Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Sci-Fi Media News Entertainment Technology

Upcoming Blade Runner Sequel Gets a Title: Blade Runner 2049 (theverge.com) 136

Posted by BeauHD from the coming-to-a-theater-near-you dept.
The sequel to Ridley Scott's 1982 sci-fi classic "Blade Runner" is officially titled "Blade Runner 2049." Harris Ford is confirmed to be returning as Rick Deckard. Other stars include Ryan Gosling, Jared Leto, Robin Wright, Dave Bautista and Lennie James. The Verge reports: There's a hashtag included in the press release, of course (#BladeRunner2049), but other than that there's little else revealed about the story itself. There is a new picture out, however, with Scott, Villeneuve, Gosling, and Harrison Ford chatting over some Blade Runner weaponry. Whether you like or hate the new title will most likely depend on how excited you are about knowing the exact year that the new film takes place. The original was set in 2019, so it's good that they're tacking on an extra 30 years because the Los Angeles of today really doesn't look anything like the dystopian vision Scott wowed audiences with way back when. But hey -- there's still time. Blade Runner 2049 is scheduled to arrive in theaters on October 6th, 2017.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Upcoming Blade Runner Sequel Gets a Title: Blade Runner 2049 More

Upcoming Blade Runner Sequel Gets a Title: Blade Runner 2049

Comments Filter:

  • Really excited about this (Score:3)

    by kamapuaa ( 555446 ) on Thursday October 06, 2016 @05:15PM (#53028219) Homepage

    San Francisco Rush 2049 was hella fun, so I anticipate this will be a really top-notch entertainment.

  • maybe firearms go digital/electronic or something besides analog gunpowder.
  • A hashtag tells us not much really.

    Bladerunner is probably my favourite Science Fiction movie but if they call it "Bladerunner 2049" I probably won't bother.

    (Well I might grab a torrent once the DVD is released).

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by PeelBoy ( 34769 )

      I'm with you. Buying into the hype is just setting yourself up for disappointment. Even if everybody *loves* it, I'll wait until it's been out on DVD for a while before I watch it.

      Hollywood is out of ideas. All they're capable of is doing a bad job rehashing things we used to love.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        Those shite cash in reboots are just getting worse and worse at least the king of crap reboots Jar Jar Abrams is no involved but that title is just so 'B' grade, ugh.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by doggo ( 34827 )

          "Jar Jar Abrams"?! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That's awesome! I'm stealing that. Er, I'm quoting you!.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by rtb61 ( 674572 )

            Seriously WTF? dude https://www.google.com.au/sear... [google.com.au], 19,900 results and that's using quotes and ooh look a whole bunch of images and even video's, talk about slow to the party. Just to be clear, you will not be stealing it from me, as I most definitely did not originate it but well boo hoo, sucks to be yoo.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gnick ( 1211984 )

        I'll wait until it's been out on DVD for a while before I watch it.

        If you wait long, you'll have to choose from the "Workprint," the "Theatrical Cut," the "International Cut," the "Director's Cut," and the "Final Cut."

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by PeelBoy ( 34769 )

          Crap, you're right. They'll probably cut the original introduction and put in some lame one that explains the whole story or something stupid like that, and then add really bad CGI of Jabba the Hutt in some random scene arguing with Rick Deckard about money he's owed.

    • Re:Maybe, maybe not (Score:4, Funny)

      by gfxguy ( 98788 ) on Thursday October 06, 2016 @07:57PM (#53028907)

      (Well I might grab a torrent once the DVD is released).

      Yup. Anything deemed not worth paying for is stuff you're allowed to steal. It's right there in the constitution.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Copying is not theft [youtube.com]

        Stealing a thing leaves one less left
        Copying it makes one thing more
        That's what copying's for!

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gfxguy ( 98788 )
          Until you change the law, IP theft is theft. I'm pretty sure if you tried to capitalize on a great idea you had, you'd be pissed if someone came along and stole it, and then claimed they did you no harm.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by Wulf2k ( 4703573 )

            No, it really isn't.

            They use the word theft a lot with the masses, but you're never charged with theft.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by gfxguy ( 98788 )
              Now you're just nit-picking. If you prefer, then, it's OK to commit copyright infringement when you deem something not worthy. Better?
  • No Rutger Hauer?

    • I don't think his character survived the first one, something to do with the main plot.

