⊃∪∩⪽ | Legendary | October 22 2021 | Denis Villeneuve | Returns to IMAX on December 3

[filmlover]

5 hours ago, RichWS said:

Just got home from the IMAX and it was everything it was hyped up to be. Hate to be hyperbolic but kinda astounding.

I also saw this in true IMAX over the weekend and can't recall the last movie that was a total Big Screen Experience that deserved the overhype as much as this one does. Honestly feel sad for anyone who even thinks about first experiencing this on an iPhone screen.

[lorddemaxus]

I want to rewatch this but I'm defenitely not watching this in the AMC IMAX again (I would if I had the disposable income and the time, but I don't) and kinda want to just watch it at the nearby Regal but I feel like so much of this is made for IMAX that even just watching it in a regular cinema is weird. Would be a shame too if WB doesn't make a deal with IMAX to release the expanded 16:9 version for blu-ray (I would prefer it if they just released it full frame, but that's definitely not happening).

[Eric Prime]

 

[The GOAT]

Only Nagging Problem I had with this movie is that it felt more like the end of season 1 of an epic TV Series instead of the first movie of a trilogy.

[Macleod]

18 minutes ago, The GOAT said:

Only Nagging Problem I had with this movie is that it felt more like the end of season 1 of an epic TV Series instead of the first movie of a trilogy.

And this is what a user a few pages back (can't be arsed to find it) meant by "Cinema is Dead."  If you can't tell a story without always leading to something else within a 2-3 hour timeframe, our culture has problems.  Never-ending superhero universes and streaming TV have ruined people's singular story senses.  If this book can't be encompassed in a 2-hour film, then it shouldn't have been made as a film -- it should be a mini-series... which sounds like the same problem that ETERNALS has.  

Edited October 26, 2021 by Macleod

[The GOAT]

14 minutes ago, Macleod said:

And this is what a user a few pages back (can't be arsed to find it) meant by "Cinema is Dead."  If you can't tell a story without always leading to something else within a 2-3 hour timeframe, our culture has problems.  Never-ending superhero universes and streaming TV have ruined people's singular story senses.  If this book can't be encompassed in a 2-hour film, then it shouldn't have been made as a film -- it should be a mini-series... which sounds like the same problem that ETERNALS has.  

I wouldn't have mind if the movie was 30 mins longer to make it feel more like a movie. Then again, I watched this at home.

And tbf, Eternals seems to be about the origins of how ancient aliens created the pyramids and shit.   

Whereas Dune started right before a major point of conflict and has only a select few amount of characters to focus on. 

[Macleod]

52 minutes ago, The GOAT said:

I wouldn't have mind if the movie was 30 mins longer to make it feel more like a movie. Then again, I watched this at home.

And tbf, Eternals seems to be about the origins of how ancient aliens created the pyramids and shit.   

Whereas Dune started right before a major point of conflict and has only a select few amount of characters to focus on. 

They both have their own unique sets of issues, sure.  But they both equate to: "Story Problems."  And these are not just the script assembled for the production, but of course often from the source material, itself, specifically in DUNE's case, which has made it historically one of theeeee most difficult stories to adapt into movies.  See the doc JODOROWSKY's DUNE for more history...

[ZackM]

8 hours ago, Macleod said:

And this is what a user a few pages back (can't be arsed to find it) meant by "Cinema is Dead."  If you can't tell a story without always leading to something else within a 2-3 hour timeframe, our culture has problems.  Never-ending superhero universes and streaming TV have ruined people's singular story senses.  If this book can't be encompassed in a 2-hour film, then it shouldn't have been made as a film -- it should be a mini-series... which sounds like the same problem that ETERNALS has.  

But this completely ignores the importance of the theater experience.  Which is a massive part of the equation.  Why restrict the visual medium based on the story telling format?  A trilogy on the big screen is the best way to tell this story.

[Eric Prime]

 

Spoiler

On 11/21/2016 at 3:43 PM, elcaballero said:

I'm not sure I trust Legendary with this.

On 11/21/2016 at 7:22 PM, Arlborn said:

I smell a disaster incoming, I hope I'm wrong.

On 11/21/2016 at 7:50 PM, elcaballero said:

I just don't see a way that this turns out to successful no matter who does it, especially if they are trying to kickstart a franchise, although my only exposure to the property is the David Lynch film, but I think that may be the case for a lot of other people as well. As far as Legendary goes, I'm curious as to if/when the Wanda Group starts to get more hands-on with the production side.

On 11/21/2016 at 11:21 PM, Kvikk Lunsj said:

You're that excited to see it flop?!

On 12/21/2016 at 4:11 PM, CoolioD1 said:

i won't have any interest until deakins is confirmed. not sure villeneuve is an interesting enough filmmaker for this.

On 11/9/2017 at 5:29 PM, grim22 said:

 

We will see. I really doubt this happening after the BR2049 flop, another niche sci-fi franchise which flopped before.

