Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Sci-Fi Television

'Blade Runner 2099' Live-Action Sequel Series From Ridley Scott Enters Development (deadline.com) 51

Posted by BeauHD from the currently-in-the-works dept.
The replicants are heading to the small-screen as Amazon Studios has put a live-action series set in the Blade Runner universe into development. Deadline reports: Ridley Scott, who directed the original 1982 Blade Runner movie, is executive producing the series, Blade Runner 2099, a follow-up to the feature film sequel Blade Runner 2049, which was released in 2017 and directed by Denis Villeneuve. Silka Luisa, showrunner of Apple TV+'s upcoming Elisabeth Moss-fronted drama series Shining Girls, is writing and exec producing Blade Runner 2099, which comes from Alcon Entertainment in association with Scott Free Productions and Amazon Studios. The project, which would mark the first Blade Runner live-action series, is in priority development at Amazon Studios, which is fast tracking scripts and eyeing potential production dates. Staffing is currently underway for writers to join a room. Scott may direct if the series moves forward, sources said.

As indicated by Blade Runner 2099's title, the latest installment of the neo-noir sci-fi franchise will be set 50 years after the film sequel. [...] Blade Runner 2099 is the latest extension in the Blade Runner franchise since Alcon Entertainment in 2011 acquired the film, television and ancillary franchise rights to produce prequels and sequels to the 1982 sci-fi classic. Kosove and his Alcon co-founder Broderick Johnson are exec producing the series along with Michael Green, who wrote Blade Runner 2049, Ben Roberts and Cynthia Yorkin as well as Scott Free Productions' David W. Zucker and Clayton Krueger. z
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

'Blade Runner 2099' Live-Action Sequel Series From Ridley Scott Enters Development More

'Blade Runner 2099' Live-Action Sequel Series From Ridley Scott Enters Development

Comments Filter:

  • I'm keen to see this (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dwywit ( 1109409 ) on Tuesday February 15, 2022 @03:18AM (#62268497)

    But I hope the fanbase doesn't destroy it like they did the live action Cowboy Bebop.

    Yes, that had its flaws, but it was improving. The last three episodes were quite the improvement on the earlier episodes.

    Anyway - Blade Runner. It seems to have become a franchise - movie, sequel, comics, anime, and now a live action.

    Ridley Scott's output has been so varied in quality, I really hope this is one of the good ones. He's very good at some things - if he's actually helming this production, I hope he picks a good writing team, and good directors.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by nagora ( 177841 )

      But I hope the fanbase doesn't destroy it like they did the live action Cowboy Bebop.

      Yes, that had its flaws, but it was improving

      You can not blame "the fan base" for the fucking shite that Netflix put out under the name of Cowboy Bebop. The blame is squarely with the sort of retarded pricks that think a cartoon needs to be remade as a live action series in order to be valid. The result - which on the way mangled the characters and lost the point of the story - deserved what it got. It was just plain old-fashioned bad.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by dwywit ( 1109409 )

        Thanks for supporting my point.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by nagora ( 177841 )

          Thanks for supporting my point.

          Your point was that people should watch badly written crap because they're not fans of the original version?

          Or perhaps that you think that a series that explores, for example, Faye's culture-shock and her vulnerability in a world she really doesn't know is too complicated for plebs and that they should get a watered-down sweary lunitic version that suits the level of intelligence that the studio thinks they have.

          Or was it just that you don't know a bad show when you see one?

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by dwywit ( 1109409 )

            Mate, you keep supporting my point.

            Viewer approval was running between 40 and 50%. It wasn't clear and universal disapproval. You're just reinforcing the frothing blather of the anime fanbase.

            I love the anime. But it had flaws, too.

            Anyway, we're talking about Blade Runner. Care to debate some points about that?

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by nagora ( 177841 )

              Mate, you keep supporting my point.

              Viewer approval was running between 40 and 50%.

              Viewer approval amongst people who kept going despite the terrible writing and direction is a self-selecting value.

              You're just reinforcing the frothing blather of the anime fanbase.

