Ridley Scott signs to do another "Blade Runner"

It was announced last week that Ridley Scott has signed to develop and direct a new film set in the Blade Runner universe. It is unclear whether this new film will be a prequel, sequel, or something with only a thematic connection to the original (like Prometheus, his new Alien prequel). Deadline broke the story last Thursday morning and the deal was official that afternoon.

Alcon Entertainment bought the rights back in March and has been working to get Scott involved since then. The deal would allow them to produce films or television shows based on Scott’s 1982 film, but would exclude an outright remake. Obviously, they didn’t pay for those rights to let them sit – a film was going to be made with or without Ridley Scott in the director’s chair.

The fact that they went back to Scott with the project is not very surprising. He was the creative force behind the original film and has publicly expressed interest in doing another Blade Runner [many times] in the past. He also returned to the original film twice – in an attempt to completely satisfy his “original” vision – which culminated in 2007 with the release of his Final Cut for the film’s 25th Anniversary. That marked the end of a very long creative journey for him, but must have re-ignited his passion for it because in 2009, Scott announced the development of a new web-series called Purefold, based on the ideas and themes of Blade Runner.

Unfortunately, that project proved to be too ambitious and stalled due to a lack of funding, but it’s clear that the idea of returning to this world is not a new one for Ridley Scott. He doesn’t need the money and there’s no shortage of alternate projects for him to direct, but as he continues to work, the nagging urge to return to the world of replicants is there – an itch that needs to be scratched.

Now is the chance he’s been waiting for. Realistically, at 72 years old, he probably only has a few more movies in him. As he gets older he may have some (more) interesting things to say about mortality. Like the character of Roy Batty, he wants more time to accomplish the things he wants.

Since the news was announced, the Internet has been abuzz with cries of disapproval from fans who don’t want to see the original film tarnished by a sub par sequel. I can certainly understand that sentiment, but the real question is this: Do you feel better about a follow-up to Blade Runner with Ridley Scott, or do you think it’s a mistake to let Ridley play in this sandbox once again?

For me, the more I think about it the more I don’t want anyone else to touch it except Ridley Scott. For better or worse...let him have a shot at it.

Catching up with a Classic: The Searchers

"Catching up with a Classic" is a recurring series here on Setting the Frame, where I screen a classic film that I have never seen and share my thoughts with you. I try to watch as many films as possible, but even some really big films slip through the cracks. I encourage discussion in the comments area below or on facebook.

The Searchers (1956)
Dir: John Ford
Starring: John Wayne, Jeffrey Hunter, Ward Bond, Natalie Wood, Vera Miles

My relationship with John Wayne films began in high school when I had to read True Grit for an English assignment. Naturally, I watched the movie as well. In college, I took a film history course and out of 16 films, we screened only two westerns. The films were Stagecoach and Red River, both starring John Wayne, which immediately gives one an impression of the long shadow he casts over the genre. In the years since, I’ve seen a number of his films, but somehow The Searchers slipped by unseen.

The film begins three years after the Civil War has ended. Ethan Edwards (John Wayne) is a former Confederate soldier returning to his family’s home for the first time since the war began. His reunion is cut short, however, when a nearby rancher’s cattle go missing and the Texas Rangers come knocking on the door of the Edwards’ home for assistance. Ethan and his brother’s adopted son, Martin Pawley (Jeffrey Hunter), agree to join the Rangers in their search, but after riding for hours, the men discover the cattle slaughtered and left in the desert to rot. Realizing that the missing cattle were meant to draw them off their land, they hurry back only to find the home destroyed – burned to the ground during a Comanche Indian raid. Everyone has been killed except the two daughters, Lucy and Debbie, who have been taken by the invading Comanche. Ethan and Martin begin a five year journey to find the murderous tribe and rescue the girls…if they are still alive.

The Searchers is an adventure story, but the dramatic backbone is a man dealing with his prejudices. The film excels during the scenes that concentrate on the relationship between Ethan and Martin as they search for the girls. Ethan is an openly racist character and Martin is one-eighth Cherokee, which makes their ‘partnership’ uneasy and provides the characters with plenty of tension. From the opening scenes, Ethan shows only disdain towards Martin because of his Indian blood. Even before the attack, he consistently downplays any relationship that Martin has with the rest of the family and degrades him openly throughout the film by calling him “blanket-head.” After the attack, he is able to use that racism to fuel his vendetta as he searches for the Comanche tribe that abducted the girls. Ethan is ruthless, going so far as to shoot out the eyes of a dead Comanche so that he “…won’t be able to enter the spirit land” and wildly shooting at a herd of buffalo because “…killin’ buffalo’s as good as killin’ Injuns in this country.” As the seasons pass, and the hope of finding the girls unspoiled diminishes, the film veers into some dark territory that may make fans who have only seen John Wayne’s more heroic roles a bit uncomfortable.

