Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

haXvp8M9Cog

Dennis Villeneuve (Sicario, Prisoners, Arrival) directs.

Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford star.

haXvp8M9Cog

I have yet to see any of this guy's movies, but I hear good things.

I'm not a big fan of Blade Runner personally, so I'm pretty 'meh' on this.

How is it that we get a teaser for this before we get a teaser for Alien: Covenant?

this looks good

So does this mean Deckard isn't a replicant?

First one was meh city but I'll give this a chance.

how did i not hear anything about this until today?

Originally posted by marwash22
how did i not hear anything about this until today?

There's been plenty of news along the way before the teaser trailer dropped.

Indeed. But I got say, the trailer gives me goosebumps.

Denis Villeneuve is a great director. I didn't know him when his name turned up for him to doe Blader Runner. Then I watched Sicario and I thought: this guy is great. So I got all the rest of his movies. He's the first name of potential director's to do the new Blade Runner that made me think he can actually do it.

An this looks good. Looks like they adopted Blade Runner's Theatrical release' idea that Deckard had no limited life span. That was gone from the director's cut(s).

Originally posted by Kazenji
There's been plenty of news along the way before the teaser trailer dropped. lol. i had no idea this was in the works.

I don't think Blade Runner is the type of movie that should have a sequel.

We all did... but now, with Gosling, Villeneuve... I dunno, this might actually work.

I know Philip K. Dick's friend did some follow up novels

not sure what they're like.

I wonder if they're going to try to connect this to the new series of Alien films. If they do I hope it doesn't get awkward.

I doubt it. Villeneuve doesn't strike me as the kind of director that goes for that sort of thing.

Originally posted by queeq
I doubt it. Villeneuve doesn't strike me as the kind of director that goes for that sort of thing.

I agree. Same with Ridley Scott. At least I don't think they'd do it too blatantly. But the studio may think otherwise and they are of course the ones financing the things.

Well, you're talking about Ridley Scott here... one of the few directors that get final cut. And Denis Villeneuve that only does projects that are up his alley. So if a studio hires these guys, I bet they make some hard conditions.

^ Very true.

I think the studio really respects Ridley Scott, which is why they wanted him to revive the Alien series.

Still don't know if that was a good idea... hehehe

I remember the PC game for Blade Runner, it was pretty cool..I still have it somewhere.

But yeah I feel they should have left the series alone. I liked the movie well enough. Plus it had a great soundtrack.

C9KAqhbIZ7o&t

I wonder if they'll use a version of this in the new movie.

Originally posted by queeq
Indeed. But I got say, the trailer gives me goosebumps.

Denis Villeneuve is a great director. I didn't know him when his name turned up for him to doe Blader Runner. Then I watched Sicario and I thought: this guy is great. So I got all the rest of his movies. He's the first name of potential director's to do the new Blade Runner that made me think he can actually do it.

An this looks good. Looks like they adopted Blade Runner's Theatrical release' idea that Deckard had no limited life span. That was gone from the director's cut(s).

Agreed, great first film and they've attached a great director, any fan of SciFi should be looking out for this.

Thought the theatrical left it opened ended if Deckard was an android? Where there were hints throughout the film which lead the viewer decide for themselves?

In the theatrical there was no real hint of him being a replicant. Except maybe for the glowing eyes scene in the kitchen with rachel. But according to Ford, that was not planned, he accidentally moved into the light that made his retina glow too. So from just the movie, there was a slight hint that he might be a replicant.

However, it was always Ridley's plan. Not of screen writer Hampton Fancher though, it was a thing Ridley found intriguing.
In the sloppy Director's Cut and the really nice Final Cut, it was final that Deckard was a replicant by adding the unicorn dream shot. Gaff's little paper unicorn in the hall at the end of the movie sealed it: Deckard was a replicant for real.

However, only in the theatrical version the narration said that Rachel had no limited life span. In de Director's and Final Cut, that was no longer there. It was open ended. Maybe they only had a couple of months.. who knows. (open ending, no explanations... great!!)

