about, but…it’s a very important color.”

replicant urination confirmed

I'm looking at these pictures and thinking "Ryan Gosling: Man of Many One Faces"

can't replicate his face into a heart

I'm getting Ghost in the Shell 2017 flashbacks

I'm looking at these pictures and thinking "Ryan Gosling: Man of Many One Faces"

Says you!

http://i.imgur.com/km03GH4.jpg

.. Billy Corgan cosplay?

The more I see from this film the less impressive it gets

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZOaI_Fn5o4

shit I should phave posted here

i don't know...i think to compare it to the original will always have this coming out well behind, but maybe it'll be a 2010-type thing, interesting or compelling on its own merits. i still trust Villeneuve.

Maybe it will be as good as another classic release from 1982, Miner 2049er.

I can see the 2010 comparison, but that's a movie that really held back on trying to explain it's predecessor. BR2049 seems more like it's going to try to fill in every. single. detail. of the backstory, whether the audience wants to hear it or not.

It does look worryingly action heavy and light on thoughtful introspection. I really hope it's just a misleading trailer to get the punters in.

Isn't the scene with Dave Bautista based on one that was dropped from the first movie? From what I recall from "Dangerous Days" it was originally supposed to be Deckard's introduction but was cut before filming started.

if it's on par w/2010 or The Two Jakes or some other traditionally kinda derided sequel to a legendarily classic film that's actually interesting despite their flaws (and trying to live up to the predecessors), i'll be happy enough.

I suppose my own concern is what Ridley Scott is currently doing to the Alien backstory.

you just want to shake him scream has george lucas taught you nothing???

*and scream

guys I bet this movie has a twist

there's no blade

and get this: he's walking slowly

the twist is... they are all Legos

It's strongly implied by what Deckard finds in the final scene.

http://geekologie.com/2010/05/26/lego-unicorn-3.jpg

New trailer is not promising. I think Jared Leto is gonna sink this movie for me. He's just not a credible actor in any role and looks particularly egregious here - and apparently has very big part.

Isn't the scene with Dave Bautista based on one that was dropped from the first movie? From what I recall from "Dangerous Days" it was originally supposed to be Deckard's introduction but was cut before filming started.

yeah, looks like it. I remember the bit about the pot boiling over

really wish movie trailers didn't have to be a series of escalatingly tense moments leading to the title drop in 2017

first trailer: "tell either side there's no wall, you bought a war"

second trailer: "if this gets out we've bought ourselves a war"

screenwriter clearly very taken with this very bad line.

I... like the second trailer more than the first one. A lot more, actually.

I miss trailer narrators. Just because "in a world" is a joke people can make at bad parties and Lake Bell made a movie doesn't mean LaFontaine didn't have an important job that needs doing

I miss really vague trailers that just teased the movie's content

There's some good imagery in this new trailer, no lie; there's also more of a whiff of the generic about it. (A minor detail but I especially like the way that conversations in the original film are shot -- lots of interesting choices in terms of framing, lighting, characters talking past each other. I get a hint of that in the Gosling/Batista exchange, not so much from the rest.)

I'm just angry the scenes with intense lighting/architecture are being spoiled with Leto

Agreed Ned. This trailer has a lot more dialogue scenes and it's quite jarring how flat they look in comparison to the whiz bang visuals they've mostly focused on up to now

jared leto is in this

well at least it will be twisted.

Q: Leto's character is blind, as seen in the trailers for this. Is there any special significance to that?

Scott: This was my idea. You remember from the first picture, towards the end Batty destroys Tyrell's eyes before killing him. My theory was that this was a moment of, yes, special significance to a certain type of person. Wallace, in the new picture, is just that type of person. He has blinded himself, as Batty blinded Tyrell. He worships Batty, believes he possessed a measure of truth not known to humans. One where sight wasn't required. And in fact may block said truth. This is something I hope to see pursued further in sequels, this idea of this band of fanatics who believe replicants are utopian ideals of humanity.

Q: So you believe there will be more Blade Runner films?

Scott: I've mapped out three more beyond 2049. We simply need to line up directors. I hope to direct at least one, if not two.

You remember from the first picture, towards the end Batty destroys Tyrell's eyes before killing him. My theory was that this was a moment of, yes, special significance to a certain type of person. Wallace, in the new picture, is just that type of person. He has blinded himself, as Batty blinded Tyrell. He worships Batty, believes he possessed a measure of truth not known to humans. One where sight wasn't required. And in fact may block said truth. This is something I hope to see pursued further in sequels, this idea of this band of fanatics who believe replicants are utopian ideals of humanity.

this makes no sense either from a narrative or character POV

that's a speculative fiction interview