              Right, so specific criticism is "frothing blather"? Fuck off.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        It's very common in Japan to have multiple versions of things. Cowboy Bebop is actually something of an exception in that regard, as they only did animated versions of most of the stories, and a separate comic.

        They do it because different audiences like different things, and because some people like seeing different versions and takes on things.

        Aside from some budget issues I thought it was a good show. They got the characters just right, and although some of the scripts could have been a little better, the

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by nagora ( 177841 )

          It's very common in Japan to have multiple versions of things. Cowboy Bebop is actually something of an exception in that regard, as they only did animated versions of most of the stories, and a separate comic.

          As far as I know it wasn't a pre-existing thing, unless you mean there were scripts that weren't made?

          They got the characters just right, and although some of the scripts could have been a little better, there were lots of good episodes. It added something to the original, while taking nothing away.

          You must have watched a different thing. The Netflix CB did nothing except knock down the characters and their reason for existing as far as I could see. I mean, Jet's family stuff? WTF?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            Jet's family was there to make up for Edward's later appearance. In the anime Jet is a bit of a "dad", especially with Edward but also when it comes to Spike's laziness and laying down the law on his ship. Faye too, for that matter.

            It also set up the end of the first season, which was necessary since Netflix wasn't willing to give them enough episodes for the whole story and all of the characters. That was probably its weakest point really, the fact that Netflix didn't seem to be all in on it. Some of the o

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by nagora ( 177841 )

              The whole premise of the show was that all five characters were without a family and reluctant to find (and incapable of creating) a new one with each other. At the start Jet is the one that has moved on the most from his past, albeit that he ends up having made the least progress by the series' end, but the idea of giving him a family and then making them comic relief just shows how little this remake actually was a remake and how much it was an attempt to exploit a well-known name. It completely undermine

              • Probably the same apologists for Ghostbusters 2016...

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Rhipf ( 525263 )

                I have come to the realization that if you love a story in one medium don't watch it in another. This became abundantly clear with Amazon's Wheel of Time.
                It may be a rather good series if you haven't read the books but it strays too far away from the book series for a fan of the books to get past that fact and just watch it as a standalone story.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by noodler ( 724788 )

          They do it because different audiences like different things, and because some people like seeing different versions and takes on things.

          LOL, no. That's the stupid consumer point of view.
          They do it because they can make more money off of a single idea.

      • Just a heads up -- you are arguing with an apologist/shill. They ignore the message and blame the messenger for the show being shit.

      • The blame is squarely with the sort of retarded pricks that think a cartoon needs to be remade as a live action series in order to be valid.

        Steve-O has more than a passing resemblance to Lupin...

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I wasn't paying attention, how did the fans destroy Cowboy Bebop?

      I enjoyed the live action version. Yeah there were a few issues, some of the sets looked a bit cheap, but the characters were spot on and the casting was perfect. Really sad that it got cancelled.

      I did not think much of the animated Blade Runner. Hopefully this is better.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by dwywit ( 1109409 )

        Run a search through reddit r/cowboybebop.
        It's not pretty.

        • Re:I'm keen to see this (Score:4, Insightful)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Tuesday February 15, 2022 @05:48AM (#62268643) Homepage Journal

          Ugh, that's nasty. People complaining that Spike is played by an Asian actor don't even seem to be familiar with the original anime. If I have any criticism of Spike as a character, it's that he's something of a Japanese stereotype, although that's perhaps not quite the right word to use.

          • As usual for you, of course you try and go for the lowest hanging fruit. The usual thing about trying to imply that anyone who complains about a needless race swap is racist. No mention of all the substantial stuff like hokey writing with even downright moronic stuff like Faye now having the personality of Kramer from Seinfeld.

            Never change... Never argue in good faith...

            • Re:I'm keen to see this (Score:5, Interesting)

              by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Tuesday February 15, 2022 @07:29AM (#62268821) Homepage Journal

              Spike is Japanese in the original anime. Creator ShinichirÅ Watanabe described him as a "classic Japanese man", and based him on performances by famous Japanese actors.

              There was no race swap, Spike is and has always been Japanese.

