Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
Blade Runner 2049: 3 alternative plotlines that would make a better sequel
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 11. 2017
- Support me on Patreon / robager
More on Blade Runner (and other classic movies) at www.collativele...
My original thoughts on Blade Runner 2049 can be watched here • Rob Ager's thoughts on...
Actually, the fact that it flopped doesn't say anything about the quality of the film. By that logic the transformers films would be awesome.
DerMoni and the original Blade Runner and The Thing would mean that they suck and that is clearly not the case
Flops happen more because of poor marketing and poor judgment on the part of the producers and production studio with regards to budget.
And Dredd (2012) must suck, it flopped horribly. (Sarcasm, obviously. Dredd is frakkin' awesome.)
Hey. Avatar, Titanic and Star Wars the Force Awakens are obviously the greatest films ever made. They all made over 2 billion in the box office.
Dredd flopped because it was so badly marketed. By the time word of mouth started to pick up it was already off the cinema circuit. BR 2049 was marketed to death.
The replicants didn't come back to Earth with intentions to kill Tyrell, they wanted him to extend their lives. It was only when Roy found out that Tyrell couldn't do it that Roy decided to kill him.
The problem is that Hollywood would always want to shoehorn Ford into the film, therefore limiting scriptwriters immensely
I would like to preface this by saying I greatly respect your work, Rob. You’re the main reason I sat down and watched The Shining for the first time after years of wanting to. You made me look at 2001 as a wholly different film. Other analyses you’ve done have been hit or miss but a true passion for film and film-making is ever present.
But I think you’ve missed a huge mark with Blade Runner 2049. Your arrogance in saying you could write a better script in a week is frankly embarrassing. Especially since the suggestions you’ve put in this video seem to miss some of their most own plot points in the mix. Firstly with “Blade Runners”, how can people from the city not know what’s in the blightlands (or anything outside the city) when the first film clearly states off-world colonies exist? It would be silly to assume that no-one happened to have a satellite to prove otherwise. I think your love of Dredd’s ideas is mixing a bit hard here. Not that these concepts aren’t fine on their own merits, but they don’t really feel like original ideas at all. I like the concept of multiple Blade Runners reluctantly working together, there’s a lot of room for open dynamics with characters there, but why would Blade Runners work with or for the Tyrell corporation? Blade Runner’s are a special sect of Police Force, not hired mercenaries. And why would the Tyrell corporation wait so long to find Rachel and Deckard if they knew where they’d gone?
Your second concept, “Off-World”, is immediately interesting, but it's stated in the first film that yes, Batty and his crew had assistance from other Replicants in their escape. Those replicants either died trying to enter Tyrell Corp, or were retired already. Another thing to point out is that Humans seem coldly uninterested in Replicants or their motivations in the original film. I don’t think just because they managed to murder Tyrell that kind of outlook would change at all. And this would also feel like a retread, as we the audience already know why the Replicants did what they did. So from an audience standpoint, the main reason for the plot is pretty much pointless. And it's heavily implied that Replicants were never given any promises at all, they were simply forced to work through threats and general coercing, again because clearly humans couldn’t give a shit about what Replicants think or feel.
Now for the third; Replicant. Great title. Very catching. Your idea that Replicants would be given less empathy as to not be so identifiable with Humans is interesting, but I think that's kind of what they were going for in 2049. The reason all these Replicants are so integrated into society is because they are easy to spot, and by extension, easy to retire if necessary. However, this backfired when their life-spans were increased, as Empathy is something that can be taught. Again, it's not explicitly stated in 2049, but it's mentioned by Luv (when watching Rachel’s Voidt Kampf test) that Replicants were ‘more difficult to spot then’. This is why K is so easily integrated within the LAPD as a Blade Runner; because he’s assumed to not have a soul. He discovers throughout the film, on his own, that he does have what constitutes as a ‘soul'. And the idea of robbing a replicant of their empathy is interesting, but it makes them, as you’ve already stated, potentially even more dangerous. It seems a bit counter-intuitive to make your slave work force more likely to slit your throat by lacking humanity.
Now I understand that all of these are simply concepts, not fleshed out in any way. But I feel a need to remind you; even the Star Wars prequels started as great concepts. If these films ran into creative trouble along the way, they could not only come out worse than 2049, but could widely be seen as huge mistakes.
I understand the frustration with not exploring different themes than the original when it comes to 2049, but I feel that the original film only explored those themes from one angle; what separates man from replicant? 2049 I thought did a fine job exploring different angles of the same theme; what separates replicants from each other? How can memories, real or not, dictate one’s actions or inactions? What makes you different than everyone else? What blurs the line between ‘made' and ‘born'? 2049 opened up a wealth of possibilities for the themes of the original, and it seems you have either forgotten about that or simply dismissed them entirely.
Also, the actor who plays Gaff was in Blade Runner 2049. How can you say you don’t know if he’s still alive if you were paying attention?
Don't hold your breath waiting for Rob to reply.
lol the "he came up with three ideas in one day" argument doesn't hold. first, it's a great leap of faith to believe he really came up with them in one day. second, he said he could write a better script in one week, which is highly arrogant, given that not everyone shares your enthusiasm about his rough outlines. I didn't think 2049 was that good of a movie but rob's ideas almost made me fall asleep lol
Sorry you are in no way qualified with your Opinions. 2049 is literally shit.
Well said. Blade Runner 2049 was one of the best films of the year. I think Rob lost the plot with this one.
Purefoldnz it wasn't that good, don't follow the sheeple. Could have been way, way better. The odd world idea how they came back to earth would clearly be better.
I liked the film...but I appreciate what you're saying. The film didn't fail because of the quality of the film,it failed because it was a sequel to a cult film that failed and was a flop in the first chance. It never stood a chance. I liked the film,but to each his own.
