FAQ  •  Login

Modern Blade Runner cast

<<

Miles Prower

Rookie Rep Detect
Rookie Rep Detect

Posts: 1

Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 1:16 pm

Location: Station Square, November 2019

Post Sat Nov 11, 2006 8:36 pm

Peter Weller as Deckard, Holden or Bryant.
Deck-A-Rep Supporter
Maria Robotnik-A-Rep Supporter (Sonic the Hedgehog - Blade Runner adaptation)
<<

diesaturn

Rookie Rep Detect
Rookie Rep Detect

Posts: 24

Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:16 pm

Post Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:38 am

Of course, we all know that they should NEVER really make a sequel or remake of BR and we all know they'd screw it up.....but, it's still fun to play with some ideas.


I always thought Scott Weiland (circa 1994) of Stone Temple Pilots would have made a good Roy Batty. He had the look for sure, for a while there he even sported the white hair & looked so much like Batty. I think he had the rockstar attitude, charisma and over-the-top persona to pull it off. I swear I could completely see him confronting Tyrell & asking for more life.

I also think that Emmanuelle Chriqui might be good as Rachel.


As for Deckard...

I have some ideas, but I almost feel sacrilegious for even thinking those thoughts, let alone typing them on a message board!!!
<<

Masao

User avatar

Rep Detect Instructor
Rep Detect Instructor

Posts: 232

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:54 am

Post Thu May 31, 2007 9:34 pm

New face/old face?

I am at a loss as to why people are so hesitant to consider a remake.

Remakes can be awful or they can be better...even great.

Let's face it, there is a lot of room for improvement. While the music, f/x, and art direction was great, the story left a lot to be desired.

Much of PKD's style was lost in the film along with half the story. A remake could be just the answer.

While most people like to point out how bad remakes can turn out, the conveniently forget the successes:

-Lord of the Rings
-The Ten Commandments
-Galaxy Quest
-Copland
-Red Dragon
-First Blood

All were remakes and all were better than their predecessors.

Of course, reintroducing PKD into BladeRunner might be distasteful to some hardline fans.

I did notice one actor that might make everyone happy:

http://www.imdb.com/gallery/ss/0276816/ ... =nm0205127

http://www.imdb.com/gallery/ss/0300532/ ... tthew%20(I)&seq=2

-Matthew Davis.

Any thoughts?
<<

deleted

User avatar

Veteran Blade Runner
Veteran Blade Runner

Posts: 1191

Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 7:11 pm

Location: The banks of chaos in my mind

Post Thu May 31, 2007 10:50 pm

We. Don't. Need. A. Blade. Runner. Remake.

This isn't hard...the final cut should satisfy you folks.
[In reference to A Good Year] "So anyway, fuck 'em. It was a good film."
-Ridley Scott
<<

ridleynoir

User avatar

Veteran Blade Runner
Veteran Blade Runner

Posts: 1335

Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2002 6:00 pm

Location: Rochester NY

Post Thu May 31, 2007 11:14 pm

-Lord of the Rings
Was origionally a cartoon, and unfinished.

-The Ten Commandments
was originally silent and based on the bible

-Galaxy Quest
Huh? From what, Star Trek?

-Copland
Never seen it or the origional, IMDB mentions nothing about it being a remake.

-Red Dragon
I actually like the first one slightly better (Manhunter), but it wasn't anything special either. While BR is very special.

-First Blood
Was not a remake of anything I know of. Unless you are talking about the sequel Rambo:First Blood II?

I would prefer a Sequal to a remake. I will defend any opinion here, but I feel the idea of a remake is sacralidge. It means you aren't a true fan of this movie. Most people that want a sequel are looking for a more traditional Hollywood Action Movie to be made out of it. That has already been done by the 5th Eliment, the Matrix, I Robot, and countless B movies. Any remake would't be any closer to BR than them, other than maybe share character names in the tradition of Battlestar Gallactica for example. I also think the Idea of a new version of the book would only be semi-okay if it where a miniseries or something. I think the book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep tells the story better than a movie does and I don't think would translate all that well. That is why BR differs so much from it. I also think that most people that are clammering for a better translation of a book are either too lazy to read it or nearly Illiterate.