      Seriously though, he's great and all, and I'm sure they could have come up with some excuse that they had a bunch of copies of the Roy Batty model and they actually had a life extension procedure for him or they aged him for some purpose, but I'd rather they didn't do a rehash of all the same characters just for the sake of nostalgia.

      Hey I have an idea, maybe Gosling is Deckard's son in this one, and he kills and drops hi

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by dwywit ( 1109409 )

        I thought of a plot line a while ago, when the sequel was announced, that Hauer could be involved as the now-aged human that the Roy Batty model was based on. That would give the scriptwriter/s free reign to make his character whatever they wanted - he wouldn't have to be "Roy Batty". I don't recall anything from the first movie that said Tyrell didn't use real humans as development models for the replicants.

        Wouldn't it make sense to start with the DNA of a human, and modify it, rather than try to build a r

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Actually, that was part of the plot of Blade Runner 2: the edge of Human, but K.W. Jeter, published in 1998.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Pax681 ( 1002592 )

      No Rutger Hauer?

      only if you dig him up

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by r1348 ( 2567295 )

      Did you miss the part where Roy died?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by swb ( 14022 )

      Batty would have died anyway even if he didn't die at the end of Blade Runner.

      I would think the death of Dr. Tyrell, and possibly Sebastian, would have been a problem for further development of replicants.

      • In the sequel, the Tyrell Corporation meets its downfall. After Eldon gets his eyeballs pushed inside out, the company is managed for four years by a replicant of Carly Fiorina. As a result the replicants refuse to work unless constantly supplied with overpriced genuine Tyrell superpower refill cartridges.

  • The waiting is just (Score:4, Funny)

    by fsagx ( 1936954 ) on Thursday October 06, 2016 @05:21PM (#53028251)

    driving me batty

  • Harris Ford (Score:5, Funny)

    by Fwipp ( 1473271 ) on Thursday October 06, 2016 @05:23PM (#53028267)

    Oh cool, I loved his work in St Wars!

  • Besides, he's a Replicant, and they die after four years.

    • So, he's a Replicant. Replicate another.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Besides, he's a Replicant, and they die after four years.

      She has no time limit, in my own head canon, he doesn't either. "More human than human is our motto." Why manufacture limited replicants when you can just release pre-programed replicants into the wild with the needed desire and skills to provide for themselves and then produce and train more, new replicants? The Bladerunner world is having issues. Animals are in short supply and so are humans. There are so few humans that they need to encourage them with helper replicants to even move off world. If humans

  • How old will Harrison Ford be in 2049?

  • What is the appeal? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by irrational_design ( 1895848 ) on Thursday October 06, 2016 @06:04PM (#53028459)

    I'm in my mid-40s, but I had never watched Blade Runner until very recently when I heard they were making a sequel. To be honest I did think it was a very good movie and I don't understand why a sequel is being made. Is most of the appeal some sort of nostalgia? What am I missing?

    • Harrison ford needs the $$$$

      First indiana jones then star wars, now blade runner.

      • After Indiana Jones and Star Wars, I think it's fair to say that he doesn't need to money. Good for him though, I'm glad he gets to cash in at the end of his career, I think he deserves it.

    • Hollywood is run by profit-obsessed idiots who would rather pour $200m into a piss-poor fan-service sequel or remake/re-imagine that will make them $210m than spend $20m and take a chance on something new.

      • You must not be aware of the new stuff coming out. I heard there's a Spider Man movie coming soon that's unrelated to any others. And I'm pretty sure that Robert Downey Jr. is contracted for at least 29 more superhero movies. If that's not original content, I don't know what is.

    • > Q. What am I missing?

      A. Greed.
      All Upcoming Movie Remakes/ Reboots (2016 - 2020) [imdb.com]

      e.g.
      Apparently there are placeholders for

      Avatar 2 (2018)
      Avatar 3 (2020)
      Avatar 4 (2022)
      Avatar 5 (2023)

      --
      Redditards: A downvote is NOT to be used as "I disagree"

    • It's real Sci-Fi, not Sci-Fantasy like most movies.

      About 10 years ago, someone surveyed scientists and engineers and BR was voted the best SF nivie.

    • I prefer the book myself (but then I'm a Philip K Dick fan). I think that the film was definitely of its time though, and a lot of what made it original and unique at the time are just standard fare now. You have to remember it was definitely in on the ground floor of the whole dark and gritty dsytopian cyberpunk thing.