* place not chance
Ah I don't agree with that. Empire Strikes Back, Aliens, Mad Max 2, The Thing, Cape Fear etc were sequels and remakes that were following in the footsteps of perceived classics yet still hit the mark with critics and audiences. BR 2049 failed because it was such a poorly thought out script with no originality and too much conforming to modern movie tropes. It didn't challenge anything or anyone. It tried to play it safe, which ironically made it flop.
The Thing died on release. It's one of the biggest stories about the movie: coming out against E.T, and being ignored by a public wanting happy endings.
I'll take your views on board, Rob. You don't like the movie, and can list the reasons why it didn't gel with you. Poor box office, unfortunately, is not a point that works. Too many good films fail on their cinema run.
I have to agree, almost nobody knows Blade Runner in my day to day life. A big name like Ford doesn't even matter. They know Indiana Jones, but never Rick Deckard. I thought 2049 was good. However, we wanted to be amazed I think, and it just couldn't deliver.
VomaSaurus Rex Kinda like Tron Legacy, which I liked.
Another interesting idea for a movie: a reverse of the original. Instead of Replicants seeking to extend their lives, we have a Replicant that’s somehow achieved immortality. And throughout we have a Blade Runner (or more than one) hunting down said replicant but we never meet him/her till the end, Colonel Kurtz style. And it’s more about the journey. We explore the idea of immortality and whether it’s possible for biological entities, given that replicants aren’t mechanical machines and have more in common with human biological systems. And instead of replicants wanting to be more like humanity, we depict some replicants despising humanity and wanting to be more evolved than humanity.
I like the idea of going off world but, you know, the execution is much more important than the idea.
I prefer to watch a film with great ideas and poor execution than the other way around. Polished turds don't appeal.
7:53 Edward James Olmos did, in fact, return to reprise the role of Gaff. He even left his trademark origami. Am I tripping, or did you not realize that EJO was back as Gaff in Blade Runner 2049?
I was disappointed that his origami skills haven't improved much in 30 years.
In fact he mentioned that in his last video too. Weird.
round about midnight
Maybe it's a 'breadcrumb' for us, Will? heheh, just kidding, I enjoy Rob's sifting through the details of things, looking for clues to deeper readings into film. That's why I'm surprised that Rob would miss such an integral part of the movie.
RideMyTruck sweet truck, and maybe even sweeter noir playlist on your channel. I'll have to check it out.
The over-arching theme from the first movie and the BladeRunner world, is:
"What does it mean to be Human".....this is heartbeat of the whole premis
Something you've completely overlooked in any of your ideas
Hey Rob, you might want to check out the Blade Runner PC game they actually had a story that took place during the movie but had its own character. Was designed so that it randomized who was and wasn't a replicant each run.
Much like your ideas on a sequel to the thing, these ideas are nice enough, but again I feel zero need for a sequel. Particularly so late after the original. Hollywood just needs to do something new. Like it used to do in the 80’s
Blade Runners sounds like the most entertaining one to me due to the interpersonal dynamics between the characters. I also agree 100% that they should not find Deckard and Rachel at the end of the story.
I suppose that could be achieved with diff actors, but ... hmmm, not sure audiences would like seeing someone else in the role.
Bladerunners sounds like a direct to video flick from the 90's starring ironically Rutger Hauer lol
@@purefoldnz3070
Penny dreadfulls
The film was a flop in America. Not in Europe. It being a flop in America has absolutely nothing to do with whether it's a good sequel or not.
What's it to do with?
The runtime for a sci-fi will have scared many off. Plus wasn't the original a flop, on release, only gaining it's love over time? Dredd also is regarded as a flop, but as we know, is a damn good movie. Box office means nothing when it comes to quality.
Exactly. Many films flop at the cinema despite rave reviews from critics and the public and yet go on to be highly praised classics. The original Blade Runner being a prime example. It's a pretty weak argument to try and say because 2049 flopped in the theatre that it somehow supports any argument that the film is crap. In order to know a film is rubbish millions of people would need to go and see it first to label it rubbish but the fact remains that millions of people didn't go and see it and will probably end up seeing it for the first time digitally or on DVD/Bluray. Reasons? Age demographic, arguably a film not many women would go and see?, age restricted therefore shutting out a large younger audience, length, poor marketing and many other number of reasons resulting in American's not going to see it. Blade Runner 2049 performed extremely well in the UK and the rest of Europe.
Dredd was a gigantic flop ;-)
it made $259 million from a $150 million budget. Not quite a flop
Honestly, the Offworld concept should have been the first act (or at least the cold open) of the original film. The original screenwriter had intended to show Roy being dumped on a junkyard planet at the start of the film. I think it could have been a powerful open. Of course, all of that backstory was written out. The original film just didn't give us enough reason to empathize with the replicant characters, so a bit of the emotional impact was lost-- despite Rudger's wonderful final lines. And for the record, I didn't hate the new film, but it doesn't need to exist. I'll leave it at that.
Oh come on! The original Blade Runner flopped big time. Bigger than BR 2049 for sure.
Yet you consider it a masterful piece of work.
Box office success means nothing.
Blade Runner 2049 made $259 million from a $150 million budget. Not quite a flop
There were 2 things about BR2049 that I thought were genuinely interesting to think about, one of them you've already noted. You mentioned the hologram girlfriend Joi and how her character was interesting. I thought her character arc was the most fascinating and deliberately leaves us wondering if she had sentience or not.
But here's the second thing about BR2049 I found fascinating but am not sure you noticed: The Memory doctor's motives. She had basically been putting out her childhood memory at the orphanage/slave labour camp into all the replicants. Why? As a way to call for help, in the hopes that someone would notice and help her uncover her past. I'm not sure if something like that has been done before in terms of character tropes and cliches.
I hope you don't get too caught up in the average man's opinion. You got the balls and the brains to critique and offer a solution. Keep it up. Thank you for sharing your talent.
Rachel Young?
