Jeter Novels; BR2 & BR3
Mr. Marc
Jeter. Hasn't anyone read them?
Marc
MrBlondeMM
>Jeter. Hasn't anyone read them?
>
>Marc
Of course most of us have read them, and most of us don't speak of them because
we hope that if we don't they'll go away forever (sorry to those of you that
just loved them).
These books, Edge of Human and Replicant Night, are 89 cent pulp fiction novels
at their worst, they do not come close to Philip K. Dick's "Sheep" (or any
other of Dick's novels) and were probably written in two days by Jeter.
Here's the problems with them:
1.) In the first sequel, Jeter kills off most of the living characters and
resurrects the dead ones.
2.) The novels try to explain the "sixth rep" and "deck-a-rep" theories in ways
that I and most other people on this NG cannot even comprehend.
3.) The explanation of the word "Blade Runner"... what a crock of B.S.
4.) Bringing Dick's characters NOT SEEN in the movie into his books. Stupid
stupid stupid and confusing.
Anyone else want to get their two cents in? I don't want to talk about this
subject anymore.
-Steve Klein
Bullet Bob's Runner Surplus
http://come.to/bulletbobs
Lukas Mariman
37762004...@news.ksc.net.th...
> I haven't seen any threads about the two BR sequel books written K W
> Jeter. Hasn't anyone read them?
I am sure many of the people posting here have read them, me included;
however, (I'm speaking for myself here) I do not accept the sequels as
"canon", because Jeter took some liberties with the movie's characters;
what's more, while BR2 contained a lot of interesting ideas, in the end I
feel they did not amount to very much. BR3 was even worse.
Therefore, I prefer not to mention them too much. Of course, if you like to
discuss them anyway, by all means, start posting away... :-)
--
----
Lukas Mariman
E-mail: lukas....@skynet.be
URL: http://users.skynet.be/mariman/
Lukas Mariman
19990630124047...@ng33.aol.com...
> >I haven't seen any threads about the two BR sequel books written K W
> >Jeter. Hasn't anyone read them?
> >
>
> Of course most of us have read them, and most of us don't speak of them
because
> we hope that if we don't they'll go away forever (sorry to those of you
that
> just loved them).
I admit reading BR2 was kind of fun, even if just because, hey - it's Blade
Runner! Well, sort of... :-)
BR3 was just plain terrible. :-(
> These books, Edge of Human and Replicant Night, are 89 cent pulp fiction
novels
> at their worst, they do not come close to Philip K. Dick's "Sheep" (or any
> other of Dick's novels) and were probably written in two days by Jeter.
>
> Here's the problems with them:
> 1.) In the first sequel, Jeter kills off most of the living characters and
> resurrects the dead ones.
Indeed. A strange approach, and it makes the movie(s) in a sort of a lie.
And turning Pris human was IMHO interesting, but stupid. It was clear in the
movie that she was a replicant.
> 2.) The novels try to explain the "sixth rep" and "deck-a-rep" theories in
ways
> that I and most other people on this NG cannot even comprehend.
:-)
> 3.) The explanation of the word "Blade Runner"... what a crock of B.S.
Right. It's not very convincing. Why not accept it as just a cool code name?
> 4.) Bringing Dick's characters NOT SEEN in the movie into his books.
Stupid
> stupid stupid and confusing.
Another odd approach, trying to write a sequel to both Dick's book and
Scott's movie...
Maybe if he had just incorporated some of the books *concepts* it might have
worked better.
Those were my 2 cents. :-)
jacaranda
>> Jeter. Hasn't anyone read them?
>
>however, (I'm speaking for myself here) I do not accept the sequels as
>"canon", because Jeter took some liberties with the movie's characters;
>what's more, while BR2 contained a lot of interesting ideas, in the end I
>feel they did not amount to very much. BR3 was even worse.
I haven't read any of Jeter's work, but you've convinced to give him a look
if just to see how bad his books are :).
Indulge me the honour of swinging this thread off-topic a little :)...
Blade Runner 2, imo, is one of those film sequels that shouldn't be
attempted because it would just detract from the original film's brilliance.
It would be like making sequels to the original Star Wars trilogy (ie with
Han Solo and that lot..), or other cult movies (that have already been
affected by terrible sequels) like Escape From New York.
Blade Runner is just too good to spoil by trying to continue its story at
all - if there was any time that owuld have been ok to try this would have
been the qubsequent years after 1982 (that is, IF the film hadn't bombed :).
