Will Ridley Scott shoot the new Blade Runner film in 3D and on EPIC???

[Steve Johnson]

So Ridley Scott seems to be linked with a new Blade Runner film...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-14586762

It would be interesting to see if Ridley will shoot this in 3D and use EPIC.

Blade Runner is one of my favourite films of all time and got me interested in filmmaking in the first place. Would be stoked if it does get shot on EPIC.

What's everyones thoughts???

 

[Kristin Stewart]

A sequel, a prequel, a remake, etc... Oh boys, maybe Ridley Scott should hire talented people if he doesn't have a single original idea ? Hollywood usual shit, I guess... And what about talking about interesting filmmakers instead ? For instance, Guy Maddin, with Keyhole. Shot on 5d though ;-)

 

[Julian Fort]

Jesus Kristin, lay off the blow.

 

[Scott Crawley]

So Ridley Scott seems to be linked with a new Blade Runner film...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-14586762

It would be interesting to see if Ridley will shoot this in 3D and use EPIC.

Blade Runner is one of my favourite films of all time and got me interested in filmmaking in the first place. Would be stoked if it does get shot on EPIC.

What's everyones thoughts???

I'm with you. If he was quoted correctly, I expect that it will be in 3D. Scott doesn't seem to be prone to hyperbole.

 

[Mark Toia]

I hate 3d movies..
Sick of getting that funny pressure feeling between my eyes.. drives me nuts. I have to go see the movie again in 2d to actually enjoy it.
Costing me a fortune having to see movies twice. !

 

[Joe D'Arcy]

I'm sure Ridley Scott will do a great job with this film. When you consider what he was able to achieve in 1982 with Blade Runner, given the technology of the time.

 

[Tim Lüdin]

I hate 3d movies..
Sick of getting that funny pressure feeling between my eyes.. drives me nuts. I have to go see the movie again in 2d to actually enjoy it.
Costing me a fortune having to see movies twice. !

Damn, why do I always have to agree with you. Maybe we have the same mindset.
I hate them too. Nothing beats a beautiful filmed 2D movie. For me thats perfect. I don't need all that eye cancer stuff in front of me.
No film so far convinced me other wise. Not even Avatar or Transformers 3. There is a long way to go for 3D. But I won't join it till it's really perfect.

Tim

 

[Martin Stevens]

The original "Blade Runner" is a Masterpiece......and I LOVE it!

 

[AnthonyFlores]

Yes, it will be tough to approach what the original Blade Runner means to the history and evolution of cinema. Much of it would be so hard to replicate - including one of the best ever performances from Harrison Ford and probably career best performances from Sean Young, Darryl Hannah, Rutger Hauer and others. Also, the art direction was so fantastic -- I could watch it now and it would hardly feel dated. Just an amazing film. My dad took me to see a remastered re-release in a big LA theater (forgot which one) when I was 8 or 9 ... it will always stick with me. If can even come close to the overall quality of the original, I will be blown away.

 

[Michael Olsen]

I have to believe that the creator of the first would be capable producing a "new installment" that lives up to it's name.

And Mr. Scott, if you happen to browsing these boards, please keep Shia LaBeouf away from this particular film.

 

[Julio Quintana]

I have to believe that the creator of the first would be capable producing a "new installment" that lives up to it's name.

Indiana Jones 4
Star Wars Episodes 1-3
The Godfather 3
Rocky 2-5
Wall Street 2

 

[AnthonyFlores]

I agree! No Shia, pleeeaaaaaaaaaaaase. They would really need to go the extra mile on script and casting, but as you posted Julio - no guarantees and most sequels disappoint ... though some of the ones you left off the list like Raiders and Godfather 2 were pretty impressive. Still, those are the exceptions to the rule.

 

[Michael Olsen]

Indiana Jones 4
Star Wars Episodes 1-3
The Godfather 3
Rocky 2-5

True. But I still believe that he is capable.

Star Wars Episode 4 - 6
Indiana Jones 1 - 3
The Godfather 2

 

[albert rudnicki]

Damn, why do I always have to agree with you. Maybe we have the same mindset.
I hate them too. Nothing beats a beautiful filmed 2D movie. For me thats perfect. I don't need all that eye cancer stuff in front of me.
No film so far convinced me other wise. Not even Avatar or Transformers 3. There is a long way to go for 3D. But I won't join it till it's really perfect.