Don't you mean Sean Tyrell? 😂
The problem is that this didn't need to happen. The original movie did not need a sequel at all. This was Hollywood trying to cash in on the success of the first movie which didn't do well in the theater. Mostly because people thought it was an action movie and it was trying to be too intellectual and dark and most couldn't handle that. After the vhs market kicked on it became an underground success but only after people watched it a bunch of times. Hollywood NEEDS to stop with the unnecessary sequels/remakes/reboots and start making movies with untouched material because there are so many books and ideas out there that would be amazing to use as a movie. Love the channel Rob.
Villeneuve and Fancher tried to OUT-Dick Phil K Dick....and it backfired COLOSSALLY!!!! Dumb n Dumber shoulda just optioned the novel and put it on screen; word for word, page for page. Either that or they shoulda re-booted that other little known Ladd Company property called "OUTLAND" by Peter Hyams, a movie about a sheriff on a Jupiter mining colony hunting down criminals. They could have tweaked the story a bit and made it an AWESOME off-world Blade Runner movie. But just DONT try to out-cyberpunk Phillip K Dick. MASSIVE fail dudes.
really liked the last idea, especially it's title, calling the blade runner sequel Replicant is genius, instantly recognizable. It's so good I'd say it should've been the title to the actual sequel we got, given how the main character now isn't a blade runner anymore
Hey Rob, how about getting the new 2049 Blue Ray and slapping together a REDUX edition for fans ? I'm talking about a complete RE-EDIT of the entire movie. Maybe even creating a new plot line?
The interesting thing about replicants lacking any empathy is that you could argue they're not responsible for the horrible acts they commit; humans programmed them to be capable of it. It'd probably be even more "misanthropic" in that regard than the original film.
That second idea is really strong. Lots of satisfying ideas in there.
YES!! I've been waiting for this video for a while now! For the first time in forever, I'm glad I caught a bug so I can stay home and watch this uninterrupted! Too bad I can't taste anything... This would go great with popcorn.
Worst thing about the movie is that you've got a guy playing an emotionless computer, OK, who has to take test to prove he has no emotion, OK... Then why implant him with memories designed to give him emotions?
I fucking love these ideas. I love Off world idea the most, but all three are great and interesting.
Pretty good, Rob! I always appreciate your analysis. Even the titles are cool ideas “Replicants” being especially good.
I was disappointed I didn’t get a chance to see the new BL before they pulled all the fall movies this past Thanksgiving weekend, thanks for making me feel better about that. Lol! Cheers man.-E
I’m curious on your opinion on the first season of True Detective
“Are you criticizing the movie I made or the movie you would have liked me to make?”
To begin with, I'd like to observe that as someone who leveled some of the criticisms you directly address with the beginning of this video, I appreciate that you took time to address them. While I still maintain that too much of your previous video relied on making too many comparisons with the original novel and its themes; it's clear that you have other ideas and concepts beyond simply clinging to the source as a fanboy. As I've said on various videos, I enjoy your content, regardless of any disagreements with your opinions.
I still disagree with your feelings as regards Bladerunner 2049, as my gut reaction was walking out of the cinema feeling wholly satisfied by the film I'd seen, and feeling it was a well made sequel that matched well to the style and ethos (as well as to the underwritten and somewhat cliche'd nature of the original) while simultaneously building on the universe and creating new thought experiments for the audience. Most notably the notion of how a replicant reacts to an A.I. being.
A conundrum built out of the concept of how in Blade Runner, the replicants are more human than human (especially in showing facets of humanity such as empathy and emotion) whereas in 2049, the AI companion further shows more than the replicants, and yet we are begged to question how autonomous she actually is. For me, that was one of the most intriguing ideas.
I do find your ideas for potential sequels interesting. Although the Offworld concept, particularly the lifespan idea, has been portrayed in both The Island, and in one plotline in Cloud Atlas (a film I'd be very intrigued to hear your thoughts on)
As to the "Rob hates new films" argument. There's a really simple fix to this... make more videos about new films that you like rather than only really covering the ones you disparage and compare to classics of yesteryear!
Yeah I've been wanting to do more on new movies. Gave a positive review of Fury Road then had to update after third viewing in which my estimation dropped. I've done a study of Dredd already. Definitely need to do something on Snowtown - I think that's the most socially important film of the last couple of decades. Thought about some stuff on Prometheus, but everybody's posting about that. Oh, I did a video about the therapy scene in The Master as well.
Graeme Strachan I can't understand you. Go back to your country.
Maurice Searcy TROLL
@rob ager what do you think about Paul WS Anderson sorta-sequel Soldier?
A blade runner prequel.
With Roy batty as the main character... his war experience. Ending with him organising a mutiny
yeah I've had one floating around in my head for a while, but who can play batty with rutger dead? Nobody
The problem I have with your ideas is that they take the story out of what makes Blade Runner great, the gritty noirish city.
These are concepts, not scripts. You can just say oh we'll explore these things and that thing and it will be great, but that doesn't equal good dialogue or even good film making. Just saying I could have made a better movie and then listing some vague concept you've decided is cooler is the height of masturbation.
I never claimed they were scripts - read video title. Sure execution would count for a lot, but the big problem with the new movie is the basic core plotline is dull as nails to the point where good execution can't elevate it. Result is the height of masturbation and falling for it is the equivalent of taking one up the arse lol
I loved Blade Runner 2. It is easily the BEST sci-fi film since 1999's The Matrix. I don't give a sh#t about the Box Office.
Would you consider analysing [REC]? There are a couple of interesting mysteries that wait to be solved.
As a fan of the science fiction subject, I didn't want to come in with any perceive notion. An open mind was my intention. Having read the books by its author was I felt important as far a direction of the story line. First of all my first impression was the length of the movie. Whew Ok here we go but...still wanting to keep on track. Clearly the movie had to many plots and sub plots and so forth...as I discover the movie was un necessary long. In my view there was not a single over all vision. Which would have made the story earlier to follow. A sequel? We as a viewing audience needed to know what happen to the period when Decker and Rachel left the city before 2049 happened. The movie ended in 2019 right? Soooo a thirdy year gap WHAT happen?
