Support NeoGAF

[Haloid1177]

I didn't see Ghost in the Shell because I heard that it was bad. Was that wrong? One lesson that I have relearned recently is to not trust audience and critical consensus.

GitS was decent visually, but dire in almost every other way.

 

[IKizzLE]

I think this might actually be a worse take than OP, impressive really.

Film fucking owns, but most people want bad action filled superhero movies. Glad they didn't make it short and stupid, if you liked Arrival, you'll love it.

Hate transformers, loved prisoners, sicario and arrival. Wasn't a fan of this movie.

People still can't grasp the fact that people have legitimate reasons for not liking a film outside of "he/she has bad taste".

 

[Morts]

I didn't realize this was out ready. I'm also intimidated to watch it before rewatching the original, which I'm not sure when I'll have time for.

 

[shandy706]

A real shame, from what I've gathered the film just like many others deserves much better.
I'll probably wait for Bluray too though.

Don't do that...I do that with like 99% of movies, but this isn't the one.

The audio/visual experience is worth every penny.

 

[ZombAid82]

That's the job of producers. That is literally what their job description is. They manage the expectations of the director in terms of what they can afford and what sort of film they should be aiming for. They find out how to sell the movie and make it profitable. They get partners together to fund the movie. That's production. The director just directs. Some directors are also producers, so the roles blend. In this case Villeneuve carried out exactly what he was asked to do per their arrangement. He made it really clear that if they had wanted a blockbuster sort of movie he wouldn't have been involved, so it's not like he forced his way into anything! They all wanted this!

...and it was a good decision!
This movie's gonna make his movie back, I'm sure of it. At least when it's released on Blu-Ray.

 

[Zen Aku]

Sadly I think I had more fun watching I, Robot than Blade Runner 2049.

Not saying I, Robot is necessarily better. It's just outside of a few scenes in BR2049, I never felt like I was really enjoying or having fun with the movie.

 

[kraspkibble]

it might not "perform" well but hey i got to watch an awesome movie and will be buying it on blu ray where i can watch it as much as i like. but yeah it does sucks that it'll mean we're unlikely to see any future blade runner movies any time soon and maybe even less cyberpunk movies.

 

[Piers]

Ooof. The cycle repeats, right? Wasn't Bladerunner also kind of a box office flop?

 

[duckroll]

...and it was a good decision!
This movie's gonna make his movie back, I'm sure of it. At least when it's released on Blu-Ray.

Well.... http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...2049-behind-big-bet-by-alcon-a-sequel-1043128

 

[Glass Shark]

Villeneuve is kind of an asshole to be honest, to get this kind of budget and then turn out something like this. He obviously had zero interest in making something friendly to mainstream audiences lol. At least Nolan feels somewhat responsible to WB.

Guys I found it...the worst take on GAF

 

[Pandy]

I liked Ghost in the Shell, but it was nowhere on the level of Blade Runner. Also, people stayed away because of the whitewashing, and the lack of knowledge on Ghost in the Shell in general.

.

 

[Addi]

That's the job of producers. That is literally what their job description is. They manage the expectations of the director in terms of what they can afford and what sort of film they should be aiming for. They find out how to sell the movie and make it profitable. They get partners together to fund the movie. That's production. The director just directs. Some directors are also producers, so the roles blend. In this case Villeneuve carried out exactly what he was asked to do per their arrangement. He made it really clear that if they had wanted a blockbuster sort of movie he wouldn't have been involved, so it's not like he forced his way into anything! They all wanted this!

Yeah, exactly. Also, I don't think the "it's too artsy/too slow for the masses" and "it was marketed as an action movie when it wasn't" are good arguments to explain the bad performance on opening weekend. Later on, sure, but the first day when nobody has seen it yet? Not much time for word of mouth. It's mostly about marketing and the weird franchise name people don't know much about.

 

[shandy706]

Sadly I think I had more fun watching I, Robot than Blade Runner 2049.

Not saying I, Robot is necessarily better. It's just outside of a few scenes in BR2049, I never felt like I was really enjoying or having fun with the movie.

It seems you're not a big fan of the artistic or the audio/visual part of films?

More of an action/thrill ride kind of person? (there's nothing wrong with this)

Just the imagery alone in Blade Runner had me admiring each shot. The set pieces, the soundtrack, the attention to detail in scenes. I found the entire movie enthralling.

