Is Blade Runner 2049 thirty years late? Let's discuss the concept of a late sequel and find out!
Took them a while, didn’t it?
All jokes aside, this weekend sees the release of Blade Runner 2049, the sequel to Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner, thirty-five years after the original film. Nowadays we’re getting sequels to current movies every two to five years at most. You kids are lucky. I had to wait fourteen years for another Jurassic Park movie.
I guess you can say the sequel was late. Get it?
So why did Blade Runner 2049 come out so late? How much does the source material hold up exactly and can it still be relevant for today’s audiences? Well, let’s do a refresher course. Keep in mind, this post will retread familiar ground covered in my Flatliners reboot post, so I guess you can say this is the sequel to that post. See what I did there?
WHAT IS A LATE SEQUEL?
As I mentioned before in my fore-mentioned reboot blog, a reboot must be a complete reset of the continuity. A reboot must have a new cast and a new tone, yet it can still use the same character names and the same elements from the original source material if the reboot so chooses. The exception to the rule is a soft reboot, or a continuation of the previously-established continuity that can take on its own movie, and all late sequels are typically soft reboots.
Think of how to make a parody. Parody makes fun of the familiar conventions you see of the genre. Fans of the genre can joke at how absurd some of these actually are when applied with real world logic, so professional filmmakers would lovingly joke at them in their movies within the context of a cleverly-weaved narrative. Filmmakers are as much fans as a lot of people within their audience.
I like to estimate it between ten to thirty years for a filmmaker (it can be the same one or a different one) to conjure up an idea for a sequel. In the same vein of making a parody, he/she would the previous movies well enough they would also brainstorm creative ideas to improve upon it. Which brings me to…
WHAT TOOK YOU SO LONG?
Why wait for a sequel? What more can a sequel offer that an old idea has not? While I do not have an easy answer, it is clear that it takes a filmmaker with an understanding of the original movie(s) to answer questions that even the audience won’t have thought of: “What happened after happily ever after?” “Whatever happened to this person or that person?” “What does the ending mean?” “But why did this happen?” “What if this happens?
Filmmakers are no different than novelists because these ideas are hard to come across. When I was in a Screenwriting class, I would be running with an idea for my story and I would hit writer’s block. A lot. It’s not always that easy coming up with a new idea for a sequel.
Take for instance, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. According to J.W. Rinzler and Laurent Bouzereau’s The Complete Making of Indiana Jones, filmmakers George Lucas and Steven Spielberg agreed with Paramount to produce five Indiana Jones movies in the late 1970’s. Lucas changed his mind after The Last Crusade because he cannot think of more plot devices for Indy to pursue forward with. So he produced a Young Indiana Jones television series instead.
For the last two decades, many treatments for a Blade Runner sequel were made. One rumored to be titled Blade Runner Down, based on the K. W. Jeter novel, Blade Runner 2: The Edge of Human. Another referred to as Metropolis, focused on the off-world colonies after the death of Tyrell Corporation’s CEO. And another one that, according to Blade Runner co-writer Hampton Fancher, sees Harrison Ford’s Rick Deckard character on a mission in Moscow.
It is all the matchmaking of movie ideas that must be able to fit the themes and tone of the original film(s). Not all ideas like planned sequels for Forrest Gump, Top Gun and Ghostbusters 2 will come to fruition but some will come through. That being said….
IS IT WORTH THE WAIT?
In similar fashion to their rejuvenated contemporaries, late sequels are a mixed bag of opportunities. Time can work for some sequels and audiences would praise it, while others leave audiences much to be desired.
After several script re-writes, Lucas and Spielberg finally made The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and… the once-euphoric fans didn’t like it. After the movie got released back in 2008, I remember hearing them say: “The CGI looks fake”, “Indy is old and it’s depressing”, “How the hell does he survive a nuclear blast in a refrigerator?!” “Indy has Shia LaBeouf as his son? Lame!” At least it wasn’t Blue Brothers 2000. Now that’s a sequel nobody (and I mean nobody!) asked, for. John Belushi died and the plot is lacking and gimmicky. Who thought this was a good idea?!
Sorry, I got sidetracked. Anyhow, unlike the widely popular Indiana Jones series, Blade Runner initially underperformed at the box office, but grew into a cult following with new edits in the following three decades. When Blade Runner 2049 was first announced in 2015, I was naturally skeptical, thinking They’re not going to water it down for a modern audience, are they? However, the announcement teaser and the movie itself told a different story, a story I believe is worth telling. How do you feel about late sequels? Are you enjoying their products or would you like to file a complaint? Leave your thoughts in the comments down below.
Do not worry, they won’t be lost like tears in rain. Because you wrote them down.
WORKS CITED
Britt, Ryan. “Are Sequels Made 20 Years Later Actually Successful?” Inverse. Inverse, 27 June 2016. Web. 10 Oct. 2017.
Fusté, Joan. “Are There Any Sequels? I Heard Rumours….” My Blade Runner: A BR Otaku Site. My Blade Runner, 28 Oct. 2012. Web. 10 Oct. 2017.
Rinzler, J.W, and Laurent Bouzereau. The Complete Making of Indiana Jones: The Definitive Story Behind All Four Films. New York: Del Rey, 2008. Print.
Trumbore, Dave. “Original ‘Blade Runner’ Sequel Would Have Sent Harrison Ford’s Rick Deckard to Russia.” Collider. Complex Media, Inc, 24 July 2017. Web. 10 Oct. 2017.
Comments