On 11/9/2017 at 5:31 PM, That One Guy said:

I hope this flops but flops with honor like Blade Runner

On 1/19/2018 at 2:12 PM, Valonqar said:

This is so bombing. Villeneuve has no touch for masses. Arrival was saved by a small budget but this is going to be expensive af. he just doesn't have the right feel for audience unlike, lets say, Nolan who knows how to make intellectual 4 quadrant movies. 

On 1/19/2018 at 3:28 PM, aabattery said:

This is absolutely gonna bomb, but it'll be a noble failure. There are far worse ways to lose a shit ton of money.

On 1/20/2018 at 7:18 AM, Valonqar said:

Yes there is. he smells a bomb and turns it down. Like, it could be the best movie ever but you don't want to be a young, up and coming actor who headlined a big loss for the studio. Not even if it isn't your fault. 

 

You are as hot as your last movie. 

 

That said, he would be a great choice. Paul is a teenager and Timmy is early 20s so that's fine. I've just seen the most idiotic fan casting for Paul - Oscar Isaac! Like, the guy's 40, why the fuck is he fancast as a teenager? 

On 1/20/2018 at 8:12 PM, Macleod said:

I think everyone's getting way ahead of themselves.  I'll be surprised if this movie happens at all. 

On 7/16/2018 at 4:33 PM, John Marston said:

glad this is getting made but it's going to lose a lot of money

On 7/16/2018 at 4:33 PM, CoolioD1 said:

every day since blade runner bombed i've been consistently surprised that this guaranteed bigger bomb seems to be going forward. i'm not mad at it since i think Denis can make a dope movie here but idk.

On 7/16/2018 at 4:34 PM, WrathOfHan said:

 

Yeah, I can buy this guy as him:

 

On 7/16/2018 at 4:37 PM, Alli said:

VILLENUVE NO.  This is a mistake.  This guy looks too delicate. I can kick his ass.

On 7/16/2018 at 4:57 PM, MrGlass2 said:

So happy that Hollywood is willing to lose money to fund great movies.

On 7/16/2018 at 5:03 PM, Scubasteve716 said:

I'm sure the movie will be good but I can see this grossing less than Blade Runner. Almost a for sure bomb. Which is a bummer because Villeneuve is probably top 5 out there right now

On 7/17/2018 at 9:28 AM, PenguinHyphy said:

If the budget parallels Blade Runner: 2049's, they might as well just incinerate that money because they honestly cannot be expecting great box office returns. 

On 7/17/2018 at 6:23 PM, filmlover said:

This, like Blade Runner 2049, does not strike me as a movie that's going to be intended to launch/re-launch a franchise. Gotta admire that Villeneuve has enough clout at this point that studios are willing to be on board for anything he wants to make even if he has yet to see the kind of returns that, say, Nolan has seen on his "risky" projects.

On 9/5/2018 at 8:07 PM, Ryan Reynolds said:

Doesn't this need at least one big name star, not that it helped BR2049 much

On 1/8/2019 at 10:11 AM, John Marston said:

Glad this is getting made. Even though it will likely lose money and not get sequels like the Lynch version 

On 1/8/2019 at 2:56 PM, MrGlass2 said:

Let's face it, this will be one of the best movies of the decade - and a bomb. Hopefully both parts will be shot at the same time.

On 2/13/2019 at 2:51 PM, JGAR4LIFE said:

I’m loving the cast, but how will the film be a box office success 😕

On 2/15/2019 at 8:58 AM, Rebeccas said:

This is going to be one expensive flop... lol

On 2/15/2019 at 9:02 AM, Valonqar said:

true. I don't understand anyone who read the book and saw Villeneuve movies that thinks this will be a success. especially with the split that makes the first movie heavy on exposition and numerous characters (many that don't matter in the second movie) but low on action. it isn't the next LOTR.

On 2/15/2019 at 9:41 AM, Valonqar said:

yep, budget is really a big roadblock for this cause it's gonna be big but the material and Villeneuve style are not GA friendly. this ain't no 4 quadrant. 

 

Big gamble is fine but since they are making 2 movies, all depends on the first one which is a tougher sell. The second one is more of a traditional blockbuster with romance, sandworm-riding, and all out war. Which is why many fans find that part of the book inferior to earlier stuff (that makes the first movie). I can see them release the first, that flops and then make a streaming event out of the second. 

On 2/16/2019 at 10:15 AM, NamakFiskKa said:

Wait is this the dude people are talking about in this thread.

 

Idk anything about Dune or its protagonist but this dude looks like Nancy from Stranger Things

On 3/18/2019 at 6:54 PM, shayhiri said:

I've got a bad feeling about this...

 

I just really hate the Frenchie, and what he brings to movies... I'd be incredibly excited for Dune - in the hands of almost anyone else - but now, the Shay just weeps...

On 3/18/2019 at 9:12 PM, shayhiri said:

 

No, it will fail like BR2049. Which failed only because of the director's approach.

 

Actually, Dune will fail worse. Because Blade Runner at least had the cult status of the original to lure people in. Dune has nothing. And will be given nothing by this director - only taken from.

