The Christmas period saw the release of two trailers that make 2017 a big year for Ridley Scott. The legendary film maker is returning to two genre defining universes that he helped to create. Firstly with Alien: Covenant, the follow up to 2012's Prometheus, in which Scott will continue to chart the creation of the 'Xenomorph'. As a fan of the Alien movies I was very excited about Prometheus, which upon viewing I found to be very underwhelming. I shall reserve judgement on Alien: Covenant for now, but given how good the Alien movies are (the first two at least) do we really need another prequel? Or are we drifting into Star Wars prequel territory? The second trailer is for Blade Runner 2049, Scott handed directing duties to Denis Villeneuve in order to make Alien: Covenant however he's still on board as a Producer. Set thirty years after Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) disappeared, LAPD Officer K (Ryan Gosling) makes a discovery that sends him in search of the missing Blade Runner.
I'm not sure whether making a sequel to Blade Runner is a good idea. Although a commercial flop at the box office, Blade Runner has developed a massive cult following. Will 2049 be able to live up to the original? Given the players involved, I'd say this movie has a good chance of succeeding. The new players appear to be on top of their game right now. Denis Villeneuve has directed some great movies over the last few years, including Arrival, Sicario and Prisoners. Ryan Gosling is one of the biggest actors in Hollywood and has demonstrated incredible flexibility in the roles he takes on. Add to that the involvement of both Ridley Scott and Harrison Ford and you've got a great line up. If anyone can make 2049 a success it's them. But given the unique nature and ambiguity of Blade Runner, will it continue the story or damage it?
The trailer itself is very ambiguous! It begins with several shots of future Los Angeles. One shot includes a street sweeper vehicle (possibly automated) over which you hear Deckard from the first movie saying: "Replicants are like any other machine - they're either a benefit or a hazard. If they're a benefit, it's not my problem". It's then we see K walking through some sort of haze or fog. He enters a building where he's confronted by Deckard who's armed with his famous pistol. Deckard tells K "I did your job once - I was good at it" to which K replies "things were simpler then". The trailer gives away just enough to pique our interest without actually telling us anything, except that K will find Deckard. Which is something we could guess given that it's common knowledge Ford is returning to the role.
My biggest question about all this is a question that has been around since 1982! Is Deckard a Replicant? Now I know everyone has their own theory on this, and there are clues in Blade Runner to suggest he is, but what is the use of a Replicant Blade Runner who doesn't know he's a Replicant? They're stronger and faster than humans making them more than a handful to "retire", Deckard goes through hell rounding up Roy Batty and his pals! Now if he is a Replicant and he knew of his abilities, at least that would level the playing field. We know he can't be a Nexus 6 because his four year lifespan would be more than up. According to Villeneuve, the sequel will not look to solve this riddle. So what does K want with either an old cop or a Replicant that's roughly thirty years past his sell-by date?
Fans on both sides (including me) will no doubt be very excited about the prospect of a sequel to one of the most influential sci-fi movies in history. Right now there are many questions and little in the way of answers. This trailer and any that follow over the course of the next nine months will undoubtedly be the subject of mass speculation by fans. What do you think? Where do you stand on the 'Deckard: Human or Replicant?' riddle? Feel free to let me know.
Are you excited about Blade Runner 2049? What do you think of the teaser trailer? Let us know by leaving a comment below or find us on Facebook and Twitter.