Your only examples of actual remakes above were either done in different mediums, or the original was never seen. I think a much better idea is to make an entirly different movie using the same setting and maybe even same characters (as the Westwood game did). No reason to retell the origional because most people have seen it and know the plot already. More importantly it still stands on its own, even with all the dated special effects and costumes (as it has been said by some, not me). In order for it to work you need to tell a story they aren't familiar with, and at that point you might as well tell a different story all together.
Image
<<

Masao

User avatar

Rep Detect Instructor
Rep Detect Instructor

Posts: 232

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:54 am

Post Fri Jun 01, 2007 2:29 am

ridleynoir wrote:-Lord of the Rings
Was origionally a cartoon, and unfinished.

-The Ten Commandments
was originally silent and based on the bible

-Galaxy Quest
Huh? From what, Star Trek?

-Copland
Never seen it or the origional, IMDB mentions nothing about it being a remake.

-Red Dragon
I actually like the first one slightly better (Manhunter), but it wasn't anything special either. While BR is very special.

-First Blood
Was not a remake of anything I know of. Unless you are talking about the sequel Rambo:First Blood II?

I would prefer a Sequal to a remake. I will defend any opinion here, but I feel the idea of a remake is sacralidge. It means you aren't a true fan of this movie. Most people that want a sequel are looking for a more traditional Hollywood Action Movie to be made out of it. That has already been done by the 5th Eliment, the Matrix, I Robot, and countless B movies. Any remake would't be any closer to BR than them, other than maybe share character names in the tradition of Battlestar Gallactica for example. I also think the Idea of a new version of the book would only be semi-okay if it where a miniseries or something. I think the book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep tells the story better than a movie does and I don't think would translate all that well. That is why BR differs so much from it. I also think that most people that are clammering for a better translation of a book are either too lazy to read it or nearly Illiterate.

Your only examples of actual remakes above were either done in different mediums, or the original was never seen. I think a much better idea is to make an entirly different movie using the same setting and maybe even same characters (as the Westwood game did). No reason to retell the origional because most people have seen it and know the plot already. More importantly it still stands on its own, even with all the dated special effects and costumes (as it has been said by some, not me). In order for it to work you need to tell a story they aren't familiar with, and at that point you might as well tell a different story all together.




Actually, LotR was finished by another production company, and to dismiss serious animation as 'cartoons' is pretty simplistic. It would be like relying on IMDB or Wikipedia for all film reference. Neither is complete.

You got The Ten Commandments right, but the rest:

-Galaxy Quest was the first remake of Three Amigos.
-Copland was at least the second major remake of High Noon.
-First Blood was remade from a film called Ruckuss starring Dirk Benedict

There are many such examples but those are the ones off the top of my head.

I would like to address that "You are not a good enough fan" kind of argument. There are great elements to the film, but individual elements do not guarantee a cohesive whole. Ignoring the glaring flaws does no one any good. There is a lot that wasn't great. Those parts, any true fan would want great. What is the point in turning flaws into a religion? To quote William Shatner:"you have taken a fun little show and turned it into a monumental waste of time. Get a life" ;)


Since those flaws will never be fixed in the original film, the easiest logical solution is a remake.

The main problems we face with a remake is the same as all other current films;

-illiteracy in the film industry: many producers can't even follow comic books.

-They have that same flawed reasoning: A book that has been thought over and every word has been meditated upon, is not good enough for film. Film must be made from the tiredest, re-used crap to be of true quality. If you want a book, read one. Stay away from movies. Movies should be crap because...

-The audience is stupid...especially fans. (who else would spend more on a movie ticket than the DVD coming out in 4 months?)

The old films were not made that way. Hollywood was not built that way. ...But 'Presold' is gold and too original is too risky.

-The love of CGI is the root of all film evil. (Compared to the work of Doug Trumbull, most of it is a throwback to the cartoon f/x of the 1950's.) Today, CGI is an overused crutch that is rapidly losing its audence.

-Much of what we know now about the film is not even actually in the film. This is a major problem that cannot be fixed.

Now, if we were discussing a really top-notch independent, you could solve most of your problems with a very cleverly written sequel. Unfortunately, there is no author/writer that gets PKD, who would also be allowed to write a clever sequel.

Alas, the trilogy will never be complete and no one will ever know what was really going on.
<<

ridleynoir

User avatar

Veteran Blade Runner
Veteran Blade Runner

Posts: 1335

Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2002 6:00 pm

Location: Rochester NY

Post Fri Jun 01, 2007 8:50 am

I never dismissed cartoons, just said they were a different medium. Don't make assumptions (unless you state that is what you are doing).