And yes, the game was great indeed!

Probably the best sci-fi of the decade... Roger Deakins may finally get his hands on his first oscar.

Originally posted by queeq
In the theatrical there was no real hint of him being a replicant. Except maybe for the glowing eyes scene in the kitchen with rachel. But according to Ford, that was not planned, he accidentally moved into the light that made his retina glow too. So from just the movie, there was a slight hint that he might be a replicant.

However, it was always Ridley's plan. Not of screen writer Hampton Fancher though, it was a thing Ridley found intriguing.
In the sloppy Director's Cut and the really nice Final Cut, it was final that Deckard was a replicant by adding the unicorn dream shot. Gaff's little paper unicorn in the hall at the end of the movie sealed it: Deckard was a replicant for real.

However, only in the theatrical version the narration said that Rachel had no limited life span. In de Director's and Final Cut, that was no longer there. It was open ended. Maybe they only had a couple of months.. who knows. (open ending, no explanations... great!!)

And yes, the game was great indeed!

It's been a few years now, think the last time I saw it was 5ish years ago when a local theater here screened it for its 30th anniversary. But I thought there were more hints, like the beating he took and was seemingly okay and his apartment loaded with pictures?

Yeah, also think in the book he's human, it's on my "to read" list, will probably get around to it early next year.

Think I'll get a copy of the Final Cut and watch it this weekend. The copy I have is the director's, iirc.

You're right Robtard, in the movie it's heavily implied that Deckard himself is a replicant, a huge clue comes from Gaff himself. Which is interesting because there's a popular theory that Deckard is a replicant OF Gaff, which is why Gaff resents Deckard so much.

Ridley Scott himself confirmed Deckard was a replicant.

Guess they decided to throw that out the window, but honestly I'm fine with it either way. Doesn't take away from the original since I thought it was better when it was all up in the air and people were discussing back and forth whether or not he was a replicant.

Definitely like the preview.

Denis Villeneuve confirms an R rating for this movie.

He's now being linked with a Dune reboot as well.

My worry is that otherwise talented directors get tied up in established stories and franchises. I'd rather they stuck to doing original movies

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
I wonder if they're going to try to connect this to the new series of Alien films. If they do I hope it doesn't get awkward.


What's more awkward than a 74 yr old Deckard getting it on with a 67 yr old Ripley?


And David watching...

Wonder if this sequel will flop at the box office like the previous one.

Looks pretty good... was that Dave Bautista I saw in there? I didn't know he was in this. Just checked imdb, why yes it was him. I also didn't know Jared Leto was in it..

gCcx85zbxz4

Yeah, that's him. This looks amazing, imo.

Does look good, really looking forward it

Looks good indeed. I even saw an expression of emotion on Gosling's face in this trailer.

Originally posted by queeq
Looks good indeed. I even saw an expression of emotion on Gosling's face in this trailer.

Whoa! I must have missed it...

QZOLKwSsFik

Yeah... that's hard core Gosling for ya.

9uTv4CfyeZY

4HyVpieVgTQ

Sounds like the "Final Cut" is the canon version

http://screenrant.com/blade-runner-2049-original-movie-canon/

Pretty new poster...

http://empireonline.media/jpg/70/0/0/1280/960/aspectfit/0/0/0/0/0/0/c/articles/599f53741deb298668eb8728/blade-runner-2049-poster.jpg

Every trailer looks better and better.

^ I was just thinking the same thing. Every time I see more footage from this it looks great. I actually really like the look of the film.

I'm still not really big enough of a fan of the original to really rush out and see it, but I have much better hopes for this than Alien: Covenant because of Villeneuve behind the camera.

Film is getting rave reviews. Well made sci-fi is always good.

^ Good to hear

i can imagine it if Ridley did it, It would've ended up like his recent attempt at an Alien movies.

Goddamn, yeah. People are saying some extremely positive things about it.