Wayne is usually thought of as a great movie star rather than a great actor, but his performance in the film is certainly deserving of some recognition. Ethan is a character who had his entire world turned upside down when his side lost the war, and he wandered for three years, unable to give up the fight. Just as he’s finally able to set his saber down and return to a normal life, his family is taken from him. He’s a man dealing with tremendous loss who cannot control his grief as it brings out every undesirable quality hidden within. Wayne beautifully externalizes the inner rage and the character’s fears in subtle ways that may have become overly sensitive or too grandiose with a different actor, but which suits the battle-hardened, man’s-man character of Ethan perfectly.

In contrast to Ethan’s ruthlessness and bigotry, the character of Martin is portrayed as more humane, despite his Indian blood. Even when Ethan tells him that his mother’s scalp is proudly displayed on the Comanche Chief’s trophy spear, Martin is not blood-thirsty. He remains loyal to the task of saving the girls, whereas Ethan’s judgment is clouded by hatred. Martin knows that the longer the search goes on, the more important it is for him to be there to remind Ethan of their true purpose. Jeffrey Hunter does a fine job with the character’s arc from an eager-to-please boy to a fully-matured man who will need to stand up to his ‘Uncle’ Ethan before it’s all said and done.

Unfortunately, considerable time is spent on a sub-plot involving Martin’s girlfriend, Laurie (Vera Miles), and her growing frustration in his absence, which results in her engagement to a rival. While these scenes may be necessary to illustrate the passage of time and also to add levity and thematic value – paralleling a failed romantic history between Ethan and his brother’s wife (Dorothy Jordan) which is hinted at during the film’s opening scenes – they run too long, feel like they belong in a different movie, and take away from story’s true focus. What the audience really cares about is whether or not they find the girls, and whether Ethan can set aside his prejudice and accept Martin in spite of his mixed heritage.

I found The Searchers to be a challenging film, one that I needed time to chew on before understanding my own feelings towards it. While the film features a very simple plot, it’s treasured as one of the finest examples of the western genre because of the complexity of Ethan Edwards. He’s both heroic and deplorable. The film dares you to love him...and hate him. Ultimately, it does not pass judgment, revealing the truth that both the light and the dark is within us all.

Filmmakers issue open letter, address only half the problem

Last week, there was an open letter drafted by many of today’s biggest Hollywood players regarding Direct-TV’s new “Home Premiere” on-demand service, which would rush select blockbuster movies into the home, with high-def quality, only 60 days after their premiere at your local multiplex. The letter raises concerns that reducing the theatrical window to 60 days would virtually eliminate the opportunity for platform releases to build up word-of-mouth on films like last year’s Black Swan and The King’s Speech. These are films you cannot successfully market without the benefit of a long-term release strategy.

It’s important to note that the letter does not address the day-and-date on-demand service that is happening with micro budget, arthouse, and foreign titles right now. As many communities do not have a revival or arthouse theater, day-and-date releases are seen as a benefit to filmmakers – providing distribution for niche films that would not be seen in most markets until home video anyway. Although not stated implicitly, what we’re really talking about here are those films that have the potential for success with general audiences – the “big” films that you see in most large chain theaters.

Here’s the argument: As theater attendance has steadily dropped with the rise of the “home theater”, this quicker on-demand service will contribute to further reduce the amount of time a film spends at the theater. The filmmakers believe that preserving the theatrical viewing experience is tantamount to the survival of the motion picture industry, and I agree. Not only is theatrical exhibition the primary source of revenue for most movies, but it is also the viewing environment for which these films are created.

In its current incarnation, however, the Direct-TV plan poses no great threat to anything. It calls for only one film to be available at a time, at the ridiculous price point of $29.99 for 48 hours of access. There is a sense that the filmmakers don’t expect it to be successful, but it’s a slippery slope, and their concerns about home video’s negative impact on theatrical exhibition have good foundation in historical precedent.

