Developing a sequel to Ridley Scott's BLADE RUNNER which managed to live up to the original was always going to be a tall order, but audiences did seem to enjoy Denis Villeneuve's BLADE RUNNER 2049, although that can't be said for everyone. Rutger Hauer, who played replicant leader Roy Batty in the 1982 film, recently chatted with THR and gave his thoughts on the recent sequel, which he seems to find unnecessary.
I sniff and scratch at it. It looks great but I struggle to see why that film was necessary. I just think if something is so beautiful, you should just leave it alone and make another film. Don't lean with one elbow on the success that was earned over 30 years in the underground. In many ways, Blade Runner wasn't about the replicants, it was about what does it mean to be human? It's like E.T. But I'm not certain what the question was in the second Blade Runner. It's not a character-driven movie and there's no humor, there's no love, there's no soul. You can see the homage to the original. But that's not enough to me. I knew that wasn't going to work. But I think it's not important what I think.
I'm still processing BLADE RUNNER 2049 myself, but I'm sure there are some who feel similar to Rutger Hauer in regards to the sequel. The actor isn't even the only member of the original BLADE RUNNER who found that he had issues with the sequel, as Ridley Scott wound up thinking that BLADE RUNNER 2049 was "f**king way too long." That said, Scott is still holding out hope for a third film, which is already has an idea for. "I think there is another story," Scott said. "I’ve got another one ready to evolve and be developed, so there is certainly one to be done for sure." Given BLADE RUNNER 2049's lackluster box-office, that may not happen, but hey, I never expected a sequel to BLADE RUNNER in the first place.
Do you agree with Rutger Hauer? Was BLADE RUNNER 2049 an unnecessary sequel?
BLADE RUNNER 2049 is now available on DVD/Blu-ray/4K Ultra HD/Digital HD.