All your other examples actually seem to prove my point. They were such different films, they actually were different films. At most they could be said they were based on the story of.... As much as Star Wars could be considered a " Re-make" of the Seven Samarai, or Fistful of Dollars is a Re-make of Yojimbo. None these are actually remakes. They share different characters, and even different plots to a large degree. You could say that BR is a remake of several 40s noir movies using your logic.

I feel that what you are calling glaring flaws in the movie are more than the things like the visible spinner wires and such? Except for a few fixable things that I believe will be taken care of with the new cut, I am totally happy with the way the movie is. I think any other changes would change the movie to a degree that it doesn't have the same mood or atmosphere. It would then take away a significan't part of why this was a cult movie to begin with. The few "great" moments were not enough by themselves to make this movie gain the legacy it has. There seems to be more to this movie that you are missing or don't appreciate.
Image
<<

Centauro

User avatar

Blade Runner
Blade Runner

Posts: 729

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 6:00 pm

Location: Bogota, DC [CO]

Post Sat Jun 02, 2007 9:40 am

Well, there are degrees of fandom. Example: There are people who knows who is Batman and how he came to be, and thinks it is a cool character... and there is people who knows the map of scars in Bruce's body (and mind), the size of Alfred's underwear and the exact block and cell in Arkham where the villains get sent to upon capture.

If a person belongs to the first group he/she'll probably like the settings, the themes and the devices to tell stories in that universe, but don't have a special relationship with the characters, so things like the last Schumacher movie won't piss them a lot; they'll just think it's awful bad, but won't get enraged and passionate about it.

I think (not just for this thread but for his past messages) Masao likes Blade Runner overall, but he is not enamoured of the film as some of us here are. So, in my opinion, Masao thinks like the first group of people in the comics example I presented.

On the other hand, I (and I think I may speak for Ridleynoir?) am totally driven with a passion for this film that gets scarily close to the affection that is usually reserved for people. And just like the woman you love, you may perfectly see her flaws, her bad spots, what feature of her you'd like to look a little different, but none of this matters, because all in all, in the end you like her for being her and just like that she's perfect in a way. She's the one.

if you change a little here, a little there, and a little more there, in the end she is not she.

So, trying to put myself in Masao's shoes, I think Ridleynoir's comment was not meant to be a veiled acusation of "You're not FAN enough". Yes you are Masao, but in your league. In your own terms, which is just perfect, for it is the degree of fandom that you think the film deserves, and the degree of fandom that you are comfortable with, in the sense that you can see things in a way that makes you feel you are not a blind man who denies the shortcomings of something just for acceptance on the forums or keeping your critics silent for political correctness. And I agree, this isn't a religion. (Nothing should be, not even, well... religion).

Though in many things I may not share Masao's opinions, on e thing I like about him is that he always give arguments to back up what he thinks.

Back on topic, while I dislike the idea of a remake, I can envision it in my mind. I play it like the scenario of some weird ontological disturbance in the universe that wipes out all copies, film, negatives, and even digital pics and every visual reference of Blade Runner in books. So what's left to do? Gotta make it again, it CAN'T be lost! And then, the old crew must be reunited, commanded by Ridley Scott, but the thing is... the original cast is too old... Sigh. OK, get an appropriate cast.

Lately, when watching LOST, I can definitely see that guy who plays conman Sawyer as Roy Batty. If he could pull it off and get the best of his acting skills, he's got the looks for all I know.

Deckard, on the other hand, I can't decide... At some point I used to think of Dennis Quaid, but, mmm, he lacks something. Never liked the idea of Russell Crowe. If Crowe could take any role, which I'm not convinced of, he'd be Holden. Someone once said David Duchovny as Deckard, but he lacks that world weary quality... and face it, he'll always be Mulder.

Don't know, lot of options pass through my mind, but mostly when I see someone on screen and think "Hmmm... could do a decnt XcharacternameX" Bt later I forget names, and now I've forgotten a list of candidates I had.

What I can definitely see is a silent cameo of Colin Farrell (in his Minority Report looks) as rookie Ray McCoy.
-------------------------------------------------------------- Revel In Your Time --------------------------------------------------------------

Image
<<

ridleyville

Rep Detect Instructor
Rep Detect Instructor

Posts: 239

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 12:53 pm

Location: Billericay UK

Post Sun Jun 03, 2007 6:04 am

On the other hand, I (and I think I may speak for Ridleynoir?) am totally driven with a passion for this film that gets scarily close to the affection that is usually reserved for people. And just like the woman you love, you may perfectly see her flaws, her bad spots, what feature of her you'd like to look a little different, but none of this matters, because all in all, in the end you like her for being her and just like that she's perfect in a way. She's the one.

if you change a little here, a little there, and a little more there, in the end she is not she.