I'm beginning to think this is one of the best directors working right now. I still need to see Prisoners.

He definitely is. I have very high hopes he can do Dune justice.

Originally posted by playa1258
He definitely is. I have very high hopes he can do Dune justice.

Is he supposed to be doing Dune? I don't see it on IMDB.

He's confirmed to be doing it.

Even said it's his dream project.

Well I hope you're right. Fu#k yeah. It might actually get a proper treatment!

This is getting damn good reviews.

this doesn;t look at that impressive but will judge after i see

Goddamn, 94% on RT.

I wouldn't have seen that coming, but I guess I'm not too surprised after seeing some of this director's films. He's really great.

Saw the first trailer. Not having high hopes when I saw them pull the Tiny Review Source Trick. But then not a big fan of the first movie.

It was pretty to look at but really kind of boring and slow. I am willing to bet this will be that just BIGGER!

this better be good since its damn near 3 hours long

Saw it. Better than the first but I didn't care for the first. Very long film.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
It was pretty to look at but really kind of boring and slow.

That's pretty much how I feel about the original. And I've seen it 3 or 4 times now. That's why I'm not in any big rush to see this one, but I will eventually.

Been hearing about that there's some plot points in the film which they've not put in the trailers, But of course typical these days people on the internet just have to spoil everything.

not really a good film.

this drags at various times.

villanueve must've waned a big payday..

great seeing ford a olmos again

What few reviews I have seen done by None Pro Critics...aka Interweb Hacks... and it was what I pretty much thought. One pretty much summed it, up. Said the movie was Pretty and had an Awesome Soundtrack. Story and Actors were Ok to Solid..

Oh my god it's a beautiful movie. Not for everyone tho.

Does Harrison Ford give that "I don't really give a shit about being here" performance as he did in the first?

Originally posted by Flyattractor
What few reviews I have seen done by None Pro Critics...aka Interweb Hacks... and it was what I pretty much thought. One pretty much summed it, up. Said the movie was Pretty and had an Awesome Soundtrack. Story and Actors were Ok to Solid..


so you talking about yourself

hahahahahaha



anyways, i keep saying it.. nobody gives a f*ck about what rotten tomatoes says expcet those that cannot make up their own minds... this film was tracking to an opening weekend figure of $44 to $46 milion and now like so many other films has to look towards the overseas market to make money..


this is only going to make $32 milion opening weekend unles it crawls to $40 milion... so so much for what idiotic critics are saying... I keep saying it.. You and you alone must decide on whether or not to go see a movie...

http://deadline.com/2017/10/ryan-gosling-blade-runner-2049-harrison-ford-opening-weekend-box-office-1202183063/

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
It wasn't Avengers or Star Wars. I HATE IT CAUSE I WEAR A DIAPER!!!!!

WAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!

Great movie, beautiful visuals but slow in parts. Reminded me of Arrival which I also liked.

Wish it could have opened bigger.

Originally posted by Flyattractor


that is very ignorant of you... so tell us whst is it like being a butthurt c$ckbiatch evryday of your miserable dumbas life

do tell us you idiot closetd SJW lover

It must feel like being BruceSkywalker.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
It must feel like being BruceSkywalker.


no idea as you do not even exist...


hahaha

grow the f$ck up

I guess this is bombing in theaters?

Not surprising though as the first film also bombed.

Originally posted by Firefly218
Oh my god it's a beautiful movie. Not for everyone tho. Is it for me?

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
no idea as you do not even exist...


hahaha

grow the f$ck up

If I "don't exist" then that would mean you like to argue with
yourself?

Ghost in the Shell was better.

Yes, I said it.

I guess this worries me. I see a lot of people who, when they speak about positive things in this movie, tend to just talk about how "beautiful" it is. Yeah, the visuals of a film are just one element. The plot, the characters, the acting are all just as important if not more important.

So it alarms me that most of the compliments are about the visuals.

And it's damn good that it alarms you.