I think a movie about a replicant who escapes from the off world colonies and ends with him and his holographic girlfriend finally getting to earth and dying there would have been cool. Roy Batty and the others would be mentioned but that would be it. There would be no mention of Rachel and Deckard, and the movie could be called Replicant. It would take place in 2019 or 2020, it doesn’t matter because who cares. All the technology would look the same as in BR. The music would have to resemble the Vangelis music as much as possible. I think the actors from BR2049 would do just fine. The replicant’s motivation to go to earth would be to feel more human, not to fight for his rights or to expand his life span. The holographic girlfriends would be for the lesser replicants who work the mines or something, because the replicant girlfriends would be reserved for the more important ones -like Roy Batty -. Maybe we see our replicant purchase a real sheep with all the precious minerals he stole from the mines, and we could have a really moving scene of the holographic girlfriend crying because she can’t touch the sheep. Maybe the movie begins with our replicant dreaming with a sheep and not knowing what that beast is. That could lead to him thinking that he is special a la BR2049 when he finds out what a sheep is, and decides to go to earth to get a sheep or, to make it more comprehensible for the audience, a real dog. Speaking of dog, the fact that Deckard had a dog and wasn’t sure if it was real in BR2049 didn’t make any sense. The dog had no reason to be there.
To me, the worst and most disappointing thing of BR2049 was Deckard and his love for Rachel. The bastard raped her in BR, he didn’t love her. The whole thing about Rachel and him having a child didn’t make sense either. Tyrell didn’t want Rachel to have a child with Deckard. Why would Tyrell want Rachel to have a child with the one guy who kills Rachels for a living? That’s like making the greatest computer program ever created and wanting to run it on Windows Vista. What would the psycho Deckard we met in BR have done if he knew the machine he raped was pregnant? He would have killed both of them immediately. The psycho Deckard from BR and the loving widower/father Deckard from BR2049 are opposites, they’re completely different from each other! Deckard was a psycho replicant killer drinker who hated everyone and everything, enjoyed raping replicants and making weird voices, not a loving widower father that enjoyed drinking cocktails with his dumb dog while he listened to Elvis- WTF!?
...oh yeah, I would love to know exactly what Zhora was up to in her 'kick murder squad'! I love the line, it makes no sense, I doubt kicking someone to death would prove very stealthy in political assiasinations, but it sounds great and hints at just how tough she is, so yeah, I am all for seeing that Kicking squad getting down and dirt in a sequel!
I want to see all 3 of those movies. If I had any doubts about you being able to come up with a better script in a week, you dispelled all doubts in the most knock-down, definitive way.
Do you think it would be interesting if the empathy lacking replicant turned out to be a human whose memories were deleted? Kind of a contrast to the memory implants in the original
I am not the least bit surprised Rob here forgot Edward James Olmos was in the film. He did next to jack shit.
"If only you could see what I've seen with your eyes", said Roy Batty..
I'm more interested to see a Blade Runner universe off-shoot movie that expands on the "Tannhauser Gate" and "C-beams glittering in the dark" mentioned in Roy Batty's dying speech ..
Its such a moving speech that left a deep impression in viewers ... a lot of people must be wondering what about these places, events and visions that Roy experienced that moved him so much that has made him so driven to extend his life span .. maybe there's something that Roy has yet to do, some great unfinished business that he feel deeply about and it has to do with a monumental event that took place at Tannhauser Gate or something special about that place ... maybe he wants to extend his life so that he could go back to Tannhauser gate to fulfill a wish to an unfinished business ..
So yah, I think a plot revolving around the mysteries of the Tannhauser Gate would make a great movie ..
(in fact, if you google for imageries for many artists' rendering of what the Tannhauser Gate may look like, you'll get A LOT OF great great illustrations which makes 2049 pale in comparison)
Can't say which one of the three would make the best sequel but any single one would be an improvement over 2049. The biggest problem there is with that one is the fact that Blade Runner units are essentially rendered irrelevant since Replicants are revealed to be entirely indiscernible from humans biologically and they're just as empathetic, and they have absolutely no reason to go off the rails when they're given open ended lifespans and are left alone to live their lives in peace. There's absolutely no good reason why they'd get discriminated upon since the vast majority are really not a threat to society, it's clear that the director was making an allegory for racism and social injustice when Replicants in 2049 would get discriminated unjustly. He never even questions why BRs were necessary in the first place.
While the Replicants in the original BR were also empathetic, unlike the purely psychopathic ones from Electric Sheep, they were also just as dangerous. They had the emotional maturity of toddlers, so they could easily go from very innocent and loving childlike beings to cruel murder machines, and they have a higher intelligence than their creators and have the strength of ten people. While Deckard clearly feels bad for killing them, the original movie also makes it quite clear that they really were a threat to society that needed to be eliminated. As for 2049 though, I couldn't make sense as to why the things that happened in the movie have happened, and how modern Replicants were in any way a threat in the way that the Nexus 6 were in the original.
I don't quite understand the part about wanting Racheal dead so bad in the first plotline, I mean she only had a four year life span to begin with.
interesting ideas...I have a 4th one though.the films is called the ''Blue Blood Run''The idea is back in the past when the first replicant is created. It is made of plastic, and the blood is blue hydraulic fluid.It is a prototype so the testers are pushing its emotional and physical features to the limits....the testers asking to enter in a pub full of humans and tease them to purposely be beaten...and tests like that...a sort of that 'eye' test reaction...Basically the testers are calibrating and interpreting its behaviour in order to create the right kind of replicant.During those experiments the idea of the 4 years life span emerges...there is tension as the team cannot come to decide as the first prototype named ''blue blood'' resamble too much a human being...At the end they decide to create 2 different classes: the strongest 4 years of lifespan, the weaker and less capable replicants a timeless lifespan...Blue Blood receives his timeless lifespan as it is the first prototype...as sort of gift.After 20 years almost of the replicants are of the strongest kind as humans need them , but the 4 year models decide to chase the few remains timeless models to have their blue blood which contain the quality of immortality....humans in panic try to destroy the few remain timeless model to destroy any chance that the 4 year models have to extend their life....'Blue Blood has to run''......so what do you thnk?...I wrote this in 10 minutes....:-P......
