Sep 30 2008How About Another 'Blade Runner' Moving Picture?
Blade Runner is widely regarded as one of the best science fiction films of all time--an untouchable masterpiece. Well, considered untouchable to everyone except one of the guys who wrote Eagle Eye, that is. While all of humanity says, "No, there should obviously never be a sequel to Blade Runner," screenwriter Travis Wright is all, "Maybe I should be writing a sequel to Blade Runner, and I am," and he reportedly told an audience just that. It's apparently being done in association with Blade Runner co-executive producer Bud Yorkin but without prior studio approval. From /Film:
“I recently attended a Q&A session with one of the writers of ‘Eagle Eye’ after a free screening organized by the magazine Creative Screenwriting. During the Q&A, the writer said that he and whomever it was that helped him co-write the ‘Eagle Eye’ screenplay were in the process of writing a sequel to Blade Runner, and had already contacted the producers of the original, etc., etc.
Wright's co-writer John Glenn has already disavowed himself of the project, which is smart considering everyone will hate whoever does this. It feels like some stranger coming in and trying to re-marry your divorced parent, and then you find out that stranger is writing a screenplay for Blade Runner 2. "Sorry, Mom, but you're marrying an asshole."
Reader Comments
1. -sh3lby- - September 30, 2008 2:27 PM
worst idea ever?
why doesn't he leave brett ratner to direct it while he's on a role.
2. Funinufu - September 30, 2008 2:27 PM
will Harrison Ford be in it? Or probably Sha LeBoof. They should call it something good like BL2DE RUNNER...
3. -sh3lby- - September 30, 2008 2:30 PM
BL2D2 R2NN2R: All Hands On Deckard
4. whistle - September 30, 2008 3:32 PM
I think it should be remade, but with a much slower pace. And more rain.
5. Blade Runner is a timeless classic and should not be fuck with - September 30, 2008 3:39 PM
At first I thought maybe if they had stuck to the ending in the book they wouldn't have this problem. But this is Hollywood and they will piss and shit on anything. Then light it on fire.
6. Winston Smith - September 30, 2008 3:57 PM
LMAO @ whistle...that was awesome.
Anyway, Blade Runner is not really the most interesting sci-fi flick in the world but I love it for what it is...a beautiful, slow paced interpretation of an even slower paced book.
This moron should stay away from a sequel. It's not Friday the 13th...it's Blade freakin' Runner...leave it alone, man.
7. Oscar - September 30, 2008 4:01 PM
Why can't guys like Harrison Ford and Ridley Scott speak up and slander this little dweeb?
You don't mess with a masterpiece.
8. mtk - September 30, 2008 4:47 PM
"Untouchable masterpiece"? Then why did Ridley Scott go back and "touch" it for three or four or fifty million various director's cuts? I say bring on Blade Runner 2 and cast Shia LaBeouf as the rebellious love child of Harrison Ford and Sean Young.
9. MDK - September 30, 2008 5:32 PM
it was HIS to touch retard.
10. mtk - September 30, 2008 7:23 PM
Hey MDK, don't resort to name calling just because somebody is being too sarcastic for you to follow.
11. pluto - September 30, 2008 7:24 PM
WORST IDEA EVER!
the generation of "film-makers" in Hollywood make me sick
12. reek s - October 1, 2008 1:52 AM
how about NO
13. TheLC - October 1, 2008 5:00 AM
That last sentence is fucking brilliant. Well done, I Watch Stuff Writer.
14. Bobeyo - October 1, 2008 10:27 AM
LOL @ #4
15. CMYK_Josh - October 1, 2008 12:33 PM
The problem with Blade Runner is that there were like 12 dozen producers (or maybe more like 10) because the financing was strung together in such a fucked up way. So, you've got 10 people who think they own it, or at least a part of it, and you really don't know who this nimrod is talking to. Philip K. Dick wrote a lot of other stuff, any one of which could be made into a movie. Why rework this one? Dumbasses.
16. djcorbijn - October 2, 2008 7:10 AM
@8
Ridley Scott went back and did the director's cut because the studio had him add things that deviated from the film he wanted to make. That is why there is no narration from Ford and the ending is different along with the unicorn dream sequence. The studio did not like the way the movie was done so they dumbed it down for audiences to make it more understandable. How you could make this movie more audience friendly makes no sense. It is what it is.
This movie is famous because it's just a wonderful film. It set the framework for almost every sci-fi film that has come out since. Go back and look at it then look at the date when it was done. Even though it deviates from the novel quite a bit, it still carries the soul of the story. You can read into the book and still get the quite desperation of a world and technology gone mad. In the book, most of the animals of the earth had gone extinct and were made to be clockwork where the movie makes the bio-engineered.
Now that they are making movies out of anything Phillip K. Dick wrote. They are a disgrace to his writing and are just playing on the marketing of "Hey there. did you know this movie was a Philip K. Dick book"? Blade Runner is a masterpiece and should not be made into a sequel. Some jack-ass did write a sequel to this years ago and possibly was one of the worst books written. Anyone who cannot understand why this movie is a cornerstone of sci-fi really should just stick with Harry Potter.
There are so many potential sci-fi books that could be turned into badass films why would they consider making a sequel to this? This is like making a sequel to Apocalypse Now or Fight Club. I would die to see a genuine take at Neuromancer by William Gibson or The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Robert A. Heinlein. However, this is going to made into a sequel? Remember the sequel to 2001 and how shitty that was? If hollywood really wanted to re-make a sci-fi novel that has consistently had lame attempts done to it, do a kick-ass version Dune.
17. Rich Wubble_U - October 2, 2008 8:57 AM
Did anyone ask Philip K. Dick what he thinks about this? I'll wager no. Because he's dead. Which is just selfish if you think about it...roll film.