Now I know the probably answer is that because in it's 1982 release it totally bombed at the cinema.
But over the last 25 years it had gained such a status and is now constantly appearing in top 10 film lists, so why doesn't Ridley Scott back up his statement from the mid 90's and explore the idea of a sequel?
2006-10-26 10:39:49 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
HEY! It did NOT suck! You people just do not appreciate fine cinema.
2006-10-26 10:51:21 · answer #1 · answered by Chloe 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I don't have the answer to your question, but I'd personally love to see a sequel. It's a beautifully shot film and one I can watch over and over again.
This quote was from 1995 which you've probably already seen:
In Hollywood Reporter, August 16, 1995, it is reported that Ridley Scott will be directing a science fiction film tentatively titled Metropolis, which he sees as a follow-up to Blade Runner, but not a sequel. According to one source he's somewhat reluctant to tamper with the now classic movie by making a direct sequel.
Try asking your question at the site I've listed in the source box.
2006-10-26 17:52:52 · answer #2 · answered by Kate J 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It did fairly well on opening weekend, but has only grossed about 30 mil. over the years. It's # 1,500 on the alltime list, and was the 27th highest grossing film of 1982.
Philip K. Dick, the author of the story the movie was based on, never wrote a sequel.
Also, I've never heard of a film sequel being made on the strength of the cult status of the original movie, especially if it bombed out at the box office.
2006-10-26 17:57:49 · answer #3 · answered by funnyrob01 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Ridley Scott learned from God. God created perfection in Man, so tried a sequel - Woman! Woman, though hugely successful and much appreciated, was never as good as the original. Ridley Scott knew that a sequel would be a lot better looking, and a lot more lucrative, but just wouldn't have the substance!
2006-10-26 17:52:33 · answer #4 · answered by alfie 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the film at the time was great, even now and then i pull my copy out and watch it, but in the end of the story they were to disappear and never be heard of again
2006-10-26 18:36:11 · answer #5 · answered by getmeout2001 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i dont no of a sequel, the way film are being remade i wouldnt rule it out in the future
2006-10-26 17:43:47 · answer #6 · answered by skyebluetops 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
may be because it didn't do too well in 1982. i seem to be the only one who thought the film was ok though!
2006-10-26 17:48:52 · answer #7 · answered by feefee 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Personally, I've often wished that there had never been an ORIGINAL, never mind a sequel.
2006-10-26 18:46:09 · answer #8 · answered by shkspr 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no idea. it was a great movie with a good story, there should have been a sequel
2006-10-26 18:07:19 · answer #9 · answered by The Seeker 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
here you go check out this link, it is talking about a directors cut of blade runner that is supposed to be coming out.
2006-10-26 17:50:37 · answer #10 · answered by toddlr70 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