Tim

+1
high hopes for this whole 3d to be a thing of a past once again. My six year old son chooses movies with no glasses too

 

[Steve Johnson]

I am sure Ridley will not go for a Blade Runner 2 if the script wasn't up to it. He's come a long way since Blade Runner and given he made it just after his younger brother died, and given the films he has made since, I can only hope for something spectacular.

Personally, I'm not bothered if its not 3D, I can live with that - but its going to take she beating because of what the original has done throughout the years becoming a cult.

 

[Michael Olsen]

BTW, the original is great on blu-ray.

 

[Julio Quintana]

They would really need to go the extra mile on script and casting, but as you posted Julio - no guarantees and most sequels disappoint ... though some of the ones you left off the list like Raiders and Godfather 2 were pretty impressive. Still, those are the exceptions to the rule.

There are definitely examples of awesome sequels, but I can't think of a good sequel made by the same director several years after the original. I just think directors change after 20 years, and it's difficult to capture the original tone and energy when the filmmaker now has a very different worldview.

 

[Paul Nordin]

Ridley Scott is one of the great directors of "our" modern cinema era. Easily in the top 10. Blade Runner and Alien are masterpieces and groundbreaking on many levels. Blade Runner's visuals lensed by Cronenweth defined a core visual style which many many have tried to copy and/or extend and very few have managed to do as well.

Julio, its actually 30 years ago that Ridley made Blade Runner. He was 42 at the time and at the peak of his directorial creative powers. Its been quite some time since Mr.Scott has had a blockbuster film (the last being Gladiator in 2002). In the span of 4 years following his wild success with Alien, Mr. Scott made only one film: Blade Runner. His focus was very much on that film. Today he has 39 major projects in development and 6 major projects in production. Will all these responsibilities have an impact on what he is able to acheive with BR2? Also the studio system is at an all time low in terms of willingness to take financial risks. Which is why seeminly only 1 in 20 big budget studio films are NOT derivative works or comic book enactments. These are some challenges confronting this project being great.

However, it really comes down to Ridley. How hard does he want to fight to the studio system to create a new and original view into the BR universe? The studio system will resist anything which does not fit into a predictable (financially) formula. Blade Runner remember was not a financial success until years after its release.

A intersting question for me is who should Ridley Scott push for as his cinematographer? Over the last 15 years he has become very impatient with meticulous lighting/camera setups, and DPs that lean in that way do not gell with Mr.Scott. However, the visual style in BR was beautifully & painstakingly created by Cronenweth. THis attention to detail is part of why BR was so over budget.

Its hard to imagine a top DP not wanting to jump at the chance to imapart thier vision to Cronenweth's visual masterpiece. I would love to see Mr.Scott pair up wth Matthew Libatique (new school) or Roger Deakins (old school).

 

[AnthonyFlores]

Ridley Scott is one of the great directors of "our" modern cinema era. Easily in the top 10. Blade Runner and Alien are masterpieces and groundbreaking on many levels. Blade Runner's visuals lensed by Cronenweth defined a core visual style which many many have tried to copy and/or extend and very few have managed to do as well.

Julio, its actually 30 years ago that Ridley made Blade Runner. He was 42 at the time and at the peak of his directorial creative powers. Its been quite some time since Mr.Scott has had a blockbuster film (the last being Gladiator in 2002). In the span of 4 years following his wild success with Alien, Mr. Scott made only one film: Blade Runner. His focus was very much on that film. Today he has 39 major projects in development and 6 major projects in production. Will all these responsibilities have an impact on what he is able to acheive with BR2? Also the studio system is at an all time low in terms of willingness to take financial risks. Which is why seeminly only 1 in 20 big budget studio films are NOT derivative works or comic book enactments. These are some challenges confronting this project being great.

However, it really comes down to Ridley. How hard does he want to fight to the studio system to create a new and original view into the BR universe? The studio system will resist anything which does not fit into a predictable (financially) formula. Blade Runner remember was not a financial success until years after its release.

A intersting question for me is who should Ridley Scott push for as his cinematographer? Over the last 15 years he has become very impatient with meticulous lighting/camera setups, and DPs that lean in that way do not gell with Mr.Scott. However, the visual style in BR was beautifully & painstakingly created by Cronenweth. THis attention to detail is part of why BR was so over budget.

Its hard to imagine a top DP not wanting to jump at the chance to imapart thier vision to Cronenweth's visual masterpiece. I would love to see Mr.Scott pair up wth Matthew Libatique (new school) or Roger Deakins (old school).