              The live action Faye was spot on personality wise. It maybe helps if you understand Japanese culture and humour a bit to see just how faithful she is to the original anime's script. Not word for word, but the same comedic and emotional beats.

              • Yeah honestly, the show is from fucking Japan for goodness sake. God forbid an Asian bloke gets cast as Spike! I also enjoyed the adaptation, and thought the banter between Spike and Jet, then later with Faye, was spot on.
                • My problem with John Cho in that part (and I never got around to watching the show before it was canceled) was that he was too old. In the original, Spike seems to be about 30, give or take. Jet, who was in his late 30s (although he seemed older), frequenly referred to him as 'kid'. Surely there was an age appropriate Japanese actor who could play the part. John Cho isn't a bad actor, but casting him as Spike seemed to be for name recognition and I think it backfired.
                  • That's a fair analysis. Having watched the original when I was in my twenties, I didn't get the impression that Spike was particularly old or young. Watching the live action adaptation in my late 30s, he once again seems 'age appropriate', but that's because I have aged as well.
                    • I don't think they ever said how old Spike was in the anime. They did establish Jet's age in one of the episodes. I had the impression Spike was a few years younger than Jet from the way they interacted. So it threw me when I saw the trailer with John Cho and he just seemed so much older than I imagined. I can't really comment on his performance, though, since its gone down to the bottom of my watch list since being canceled.

              • I understand that it is a common artistic style in Japanese comics (and animated movies/series) to draw characters with paper-white skin, regardless of their race. It is apparently a throw back to the birth of the comic book industry in Japan, which drew a lot of inspiration from Disney at the time, and also many shops had barely any startup money and needed to save on ink.

                So Americans see these paper-white characters and think of them as being of a white race, and also in the case of movies/series the voi

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dasunt ( 249686 )

          One can view the fan's reactions to gameofthrones at r/asoiaf.

          It was initially favorable, but ended up turning hostile.

          Series still got completed. HBO even wanted more seasons, but the producers wanted to wrap it up.

          Seems like if the series is popular enough with new people, it'll continue.

          PS: The ASOIAF fans were right. One could tell when the producers ran out of books to base the series on.

        • You could say that about anything on reddit. . . reddit r/vanilla ice cream :P

    • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

      by thegarbz ( 1787294 )

      But I hope the fanbase doesn't destroy it like they did the live action Cowboy Bebop.

      I'm sorry but HORSESHIT. Don't gaslight the fanbase. Cowboy Bebop got lot of things wrong, even for those people who'd never seen the original.

      It was the epiphany of bad story telling. Verbal diarrhea rather than "show don't tell". Character development done via expositional dump in a single episode. The last three episodes were a nice change in story, but very much an issue of not being developed for. The villain was just not scary in the slightest. Staring in the distance while expositing about how you wi

      • I'm sorry but HORSESHIT. Don't gaslight the fanbase. Cowboy Bebop got lot of things wrong, even for those people who'd never seen the original.

        Reminds me of John Carter. Remember that pile of Disney shit? When I saw the commercial for it I knew right away it was a steaming pile. Having read the Edgar Rice Burroughs books, other than being on Mars and having a red tinge to everything, nothing I saw remotely came close to the books.

        I told some of the people I worked with at the time that the movie would be

      • If the fans don't like the show, then the show failed. It really doesn't matter if the reason why the fans didn't like the show is because they are all evil reprobates full of pettiness and wrong. Producers secure funding on the promise of profit, so it is their job to produce a show that people will want to pay to see. They need to do their market research, pick a target audience that is big enough, and produce a show that such a target audience will like. If they fail to do this, then that failure is

    • The original Cowboy Bebop wasn't even... dare I say this, perfect to begin with. Ed, especially, was extremely annoying. The live action was fine, I rather enjoyed it and think it's a shame viewership tanked so sharply (which is apparently why Netflix canned it). It had a great deal of style and the score was absolutely on point, I feel that it was a little misunderstood. There was no need for the sort of vehement response we see from xXFatAnimeNerdXx attached to your post. With that said, fans of Bladerunn
    • Yeah writing has not been his strong suit in recent projects like Prometheus and Alien: Covenant.