I was hanging in up until “I think it was a Pixar movie” and “pretty good animated movie”
Wall-E was actually good - an exception for its kind.
Hi, Rob, i´m with the people who didn´t like it much. Although i really loved this flick´s slow paced vibe (i really like that), which i miss a lot, in many movies today; i also thought that the story had some holes, yeah, the script was not good. And also, that it wasn´t developed as good as it could be.
Now, i am really, reaaaaally crossing my fingers on the new Dune movie, which is gonna be released later this year, cause i really like the novel, and i do like a lot the original David Lynch Dune movie, of 1984, which has an exceptional cast, scenarios, cool figurines, soundtrack, excellent music by TOTO. Although it has some holes in the story too, it´s a movie that i have always have felt very good when i see it or re-see it, along the years, i have watched it hundreds of times. It´s actually even an important part of my childhood, and tennage years imaginary; an integral part of my life´s emotional experiences.
So... i´m crossing my fingers, heavily for this one! Let´s hope that Dennis Villeneuve can deliver something closer to Arrival, and more far away from Blade Runner 2049, in therms of quality filmmaking, script, and everything else.
Continuing on with the human Blade Runner, maybe he can have a cybernetic arm from a encounter with a violent replicant that possibly killed someone close to him. This made him quit, but after the report of more replicants, maybe advanced more intelligent ones like you mentioned, he goes back to being a BR and throughout the course, he becomes a straight killing machine out of anger. Like Dekard, only he's become less human and slowly begins to lack empathy, coming off as a replicant himself. That might not be too strong, but it could work in my opinion. Thanks for reading!.
The actor that played Gaff (Edward James Olmos) is still alive, in fact he had a (small) role in Blade Runner 2049. The boss (M. Emmet Walsh) is still around too.
I disagree. That first idea movie sounds like a cliched hunt the fugitive down movie. With the same cliched movie dynamic of Cops who refuse to work with each other like in “Lethal Weapon” or even that one Martin Lawrence movie: Maximum Security. That dynamic we have seen in hundreds of buddy cop movies. Two cops get partnered up and they don’t want to work with each other. Sounds uniorignal, cliched and forgettable movie. Plus if this Deadbelt is discovered not to be radioactive and harmful. Wouldn’t the advanced technology like drones with radioactive sensors show that the area is not radioactive or harmful? Plus what lead could they possibly have that Deckard and Rachel are alive? Plus what possible important information does Rachel have? Plus you just retconned a ton of lore and story of the first blade runner movie.
The Lethal Weapon comparison doesn't work at all, itself a sort of rip off of 48 hrs, but not as good. In the cop buddy movies you're talking about they tend to bitch with each other at the start and gradually become best buddies by the end of the movie. The outline I gave was totally different. A team of BRs, not a duo ... they gradually turn on each other and get into conflicts (I didn't expand upon it a lot, but my written plot synopsis has them testing each other as potential replicant infiltators etc and some end up killing others out of suspicion) ... and, unlike every cop buddy movie along the lines of Lethal Weapon, they aren't actually hunting "bad" guys and never find the fugitives they're looking for. So there are hardly any movies out there that compare in base plotline. Maybe you can find some obscure example, but it's certainly not a well-trodden story path.
Regarding the Deadbelt, the notion is that the powers in the city in charge of the media, the cops etc would be the only ones to have access to the kind of technology you mention and are able to suppress the rumours from people who had managed to find out what was out there.
Leads for finding Deckard and Rachel? Good question. Lots of possibilities on this. Tracking devices installed in all vehicles, which they later learn that Deckard has found out about and had removed from his vehicle when he and Rachel hooked up with the Blight Siders. Rachel herself could have been chipped (though that would have been used to hunt her in the first movie, so wouldn't work). General satellite imagery picking up odd snippits of Deckard's car from time to time. Randomly placed sensor units already in place outside the city. That's not a difficult plot point to resolve.
What info does Rachel have that they want? For one thing, all of Tyrell's actual niece's insider understandings / memories of her uncle's business - valuable to any up and coming competitor company as I mentioned in the video. How about the suppression of research data on how dangerous their replicant products are? And how about Tyrell using replicants on Earth (even though they're illegal) to infiltrate and subvert government to his company's commercial agendas?
Retconned in what way? This story would take things outside the city and explore the world beyond that we never really saw in the first movie. And naturally as a sequel it would link back to themes and ideas in the first movie. Empire Strikes Back "retcons" Star Wars but is still great because it brings lots of great new stuff to the table. Same for any good sequel. And do you not think BR 2049 "retcons" the first movie far more than the plot lines I've offered, right down to aquatic lighting effects, sex slavery and empathy for replicants? It even opens with a scene that was scripted and not used in the first film.
I don't agree with all of your opinions, but I can respect how well you can support them. Films allow for different interpretations, and the only wrong answer is an unsupported perspective. I'm curious but will you ever make a video about the post-millennial movies you did like? And perhaps go in depth to why you preferrred them?
17:04 Rutgers Performance is Just Stunning.. Nothing in the new film comes close that.. They kinda tried to make agent luvs character be an off the rails roy batty type.. Being Emotionally disconnected and having all this rage all the time. But my question is why she would act that way.. if shes to be the most advanced nexus 9 model. Why would she show those flaws basically is what im asking..