I agree with everything you said Paul. I still have immense respect for him, but we sometimes forget how much focus impacts a person's performance. Blade Runner was a masterpiece and I doubt Ridley would take it on if he didn't believe he could live up to those same standards, however, sometimes it's easy to think we can do more than we really can do. 45 projects in total is quite a bit to juggle

In terms of the studios, I'm willing to bet their position is that: 1) it's Ridley Scott and he's publicly pretty much committed to shoot ONLY 3D going forward - check! ... 2) Despite how it wasn't initially a success, it developed a huge cult following since that time, and the buzz would be considerable - check! and 3) if they can get a big time actor/actors with star power or at least "hot" up and comers, it will help financially - another check!

So, as long as it's well done, it should be profitable.

Either way, I really hope it will be a great film. If they do as well (visually) with Prometheus as we've heard from initial buzz, reports and what has been said by their team about Epic/3D then I will be very excited about this next Blade Runner until or unless it proves otherwise.

 

[Mitch Gross]

Ridley Scott is one of the great directors of "our" modern cinema era. Easily in the top 10. Blade Runner and Alien are masterpieces and groundbreaking on many levels. Blade Runner's visuals lensed by Cronenweth defined a core visual style which many many have tried to copy and/or extend and very few have managed to do as well.

Julio, its actually 30 years ago that Ridley made Blade Runner. He was 42 at the time and at the peak of his directorial creative powers. Its been quite some time since Mr.Scott has had a blockbuster film (the last being Gladiator in 2002). In the span of 4 years following his wild success with Alien, Mr. Scott made only one film: Blade Runner. His focus was very much on that film. Today he has 39 major projects in development and 6 major projects in production. Will all these responsibilities have an impact on what he is able to acheive with BR2? Also the studio system is at an all time low in terms of willingness to take financial risks. Which is why seeminly only 1 in 20 big budget studio films are NOT derivative works or comic book enactments. These are some challenges confronting this project being great.

However, it really comes down to Ridley. How hard does he want to fight to the studio system to create a new and original view into the BR universe? The studio system will resist anything which does not fit into a predictable (financially) formula. Blade Runner remember was not a financial success until years after its release.

A intersting question for me is who should Ridley Scott push for as his cinematographer? Over the last 15 years he has become very impatient with meticulous lighting/camera setups, and DPs that lean in that way do not gell with Mr.Scott. However, the visual style in BR was beautifully & painstakingly created by Cronenweth. THis attention to detail is part of why BR was so over budget.

Its hard to imagine a top DP not wanting to jump at the chance to imapart thier vision to Cronenweth's visual masterpiece. I would love to see Mr.Scott pair up wth Matthew Libatique (new school) or Roger Deakins (old school).

I would never diminish Jordan Cronenweth's work on this seminal film. But much of what is associated with the look of Blade Runner is from the Art Direction, Doug Trumbull's effects work and Ridley Scott's driving vision.

Scott may have only had one feature released in the four years following Alien, but he was certainly busy with many, many projects. One of them was Legend, which he was developing concurrently with Blade Runner. Also consider that he was one of the top commercial spot directors at the time and directed scores of them during this period, including the famous "1984" commecial which introduced the Macintosh computer. He's always been a very busy guy.

Gladiator and Alien are his only "blockbuster" features, but Thelma & Louise, Black Hawk Down, Hannibal and several others have performed quite well at the box office --certainly well enough to keep him very in demand.

I also question is Hollywood is any more risk averse now than it was then. It's long been a conservative business. But in both the original Blade Runner production and this time around, smaller independent companies with production release deals with major studios are bringing the projects to fruition.

There are a number of examples of major directors remaking or reworking their own movies a generation later. A good example is Hitchcock's two versions of The Man Who Knew Too Much. C.B. DeMille remade a few of his silent epics as talkies. A not-so-good example would be George Sluizer's remaking of his film The Vanashing.

I for one feel he should leave it alone. But if he's going there then I hope that he brings back screenwriter's Hampton Fancher and David Webb Peoples. Fancher championed the project in development for years and was the first to really "get" Philip K. Dick's dystopic vision. Peoples is a brilliant structuralist (something Scott really needs) and wrote Unforgiven around the same time (one of the more perfect scripts ever written, filmed nearly word for word from the original submitted draft).

But hey, just one man's opinion. ;-)