The home video market has been a major factor in the decline of attendance for years now, as the studios have continued, by choice, to hurry the home release of big movies in an attempt to capitalize on word of mouth from, and marketing dollars spent on, a film’s theatrical run. This, compounded by falling home video prices, has made it easier for consumers to rationalize not seeing a movie in the theater because of the affordability and convenience of renting or buying a video.

While I applaud these filmmakers for trying to get involved and help protect the business model that they feel is best for the survival of the industry, this letter completely fails to address the other key reason for falling attendance: the current state of the theater-going experience.

Rude customers who use their cell phones or talk during the main attraction act as though the theater is their personal living room. Poor projection and sound quality should not be an issue anymore with the technical advancements in exhibition, but they are. Lack of cleanliness is caused by both patrons who refuse to pick up after themselves and theaters being understaffed or not scheduling enough time between shows. It’s hard to make a case for anyone (especially families) to shell out the current prices when the conditions are so poor.

Improvement in the theatrical experience is the only thing that will sell more tickets and protect the industry from being cannibalized by the home video/video-on-demand markets. This would require a two-fold approach.

Firstly, the film industry needs to continue to push the limits of image and sound quality. This includes the use of large format film to give a sense of scale (like in Inception and The Dark Knight), an increase to higher frame rates*, exploring an increase in resolution quality for high definition**, and stereoscopic 3-D (No moaning please, for the right films, it’s awesome!), All these advancements will help keep the magic of the movies alive and the experience memorable.

Secondly, and most importantly, the exhibitors need to get their act together. Cleaner theaters, well maintained equipment (change a projector bulb once in a while), and better concessions are the basics – there is no excuse for missing these – ever! The tougher part will be for them to grow a backbone when it comes to enforcing their own policies regarding talking during the show, cell phone use, and general disrespect.

While it’s not surprising that the filmmakers who drafted this letter are obtuse to the current conditions of theater-going (most probably haven’t been to a theater with an average crowd in years), theater owners are definitely aware. The fact that they have not taken action, in an effort to create an environment that is inviting for all movie lovers, makes them negligent. They have no right to place the blame elsewhere for the loss of revenue that home video takes away.

As far as the filmmakers who drafted this letter are concerned, they need to start siding with the consumers who watch, rent, and buy their work. Both the falling standards of movie theaters, and the encroachment of home video on a film's theatrical window need to be addressed. If not, it won't matter whether the video is available 60 days or 6 months later; the industry will continue on its steady decline.



* The Hobbit is currently in production using a new 48 frame per second digital capture 3-D process. You can read a bit more about it here.

**Higher resolution quality is something they’ve been talking about for a few years. Current HD resolution is 1080p, but they’re experimenting with up to 4320p.

NEW! Green Lantern WonderCon footage

DC Comics has been running second place in the "Superhero Movie Race" for quite some time. Even with the enormous success of The Dark Knight, and their quality direct-to-video animation, they are having trouble keeping up with the ambitious pacing of Marvel Entertainment in the big arena.

Marvel is running on all cylinders and looks to have another great summer lined up with both Thor and Captain America building towards the 2012 release of The Avengers. They also have licensed property coming this summer from Fox (X-Men: First Class) and next year from Sony in the form of a new Spiderman film. Right now, Marvel characters are everywhere, and audiences like what they're seeing.

This summer will debut DC's big first step towards asserting itself as more than just the company that does Batman & Superman movies. On June 17th, Green Lantern will premiere at a theater near you, and until today, most fans didn't know just what to make of it. The presentation from last year's San Diego Comic Con was underwhelming, and the more recent teaser trailer emphasized humor over action, which left lingering doubts in most fan's minds.

This footage from Wonder Con will give you a glimpse at a Green Lantern movie that is epic in a way that no comic book movie has been before. I hope you enjoy...



I like it. It feels like it has real stakes, not just for Hal Jordan, but for Earth, the Lanterns, and the galaxy. There's a Superman-meets-Star Trek quality to Green Lantern that is hard to pull off outside of animation. Sure, I could nitpick over the CGI suit or casting of Ryan Reynolds, but it looks like they're getting more right than wrong here. We'll see if the final product lives up to this short 4 minute version, but I'm interested, much more than I was before.

What do you think?