Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

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

Blade Runner is the one movie I revere and would be glad to see another instalment of at the same time.

I think this is probably because the original movie was just a lot of beautiful art direction and a rather pulpy story. Lets hang out with some of the other Blade Runners, some other replicants, why not? Plenty of story to go around.

Although the turnkey computer program that Dekkard uses to zoom in on photos - Photoshop is like a billion times more powerful than that now. There's probably an update in order, or some 'splaining to do...

Speaking of remakes, God this new Conan movie looks so bad.... Why!!!
 
Mitch Gross said:
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. ;-)
Click to expand...

Amen Mitch. Also, didn't know that about Unforgiven -- but I agree with you, bringing the original writers back could go a long way toward helping recreate some of
that original magic.

I'll never forget my freshman year, Stanford experimented with a very "alternative" humanities program, and brought in the Art Director of Blade Runner to speak.

I was elated, and at the same time a bit shocked because it was really interesting when someone asked him about vision of the film and the Asian influence. He said
that they had all postulated that in Los Angeles in future would be primarily Latino, however they went with the Asian theme because they all thought it "looked cooler."

And you know what, I kinda agree ... the visual look and overall feel of the film is perfect, and would not be the same had they not done it that way.

Also, you didn't mention the acting -- but maybe because people like me already did, but I feel it was one of Harrison Ford's best dramatic performances (maybe his very
best) and coupled with the other performances, really helped make the film engaging on a level that has been matched only by some of the other great films in history.
 
Bring it on. Hopefully he will do a great job on this.
 
Tim Lüdin said:
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
Click to expand...

I liked the opening 3d scene, the fight on Cybertron, in Transformers 3. The rest of the movie could have been 2d.

the picture window 3d look is annoying and I enjoy the movies more in 2d.
 
I'm curious to see what Scott does with 3D, based on his last quote. It's one thing to hear "3D is really immersive" from a stereographer, but quite another to hear it from someone like him. Fortunately, so far the production of 3D films haven't noticeably impacted by ability to enjoy them in 2D!
 
[QUOTE=Mitch Gross;806310

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).

Agreed. Leave it alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top