I need to watch it again as I like to look at all the things a movie brings to the table. Usually on my second watch I focus on the backgrounds, the sets, anything but the main character/focus on the screen.

 

[jack_package_200]

Seeing it again. Movie is a masterpiece

hot take. should have been faster paced with a bit more whizbang maybe. :/

Villeneuve is kind of an asshole to be honest, to get this kind of budget and then turn out something like this. He obviously had zero interest in making something friendly to mainstream audiences lol. At least Nolan feels somewhat responsible to WB.

150 mill for a sequel to a movie that only the nerdiest of the nerds watched and uphold.

What could go wrong?

Been awhile since I have seen takes so bad.

 

[ZombAid82]

Well.... http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...2049-behind-big-bet-by-alcon-a-sequel-1043128

At least they go out with a bang....
Who's the one to helm Dune btw?

 

[jett]

That's the job of producers. That is literally what their job description is. They manage the expectations of the director in terms of what they can afford and what sort of film they should be aiming for. They find out how to sell the movie and make it profitable. They get partners together to fund the movie. That's production. The director just directs. Some directors are also producers, so the roles blend. In this case Villeneuve carried out exactly what he was asked to do per their arrangement. He made it really clear that if they had wanted a blockbuster sort of movie he wouldn't have been involved, so it's not like he forced his way into anything! They all wanted this!

Haha well all right.

I obviously don't consider Villeneuve an actual asshole, and I don't really think he squandered their money, but I will never understand how this movie got made and how this is the cut that was released to theaters considering Alcon's expectations.

 

[Budi]

lol at calling Villeneuve an asshole for making a film he wanted to make. Maybe Warner Bros. should have thought a bit more carefully before giving that kind of money to a Blade Runner sequel made by the guy who directed Arrival and Sicario.

Nah they did good, more should follow their lead. There are plenty of other movies that could take some cuts in the budget if necessary. Support filmmakers and let them do their thing.

 

[duckroll]

At least they go out with a bang....
Who's the one to helm Dune btw?

Legendary I think. Which could mean China money. Not sure what impact this bomba will have on it.

Haha well all right.

I obviously don't consider Villeneuve an actual asshole, and I don't really think he squandered their money, but I will never understand how this movie got made and how this is the cut that was released to theaters considering Alcon's expectations.

No one knows how this movie got made. It's the greatest mystery of all. I think even Villeneuve is probably looking back at it going "oooooooooh boy how did that happen."

 

[Tony Redgrave]

The production team knew what they were doing, they'll get their money back after the worldwide release is done and on the Blu Ray market.

The Blade Runner+BR2049 bundle alone will probably make good cash worldwide over time. That's not even counting special editions, director's cut etc.

If they really need it Ridley still has quite some Blade Runner cut material for a super dooper final cut ver 2.0

No one knows how this movie got made. It's the greatest mystery of all. I think even Villeneuve is probably looking back at it going "oooooooooh boy how did that happen."

100% convinced the producers just loved the original, had a way to convince investors and said fuck it. Rare case of actually loving art more than money.

 

[Jarmel]

It was kind of a joke, but also kind of this:

I think when you're handling a massive 150M+ production (nearly twice that with prints and advertising included), you have a higher responsibility than just making "good art." It's not just a movie, it's this massive investment. I'm one of those that enjoyed 2049 but still thought it felt slow as molasses at times, so I believe a little trimming here and there could've helped making it more palatable to the average moviegoer without compromising itself. It's not like the length is the problem, it's barely 15 minutes longer than some comic book movies these days. And yet most complaints of people that disliked it "oh it's sooo loooong, sooo boooring", it's almost becoming meme-like. That's about pacing and editing and rests solely on Villeneuve and his editor.

Sure, Villeneuve didn't go overbudget, and he was handed this project, in a way. But when you reach budgets of a certain level you probably do need a little compromise to make the money back. Good for him I guess. Not good at all for Alcon.

Alcon is for sure insane. Denis Villeneuve didn't even have final cut in the movie. They just let this happen.

Villenueve came under the allocated budget by 30 million. What more do you want from him?

 

[Addi]

I feel that there never was that many (1982) Blade Runner fans, they are just really fucking loud fans.

For one thing, my gut feeling is BR1982 fans really are not hard scifi fans, they are more champions of a particular cinematic narration style, which is very good but not scifi. If you actually read the book, Deckard is not a replicant and his personal story with his wife and all that makes a lot more sense. In other words, BR1982 fans are really more Ridley Scott fans than hard scifi fans. I can go on and on why BR1982 is not very good but I feel that there is no point to argue with the Scott Choir.