It wouldn't be the same with some jackass like Keanu Reeves trying to repeat
his role in Johnny Mnemonic. Harrison Ford was and is the only leading role
worth using.
Oops, let out my Star Wars fixation again :)...
--
http://www.clan-evans.freeserve.co.uk
"That dingo stole moi baby!"
Lukas Mariman
7lfli3$ad3$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Lukas Mariman wrote in message <7lf6m4$a9h$1...@news0.skynet.be>...
> >Mr. Marc <marc...@hotmail.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
> >37762004...@news.ksc.net.th...
> >> I haven't seen any threads about the two BR sequel books written K W
> >> Jeter. Hasn't anyone read them?
> >
> >I am sure many of the people posting here have read them, me included;
> >however, (I'm speaking for myself here) I do not accept the sequels as
> >"canon", because Jeter took some liberties with the movie's characters;
> >what's more, while BR2 contained a lot of interesting ideas, in the end I
> >feel they did not amount to very much. BR3 was even worse.
>
> I haven't read any of Jeter's work, but you've convinced to give him a
look
> if just to see how bad his books are :).
Be my guest; BR2 is not entirely bad, mind you - Jeter plays with a lot of
ideas, and it's kind of fun to see how he takes the movie's plot holes and
turns them into plot *elements* for the book...
> Indulge me the honour of swinging this thread off-topic a little :)...
>
> Blade Runner 2, imo, is one of those film sequels that shouldn't be
> attempted because it would just detract from the original film's
brilliance.
> It would be like making sequels to the original Star Wars trilogy (ie with
> Han Solo and that lot..), or other cult movies (that have already been
> affected by terrible sequels) like Escape From New York.
>
> Blade Runner is just too good to spoil by trying to continue its story at
> all - if there was any time that owuld have been ok to try this would have
> been the qubsequent years after 1982 (that is, IF the film hadn't bombed
:).
OK. so how about if the exact same crew could work on the sequel?
> It wouldn't be the same with some jackass like Keanu Reeves trying to
repeat
> his role in Johnny Mnemonic. Harrison Ford was and is the only leading
role
> worth using.
Ford was/is great, but did he really "make" the movie? I feel Deckard's
story is better left alone - "finished", so to speak, even though the film
had an open ending - but the BR world's setting could be used to tell other
interesting stories... that's my feeling, anyway.
> Oops, let out my Star Wars fixation again :)...
OK. No harm done, I'm sure. :-)
jacaranda
>> Indulge me the honour of swinging this thread off-topic a little :)...
>>
>> Blade Runner 2, imo, is one of those film sequels that shouldn't be
>> attempted because it would just detract from the original film's
>> brilliance.
>> It would be like making sequels to the original Star Wars trilogy (ie
with
>> Han Solo and that lot..), or other cult movies (that have already been
>> affected by terrible sequels) like Escape From New York.
>>
>> Blade Runner is just too good to spoil by trying to continue its story
at
have
>> been the subsequent years after 1982 (that is, IF the film hadn't bombed
>>:).
>
>OK. so how about if the exact same crew could work on the sequel?
>
I don't think the crew would influence the projected sequel's quality -
sure, it would be nice and poetic and all, but the film would need an
absolutely phenomenal script - something I don't think Peoples or Fancher
could conjure up between themselves. Of course, Scott would have to direct
it :). I don't think the Blade Runner world could depict another tale of
equal morality questioning and high art. It would always be compare to Blade
Runner, and so wouldn't be as original (that goes back ot my Escape from New
York example - L.A. was just Plissken running through the same raspy
dialogue and blowing up more people).
>> It wouldn't be the same with some jackass like Keanu Reeves trying to
>>repeat
>> his role in Johnny Mnemonic. Harrison Ford was and is the only leading
>>role
>> worth using.
>
>Ford was/is great, but did he really "make" the movie? I feel Deckard's
>story is better left alone - "finished", so to speak, even though the film
>had an open ending - but the BR world's setting could be used to tell other
>interesting stories... that's my feeling, anyway.
I agree it isn't Ford that made the movie great or anything (though he was
excellent), but in retrospect he just fits my own vision of how a veteran
Blade Runner would look - not as crusty as someone like Redford, and not too
flavour-of-the-month as Keanu or Matt Damon.
I agree the BR world has many openings to make more stories, but nothing
special enough to make into a film - Star Wars spin off books like the Rogue
Squadron series, Timothy Zahn's work and others are all very successful and
most are truly new and extend the ideas of the films, but none are worth
making into a film (of course, the fans would love them to be, but we have
the prequels to get gooey about now...
David Cardinal
Lukas Mariman <bs24...@skynet.be> wrote in message
news:7lfcam$bvk$3...@news0.skynet.be...
> > >Jeter. Hasn't anyone read them?
> > >
> >
[snip]
> I admit reading BR2 was kind of fun, even if just because, hey - it's
Blade
> Runner!
I agree.
> Well, sort of... :-)
> BR3 was just plain terrible. :-(
>
I have not read Replicant Night.
[snip]
> > 4.) Bringing Dick's characters NOT SEEN in the movie into his books.
> Stupid
> > stupid stupid and confusing.
>
> Another odd approach, trying to write a sequel to both Dick's book and
> Scott's movie...
> Maybe if he had just incorporated some of the books *concepts* it might
have
> worked better.
>
It is pretty strange to make a sequel to both the book and film. It's even
weirder because Jeter did *two* sequels. Instead of two one-size-fits-all
sequels, he should have written one sequel solely for Dick's novel, and one
sequel based on the movie. It would have been neat if Jeter had written two
parallel sequels that were like opposite sides of the same coin -- similar
to the way Stephen King's Desperation and "Richard Bachman's" The Regulators
are.
> --
> ----
> Lukas Mariman
Lukas Mariman
7o0u35$76n$1...@autumn.news.rcn.net...
>
> Lukas Mariman <bs24...@skynet.be> wrote in message
> news:7lfcam$bvk$3...@news0.skynet.be...
> > MrBlondeMM <mrblo...@aol.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
> > 19990630124047...@ng33.aol.com...
> > > >I haven't seen any threads about the two BR sequel books written K W
> > > >Jeter. Hasn't anyone read them?
> > > >
> > > >Marc
> [snip]
>
> > I admit reading BR2 was kind of fun, even if just because, hey - it's
> Blade Runner!
>
> I agree.
>
> > Well, sort of... :-)
> > BR3 was just plain terrible. :-(
> >
>
> I have not read Replicant Night.
That was my personal opinion, of course, so if you want to give it a try
anyway, don't let that stop you; BTW, in that case, I would like to know
what you think of it.
> [snip]
>
> > > 4.) Bringing Dick's characters NOT SEEN in the movie into his books.
> > Stupid stupid stupid and confusing.
> >
> > Another odd approach, trying to write a sequel to both Dick's book and
> > Scott's movie...
> > Maybe if he had just incorporated some of the books *concepts* it might
> have worked better.
> >
> It is pretty strange to make a sequel to both the book and film. It's
even
> weirder because Jeter did *two* sequels. Instead of two one-size-fits-all
> sequels, he should have written one sequel solely for Dick's novel, and
one
> sequel based on the movie. It would have been neat if Jeter had written
two
> parallel sequels that were like opposite sides of the same coin -- similar
> to the way Stephen King's Desperation and "Richard Bachman's" The
Regulators
> are.
Right, that might have been a better idea. Would have sold twice as many
books too, probably. :-)
MrBlondeSK
>books too, probably. :-)
That would have put the total at what? 1,000? 2,000 copies sold?
I hate the sequels. Every single time I started to feel like I was really
getting into a true Blade Runner story Jeter did something really stupid to
mess it up. After the fabulous resurrection of J.F. AND Pris, I lost interest
completely and had to struggle just to get through the first sequel. I haven't
read the second sequel.. I think I'll buy it in case I ever have trouble
sleeping.
Captain HooK
>> Scott's movie...
I'm sorry. I read the BR2 book, but I havn't seen any kind of think I could
rely on Dick's book. This could have been done by adding the mood orguan
(orgue ?) or Mercer's presence, but there's absolutely nothing in this book
that can help me recall Dick's novel. It's just a bit linkable with the
movie, well... huh...
I don't even know if J'ai Lu (the french editor for BR2) would publish BR3.
I think BR2 was a mess here :):)
So...
HK (not yet VKed)
------------------
"Please, mr Scott, don't let them make a sequel !"
Teared fan.
Lukas Mariman
93370480...@sofia.magic.fr...
> >> Another odd approach, trying to write a sequel to both Dick's book and
> >> Scott's movie...
>
> I'm sorry. I read the BR2 book, but I havn't seen any kind of think I
could
> rely on Dick's book. This could have been done by adding the mood orguan
> (orgue ?) or Mercer's presence, but there's absolutely nothing in this
book
> that can help me recall Dick's novel. It's just a bit linkable with the
> movie, well... huh...
You're right, it is more linked to the movie than to Dick's book; but he did
use at least one or two characters from Dick's book... I'm sure there were
other elements as well, but I don't remember. I'd have to reread BR2... And
I'm not sure I want to do that. :-)
> I don't even know if J'ai Lu (the french editor for BR2) would publish
BR3.
If it's any consolation, you're not missing much. BR3 wasn't very good (a
small understatement there :-)
> I think BR2 was a mess here :):)
I'm sure it was a mess everywhere else as well. :-)
Seriously, I have no idea how well the Jeter sequels have done (critically
and commercially). Does anyone have any figures on this?
Chris Kerr
> and commercially). Does anyone have any figures on this?
No figures, but I picked up my copy of both from the bargain bin in the local
bookshop. Saw it on a shelf a few months earlier, passed it over in favour of a
favourite author, didn't see it the next time I looked at the same shelf.
--
Chris Kerr
artist, philosopher, intellectual, compulsive liar
URL: http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~ckerr
REAL email address: ck...@ihug.co.nz
Lukas Mariman
37A75D11...@nospam.com...
> > Seriously, I have no idea how well the Jeter sequels have done
(critically
> > and commercially). Does anyone have any figures on this?
>
> No figures, but I picked up my copy of both from the bargain bin in the
local
> bookshop. Saw it on a shelf a few months earlier, passed it over in
favour of a
> favourite author, didn't see it the next time I looked at the same shelf.
Uhm... Is that good or bad? :-)
Chris Kerr
Generally bad. Popular authors stay on the shelves for years, with a different
cover for a different edition once or twice a year.
Lukas Mariman
> > Uhm... Is that good or bad? :-)
>
> Generally bad. Popular authors stay on the shelves for years, with a
different
> cover for a different edition once or twice a year.
Right, I see (I never buy books anymore... :-)
Thanks for the info.
Steve Roby
"Lukas Mariman" (bs24...@skynet.be) writes:
> Captain HooK <ho...@magic.fr> schreef in berichtnieuws
> 93370480...@sofia.magic.fr...
>> >> Another odd approach, trying to write a sequel to both Dick's book and
>> >> Scott's movie...
>>
>> I'm sorry. I read the BR2 book, but I havn't seen any kind of think I
> could
>> rely on Dick's book. This could have been done by adding the mood orguan
>> (orgue ?) or Mercer's presence, but there's absolutely nothing in this
> book
>> that can help me recall Dick's novel. It's just a bit linkable with the
>> movie, well... huh...
>
> You're right, it is more linked to the movie than to Dick's book; but he did
> use at least one or two characters from Dick's book... I'm sure there were
> other elements as well, but I don't remember. I'd have to reread BR2... And
> I'm not sure I want to do that. :-)
>
>> I don't even know if J'ai Lu (the french editor for BR2) would publish
> BR3.
>
> If it's any consolation, you're not missing much. BR3 wasn't very good (a
> small understatement there :-)
>
>> I think BR2 was a mess here :):)
>
> I'm sure it was a mess everywhere else as well. :-)
> and commercially). Does anyone have any figures on this?
I don't have any figures, but it may be worth noting that the next book in
the series will be published in October in the UK, but no US edition seems
to be planned.
I haven't read BR3 yet, but I did think Jeter tried to incorporate
elements of DADOES in BR2. It wasn't an entirely successful experiment,
because Blade Runner was so different from DADOES in just about every way.
Should he have tried to reconcile BR with PKD's fiction? Hard to say. As a
long time PKD fan, as a fan of many of Jeter's own novels, and as someone
who knows that Dick and Jeter were friends, I was happy to hear that Jeter
got the job to write the sequels. (It's a shame that so many of Jeter's
best novels are out of print.)
As written, though, the book suffered from its influences clashing. Maybe
it would have been better to disregard Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep
entirely, and work strictly in the style and setting of the film. Whether
it would have made for a better novel is something we can only wonder
about.
FWIW, another of my favorite movies inspired a novel not too long ago.
Casablanca was prequelized/sequelized in the novel As Time Goes By, by
Michael Walsh. Compared to that, BR2 was a literary masterpiece.
Steve
--
Steve Roby
ae...@freenet.carleton.ca
Star Trek books website: http://www.well.com/user/sjroby/lcars/
Lukas Mariman
7ochc8$k...@freenet-news.carleton.ca...
> I don't have any figures, but it may be worth noting that the next book in
> the series will be published in October in the UK, but no US edition seems
> to be planned.
I see. Being a sucker for all things BR, I'll probably buy it too. If only
to just to determine how bad that one will be. :-)
> I haven't read BR3 yet, but I did think Jeter tried to incorporate
> elements of DADOES in BR2. It wasn't an entirely successful experiment,
> because Blade Runner was so different from DADOES in just about every way.
> Should he have tried to reconcile BR with PKD's fiction? Hard to say. As a
> long time PKD fan, as a fan of many of Jeter's own novels, and as someone
> who knows that Dick and Jeter were friends, I was happy to hear that Jeter
> got the job to write the sequels. (It's a shame that so many of Jeter's
> best novels are out of print.)
I knew they were friends, and I understand Jeter has written some good stuff
in the past... (I have this interesting Grolier SF Encyclopedia on
CD-ROM...)
> As written, though, the book suffered from its influences clashing. Maybe
> it would have been better to disregard Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep
> entirely, and work strictly in the style and setting of the film. Whether
> it would have made for a better novel is something we can only wonder
> about.
Yes, maybe he tried a too ambitious approach...
> FWIW, another of my favorite movies inspired a novel not too long ago.
> Casablanca was prequelized/sequelized in the novel As Time Goes By, by
> Michael Walsh. Compared to that, BR2 was a literary masterpiece.
Oh no! Sequelitis has struck again. Not "Casablanca"! Noooooooooo... :-/
That's always the problem with writing a sequel (or trying to) to a classic;
the chances of it being a disappointment are fairly big, I'd say.
J. Stephen Lauder
Lukas Mariman wrote in message <7octs1$hja$1...@news0.skynet.be>...
>Steve Roby <ae...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> schreef in berichtnieuws
>7ochc8$k...@freenet-news.carleton.ca...
>> I don't have any figures, but it may be worth noting that the next book
in
>> the series will be published in October in the UK, but no US edition
seems
>> to be planned.
>
value I looked up some ranking figures from that small time bookseller,
www.amazon.com, "books for everyone",
Blade Runner 2 ranked 97,185 K. W. Jeter
Blade Runner 3 ranked 45, 866 K. W. Jeter
DADoES ranked 7,204 PKD
Future Noir ranked 15,780 Paul Sammon
and suprisingly a title called, Blade Runner: A Movie, by William S.
Burroughs, (allegedly what the movie was named after), ranked only 85,218.
>I see. Being a sucker for all things BR, I'll probably buy it too. If only
>to just to determine how bad that one will be. :-)
>
>> I haven't read BR3 yet, but I did think Jeter tried to incorporate
>> elements of DADOES in BR2. It wasn't an entirely successful experiment,
>> because Blade Runner was so different from DADOES in just about every
way.
>> Should he have tried to reconcile BR with PKD's fiction? Hard to say. As
a
>> long time PKD fan, as a fan of many of Jeter's own novels, and as someone
>> who knows that Dick and Jeter were friends, I was happy to hear that
Jeter
>> got the job to write the sequels. (It's a shame that so many of Jeter's
>> best novels are out of print.)
>
You'll be glad to hear he's doing a roaring trade recently in Star Wars: The
Bounty Hunter Wars!!
>I knew they were friends, and I understand Jeter has written some good
stuff
>in the past... (I have this interesting Grolier SF Encyclopedia on
>CD-ROM...)
>
>> As written, though, the book suffered from its influences clashing. Maybe
>> it would have been better to disregard Do Androids Dream of Electric
Sheep
>> entirely, and work strictly in the style and setting of the film. Whether
>> it would have made for a better novel is something we can only wonder
>> about.
>
>Yes, maybe he tried a too ambitious approach...
>
>> FWIW, another of my favorite movies inspired a novel not too long ago.
>> Casablanca was prequelized/sequelized in the novel As Time Goes By, by
>> Michael Walsh. Compared to that, BR2 was a literary masterpiece.
>
>Oh no! Sequelitis has struck again. Not "Casablanca"! Noooooooooo... :-/
>That's always the problem with writing a sequel (or trying to) to a
classic;
>the chances of it being a disappointment are fairly big, I'd say.
>
>--
I've read both of Jeter's BR "sequels", and found they were full of
constantly original new plots which constantly evolved from the original
movie storyline. Unfortunately he tends to get a bit bogged down by
'continually' throwing in new plots which never resolve themselves, and in
the end I feel that as a 'true' Blade Runner fan I became very frustrated
with where he was taking the story. A shame IMO because I think Jeter is a
very accomplished author and deservingly so, but as a stand alone the books
would probably have been much better.... if you see what I mean?
Stephen....
jst...@bigfoot.com
Lukas Mariman
rhGq3.12160$V21.3...@nnrp3.clara.net...
> I couldn't find any sales or published figures but just for entertainment
> value I looked up some ranking figures from that small time bookseller,
> www.amazon.com, "books for everyone",
>
> Blade Runner 2 ranked 97,185 K. W. Jeter
> Blade Runner 3 ranked 45, 866 K. W. Jeter
> DADoES ranked 7,204 PKD
> Future Noir ranked 15,780 Paul Sammon
Doh! This ranking shows blatant disrespect for PK Dick's source novel, and
the bible as well.
Oh well, no one said life was fair... :-)
> and suprisingly a title called, Blade Runner: A Movie, by William S.
> Burroughs, (allegedly what the movie was named after), ranked only 85,218.
... Yes, but except for the title, it has absolutely nothing to do with BR.
(Just for completeness' sake)
> I've read both of Jeter's BR "sequels", and found they were full of
> constantly original new plots which constantly evolved from the original
> movie storyline.
Yes, he did come up with a lot of good ideas. And some bad ones too, maybe.
:-)
> Unfortunately he tends to get a bit bogged down by
> 'continually' throwing in new plots which never resolve themselves, and in
> the end I feel that as a 'true' Blade Runner fan I became very frustrated
> with where he was taking the story. A shame IMO because I think Jeter is
a
> very accomplished author and deservingly so, but as a stand alone the
books
> would probably have been much better.... if you see what I mean?
I don't, actually. How can a BR sequel be "standalone"?
J. Stephen Lauder
Lukas Mariman wrote in message <7ofo15$g77$2...@news0.skynet.be>...
>J. Stephen Lauder <jst...@bigfoot.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
>rhGq3.12160$V21.3...@nnrp3.clara.net...
. . . . . . . . . . .
>> I've read both of Jeter's BR "sequels", and found they were full of
>> constantly original new plots which constantly evolved from the original
>> movie storyline.
>
>Yes, he did come up with a lot of good ideas. And some bad ones too, maybe.
>:-)
>
>> Unfortunately he tends to get a bit bogged down by
>> 'continually' throwing in new plots which never resolve themselves, and
in
>> the end I feel that as a 'true' Blade Runner fan I became very frustrated
>> with where he was taking the story. A shame IMO because I think Jeter is
>a
>> very accomplished author and deservingly so, but as a stand alone the
>books
>> would probably have been much better.... if you see what I mean?
>
>I don't, actually. How can a BR sequel be "standalone"?
>
I think what I was trying to say was that if the books were not a 'BR
sequel' and he hadn't tried to continue the storyline, and didn't contain
characters from BR, but rather instead said, "here is a book that has
similarities to bladerunner, from which I took inspiration from and I've ran
with this train of thought", but that is purely my opinion of course.....
:¬)
Stephen....
jst...@bigfoot.com
Lukas Mariman
> I think what I was trying to say was that if the books were not a 'BR
> sequel' and he hadn't tried to continue the storyline, and didn't contain
> characters from BR, but rather instead said, "here is a book that has
> similarities to bladerunner, from which I took inspiration from and I've
ran
> with this train of thought", but that is purely my opinion of course.....
> :¬)
I see what you mean now. Well, maybe that would have been preferable.
Smiley
uttered the words:
>>> Another odd approach, trying to write a sequel to both Dick's book and
>>> Scott's movie...
>
>
>I'm sorry. I read the BR2 book, but I havn't seen any kind of think I could
>rely on Dick's book. This could have been done by adding the mood orguan
>(orgue ?) or Mercer's presence,
The movie turned out to be amazing without it anyway. You might want to
read 'The little black box' if you liked Mercer and empathy boxes.
>but there's absolutely nothing in this book
>that can help me recall Dick's novel.
>It's just a bit linkable with the
>movie, well... huh...
anyway i rather liked it. especially the way the deck-a-rep thing was
still left open for argument, no definite answer was given as to whether
or not he was.
the ending also struck me as quite PKD. the seemingly happy ending . . .
but with twist.
>I don't even know if J'ai Lu (the french editor for BR2) would publish BR3.
suppose...
>
>So...
>
>HK (not yet VKed)
>------------------
>"Please, mr Scott, don't let them make a sequel !"
> Teared fan.
>
Smiley :p
ICQ - 16141921
All are lunatics, but s/he who can analyze hir delusion is called a philosopher.