Where is the sequel?
I don't know about you guys but i want a sequel it was awesome
shareReally?? The ending was cool and surprising, but I thought most of the movie was pretty dull. It pretty much bombed in the theaters anyway, but hey, a movie bombing never necessarily stopped a sequel from being made
shareWhat would you want in a sequel? I thought the ending was pretty conclusive.
shareYeah, while the interstellar conflict surrounding the characters is intriguing, I think they should have left it as a short (30 min) section of a "Trilogy" movie. The middle section wasn't enough to carry a full length movie.
When he calls his wife in the tunnel (at the beginning) is where they take the movie in another (apparently unnecessary) direction. After the whole hospital ordeal, he calls her again from within a tunnel. This is where the middle section ends and the original narrative picks back up.
Of course, now I'd like to know whatever happened to the other two 30 min. segments that would have completed the original movie.
why do they make any sequel? john mclane killed all the terrorists in die hard yet there was still a sequel (crappy, but nonetheless there)....war movies--especially in the future--are easy because all u have to do is say theres another mission/battle/trip/or crime that takes place or needs to take place. I could easily see an impostor 2 involving a second, more advanced running replicant....
shareAny sequel to Impostor would likely come across as a Terminator 2 rip-off. "What? we killed off the bad guys in the first one? Let's invent some stronger, faster statier-of-the-art prototype bad guys for a sequel!" Thank goodness Cameron is a good director. /pessimism
(As for Die Hard, at least they had a popular, surviving character to work with... and a story adapted from a better (natch) book called 58 Minutes.)
it was actually a novel called nothiing last forever....check it out it was pretty good.....but good luck finding it anywhere but a library....
shareHuh. None of the "Nothing Lasts Forever"s I've found (books, movies, etc.) have similar plots to Die Hard II (or Impostor, if that's what you meant).
Despite this being a discussion of PKD's Imposter...
Die Hard is based on the novel Nothing Lasts Forever by Roderick Thorp.
Die Hard 2 is based on 58 Minutes by Walter Wager.
I've read both, the latter is better.
As for Impostor, and any PKD story for that matter.....I go with the author first.
Paycheck is a prime reason why. Screamers was good though.
(Yeah, while the interstellar conflict surrounding the characters is intriguing, I think they should have left it as a short (30 min) section of a "Trilogy" movie. The middle section wasn't enough to carry a full length movie.)
That WOULD be a really good idea for PK Dick stories, especially the SHORT stories. One nice thing about making a 2hr film about a short story is that at least the core idea of the story is sure to shine through, if well executed. But a trilogy movie of Dick short stories would be a wonderful idea. Take one of his common themes and show the counterpoints from the different stories showing essentially the same ideas expressed several ways. How James Joycean!
(When he calls his wife in the tunnel (at the beginning) is where they take the movie in another (apparently unnecessary) direction. After the whole hospital ordeal, he calls her again from within a tunnel. This is where the middle section ends and the original narrative picks back up.)
Agreed, I get this sense that the actual story is on pause. In eXisTenZ the live game characters would go into 'pause' mode where there eyes would go glassy and they would stare at nothing with their heads sort of sway, untill another character engaged them again at which time they would snap to, like coming out of a trance or just waking up. Many movies have that floaty, non-essential 'paused' bit in the middle; sometimes it's just that the moviemakers are building tension or something, it sure is a fine line.
Of course, now I'd like to know whatever happened to the other two 30 min. segments that would have completed the original movie.
Radio Free Albemuth and Flow My Tears The Policeman Said? How bout my favorite: Valis? (nah, that WOULD actually be a whole movie.)
The nice thing that has happened with Dick films is that while the 'IDEA' is actually preserved fairly well, Dick's atrocsiosly outdated idea of technology's nut and bolts is highly updated in the spirit of the vision the man had for the important questions about technology. They used PUNCH CARDS for christs sake in the short story Minority Report! That would be just painful to watch unless you were going for some kind of Bruce Sterling 'Difference Engine' alternareality with the tech.
Speaking of, the reason Gibson says he was so talented at writing future tech in like, say, Neuromancer is that he had no idea what technology was like at the time. He got a home computer and took it back because the hard drive was making 'this funny grinding noise' (it was the normal noise anyone old enough to have used Windows 3.11 and had a horzontally positioned 'IBM clone' actually sitting up on our desks, under the monitor, would recognize as the normal noise of a drive accessing data. Gibson pictured these amazing, SILENT, crystallyine computers capable of amazing things, he was writing pure ideas not roped down by a knowledge of the crappy tech we actually have. C'Mon guys where's that completely visual internet you access through those goggles, where we go flying around this techno landscape HUNH!?!? VRML just don't cut it dudes. Gibson wrote something that probably should have been called Science Fantasy. Nuthin wrong with that.
Dick's stuff might rightly be called Psycho-Science.
The sequal would be: doing more PK Dick stuff. That's what people who want to 'see more' are REALLY asking for.
__________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
"It's obvious that the people who weren't having sex or indeed any fun at all, were busy inventing religion.
People who are happy don't sit around questioning the nature of why they are happy, or what divine being did it to them,
And the others clearly need a more harmless hobby then telling us they know what god meant."
-God
"How could god hate sex, I'm sure the thought that he invented it and wanted us to enjoy it could only create the most devout of worshipers, that seems to be a universe that actually makes sense, what's all this other stuff about???" - me
"Ignorance does not equal Innocence"
"Serve god; Love Me..."
"Religion is an insult to human dignity.
With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things.
But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. " - Dr. Steven Weinberg an American physicist awarded the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics.
"In all things, style appears as important as content. From an evolutionary point of view"
- Michael Fiedler Ph.D. Doctor of Philosophy and Anthropology specializing in the cultural socialization of Ceatations. He currently lives in the tropical New Greenland Republic awarded the 2057 Nobel Prizes for Philosophy and Psycho-History.
We need body rockin' , not perfection
Let me get some ACTION from the back SECTION!
-Boys Entering Anarchistic States Towards Internal Excellence
I agree. I go back to the short story on which the film is based, and it IS a short short story. According to Dick's website it was first published in the 1950s. I read it late 60s/early 70s and thought it awesome. The central device, the alien doesn't know it's an alien and the trigger is the moment it realises it is, struck me as so original. So the very concept, "philosophical" issues around identity, reality etc., etc. was the main reason I bought the DVD and I was intrigued as to how the makers would treat the denouement. After Hathaway shoots Maya I sorta felt cheated; that the makers had messed around with the source just too much. Very reassuring, then, that Spence sees "himself" and blows up to such devastating effect. Maybe post-Blade Runner generations have become just too sophisticated to appreciate how original, radical and, indeed, challenging that original idea really was.
shareI fully agree with that. I just watched the movie a few minutes ago, and I had read the story less than a year ago (before I even knew there was a movie, so I was pretty intriged).
I actually enjoyed the movie all the way through, except for the irritating thought in my head that I already knew how it was going to end, assuming they didn't change the ending, which I held out hope for. When the ending came I was amazed and kinda thought, "all right" because they had actually managed to surprise me. When they started prying off the second compartment to the ship I was floored again because they had given me exactly the ending I was prepared for right after convincing me they weren't going to. I think this ending might be more amazing if you've read the story first.
I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as the fly by.
- Douglas Adams
The ending totally made my mouth fall to the floor. Never, at any point, saw it coming.