BTW the 2017 BR also has truckload of style which caters to very similar audiences.

TIL I'm a diehard Ridley Scott fan that doesn't understand scifi. Cool, care to share what you define as real scifi?

 

[GoldenCrow]

Sadly I think I had more fun watching I, Robot than Blade Runner 2049.

Not saying I, Robot is necessarily better. It's just outside of a few scenes in BR2049, I never felt like I was really enjoying or having fun with the movie.

They are two completely different genres. Blade Runner is more comparative to Breathless, Blue Velvet, Dirty Harry, The French Connection, Chinatown than it does any other sci-fi film because despite the setting it is a neo-noir film.

 

[Bulby]

Money be damned. Im sorry but thats how I feel in this case.

It was a cinema experience I will never forget. As a Blade Runner fan it was a sequal I never thought I would get, let alone meet and succeed all my expectations.

They avoided pandering to any modern day movie bullshit and delivered something I will never forget.

Time will remember this movie as something special rather than its finances. Sometimes great art is like that.

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

Blade Runner 2049 is dope as fuck and it makes sense that it's failing in a country that elected Donald Trump president.

 

[jack_package_200]

Money be damned. Im sorry but thats how I feel in this case.

It was a cinema experience I will never forget. As a Blade Runner fan it was a sequal I never thought I would get, let alone meet and succeed all my expectations.

They avoided pandering to any modern day movie bullshit and delivered something I will never forget.

Time will remember this movie as something special rather than its finances. Sometimes great art is like that.

These are my feelings on it as well.

 

[brochiller]

I feel that there never was that many (1982) Blade Runner fans, they are just really fucking loud fans.

For one thing, my gut feeling is BR1982 fans really are not hard scifi fans, they are more champions of a particular cinematic narration style, which is very good but not scifi. If you actually read the book, Deckard is not a replicant and his personal story with his wife and all that makes a lot more sense. In other words, BR1982 fans are really more Ridley Scott fans than hard scifi fans. I can go on and on why BR1982 is not very good but I feel that there is no point to argue with the Scott Choir.

BTW the 2017 BR also has truckload of style which caters to very similar audiences.

We actually studied Blade Runner and discussed its impact on the science fiction genre in a Science Fiction literature and media class I took at my University.

I have no idea where you are getting the notion that Blade Runner isn't sci fi.

 

[streetsahead123]

The production team knew what they were doing, they'll get their money back after the worldwide release is done and on the Blu Ray market.

The Blade Runner+BR2049 bundle alone will probably make good cash worldwide over time. That's not even counting special editions, director's cut etc.

If they really need it Ridley still has quite some Blade Runner cut material for a super dooper final cut ver 2.0


100% convinced the producers just loved the original, had a way to convince investors and said fuck it. Rare case of actually loving art more than money.

The producers very much did not know what they were doing. Blade Runner means nothing to most people under 35 and that’s where most ticket sales come from. This movie has to make upwards of $400 million to make a profit and even if it does get there, the production company is probably going to have to shut down before then as they’re relatively small and said that this movie was “make or break” for them.

 

[Plum]

Nah they did good, more should follow their lead. There are plenty of other movies that could take some cuts in the budget if necessary. Support filmmakers and let them do their thing.

Yeah, the movie Sony (not WB as was pointed out) funded turned out amazing. I was just going after the notion that it's somehow Villeneuve's fault when he was just doing what everyone would have expected him to do with such material.

 

[Apathy]

Money be damned. Im sorry but thats how I feel in this case.

It was a cinema experience I will never forget. As a Blade Runner fan it was a sequal I never thought I would get, let alone meet and succeed all my expectations.

They avoided pandering to any modern day movie bullshit and delivered something I will never forget.

Time will remember this movie as something special rather than its finances. Sometimes great art is like that.

Just like near the end when k was going to

Spoiler

save deckard, any other director would have made a break in to the Wallace building, shoot out with slow mo and industrial music. It might have been cool but it wouldn't have been blade runner

 

[Bloodporne]

I feel that there never was that many (1982) Blade Runner fans, they are just really fucking loud fans.