      I would also guess that if you haven't watched it until recently then its probably not your kind of film anyway.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • 2048 missing sequels (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I guess I missed Blade Runner 2 through Blade Runner 2048. Worth binging on Netflix?

  • Love me some Harris (Score:3)

    by chuckugly ( 2030942 ) on Thursday October 06, 2016 @06:21PM (#53028547)
    Harris Ford. Harris? Fire an editor. Seriously.
    • If a tree falls in the middle of the forest and there's nobody around to hear it, does it make a sound?

      If a story is posted on Slashdot and an editor doesn't edit it, is the editor really an editor?

      hashtag existentialism

      • If a tree falls in the middle of the forest and there's nobody around to hear it, does it make a sound?

        Pretty much depends on how you define 'sound', right?

    • This is Slashdot. There is no expectation that editors will even read what they post, let alone check for accuracy. Based on seeing the same editors post error riddled stuff over and over, they are never fired either. If any do get fired, I want the job next. I've always wanted a job that involved no manual labor and no mental labor.
  • Given how old Ford is, and assuming they don't use some crappy CGI to make him look young, this should put to bed the theory that Decker was a replicant. Though I guess they could spin it that he's wearing makeup etc. Hopefully, they'll just tie up the loose end.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Ridley Scott, while a genius, is also a moron for propogating this garbage just to drive interest and sales in the recuts (like Lucas). Deckard was CLEARLY not a replicant, especially so emotionally advanced, that he gets his ass handed to him multiple times by real replicants. The whole point of the movie is his emotionless character is weak, and the replicants are "more human than human". Hence, Batty's beautiful soliquoy at the end, and a dozen other examples. If Deckard was a replicant, the movie turns

      • If Deckard was a replicant, the movie turns into trite garbage, on the other hand, it's the top 2 scifi movies ever made with a close tie to 2001

        Space Oddessy 2001 was the boringest scifi movie ever made.
        You are right about Deckard, though. Part of the story is pointing out our mortality, and showing that even though we (and Deckard) are not replicants, our lives are not much longer than theirs.
        Oh, and let me tell you about my mother..........

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          2001 is slow and methodical, and the whole is greater than the sum of the scenes. I believe this [visual-memory.co.uk] explains the philosophy pretty well. Basically, that movie is about man's evolution from ape to become space-fairing men (metaphorically killing God in the process) and become ubermen (the star child). Heady stuff...

          • ok, 2001 gets credit for being philosophical, but BladeRunner is too, and manages to be engaging at the same time (Big Lebowski is philosophical, too)

  • Please don't (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 06, 2016 @07:23PM (#53028799)

    Hollywood needs to grow a pair, take a small risk, and start making original movies again. The constant recycling of old film franchises as a cynical cash grab is boring and tiresome, and leaves a permanent stain on history that can't be ignored (Star Wars is the obvious example).

    Just leave Blade Runner alone. It doesn't need a sequel.

    • Hollywood needs to grow a pair, take a small risk, and start making original movies again.

      They will, when people start paying for them.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Correction: They might try it, if people stop paying for the rehashes.

        • No, they already make original movies, and if you go to any film festival, you can see them (of varying quality). If those start making money, Hollywood will definitely notice.

  • Will we have the clear plastic raincoat (Score:3)

    by mallyn ( 136041 ) on Thursday October 06, 2016 @10:55PM (#53029505) Homepage
    I watched BRI (blade runner 1) many times just for that scene! In fact, I made my own clear plastic raincoat that looks like the one in the movie!
  • Maybe this one will actually follow the story of the Philip K Dick book the first one was supposed to be based on.

    • Maybe this one will actually follow the story of the Philip K Dick book the first one was supposed to be based on.

      Maybe this one will actually follow the K W Jeter screenplay that the first one was supposed to be based on.

  • No Vangelis... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    What is Blade Runner without Vangelis?

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • My Film (Score:3)

    by BlackHawk-666 ( 560896 ) on Friday October 07, 2016 @06:53AM (#53030549)

    I'm going to write and make a film called "Film of the Year - 5 Stars". It can't fail to become a hit with a name like that.

  • I can't wait for the scene with Deckard in the refrigerator.

  • Are we sure 2049 isn't actually the release date? Has this joke been made already?

  • I would have thought they'd call it "Blade Runner 2: Electric Sheep Boogaloo."

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close