Sequels often come with their own curse — even an experienced filmmaker like Ridley Scott finds them challenging to get right.
What makes a truly great sequel? When Quentin Tarantino discussed trilogies, he explained that follow-up films shouldn’t simply repeat what made the original successful, they should build on it and bring something new to the table. He managed to do that himself with Kill Bill, but the trilogy he praised for perfecting the art of the sequel was the one created by Clint Eastwood and Sergio Leone.
I think there’s only one trilogy that completely and utterly works to the Nth degree, and that’s A Fistful of Dollars, For a Few Dollars More, and The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, It does what no other trilogy has ever been quite able to do […] The first movie is terrific, but the second movie is so great and takes the whole idea to such a bigger canvas that it obliterates the first one. And then the third one does the same thing to the second one, and that’s kind of what never happens.
Tarantino said
While that’s Tarantino’s perspective, there are many sequels that audiences consider just as good, or even better, than the original. One of those is Blade Runner 2049, the follow-up to the sci-fi classic starring Harrison Ford and Ryan Gosling.
The original Blade Runner, based on Philip K. Dick’s novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, transformed the book’s complex ideas into a cinematic masterpiece. Harrison Ford’s performance became iconic, and the film’s “tears in the rain” monologue remains one of the most memorable moments in movie history.
So, when a sequel was announced, many fans were skeptical. There were plenty of complaints that Hollywood should leave classic stories alone and focus on fresh ideas. But Blade Runner 2049 surprised audiences by delivering a new narrative rather than a simple continuation. It earned widespread praise — though not from everyone.
Ridley Scott, who directed and co-wrote the original film, wasn’t impressed. When asked about Blade Runner 2049, he didn’t hold back:
I have to be careful what I say. I have to be careful,” he said. “It was fucking way too long. Fuck me! And most of that script’s mine.
Scott revealed that he contributed heavily to the film’s script but chose not to take credit because he dislikes the formalities involved in proving his input.
I sit with writers for an inordinate amount of time and I will not take credit, Because it means I’ve got to sit there with a tape recorder while we talk.
he said
Despite his involvement in shaping the story, Scott ultimately wasn’t happy with the finished product, saying the film was simply too long for the plot it told.
Source: faroutmagazine