on April 2, 2013 in Washington, DC.

71-year-old Harrison Ford ‘quite curious’ for another ‘Blade Runner’

Apr 14, 2014

On Sunday Harrison Ford gave an AMA for thousands of redditors to pluck and prod at all the standard fan boy questions and comments, from “talk about your Jack Ryan roles” to “How does it feel to cuddle with Chewbacca?” It was a dorktastic orgy of headache and delusion–big ups to the 71-year-old actor for constantly putting up with this shit.

But one question-and-answer exchange came up that Mashable and other news outlets have regarded as newsworthy: More talk of the possibility for a second installment of Ridley Scott’s “Blade Runner.” This was not the first mention of such a project coming to fruition, as the internet was teased with interest from Ford and Scott back in October (and back in 2012).

And the sequel/prequel/whatever circlejerk continues. “I’m quite curious and excited about seeing a new script for ‘Blade Runner’ if in fact the opportunity would exist to do another,” Ford said on Sunday. “[I]f it’s a good script I would be very anxious to work with Ridley Scott again, he’s a very talented and passionate filmmaker. And I think it would be very interesting to revisit the character.”

Indeed, it’s always interesting to revisit a character to help pay for upkeep on that 800-acre ranch in Jackson, Wyoming. But, as any member aboard Captain Obvious’s “USS Kill Me Now” is well aware, the world does not need another “Blade Runner.” A “Clifford” sequel, yes, but Scott needs to leave Rick Deckard and his pan-Asian futureworld be–and this is beyond opinion. The narrative logic is simply lacking.

Death and Taxes’s D.J. Pangburn put it best back in May, 2012, for those of you running low on “BR” masturbation material:

If Harrison Ford returns to the role of Deckard at 70+ years old — as Scott stated in a recent interview with The Independent — the whole question of whether Deckard is human or replicant becomes especially fascinating.

If Ford plays the role age-appropriate (70+), it implies that Deckard was in fact human, as Nexus-6 have a built-in 4-year lifespan. However, Scott has stated clearly that he believes Deckard was a replicant. How does Scott plan to explain a replicant with a human being life cycle? The answer might lie in the film itself. Tyrell, the creator of replicants, hinted that Rachel is more advanced than the Nexus-6 replicants. Thus, it’s possible that Tyrell designed Rachel to live much longer. Following that logic, if Deckard is indeed a replicant, either he too is advanced like Rachel or was an older replicant iteration without a built-in lifespan.

If that turned you on (or pissed you off), head over to the AMA and check out the rest of the fan boy garble. There’s a lot of it.

h/t Mashable/image: HuffPo

Around the Web
Comments