I've watched 2049 four times now. Wasn't sure about it the first couple of times but now I'm invested.
The empathy theme, while still prevalent, is less central to 2049. Memory is by and far the defining theme. I suppose any sequel to Blade Runner would have to have a philosophy that supercedes plot line. At least to some extent.
The alternative plots you mention seem interesting as explorations of motives and character etc. Blade Runner was a film that grasped the imagination of our generation. I myself imagined once I'd seen the director's cut that Rachel executes Deckard shortly thereafter. That she was human, and she'd used the Voight-Kampf test to fool Deckard into believing SHE was a replicant, when in fact it's HE who was.
Anyway, I think there's heaps going on in 2049. It may not be as good as the original, but I do think it's a good and thought provoking film.
Let's be honest. They don't make films like this all too often. For every Blade Runner there's a thousand Transformers. I think we owe it to its ethos alone to find the good in this film.
Your plot ideas make a lot more sense for a sequel than 2049. Specifically Offworld and replicant. I don’t like the idea of reviving deckard and Rachel characters as I don’t see any point to it. I think most people whether they are fans of blade runner or not would rather be more invested in a story revolving around the elaboration of the blade runner universe. There is no more that needs to be added to the story of deckard and Rachel.
The idea of going off world is a really good one. I like the space station setting. It was done poorly in 2049, which is a fucking awful movie, but the idea of a corporation being the villain makes a lot of sense since Bladerunner is a noir/proto cyber punk story. Some replicants could work for the corporation, some could be caught inbetween.
I mean some replicants could be enemies of the corporation.
I always love your analyses. I like the way your mind works.
Idea #1:
1. It seems similar to Logan's Run & THX-1138 (for which I pray for a non-Lucas sequel).
2. Yes, both actors are still alive. In fact, E.J. Olmos had a small part IN Blade Runner 2049. Remember? He makes an origami sheep for "K."
3. I would give one of the 5 Blade Runners secret orders to kill all the others, once Rachael is killed. This would keep the mission secret. Of course, the Chief would have plans to kill THAT one.
Idea #2
1. It occurred to me that this could be combined with #1, in that there is no "off world." That travel outside the Solar System is impossible, and "Off World" is really a huge off-limits area here on Earth.
2. Love the concept of Zohra.
3. The actors who played Rachael, Pris, Roy and Zohra are still alive. In fact, Joanna Cassidy (Zohra) looks even better than she did back then!
4. I love the idea of seeing "things you people wouldn't believe."
Idea #3
1. I was wondering if you were going to use key Ideas from the Novella! LOL!
2. I would sure love to see Wallace dismembered by one of the Psycho-Replicants. Maybe he is also a Replicant, as possibly was Tyrell. (a deleted scene or un-shot one in Blade Runner I shows Roy entering a room with lots of Tyrells in suspended animation, ready to replace the one he killed.
3. One danger is, the Psychos might run for office and get political power. Hey, it's happened here in the US!
4. I agree about Se7en. Good ideas, but overacted and generally sucked, esp. the ending.
A combination of all three of these plotline ideas could be the masterpiece we needed. Hell, even to write something that is stand alone of these plot ideas could be amazing!
Alternative sequel
Tyrell's Rachael experiment was part of a larger plan of Tyrell to effect his own immortality by replacing himself with a replicant after his death. His memories were implanted into a replicant version of himself. After his death, Tyrell's replicant was instated slightly ahead of schedule and all records of his death were eliminated. All people with knowledge of his death were killed except Rachael and Decker. The replicant Tyrell is motivated by self preservation above all else. In order to make sure that he won't be killed by humanity, he plans to overtake humanity with replicants by killing people and replacing them with replicants with memory implants. The replicants have superior intelligence and strength so they rapidly gain influence in society. The goal is to achieve critical majority in society and essentially replace humanity with replicants kind of like invasion of the body snatchers. The Tyrell corporation's replicants hunt down Rachael and Decker and kill them, but Decker passes the info about Tyrell to a protagonist character before dying. This protagonist returns to LA to save humanity from extinction by exposing the Tyrell replicant's psychotic plot. In the end, the character discovers that the replicants are superior and more virtuous than humans. In the end the character chooses to have his memories and consciousness transferred to a replicant and take on replicant form.
I saw the video title and jumped for joy.
The first two would lack the distinctive look and feel that makes "Blade Runner" "Blade Runner".
The 3rd is the best, though not sure about replicate being accepted on earth.
saying you don't know what Sean Young looks like now reminds me, she has a youtube channel, and it's a personal sort of affair, not a glitsy celebrity garbage thing! really cool.
it's "msyPARIAH"
Haha, just watched her rant about the NY Times.
I would have preferred an actor like Gerard Butler to play K in 2049. Gossling has too much of a happy face to play a somber replicant.
Unfortunately I didn't get a chance to see it in the theater. I've seen it twice on Blu Ray. The first I thought it was okay. I watched it a bit of a bad time cause it was night time and it's a long movie. The second time I was really able to enjoy it and loved it a lot more. I think it's a great movie. it's a movie I can watch at least once a year.
Rob, You might enjoy this youtuber's eloquent curse filled rant filled review of 2049.
His description of nursing home Gaff filling him with depression made me howl.
Razorfist: czcams.com/video/ES6jTsZ4NQs/video.html
Also idea 2 is fantastic, as they all are!
Oh, that rant of his was sweet. Very much enjoyed, and he knocked the hell out of my two vids on the subject I think. Thumbs up to that guy.
The theme of Bladerunner is ‘what it means to be human’ and could an Android be ‘more human than human’? The first two of your suggestions don’t really add anything to that, but the third suggestion does. So that would be my favourite. I think it would also tie in nicely with the neo noir detective theme of the first Blade Runner. As an aside: I wonder if you’ve ever seen or played the Hideo Kojima video game ‘Snatcher’?