It's true. Visually, the movie is excellent. And... that's it.

It's like a sci fi Avatar.

Don't forget about the Rocking Soundtrack.

So either the theories that Deckard is a replicant were wrong or he is the shittiest replicant ever created.

Does Edward James Olmos' character show up?

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
And it's damn good that it alarms you.

It's true. Visually, the movie is excellent. And... that's it.

and that's my biggest concern with this movie...

it will look amazing but other than that.... it will be long and boring. i thought arrival was boring af

i think i'll wait to see this for free....

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Ghost in the Shell was better.

Yes, I said it.

i also liked ghost in the shell

Originally posted by Flyattractor
If I "don't exist" then that would mean you like to argue with
yourself?

your a loser and a SJW ....


Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Ghost in the Shell was better.

Yes, I said it.




Originally posted by Surtur
So either the theories that Deckard is a replicant were wrong or he is the shittiest replicant ever created.

Does Edward James Olmos' character show up?


yes he tells gosling to go look for Deckard

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Ghost in the Shell was better.

Yes, I said it.

I liked Ghost in the Shell. I thought it was unfairly ridiculed.

And yeah, I share the same concern as most people here with this film, that it will look great but be slow and boring.

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
I liked Ghost in the Shell. I thought it was unfairly ridiculed.

Same.

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
And yeah, I share the same concern as most people here with this film, that it will look great but be slow and boring.

Yes, the film had a slow pace. While I wouldn't call it "boring", you still need to sit on your ass for 160 minutes and that's not including the ads/trailers that are shown before the film starts.

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Yes, the film had a slow pace. While I wouldn't call it "boring", you still need to sit on your ass for 160 minutes...

Jesus, I didn't realize it was that long. That's long as fu#k.

The movie was influenced by the MCU

http://screenrant.com/blade-runner-2049-sequel-plans-marvel-influence/

^ Isn't everything nowadays?

It was about 10,000 times better than anything Marvel has ever done so I doubt it. Franchises and sequel hooks existed before the MCU, you know.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
^ Isn't everything nowadays?

Except others go about it the wrong way DCEU & the recent Dark Universe

gotta make sure that first movie is actually good.

I really enjoyed this movie.

They seem to indicate that there is more happening in this new film than in the original. So that's good. Especially since the film is nearly 3 hours long...

O1Gqjjq1nic

It's nearly three hours but it never felt boring to me. Even when it's slowly building up to something it doesn't get tedious because every shot is so beautiful that it could be a desktop wallpaper.

Caught it yesterday, was good. Felt a little too artsy at times with the long almost stills and glaring monotone-like music blaring, though the original had this too, but more subdued.. But it's good, defo worth the watch on the big screen, imo.

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
They seem to indicate that there is more happening in this new film than in the original. So that's good. Especially since the film is nearly 3 hours long...

O1Gqjjq1nic


do they explain why this is boring at times?? do they explain why this is a flop and will need the overseas market to try and make some money

Do they explain how Rogue One was also Boring most of the time but somehow managed to NOT Bomb? Both in the U.S and overseas?

Originally posted by Psychotron
It's nearly three hours but it never felt boring to me. Even when it's slowly building up to something it doesn't get tedious because every shot is so beautiful that it could be a desktop wallpaper. Originally posted by Robtard
Caught it yesterday, was good. Felt a little too artsy at times with the long almost stills and glaring monotone-like music blaring, though the original had this too, but more subdued.. But it's good, defo worth the watch on the big screen, imo.

Damn, you two tempt me.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
do they explain why this is boring at times?? do they explain why this is a flop and will need the overseas market to try and make some money

I dunno. I only watched the first 10 minutes. My first thought would be that it didn't have quite as big of a cult following as the execs may have thought/hoped it did. For every person who thinks the original film is a sci-fi classic masterpiece there are at least 1 or 2 others who find it boring. So I bet that has something to do with it. Plus it doesn't have dinosaurs or lightsabers and wookies, so the nostalgia factor is out.. lol. Robots are too much of an intellectual enterprise. So I never would have seen this having big mainstream appeal.

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Damn, you two tempt me.



I dunno. I only watched the first 10 minutes. My first thought would be that it didn't have quite as big of a cult following as the execs may have thought/hoped it did. For every person who thinks the original film is a sci-fi classic masterpiece there are at least 1 or 2 others who find it boring. So I bet that has something to do with it. Plus it doesn't have dinosaurs or lightsabers and wookies, so the nostalgia factor is out.. lol. Robots are too much of an intellectual enterprise. So I never would have seen this having big mainstream appeal.


perhaps your are right..



this is a total disaster. not expected to turn a profit..

http://deadline.com/2017/10/blade-runner-2049-ryan-gosling-box-office-bomb-1202184297/

Not sure why folks are trying to make out the movie is a flop is such a bad thing, The first movie was also a flop too when it was released back in '82'.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
perhaps your are right..



this is a total disaster. not expected to turn a profit..

http://deadline.com/2017/10/blade-runner-2049-ryan-gosling-box-office-bomb-1202184297/

Good. I don't want Blade Runner to turn into the next Alien or Terminator franchise where the shit movies outnumber the good ones. BR2049 is a good ending the series.

Brave film making. Totally at odds with the modern blockbuster. The snail's pace editing and large chunks of sheer dark cinematography make it as bleak a dystopian movie as there's ever been. But by God it is an audio-visual masterpiece. It tackles big questions and themes with far more subtlety than Interstellar did. It's arguably far more relevant now than the original was as we move into an era of true artificial intelligence.

The fact that it'll flop disastrously doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Mass audiences don't have the attention spans to watch a 3 hour long movie unless it has lots of jokes and/or explosions.

It does make me wonder what's next for Denis Villeneuve.

^ Well, goddamn. I'm hearing such good things about this, I'm gonna try to get out and see it this weekend.

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
^ Well, goddamn. I'm hearing such good things about this, I'm gonna try to get out and see it this weekend.

always remember just because critics love something doesn't mean you or I will

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
always remember just because critics love something doesn't mean you or I will

Oh, I know. For some reason Alien Covenant has settled at a 69% on RT and I thought it was a giant steaming pile of horseshit that ruined my interest in the Alien universe. So believe me, I know. But this director's work has been stunningly impressive to me so far (I've seen Arrival and Sicario, and I still want to see Prisoners and Enemy). They weren't necessarily favorite films that I'll want to watch again and again, but they were so expertly crafted that I was in awe. So if only half of what I've heard about Blade Runner 2049 is true, it will be worth seeing on the big screen as a memorable event.

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
^ Well, goddamn. I'm hearing such good things about this, I'm gonna try to get out and see it this weekend.

This is something you most definitely want to watch in a theater for the first time, preferably a very large screen with great sound. A small crappy screen and shit audio will robe you greatly in this film.

I had to settle for lesser, cos the local film festival bumped this film from the best theater here (and it's a great theater), but it's back at that large single-plex now, going to try to catch this there for a second viewing before it leaves.

Originally posted by jaden101
Brave film making. Totally at odds with the modern blockbuster. The snail's pace editing and large chunks of sheer dark cinematography make it as bleak a dystopian movie as there's ever been. But by God it is an audio-visual masterpiece. It tackles big questions and themes with far more subtlety than Interstellar did. It's arguably far more relevant now than the original was as we move into an era of true artificial intelligence.

The fact that it'll flop disastrously doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Mass audiences don't have the attention spans to watch a 3 hour long movie unless it has lots of jokes and/or explosions.

It does make me wonder what's next for Denis Villeneuve.

Last I heard he's directing Dune, screenplay by Eric Roth. This has the makings to be an epic reboot, unless it has fallen through

Studios might be hesitant with big sci to due to both Blade Runner and Valerion flopping.

Wow, honestly thought this movie would be bigger and do better but damn it bombed and they wanna do a sequel!

Originally posted by steverules_2
Wow, honestly thought this movie would be bigger and do better but damn it bombed and they wanna do a sequel!

So?....the first one also bombed too.

Originally posted by Kazenji
So?....the first one also bombed too.

I know

Originally posted by steverules_2
they wanna do a sequel!

They do?

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
They do?

Something on the Wikipedia page about it.

Thanks. Yeah, found it:

Possible sequel
In September 2015, Ridley Scott expressed interest in making additional films. In October 2017, Villeneuve said that he expected a third film would be made if 2049 was successful. Hampton Fancher, the writer of both Blade Runner and Blade Runner 2049, also revealed that he was considering reviving an old story idea involving Deckard travelling to another country, and Ford said that he would be open to returning if he liked the script.

^ It pretty much goes without saying that sequels are planned and hoped for these days.

Except they didn't end this latest movie in a way it seemed like that there would be a sequel, Unlike other recent movies such as Alien: Covenant where it ended and it obviously will be a sequel followed up.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Except they didn't end this latest movie in a way it seemed like that there would be a sequel, Unlike other recent movies...

Why do you say that? Just because there isn't an obvious cliffhanger that needs a sequel doesn't mean there isn't plenty of material in the world for more stories.

I saw this yesterday and I think I was more impressed than actually enjoyed it. Perhaps a bit too emotionally detached and cold for my taste (which is basically how I feel about the original film), but it is still an absolutely bold and brilliantly executed piece of work. It was amazing to behold on the big screen, so I'm glad I got out to see it. The sound in particular was very well designed and powerful in the cinema. My theater had the volume up to 11 and it was great. I will say I was very tired for my showing and was sort of fighting to stay awake, heh, and it is a very slow-paced film which I ordinarily really like. That being said I'd probably like it more if it was cut down by 15 or 20 minutes or so. It felt a little like 2001: A Space Odyssey with the extremely long shots.

But I definitely do recommend seeing this on the big screen.

There was a scene or two from this that felt like a better Indiana Jones film than Crystal Skull...

Really hope this director gets to do Dune!

I agree with both of these quotes...




It's not exactly Mad Max: Fury Road in the pacing department, lol. That cinematography, though.

About to watch this shiit

Watched this last night. Very good and unique movie. Loved the tone and atmosphere. Visuals were very striking and the soundtrack was bizarre but effective.

Originally posted by BackFire
Watched this last night. Very good and unique movie. Loved the tone and atmosphere. Visuals were very striking and the soundtrack was bizarre but effective.

dude! the soundtrack was good. I like that weird type music in movies. some of the resident evil soundtracks were really good too. I went to this by myself. went to the bathroom and came back and an old a$$ man was right next to my seat.

the theatre was basically empty. WTF. phucking weirdo

The tone and atmosphere was top notch.

Should get a visual effects nomination. Sound too.

Movie sucked. The Rock didn't make a single joke about killing someone. 2/10

The Rock?

Blade Runner 2049 awesome movie. I love to watch the sequel of Blade Runner movie.

Originally posted by Raisen
went to the bathroom and came back and an old a$$ man was right next to my seat.

the theatre was basically empty. WTF. phucking weirdo

Originally posted by Kazenji
The Rock?

he's probably joking because batista is in it but the rock is the premiere Hollywood wrestler dude.

Raisen, you changed your seat or not?

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Raisen, you changed your seat or not?

the situation was weird. when I first came back I mentally said **** it. I was here first. I had my drink in the holder and all that. so I sat where I was. but I swear the dude was staring out of the corner of his eye because I felt it and would look to the right out of the corner of my eye and he would phucking get a little jumpy and turn his head away all fast.

so we spent a good amount of time corner eye staring. then he busts out this shawl like thing and covers himself up to his eyes. I went to the bathroom again because I was drinking a lot of water after getting smashed last night. the second time I moved my shiit and sat away from that chomo. but I still felt those corner eyes

He really enhanced your movie experience.

