- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 10/16/17 at 10:19 am to Peazey
Yeah but that doesn’t motivate studios to keep making movies like this
Posted on 10/16/17 at 10:22 am to JW
This movie was poorly promoted. They spent money on it i bet but I didn’t see anythin
I also think Hollywood’s reputation for nostalgia exploitation didn’t maximize turnout for people who loved the original
This is all just speculation but I don’t think audiences are dumb. I think they’re skeptical
I also think Hollywood’s reputation for nostalgia exploitation didn’t maximize turnout for people who loved the original
This is all just speculation but I don’t think audiences are dumb. I think they’re skeptical
Posted on 10/16/17 at 10:25 am to Brosef Stalin
quote:
The first one was a flop too.
That's b/c it's a boring arse movie that isn't that good.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 10:26 am to DelU249
It was a decent play on Alcon's part .... with the material, director and talent attached you can understand it being green lit. Won't be what they wanted, but at least it's not a disaster like their Depp film Transcendence
Posted on 10/16/17 at 10:27 am to TeddyPadillac
It’s not for everyone
Sci fi isn’t the biggest genre and noir movies are really niche
But it opened against the thing and ET. Death sentence for your film’s financial prospects
Sci fi isn’t the biggest genre and noir movies are really niche
But it opened against the thing and ET. Death sentence for your film’s financial prospects
Posted on 10/16/17 at 10:31 am to JW
People either didn’t see the original or didn’t know it was a sequel
I hear it from everyone
That’s a problem. Throw in shitty promotional effort, bad release date and hollywood’s reputation for ruining things we loved in the 80s and i think it didn’t have a chance
Audiences aren’t dumb. My wife hates these kinds of movies and loved it and now is dying to see the original which I’ve tried unsuccessfully for years to get her to watch.
ETA: I also don’t think movies are smart. Right now most successful movies don’t have anything going on. It’s not a matter of smart vs. dumb. they only make 2 types of movies nowadays: Oscar bait and splosions. I hate both
I hear it from everyone
That’s a problem. Throw in shitty promotional effort, bad release date and hollywood’s reputation for ruining things we loved in the 80s and i think it didn’t have a chance
Audiences aren’t dumb. My wife hates these kinds of movies and loved it and now is dying to see the original which I’ve tried unsuccessfully for years to get her to watch.
ETA: I also don’t think movies are smart. Right now most successful movies don’t have anything going on. It’s not a matter of smart vs. dumb. they only make 2 types of movies nowadays: Oscar bait and splosions. I hate both
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 10:40 am
Posted on 10/16/17 at 10:42 am to DelU249
It wasn't a bad release date. The Martian came out the same weekend just two years ago and was a huge hit. October is when the serious movies start coming out. Releasing this movie during the summer would have been worse.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 10:50 am to Brosef Stalin
Those are usually lower budget Oscar bait
I get what you’re saying. I think the biggest problem it had was people either didn’t know it was a sequel, didn’t see the original or didn’t even know it was out. Blade runner isn’t ET. A sequel 35 years after the fact should include promoting the original
I get what you’re saying. I think the biggest problem it had was people either didn’t know it was a sequel, didn’t see the original or didn’t even know it was out. Blade runner isn’t ET. A sequel 35 years after the fact should include promoting the original
Posted on 10/16/17 at 12:00 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
The international markets may help it make a little money
You do realize it hasn't opened in China or Japan yet.
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 12:01 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 2:17 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
It'll be lucky to reach $100 million in the U.S. on a $150 million budget.
Honestly, they didn't need to make it so expensive.
And they should have trimmed 30 minutes out of it. THey could have just removed teh zoom ins of ryan goslings face and you wouldn't have noticed anything.
Leto was also probably pretty pricey, and not worth it.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:18 pm to bobby_3_sticks
even though the budget was listed at $185M they certainly received rebates from the Hungarian government while shooting in Budapest. Likely 35% back.
Not to mention there are no crew unions there, so the labor is even less.
All in all won't be a disaster, but the studios were no doubt expecting more.
I sat next to an Alcon exec in a meeting an know for a fact the production designer was paid $17,500 a week.
Not to mention there are no crew unions there, so the labor is even less.
All in all won't be a disaster, but the studios were no doubt expecting more.
I sat next to an Alcon exec in a meeting an know for a fact the production designer was paid $17,500 a week.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:34 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
But let's be honest, they waited 30 years too long to make a sequel out of Blade Runner.
It's not the distance between the two films...
It's that they made it in today's audience climate. If they had made the movie in 1990 or 1995 - would have been a hit.
But the movie doesn't have animated talking cars and non-stop action and it's very long...and you know, gotta get back on that iphone pronto.
Despite my criticism of the pacing...which doesn't work, it's still a great film...I just think it would have been a bigger hit if it had an editor to take out some of the filler. Certain shots didn't need to be 10 minutes...this is why Cimino got run out of town.
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 3:34 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:37 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
It's that they made it in today's audience climate.
Definitely could have used some black or gay replicants.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:46 pm to RollTide1987
Combined box office already has it over $150M in week 2.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:16 pm to DelU249
quote:
Think it would’ve been wise to promote the original get it on Netflix & Amazon in league with promotional material
I haven't seen the original in ages because it's hardly ever on TV. They should have put it on cable a few weeks, multiple times ahead of the release. Someone told me they aired the original on Syfy once right before it was released.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:21 pm to Tigris
Plz add MacGruber to your list
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 4:22 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:27 pm to bobby_3_sticks
quote:
Leto was also probably pretty pricey, and not worth it.
The bitching about Leto is ridiculous. The dude was in the movie for like five minutes.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 5:43 pm to DelU249
quote:
Probably shouldn’t have released it in October
Also being a 2 hour 40 minute R rated movie doesn’t help. I was shocked when I saw they had a budget of $150M for this
Posted on 10/16/17 at 8:41 pm to RollTide1987
It's an incredible movie. I saw it twice in theaters and just pre-ordered my Blu Ray copy. A true shame that it didn't make more money.
Hopefully Villeneuve will keep making great, original movies.
Hopefully Villeneuve will keep making great, original movies.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News