As for 2049: I disagree with you. I loved 2049 and thought it was superior to the original film. I thought it expanded on the main ‘what it means to be human’ theme brilliantly. My sole criticism is that as far as I was concerned the whole Deckard storyline didn’t need to be in the film. I was far more interested in K’s development as a character. Harrison Ford being brought back felt a little shoe horned in.
Final thought on what would make a great Blade Runner film: I always thought Dave Bautista’s character Sapper was intriguing and thought his acting was beautifully understated. I couldn’t believe a former wrestler who’s previously played a comedic role in a superhero film did such a great job of dragging sympathy out of the audience in such a short space of screen time. There is a short they did as promo for the film showing what happened to Sapper in the lead up to 2049 and explained why he was on the run. I thought it was phenomenal and should have been expanded on. They also delved deeper with the short promo films on what led to the digital blackout mentioned in the 2049 main movie. Again that was superb and very interesting backstory (particularly the anime one they did).
Thinking about it, perhaps the future of Blade Runner should be as a collection of shorts released every few years using different directors on a streaming service. Perhaps you could pitch your third idea as I do find that one quite compelling.
Blade Runners and Replicant are cool but my favorite has to be Off World. It's what a sequel should be. Showing something new but also exploring ideas from the first film that we never got to see.
I have an idea...sort of. A BR film that stays truest to the novel in terms of Replicants living among the humans. Maybe the film can start with the main character being human and going to an independent, possibly underground police facility that scans any officers or Blade Runners to make sure they're human since other stations are avoided.
That's the most I got right now, but I've been playing certain ideas in my head every day. Like a scene inspired by the part in DADOES where you have that mind fuck, surreal moment where three characters are convincing each other of one that one or two of them have false memories. The scene can be dialogue heavy, and the audience is stuck in this tensionful, confusing, and mind-warping situation that makes us rethink the protagonist since maybe we don't know TOO much about the Blade Runner character, so the accusations of him being a replicant could make the audience think about who we is.
But I really would love a Blade Runner film that progresses the situation of the original with Replicants being EVERYWHERE and the film not explaining outright who or what is real. It can be sort of a mind-bending type movie. God I would love that.
Now I didn't finish the whole video before posting this because I was kind of excited to share my personal suggestions but if you already have ideas resembled to these, reading it anyway if you decided do lol.
I'm starting to this that reviewers give ANY film that's pro feminist or pro left wing in ideas a good review, and they give any film that even hints at a conservative view a bad review, I think that's his it works, I think even if a film is neutral it gets a bad review
Tall Apple Energy Drink This film has gotten great reviews and it is "neutral"
my thoughts were that 2049 was mostly good - a few plot holes from poor writing but i liked the feel of the film and the pacing
I didn't see "Blade Runner 2049" yet, but the idea of "Replicants" sounds very interesting.
Every time one of these videos comes out I am very excited for the great ideas and totally devastated that they are not real movies. You are a very talented movie maker Rob. Your ideas are spectacular and it pains me that you are unable to make these films. I really think you should do more of these as they are compelling and brilliant. Keep coming up with ideas this good and hopefully some day you will be able to make them. You are the best Rob thanks for your work!
LMFAO I think you haven't seen any of the films he made.
i like the Offworld plot, it could apettise the investors with "the bigger is better" mentality that they have and be willingly to put money on it and having a new setting would be refreshing to the audience because the BR setting its a death horse trope nowadays
Writing from the future, sorry you didn't like it at the time.
The "happy ending" drive into the country from Bladerunner always reminds me of the false ending from Brazil, and the opening of The Shining. Fun contrasts to think about!
This fanfiction story uses elements from both the Philip K. Dick novel, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" and Ridley Scott's movie, "Blade Runner". The story picks up where both stories left off-Mercerism has been proven to be a fraud and the CEO of the Tyrell Corporation, Doctor Eldon Tyrell, has died. sites.google.com/site/kipplezone/home/tomorrow-started
"Replicant" was my favourite movie idea out of the 3 you discussed.
2049 is one of it not the best 4K ultra had discs out there. It looks gorgeous. I enjoyed the movie.
2049 is ok. has some good ideas but it was a sequel that was never needed
The "BLADE RUNNERS" idea is the best one. Copyright that shit, Rob.
If James Cameron called you tomorrow and said "Rob, I've got the rights back to Terminator. Have you got any ideas?"
Could you come up with a decent enough Terminator story?
Appreciate your research and time on this one scouse, but the only problem is people probably wouldn't go and see a Blade Runner movie without Harrison Ford(and tbf go see one with him in it judging by the bod office of the 2 films). There were better ways of doing 2049 with an old Replicant Deckard than the film we got, but what would you do to factor him into a story?.
I especially like the idea of replicants being betrayed about their four year lifespan and then rebelling against their brutal human slavemasters offworld when they discover the truth. It paints them in a far more sympathetic light. This theme could be worked into any of your three screenplays presented here…
Your alternative plots are God awful.
BR2049 was a masterpiece and a very worthy follow up to an iconic work of art.
It 'flopped' because a film like this would ALWAYS flop. Its a beautiful, megabudget, slow, thoughtful arthouse movie released during the multiplex era of instant gratification and attention deficit disorder.
I'm just glad this miraculous film got made, against all the odds, and Denis Villenueve, NOT YOU ROB, was absolutely the man for the job.
I was disappointed too- though ive enjoyed it more on a subsequent viewing. I just personally thought it didnt understand it's progenitor- which is a film as *much* about cinema as a narrative in it's own right. Thus, it being a basic gumshoe framework to take us on an extremely indulgent but rewarding pseudo-philisoohical (but in all the best ways) retelling of "Frankenstien" rather than really a comprehensive adaptation of the source material (contrast with the excellent far more fidelitous "a scanner darkly' movie)
"Bladerunners" is one giant plot hole, in my opinion. But the other two ideas are actually quite good, I would love to see those movies instead of BR 2049.
I'm a subscriber and like your videos mate , I didn't bother watching the sequel until recently as I thought it would be rubbish being a blade runner fan, you thought it was rubbish after watching it! What a shame.
Blade runner was a flop and became a benchmark sci fi classic , one of the best I've ever seen,
Blade runner 2049 was a flop and will be a benchmark greatest sequel , and it's also one of the best I've ever seen .
They could also have used a replicant as a femme fatale like an evil Rachel. I don't think Deckard should definitely be a replicant, because it undermines the themes of the original movie, but doing this with the main character in the sequel made sense. However, they do a pretty bad job and Gosling sucks. The replicant bladerunner could have been a more advanced model than most other replicants. They could have fleshed out the universe more. Are there regular robots and cyborgs? How are the replicants made and why that way? Can they have super fast healing? What's left of the governments? The idea that Rachel can give birth in 2049 doesn't make any sense, and it was really nasty that they undid Deckard's unhappy ending. The Rachel clone was shocking, but it was nasty when they shot her in the head. It also didn't make sense. I did like Joi though and was upset when she died. It's pretty much the only effective part of this awful movie.
I mean undid Deckard's happy ending. I basically see a Bladerunner sequel as a political thriller. The original was a cop movie. They could go to different settings like Mars, maybe find out what happened to Asia (though they want to sell it there). I'm not keen on the nature ending, though it's beautiful. The destruction of Earth is a subtext and not a theme, and it's a bit naive.
Actually, the issue with Rachel giving birth is that it shouldn't be impossible. This is another forced plot that is hoping the viewer isn't thinking.
1st idea: meh 2nd idea: prequel 3rd idea: sounds good
I like the last idea the best. I haven't seen the new blade runner, my friend thought it was 'pretty' but that's about it. I'd like to see the conflict inherent in a situation where you are hunting 'your tribe' so to speak but they really do need to be stopped. You are also helping people who have placed you in a 'lesser than' spot. It would be interesting and a good way to explore the 'what does it mean to be human?' question. I'm a big fan of your videos. I realize I'm far too literal in my thinking when it comes to film.
Watched it once on Sky in 2018 (while staying in hotel) - visuals were good but the story was empty - only improved when Ford appears.
A shout out to Snowtown? Wasn't expecting that! Great film. Speaking of Aussie films I like, if you've not seen them... check out Bad Boy Bubby (1993), Hounds of Love (2016), The Proposition (2005), The Rover (2014).
Change the names from replicant, bladerunner and Tyrell, then write and sell the scripts as "bladerunner like" to mid/low budget production companies. Offworld doesn't have to be changed.
Okay so, "Bladerunners", a bit formulaic in the character interaction. The small team brought together for a mission and arguing all the time, a trope done and done to death. Something more along the lines of "Aliens" and the Colonial Marines. A platoon size unit with the interaction you get with a military platoon. Think, again "Aliens" or "Hamburger Hill".
A movie called 2307: Winter's Dream is pretty close to your Blade Runners plot. It has a few issues, but I still liked it.
Interestingly the Offworld story is very close to what is happening with the Westworld series right now. Right down to where the Delos Resort is actually located.
Would any those 5 blade runners actually be replicants and not know it.. Questioning there purpose and humanity.. And cause a paranoia within the group.. Which starts to lose trust between eachother.. And eventually start to turn on eacthother? That could be a little to on the nose tho.. Just a thought.
You dont know if Edward J. Olmos is alive wtf?? Have you or havent you seen 2049?
I was about to comment that before I saw your post
Hey Rob, I personally would like to see a video around the time when BR 2049 comes to home media as to what specifically you felt fell apart about it's 2nd half. (Maybe start a new patreon goal: 130 patreons you get a BR vs. BR 2049 comparison, X) )
***SPOILERS***
I am guessing you found some kinds of plot holes.
Was it the Luv character? I enjoyed her, but I don't think she was as interesting of a villain as Roy Batty and not as scary as Pris was. And while I agree she was quite the looker, I should probably be hating or scared of a villain and not wanting to ask her on a date.
Was it the usage of clips from the original film in the scene where Wallace was terrorizing Deckard with the notion that he might be a Replicant and that Rachel's "love" for him may just been part of her programming? (I just realized how tragic that is for Deckard...)
The appearance of a CGI reconstructed version of Rachel? (I think even the filmmakers were kind of commenting on how awful an idea that is to revive dead or old actors, after all she gets shot after being rejected as inauthentic by Deckard)
The "Predictable" appearance of a rebellion of Replicants. I don't know what you mean by this, the gang of Replicants rebelling are merely talked about and don't really take much of an active role in the plot's climaxes. I don't know what other tropes exist in movies that deal with robots that simply bring up the existence of robots who want to rebel against a corporation as a subplot... and don't show whether they succeed or fail and we just cut to Plot A.
I can understand you not liking the film because of it's length, and I don't think that it was anywhere near the film that the original BR was but I thought it was pretty good and there was nothing in the film's script that stood out as blatantly offensive to me. (I guess if I were making the film I would not have shown a clip from the original and I would try to do some "show don't tell" delivery that Wallace knows about Rachel being "Designed" to fall in love with Deckard and I would have done something to further illustrate the malevolence of Luv. Like her torturing Lt. Yoshi to show that she is a Replicant with NO empathy)
What exactly was the "I wanted to walk out of the theater moment" for you?
I am curious that if someone runs with one of these ideas you have postulated...if they develop one of those ideas and sell it, would you get any credit for the writing?
I liked the new blade runner, it has a grand sound and image, but your alternate stories are clearly better than what the movie explored. Great exercise of imagination!
I thought 2049 was an OK film. Granted - I seldom watch modern movies, not many interest me or have any character. However, I wish it was not called BladeRunner. It should have been a nod-to rather then a sequel. It was OK!