Originally posted by Raisen
he's probably joking because batista is in it but the rock is the premiere Hollywood wrestler dude.

Dave Batista is far superior to the Rock.

He is, I agree.

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Dave Batista is far superior to the Rock.

batista has a lot more range. rock is one character only

Many critics are picking at how much the box office is going to fall short. But for me, watching it in the theatre, I just marvelled at watching a $150 million dollar movie that wasn't made to make money. It was made because it was the right thing to do, and made without compromise.

Batista's scene in this film was actually probably my favorite part of the movie. It was all slightly downhill from there for me.

Bautista*

^ My bad. I spelled it that way because that's what Raisen did. Usually I look it up. But you're right. The man deserves respect...

http://cdn-flex0.heartyhosting.com/sites/flexonline.com/files/styles/node_image/public/bautista-5.jpg

ES6jTsZ4NQs

Lol!

Hey, I'm searching this Blade Runner coat. For this Winter can anyone help me to find this coat? In Between $150 to $200.

just looks like a plain old Leather Trench to me.

Good Luck with this.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
just looks like a plain old Leather Trench to me.

Good Luck with this.

Thanks for the wish

sLxxbfsj8IM

Ridley scott has an idea for a 3rd movie and might also direct it too

https://screenrant.com/blade-runner-3-ridley-scott-idea/

i'd say nope to the directing part, After how the recent alien movie was handled.

Dude, the movie tanked hard. Ridley Scott talks a lot of shit and is all over the map. You take everything to heart and are rather naive, Kaz.

And so did the previous movie before it tanked, Dumbshit112



nothing wrong with talking about it, idiot.

Originally posted by Kazenji
And so did the previous movie before it tanked, Dumbshit112



nothing wrong with talking about it, idiot. And how many years did it take to get the sequel. Therein lies the answer. Ridley Scott has diarrhea of the mouth. You are free to get worked up over this dolts ramblings but unlike you I'm capable of learning from past experiences.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Ridley scott has an idea for a 3rd movie and might also direct it too

https://screenrant.com/blade-runner-3-ridley-scott-idea/

i'd say nope to the directing part, After how the recent alien movie was handled.

I wouldn't let him near it. I'd let Villeneuve take a crack at it again, but only if they get a new writer onboard. Someone who can write a less slow plot.

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW


He really enhanced your movie experience. That's real 4D (icks) for ya.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I wouldn't let him near it. I'd let Villeneuve take a crack at it again, but only if they get a new writer onboard. Someone who can write a less slow plot.

I tend to agree. The opening with Dave Bautista was really cool and then I actually sort of felt like it was all down hill from there. I had trouble caring because it was soooooo slow moving. Although the cinematography was phenomenal all the way through.

saw this last night and liked it. i knew this would be a slow movie and i wasn't expecting a thrill ride. it was really slow but the cinematography was beautiful, bought it on blu ray

i still liked ghost in the shell better though

Dave Bautista was great, much better actor than the rock



Originally posted by -Pr-
I wouldn't let him near it. I'd let Villeneuve take a crack at it again, but only if they get a new writer onboard. Someone who can write a less slow plot.

agreed

Originally posted by The Nuul


i still liked ghost in the shell better though



Same.

Originally posted by The Nuul


Dave Bautista was great, much better actor than the rock



Oh, without a doubt.

Originally posted by The Nuul
Dave Bautista was great, much better actor than the rock

Yeah, he is great, which is why it was a shame he was underused. That was probably my favorite part of the movie.

Originally posted by quanchi112
And how many years did it take to get the sequel. Therein lies the answer. Ridley Scott has diarrhea of the mouth. You are free to get worked up over this dolts ramblings but unlike you I'm capable of learning from past experiences.

Jesus! Shut up!

Originally posted by SquallX
Jesus! Shut up! Says the emotional baby himself. Make me you worm.