Ridley Scott Directing new Blade Runner film

Scott is desperate for people to accept his view. He verbally battered Ford into submission, and admitted as much in an interview :p

It's basically all coming from Scott. He has the idea that Deckard is a replicant, and for some reason he's really hung up on people embracing his "vision" for that character.

The screen writer said there is no answer. Ford says he's human. From what I've read he's human in Dick's book. The story has more emotional weight if he's human, and less contradictions.

Everything about him being a replicant is Scott's vision/interpretation. As the audience you have a choice.

1. Do something better with your time than worry about this stupid issue :p
2. Accept that Scott is just the director and not the sole authority.
3. Make your own choice on personal preference.

There is no "truth". It's a work of fiction. The answer can be whatever you want it to be.
 
v0n said:
Ford is a weirdo. He didn't like Han Solo character and does not care for Star Wars or related canon. He does not like Blade Runner. He has more money than he can spend in three generations, but will still do roles that he hates. He does like Indiana role and would reprise it as many times as Spielberg needed, yet most of us hated his last return to the role.
Click to expand...

He probably agreed to reprise the role of Deckhard if he could make sure he was bumped off in the third act. :D
 
FoxEye said:
Scott is desperate for people to accept his view. He verbally battered Ford into submission, and admitted as much in an interview :p

It's basically all coming from Scott. He has the idea that Deckard is a replicant, and for some reason he's really hung up on people embracing his "vision" for that character.

The screen writer said there is no answer. Ford says he's human. From what I've read he's human in Dick's book. The story has more emotional weight if he's human, and less contradictions.

Everything about him being a replicant is Scott's vision/interpretation. As the audience you have a choice.

1. Do something better with your time than worry about this stupid issue :p
2. Accept that Scott is just the director and not the sole authority.
3. Make your own choice on personal preference.

There is no "truth". It's a work of fiction. The answer can be whatever you want it to be.
Click to expand...

Unless the answer is revealed explicitly in the film / book, in which case there is a "truth" within the context of the story, fiction or otherwise. Then the audience is left with little choice, other than to enter a state of denial if they don't accept it.

Of course, this is why many authors and directors do leave some ambiguity in the material, so the audience can make up their own minds and argue ceaselessly about it for decades :)
 
The news of this sequel doesn't particularly excite me. I watched Blade Runner many, many moons ago when I was but a child, and though it was boring, style over content. In my old age however, I've gained more of an appreciation of movies so I'm willing to give it another go. Herein lies my problem; there are about 38 different versions. Which one is recommended?
 
Punt said:
The news of this sequel doesn't particularly excite me. I watched Blade Runner many, many moons ago when I was but a child, and though it was boring, style over content. In my old age however, I've gained more of an appreciation of movies so I'm willing to give it another go. Herein lies my problem; there are about 38 different versions. Which one is recommended?
Click to expand...

final cut
 
After Harrison Ford's poor performances in Crystal Skull and Force Awakens, and the horror show of crap movie making that was Prometheus, I have nothing but fear for this.
 
This film finally gets a name; Blade Runner 2049.

I'm disappointed. I was hoping they would just stick a 2 on the end. Go with the tried and tested sequel naming system. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom