Sean Young Talks BLADE RUNNER Sequel & Her Interpretation Of 'Rachael' In the Original Film

Sean Young Talks BLADE RUNNER Sequel & Her Interpretation Of 'Rachael' In the Original Film

The actress who played 'Rachael' in Ridley Scott's 1982 film has confirmed in the recent interview that she had a meeting with Alcon Entertainment about the new Blade Runner film. Check out what she had to say...

So, it's been known for a while now that Ridley Scott is set to direct a new installment of Blade Runner for Alcon Entertainment. According to many, the 1982 film which was based on Philip K. Dick's novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, is one of the greatest science-fiction films of all time, and Scott said that he wants to explore more of this universe. If this is indeed a sequel as they say, what about the original cast? In a recent interview with Crave Online, Sean Young confirmed that she met with Alcon Entertainment about the new film. More below:

"Well, I did meet with Alcon, the company that owns it and is planning to do the remake with Ridley. I did meet with them, but I think at that point they just wanted to meet me and I don’t think they have any plans of using any of the original people, although I can’t say for sure. I do think, let me just say it right here, I do think it would be a disappointment to the audience not to have Rachel in it but you know what, folks in Hollywood make mistakes all the time."

She also shared her thoughts regarding 'Rachael', who is supposed to be a NEXUS-6 prototype:

"Oh no, in the interpretation I’m the one that has no end date. I’m the one that rides off in the car with him at the end that has no end date. I’m Nexus-7, not Nexus-6."

Ridley Scott already said that 'Deckard' is definitely NEXUS-6 model, and they only have a four-year lifespan. It will be interesting to see where they take the story for the next film. Are you looking forward to the new Blade Runner movie?

Posted By:
Member Since 2/9/2009
Filed Under "Sci-Fi" 1/23/2013 Source: Crave Online
DISCLAIMER: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct. is protected from liability under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) and "safe harbor" provisions. CBM will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please contact us for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. You may also learn more about our copyright and trademark policies HERE.
4thDoctor - 1/23/2013, 12:07 PM
Loved her in that film. I'll reserve judgement on the new one until I have a clearer picture on what they are doing with it. For now, I am content knowing that I'll get to revisit that universe.
DukeAcureds - 1/23/2013, 12:10 PM
Or Nexus 5, seen as though she was a prototype and the 4-year lifespans were added because the replicants were too perfect.
Love Sean Young, she's a complete fangirl.
GodzillaKart - 1/23/2013, 12:14 PM
Loved Blade Runner...but after the steaming piece of stupid that was Prometheus, I have to say I'm a bit gun shy about this.
Fogs - 1/23/2013, 12:16 PM
I really wish they don't do a direct sequel, but rather a different story set in the same universe.
jimpinto24 - 1/23/2013, 12:18 PM
I loved Blade Runner! I hope the remake is good.
DioFoRio - 1/23/2013, 12:41 PM
Rutger was badass in The Hitchhiker too !
G - 1/23/2013, 12:54 PM
Drunk bitch. Don't reward an alcoholic by putting her in the film. She's a hot drunken mess. An adult Lindsay Lohan. A has-been.
MiracleMe - 1/23/2013, 1:53 PM
What Godzillafart said!
punkstealingluggage - 1/23/2013, 1:56 PM
Finkel is Einhorn! Einhorn is Finkel!
punkstealingluggage - 1/23/2013, 1:58 PM
"Listen, pet d!ck. How would you like me to make your life a living hell?"
vtopa - 1/23/2013, 2:33 PM
She's a nutjob (re: Tim Burton, Cat Woman), plus I don't see how she'd fit in looking 30 years older. Give her a clever cameo (as a scientist or over-the-hill hooker or something), and move on with new characters.
fceeviper - 1/23/2013, 2:40 PM
"Are you looking forward to the new Blade Runner movie?"

Yes, and hopefully it's better than the first one.
AsianVersionOfET - 1/23/2013, 2:43 PM
@Punkstealingluggage, "'Is my gun digging into your hip?'...EEEUUAGHHH!"
HRDWYR - 1/23/2013, 3:33 PM
ok, question for anyone: Some have said that Deckerd(sp?) was possibly a replicant himself? I've seen BR a number of times of the years, but i'm still not sure. Any truth, or just speculation?
holeymonkey - 1/23/2013, 4:34 PM
"Folk's in Hollywood make mistakes all the time....". Lol, the irony of Sean Young uttering that particular phrase.
mgeoff88 - 1/23/2013, 9:35 PM
@Punkstealingluggage "Well, I'm not really ready for a relationship, Lois, but thank you for asking.
jj2112 - 1/24/2013, 6:33 AM
@ HRDWYR - Scott said so himself. There are many hints that Deckard might be a replicant: his obsession with pictures, the unicorn sequence, the fact that Gaff tells him "you've done a man's job"... Many say that he's too weak to be a replicant, but Tyrell wants to build replicants who are "more human than humans", and Rachel is not that strong, so Deckard could be a new model, less strong but more human and with a longer lifespan.
NorrinRaddical - 1/24/2013, 7:30 AM
I for one don't want to know that Deckard was or was not N-6, but I don't need every little thing spoon fed to me either. I'm not saying I don't think he's a replicant, nor how wonderfully Scott planted wonderful clues throughout, I just don't need him to SAY it.

She is a mess of a person, she shouldn't hold her breath on the delusion that "it would be a disappointment to the audience not to have Rachel".

someone please post her sad and hilarious attempt of hers to be cast as catwoman
sameoldthing - 1/24/2013, 7:48 AM
The film works best if Deckard is just a human.
You can interpret it however you like really,another reason why it's a great film.
So few movies are thought provoking. (Michael Bay films for example.)
ChaosLord - 1/24/2013, 10:33 AM
Ridley Scott cannot be sure Deckard was a Nexus 6 - it would not make sense - would he have only been retiring replicants for a year or so? There is a long history inferred between him and the police.

If you havent read the book, you should. It is VERY different from the movie. I like the movie depictions of Roy and crew better, but the world is more defined in the book...and emptier...and even more screwed up. There is also mention of a whole...not spoiling. ;-)
jj2112 - 1/25/2013, 12:22 AM
Yeah, that's what's great about the movie, many interpretations make sense. To me the fact that he's been retiring replicants for just a year means nothing, we see Deckard is pretty amateurish when it comes to fighting, he could have implanted memories of it. And he is enlisted once the other Blade Runner goes down, maybe they're testing him to see if a replicant can hunt others.
BFGLOOM - 1/25/2013, 9:56 AM
ChaosLord what was the spouler from the book? I've heard that Ridley is using alot of unused concepts from the book and first film... He also said that 2nd film would open on a barn where a replicant is hiding out.

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.