For one thing, my gut feeling is BR1982 fans really are not hard scifi fans, they are more champions of a particular cinematic narration style, which is very good but not scifi. If you actually read the book, Deckard is not a replicant and his personal story with his wife and all that makes a lot more sense. In other words, BR1982 fans are really more Ridley Scott fans than hard scifi fans. I can go on and on why BR1982 is not very good but I feel that there is no point to argue with the Scott Choir.

BTW the 2017 BR also has truckload of style which caters to very similar audiences.

So the only Blade Runner fans have to be either A) Ridley Scott fan boy "choir" B) Sci-Fi philistines.

I don't even know where to start with this nonsense. How about I, and probably many more, saw the movie and really fucking liked it, can that be option C) without some insanely smug derision? This isn't the IMDB comment section.

I also *actually* did read the book and still enjoy both versions. Imagine a world where people who enjoyed Blade Runner can also read, the insanity!

On topic: Sadly, the box officers numbers aren't that surprising but well, still unfortunate. I just don't think the trailer was convincing, Blade Runner is nearing ancient territory by now and going to the movies with several people, let alone a family, is fucking expensive. I can imagine many out there not wanting to take a chance on this if they weren't familiar with the original and only saw that weak trailer. I'm a huge fan and even I wasn't particularly thrilled until reviews came out.

 

[Tobor]

150 mill for a sequel to a movie that only the nerdiest of the nerds watched and uphold.

What could go wrong?

I see a lot of people calling this a “hot take” and I don’t see why. He’s exactly right.

Why would they spend this much money on a sequel to a cult classic? It’s not a widespread beloved franchise.

Why is it ok to bash Ghostbusters2016 for such a huge budget but not BR2049? At least people have heard of Ghostbusters.

 

[IISANDERII]

With the current audience climate in America, it's really not a huge surprise that a slow, ponderous, hard SF/Cyberpunk film that makes the audience work for it isn't going to do gangbusters theatrically.

I loved this movie, but I believe, like the first, it will find its home on home video, through word of mouth. This kind of movie was never going to be popular with a mainstream audience.

Yup can’t wait for the VHS

 

[Cheebo]

Why is it ok to bash Ghostbusters2016 for such a huge budget but not BR2049? At least people have heard of Ghostbusters.

Well to be fair, Blade Runner 2049 is being heralded as a masterpiece and all-time sci-fi classic by the (few) who went to it as well as critics.

Ghosbusters '16 didn't have such a reaction.

 

[Budi]

I see a lot of people calling this a “hot take” and I don’t see why. He’s exactly right.

Why would they spend this much money on a sequel to a cult classic? It’s not a widespread beloved franchise.

Why is it ok to bash Ghostbusters2016 for such a huge budget but not BR2049? At least people have heard of Ghostbusters.

Quality of the product?

 

[DavidDesu]

Sadly I think I had more fun watching I, Robot than Blade Runner 2049.

Not saying I, Robot is necessarily better. It's just outside of a few scenes in BR2049, I never felt like I was really enjoying or having fun with the movie.

It seems like you want entertainment. BR 2049 is more an arthouse thinkers sci-fi film than anything you would typically get at the cinema. I understand people do go to the cinema sometimes to just zone out to an action film or average comedy flick, but BR 2049 has a purpose beyond that and is more interesting and thoughtful to watch. It doesn't promise enjoyment of the kind I think you're seeking at the movies.

 

[Cheebo]

Quality of the product?

Bingo.

The general consensus critically and by audiences who actually went seems to land on one of the greatest sci-fi films ever made.

Who was saying that coming out of Ghostbusters?

 

[tuxfool]

Why is it ok to bash Ghostbusters2016 for such a huge budget but not BR2049? At least people have heard of Ghostbusters.

Ghostbusters is a shit film, so all that money went towards producing trash.

 

[Spieler Eins]

Villeneuve is kind of an asshole to be honest, to get this kind of budget and then turn out something like this. He obviously had zero interest in making something friendly to mainstream audiences lol. At least Nolan feels somewhat responsible to WB.

Villeneuve got Hans Zimmer, Ryan Gosling and an anime though, what more do you need, heh.

 

[Tobor]

Well to be fair, Blade Runner 2049 is being heralded as a masterpiece and all-time sci-fi classic by the (sadly few) who went to it as well as critics.

Ghosbusters '16 didn't have such a reaction.

I’m referring to the budget vs. box office result, not the quality.