That is the best explanation and reason i have ever heard. i do have special feelings for the film and could not quite make them all out. I now realise that i share that same feeling that is in that great quote from Centauro, and seeing that quote makes me feel normal and not a weirdo.
More human than human
<<

Masao

User avatar

Rep Detect Instructor
Rep Detect Instructor

Posts: 232

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:54 am

Post Tue Jun 05, 2007 9:41 pm

Centauro pretty well gets it. It is just a film. Much of it is indisputably some of the best in film ever. The rest is debateable.

A remake should not be the flashpoint of a war. Will anyone say nothing can be improved?? I have yet to hear a single person who can't pick out at least one single flaw.

Sure, there is the risk of messing it up, but like with LotR, the fans have to stick together to keep the production in line.

It can be done. We have seen that.

As for sequels:

It would be extremely difficult. It can be done, but it would be as hard as writing the Back To The Future sequels, maybe ever harder!

I have toyed around with a few ideas in this direction, but whichever way you choose, you encounter very great obstacles.

Basically, the problems include:

Time.

-Real time makes 'the day after' kind of story very problematic. It can be done, but plausibly?

-Story time, when can the story take place that will account for reprised characters current age?

Characters vs. Actors

Factoring time in, who could logically return? Rachael? Deckard?

The easiest returnees would be Bryant and Gaff. They both look close to what they did in the original. While Sean young still looks good, she looks different. Ford is simply too old to fit...unless...

-the rules of the story are expanded upon.

Let's assume tha Deckard was a replicant. To make a sequel with any of the original cast, we have to move the time frame forward.

If we do this, we will have to make two other leaps of logic:

-Deckard is dead and/or

-Rachael and Deckard have no termination date.

If we conclude that they were just Nexus 6, we both eliminate the only "good" character from the story and conclude that Tyrell lied for no good reason.

Eliminating both Rachael and Deckard kills the continuity of a sequel.

See how difficult it becomes?

But, what if...

Deckard is dead and Rachael is still alive??

Where did these characters come from?

Memory implants must have their origins somewhere!

Was Deckard made from Holden's memories or someone else? Who was Rachael really made from? Where is she in all of this??

Once these questions are asked, the story opens up slightly.

Other questions then surface:

Why were there combat replicants fighting wars in the peaceful colonies?

Who was fighting?? Why? What was the purpose of having replicats fighting wars anyway?

Ultimately, asking what the real rules of the story are, could shape the` sequel into a coherent logical form.

Let's not forget one last thing...PKD.

He had two main factors in most of his stories.

Paranoia; 'they are out to get us but you are too dumb to know it' and
Epistomololgy; how do you know what you think you know?

Add these into the mix and you could have quite a wild ride.
<<

ridleynoir

User avatar

Veteran Blade Runner
Veteran Blade Runner

Posts: 1335

Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2002 6:00 pm

Location: Rochester NY

Post Tue Jun 05, 2007 11:16 pm

The main problem with every remake is it is impossible to distinguish the two from eachother without making them in different mediums, as in live action vrs animation, graphic novel, video game etc. I think perhaps Ridley would love to make his version better, but then we get into the same territory that we had with George Lucas's special editions. Remaking it would always just be a copy (a replicant even), no matter how well done. It serves nothing. Even if told completely differently it would never be able to stand alone.

I would like a sequel if it was done with reverence to BR. I think the story of Tyrell could be the most interesting to tell. I don't want to get too into my ideas on this, because I have been working on them for a while and would like to save them for use as a screenplay or something else. letting the cat out of the bag would take away from its impact and novelty. I have allready left clues on this board about it as it is.

I would love to visit the world created by BR again. A parallel story or sequal would be okay in my opinion as long as it was able to keep the same moods and atmosphere. I can't ever see Hollywood being able to accept that though. Too much glamour and action would ruin the meditative tone of the movie. But that is what most fan's love and critics hate.
Image
<<

Kipple

User avatar

Honorary Member

Posts: 1266

Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2001 6:00 pm

Location: Satellite 2

Post Wed Jun 06, 2007 5:10 am

ridleynoir wrote:The main problem with every remake is it is impossible to distinguish the two from eachother without making them in different mediums, as in live action vrs animation, graphic novel, video game etc. I think perhaps Ridley would love to make his version better, but then we get into the same territory that we had with George Lucas's special editions. Remaking it would always just be a copy (a replicant even), no matter how well done. It serves nothing. Even if told completely differently it would never be able to stand alone.

