Sequels (or Prequels) to Sci-Fi Classic 'Blade Runner' Inch Closer to Reality

[caption id="attachment_37197" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="Warner Bros."]Harrison Ford in "Blade Runner"[/caption]

The Hollywood mantra: may no potential brand name go unsequelized, unrebooted, untouched. Where there's a whiff of franchise opportunity, studios go sniffing.

So it's not really a surprise to hear that Ridley Scott's 1982 sci-fi noir classic "Blade Runner" is back in the spotlight with talks of spin-offs and continuations.

A press release announces that Alcon Entertainment, the brains behind "The Blind Side," "The Book of Eli," "The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2," The Nic Cage "Wicker Man" remake and "My Dog Skip," have picked up the sequel/prequel/do-whatever-you-want rights to the aforementioned cinematic classic. Sounds up their alley, right?

Now - the gut reaction is "HOW COULD THEY?!" but we're an understanding group of moviegoers and, perhaps, there could be some good here. Maybe.

For years, talk of a "Blade Runner" sequel was on the tip of many a tongue, but nothing ever came of it until Alcon's announcement this week.

While they haven't disclosed their plans, it would seem that a direct sequel would be near impossible. Anyone who saw Harrison Ford in "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" knows the man ain't what he used to be. But one of the reasons "Blade Runner" is marked as a monumental achievement in filmmaking is because of its detailed world, full of floating cars, neon signs, rainy avenues and robots. Who wouldn't want to play there?

Until Alcon spills the beans on their real intentions, fans will have to stick with speculation and nerve-racking anticipation. From the sound of it, most people wouldn't mind an "inspired by" approach, but anything touching the original is murky waters. What do you think?

How do you feel about new 'Blade Runner' movies?customer surveys