    • I have to ask, if the fanbase dont like it and no one else is watching it, who is it being made for?

      I haven't seen the original anime, wasn't even aware it was a thing until Netflix announced their series (and only then made the CowboyNeal link, after 25 years on this site...) and quite frankly I wasn't interested based on the previews so I never watched it.

      And Im a big scifi fan.

      So if it wasn't drawing people like me, who was it supposed to draw?

  • EVERY WEEK A NEW DECKARD ENTERS THE DRAW.

    They have to solve a wordle, or whoops, time for 'retirement'.

    Ok I'll take my script bonus now. I figure my idea is less silly than anything previously proposed for the series.

  • After all it worked out fantastic when Ridley Scott went back and did Prometheus. Oh wait... And Denis Villeneuve set the bar impressively high with his sequel, arguably more coherent story telling and ambitiously shot than the original.

    So often it is the case that Scott is great at set design, framing and lighting but its no coincidence how many of his movies suck for editing, plot coherence and scientific / historical accuracy.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mccalli ( 323026 )
      Not disagreeing but just commenting on the "arguably more coherent story telling" bit. It's a Philip K. Dick adaptation, admittedly massively fleshed out, but Philip K. Dick didn't really do 'coherent story telling' in a nice packaged filmable way. The original short story wouldn't make a film, neither would "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale".

      Just commenting that atmosphere and not pure coherence is a stylistic choice rather than a flaw. I actually disliked the more spelled out bits in the sequel, an

      • "...Because you've never seen a miracle.."

      • Deckard was always human (at least imho). He started to question his own humanity and whether it was possible his memories were fake; but I never got the impression he was really meant to be a replicant. He would have figured all this out when he aged and didn't die.

      • Philip K. Dick didn't really do 'coherent story telling'

        This is why film adaption is a separate screenplay category for Oscars. Some material is just very hard to adapt, and some adaptations are very loosely based on existing material. But the OP's point about coherent storytelling is underscored in that Prometheus and Alien: Convenant were original screenplays from what I remember and Blade Runner was adapted from previous work albeit loosely. Those two movies were incoherent not because of source material but poor writing/execution.

    • The problem with modern cinema is: they do not want to tell a story.
      Probably with exceptions to kids cinema that is tailored to get the whole family in.

      If I can not tell after a movie is over: why X did Y to achieve Z, and who was A and B and why they are related -> there is no story.

      The first movie where it became evident for me was Transformers, the first one. I can not remember a single bit. Interview with a Vampire I probably can narrate.

      • If I can not tell after a movie is over: why X did Y to achieve Z, and who was A and B and why they are related -> there is no story.

        You just described most of the Marvel movies and most of the new Star Wars movies. Its not that I can't figure out these things, its that my brain shut off after 2.5+ hours of pure action and I no longer feel like trying. If I walk out of these movies thinking anything, its which action sequences I would have tightened up and which dialogue sequences I would have rewritten so it wasn't just a series of one-liners.

        And I'm not completely against superhero movies. I enjoyed the original Spiderman 1

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by DrXym ( 126579 )
        I'm not really commenting on modern cinema so much as Ridley Scott's inability to tell a story properly. There is no doubt he has made good movies, but many more that were stinkers too. I suspect he works best when someone else drops a tight script on his lap and all he just has to do is just film it with minimal editing.
  • It would be nice, while they are throwing all kinds of names around, if they would include the name Philip K. Dick in the summary. If you are going to rape someone, it would be nice to know their name.

  • Uh, uhhhh, can't think... can't think of anything new... Let's just rehash this old thing again.

  • And the original Blade Runner film suggested that Rachel might have had the memories of a niece of Tyrell. The K.W. Jeter authorized spin-off novels ran with that idea, as did the video game, which had some Young voice acting a few lines.

    "Just saying", while the last film established canon that had Tyrell Corporation presumably but a shell of itself, having Tyrell's niece seeking to make a comeback would be something I'd love to see.

    And if she utilized Joanna Cassidy (playing the template Zhora was based on

Slashdot Top Deals

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Close