I would like a sequel if it was done with reverence to BR. I think the story of Tyrell could be the most interesting to tell. I don't want to get too into my ideas on this, because I have been working on them for a while and would like to save them for use as a screenplay or something else. letting the cat out of the bag would take away from its impact and novelty. I have allready left clues on this board about it as it is.

I would love to visit the world created by BR again. A parallel story or sequal would be okay in my opinion as long as it was able to keep the same moods and atmosphere. I can't ever see Hollywood being able to accept that though. Too much glamour and action would ruin the meditative tone of the movie. But that is what most fan's love and critics hate.


I completely agree. And can relate to your ambitions. I too am working on a story, and a separate short story, based on this theme for my website. :wink:
Image
<<

Masao

User avatar

Rep Detect Instructor
Rep Detect Instructor

Posts: 232

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:54 am

Post Tue Jun 12, 2007 7:20 pm

The case against a remake

But you know...

It wouldn't be made unless it had Ben Affleck, Mat Damon, George Clooney and Brad Pitt.


It would probably be reimagined so that Rachael, Pris and Zhora would be missing and Bryant Chew and Gaff would now be women. Oh, and the new blaster would be an umodified Vektor and the spinners would all be redressed Canadian Humvees


Wouldn't that be so freaking awsome?

\:D/

LOL
<<

NiN_O_Negative

User avatar

Rookie Rep Detect
Rookie Rep Detect

Posts: 6

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 3:00 pm

Post Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:10 pm

Rollins wrote:Deckard= Christian Bale
Roy= Russell Crowe
Rachel= Kelly Monaco
Zora= Jennifer Garner
Tyrell= Sean Connery
Pris= Jessica Beal
Bryant= R. Lee Emery
Gaff= Luis Guzman
Holden= William Forsythe
Leon= Andrew Bryniarski

It's a start.............


That's a good list, but I think Kirsten Dunst would be better as Pris. She has that innocence about her. Jessica Biel looks badass and would be too intimidating for JF to talk to. I think JF could be played by Alan Tudyk. He could do the nervous performance and give the likeability that JF needs.

Not sure about Kelly Monaco as Rachel as I have not seen her in anything. My pick would be Anne Hathaway. I'd swap Bale and Crowe over. Bale in American Psycho and Batman was in peak physical condition, just like the ultimate Rep, Roy Batty. He's also very intense and focussed. Crowe would be good as Deckard.

The sight of seeing Jennifer Garner and Kirsten Dunst being horribly murdered in the same film would be a bit upsetting for me!

Deckard= Russell Crowe
Roy= Christian Bale
Rachel= Anne Hathaway or Eva Green
Zora= Jennifer Garner
Tyrell= Sean Connery
Pris= Kirsten Dunst
Bryant= R. Lee Emery
Gaff= Luis Guzman
Holden= William Forsythe
Leon= Andrew Bryniarski
JF Sebastian= Alan Tudyk
<<

Deckard

User avatar

Senior Rep Detector
Senior Rep Detector

Posts: 176

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:23 pm

Location: Virginia

Post Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:29 am

OK, here's my list. Fire at will:


Deckard= Jason Statham (The Transporter)

Roy= Sean Bean (LOTR and The Hitcher remake)

Rachel= Lena Headey (Queen Gorgo in 300)

Zora= Jessica Biehl (Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake, Stealth)

Tyrell= Alan Rickman (Harry Potter, Galaxy Quest, Die Hard) or possibly John Malkovich

Pris= Diane Kruger (National Treasure, Troy)

Bryant= William Forsythe (The Rock)

Gaff= Luis Guzman (boogie Nights, Traffic)

Holden= Josh Duhamel (Transformers, Las Vegas)

Leon= Gerard Butler (300)

JF Sebastian= Rick Gomez (Band of Brothers), Justin Bartha (National Treasure)

Chew= Francois Chau (LOST)
Last edited by Deckard on Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Deckard

"They don't advertise for killers in the newspaper. That was my profession: ex-cop, ex-BladeRunner, ex-killer."
PreviousNext

Return to The Blade Runner Movie Sequel

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron