re: Blade Runner 2049 is officially a flop

lol ... there was zero chance it would be a blockbuster hit ... release dates? ... marketing? ... the original blade runner, as highly respected as it is, still isn't all that popular ... i actually applaud the studio for making the sequel and spending the bucks they did ... it was a no win situation all the way around, money wise ... $150 million on a sequel to a misunderstood/little noticed film? ... that's still a lot of money, even for today ... and they did a decent job of it ... i stand by my original opinion that they were a bit too blunt with some aspects of the story and had one too many nods to the original, but there are some scenes that will garner admiration down the road ... and the visuals/mood/soundtrack are fabulous ...

It really doesn't surprise me, even though I had hoped it would do well.

I've come to realize that marketing makes or breaks a movie. The power to get people to watch a movie is almost all done by marketing these days. When a studio decides not to spend much money marketing a movie, because they know it's a shitty movie, that's understandable. But they aren't allowed to "be surprised" when they don't.

It also depends on main audience of the director's movies. Nolan movies are typically for people who like great, yet smart movies. So, marketing can get away with less advertising for his movie, as long as they reach the intended audience. Word of mouth usually pulls a lot of weight when it comes to Nolan movies. Look at Interstellar and Dunkirk for great examples of this.

Villeneuve makes smart, great movies too, but he has nowhere close to the name and set list that Nolan has. So, with his lesser known name, and not enough marketing for a movie that cost as much as 2049 to make, it all ends up being a dud.

quote:

---

The bitching about Leto is ridiculous. The dude was in the movie for like five minutes.

---

I fricking despise Leto because he’s a total dirtbag, but I didn’t let that stop me from seeing Blade Runner. Like you said, he’s in a few scenes that total amount to a few minutes in an otherwise amazing film, the best this year for me (we’ll see if it holds it when Star Wars comes out)

Blade Runner 2049 definitely reminded me of Mad Max Fury Road, a successful sequel to an 80s franchise that’s on par with the original great film (Road Warrior) or even better. Remakes like Robocop and Total Recall failed in this regard.

quote:

---

I haven't heard someone mention the term "home video" in years. That's awesome.

---

quote:

---

It'll be lucky to reach $100 million in the U.S. on a $150 million budget.

---

It's already at $62,415,066 Domestic and $95,580,774 Foreign, Total =$157,995,840
LINK

quote:

---

It's already at $62,415,066 Domestic and $95,580,774 Foreign, Total =$157,995,840
LINK

---

And that’s not good

apparently insiders are saying net was $155M Then another $50M on P+A .... so it will likely turn some sort of profit, but obviously not be a big hit.

quote:

---

I understand that it takes place 30 years after the first film. Do I really need to see that movie so I can understand 2049 better?

---

It would help your experience, yes.

You do not need to see the first film

quote:

---

I understand that it takes place 30 years after the first film. Do I really need to see that movie so I can understand 2049 better?

---

You don't need to, but I'd recommend that you see the original and watch the shorts released that cover some of the stuff between the two movies. They are all on youtube and total they are about 30 minutes.

I'd only seen the theatrical version once, so I watched the final cut over the weekend and the shorts before seeing 2049 on Tuesday. I'd say it enhanced the viewing experience.

And for this being a flop, the theater was very full for a Tuesday night.