This past week the news has been skipping around the internet regarding the progress of a sequel to Blade Runner. Scott Free, a production company owned by the film's original director Ridley Scott, has hired Michael Green, one of the credited writers for the Green Lantern film, to perform rewrites on a sequel to Blade Runner that original writer Hampton Fancher has put together. This is no guarantee that Green will be the only writer to try this or that Scott will wind up directing it. At the moment, as long as the story is on paper, it's a movie that "could" happen, rather than will happen. It is unsure if any of the original cast from the film will appear or even be mentioned. In my mind, it is not the question of who is involved that is the main issue. I feel that the whole premise of doing a sequel is flawed for these five reasons that I will detail. Please note that these arguments are intended to apply to a film sequel. There have already been 3 official novel sequels to the film, written by K. W. Jeter, Blade Runner 2: The Edge of Human, Blade Runner 3: Replicant Night and Blade Runner 4: Eye and Talon.
5. It Would Be Based On Another Future That Didn't Happen
The original film was set in 2019. We are now six years away from this and heading into a different future. This is a problem that happens with any science fiction story once they start using dates that can be reached in a generations lifetime. The question of artificial intelligence now is not focusing on creating things like humans but if and when computers can achieve that. Its becoming easier to accept humans incorporating technology within them, then making technology that looks human. The sequel has been mentioned as being set some years after the film, so the makers could use that excuse for differences. But that still could result in a lot of retroactive continuity, to cover why replicants are now being made with 3D printers. Or how they were actually humans with artificial parts and a built in self-destruct.