Many said Ghostbusters 16 had way too large a budget, and that was for a familiar franchise with massive upside. Yeah, they screwed it up, but that’s not my point.

BR is at best a cult classic. It has no widespread appeal. The budget is obscene for a property like this.

 

[Lasthope106]

Money be damned. Im sorry but thats how I feel in this case.

It was a cinema experience I will never forget. As a Blade Runner fan it was a sequal I never thought I would get, let alone meet and succeed all my expectations.

They avoided pandering to any modern day movie bullshit and delivered something I will never forget.

Time will remember this movie as something special rather than its finances. Sometimes great art is like that.

Yeap. This movie has classic written all over it.

 

[Infernostew]

We actually studied Blade Runner and discussed its impact on the science fiction genre in a Science Fiction literature and media class I took at my University.

I have no idea where you are getting the notion that Blade Runner isn't sci fi.

Me too! Best class ever.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

Yeah, the movie Sony (not WB as was pointed out) funded turned out amazing. I was just going after the notion that it's somehow Villeneuve's fault when he was just doing what everyone would have expected him to do with such material.

The one time Sony releases a good film and it's still a massive bomb.

 

[Plum]

I see a lot of people calling this a ”hot take" and I don't see why. He's exactly right.

Why would they spend this much money on a sequel to a cult classic? It's not a widespread beloved franchise.

Why is it ok to bash Ghostbusters2016 for such a huge budget but not BR2049? At least people have heard of Ghostbusters.

There's some pretty big differences here:

1) Ghostbusters doesn't need high-budget CGI and action sequences to work
2) Despite its budget, most of the film looked and felt like a cheap SNL sketch

And most importantly:

3) The end result was kinda crap so we didn't even get a good product out of it

 

[Cheebo]

I'm referring to the budget vs. box office result, not the quality.

Many said Ghostbusters 16 had way too large a budget, and that was for a familiar franchise with massive upside. Yeah, they screwed it up, but that's not my point.

BR is at best a cult classic. It has no widespread appeal. The budget is obscene for a property like this.

The reason few are complaining is due to quality though.

I dont think there is a single film goer who saw BR2049 who wishes it had a lower budget. This is a movie that will be regarded as one of the greatest sci-fi film ever made for decades. It bombing at the boxoffice is worth having a piece of lasting cinema like 2049.

 

[Ithil]

That doesn‘t matter. Things were kept out and wer misleading purposefully in the marketing campaign.

I would agree with this. For instance none of the marketing reveals that Ana de Armas' character

Spoiler

is a hologram. It's revealed in her first scene in the film, but look at any of the marketing and you'd go in assuming she was a human or replicant.

.

Revealed quickly or not, it's still a surprise.

 

[Tobor]

The reason few are complaining is due to quality though.

I dont think there is a single film goer who saw BR2049 who wishes it had a lower budget. This is a movie that will be regarded as one of the greatest sci-fi film ever made for decades. It bombing at the boxoffice is worth having a piece of lasting cinema like 2049.

To get back to where I started, a post about the budget shouldn’t be dismissed as a “hot take” because you like the end product. It’s a box office thread.

 

[Cheebo]

To get back to where I started, a post about the budget shouldn’t be dismissed as a “hot take” because you like the end product. It’s a box office thread.

But the comparison to Ghostbusters makes it relevant. You are going to get more outrage out of an expensive film under-performing if its a film that got mixed to average reactions at best compared to a film that is getting near universal praise from those who saw it.

 

[Briarios]

I have to think part of the problem was not making the original Blade Runner abusable on pretty much every streaming service before the movie came out.

Netflix and Amazon Prime should have had it available for their customers ... Even if they only had like a 3 month deal. Get more people setting it creates more of an audience.

 

[JSR_Cube]

It's a great movie for sure. I'd love to get back out to the theater and see it again.

The way I see it:
+ decent marketing prior to release
+ good star power

- sci-fi epic
- nearly 3 hours in length
- not for the idiots as they get confused easily

So, I'm not surprised that it didn't make 100 million this weekend. This isn't that easy of a sell to the general public, even with Gosling. I know it's been posted in this thread but the original is quite the cult classic. That doesn't typically translate into giant box office numbers.

 

[dorn.]

Some posts in this thread, yikes.

I would be surprised if the movie doesn't end up profitable, box office performance is getting ever less important in the age of streaming and bluray and a movie this high-quality is all but guaranteed to have decent legs.