 

Dune CAN be made into a lucrative movie - but only by someone like JJ Abrams. If it looks and feels like Star Wars. Instead they chose the worst director possible for this job. I am 100% certain this will bomb. It would have flopped even with a good director - but putting it in The Frenchie's tiny little grabby hands is like burying the movie in the ground BEFORE putting a mercy shot through its head.

 

Once again, ANY other director (barring fellow midget Ruin Johnson), and I'd at least be happily awaiting to see the movie FIVE times - even while knowing it will 90% bomb. But now I don't even want to see it that much. BR2049 was a slog and a waste, while still miles better than all other miserable movies of the Frenchie.

On 3/19/2019 at 6:20 AM, tomknff said:

I think Warner is still chasing their next LOTR. This should've been a 8-10 episode series on HBO.

On 3/20/2019 at 4:02 AM, eridani said:

While I am a fan of the books and even the adaptations, I don't see Dune making it big. BR2049 was supposed to benefit from its fan base and then... that mostly fizzled. It's like most of the people don't even know of first BR. I checked Google Trends for both brands, Blade Runner and Dune, prior to BR movie, and BR as a brand had 2-3 times more searches than Dune.  I just don't think there are enough people interested in the brand. The stellar cast MIGHT help to an extent, but that also makes the movie more expensive. It's a big sci fi saga, it's going to be expensive. And Villeneuve isn't really the most cost effective director. BR2049 cost 170 million dollars and while it looks nice, it doesn't really feel as it was that expensive, you don't see that money on the screen. Given all that, I fear Dune part one might cost close to 200 million. IF they were shooting back to back, maybe it would cost less.

 

But they're not even sure they'll make the sequel. Otherwise they'd greenlight both movies to be shot together. I'd say there are great risks financially there and we very well might get just the first half of the book adapted to big screen, when the second movie never materializes.

On 3/20/2019 at 10:14 PM, shayhiri said:

I see some reasonable voices here, but the rest are still in denial.

 

So I say to thee once again: CHECK YOURSELVES BEFORE YOU WRECK YOURSELVES!!

 

There is no way in fucking hell this movie project:

 

1. Costs less than 300m (talking only the first movie + some adds).

2. Makes more than 300m WW final.

 

This is a COLOSSAL burning of money. Kudos to Legendary for that, they have been my heroes for far too long - but they are not especially smart, and I wonder how they are still alive. Anyway - this one will kill them.

 

There is only ONE way to avert this disaster. Fire the Frenchie!

On 3/22/2019 at 9:28 PM, lilmac said:

Worried about the mainstream appeal of this film but hope they're not cutting corners.

On 3/23/2019 at 10:33 AM, Panda said:

I feel the same, the movie is going to be really strange and sort of 'out there' for normies. I see it doing even worse than BR2049

On 3/26/2019 at 11:36 PM, shayhiri said:

 

LOL, Alita and MadMax are THE two greatest movies this decade, and Top10 ever.

 

Dune should only be compared to BR2049 - a promising project that failed because of the director's unsalvageable style. It will also never make a single cent over BR2049. (259m. WW)

On 5/7/2019 at 4:17 PM, Brainbug said:

I mean i really like that this movie exists but this bound to be another Blade Runner 2049.

On 7/30/2019 at 12:33 PM, shayhiri said:

This movie will bomb so bad it is depressing.

 

BR2049 will look like Avatar (the biggest movie ever) - compared to this.

On 8/2/2019 at 7:25 PM, stealthyfrog said:

Maybe Christmas legs will save Villanueve from another sci-fi box office catastrophe

On 8/3/2019 at 12:40 AM, The Futurist said:

This is Warner s last hoorah before we get 4 DC movies a year.

 

COuld be wrong but I don't see this breaking out because of 

 

- Villeneuve, who likes his loooooooooong, contemplative shots

- SOurce Material

- Tone, is there a middle to find between light, Aquabro tone and Villeneuve cold dead tone where everybody is miserable, works miraculously for Nolan tho but Villeneuve seems to have even less a sense of humor.

- F word probably forbidden on set

 

Hope I am wrong and Herbert s books get sold by the gazillions comes February 2021.

 

Movie, on paper, feels like a beautiful commercial suicide proposition.

On 8/3/2019 at 5:48 AM, Valonqar said:

IMO, problem with Dune is that it's the story that we've seen before (White Savior, Campbellian Hero Journey) because many movies were inspired by it, similar to John Carter. So it offers nothing really new while at the same time it's much less accessible due to being hard sci fi rather than fantasy. It isn't a familiar story told in charming manner. Quite the contrary. Also, good luck with sandworms becoming the new dragons. They are not going to have the same appeal. On top of that, it's a half of a story, Part 1. Sometimes audience doesn't care, sometimes they do so it's a toss-up.

 

It should do better than BT049 but won't reach boxoffice heights of some other movies released at that time of the year since it's pretty dour story for the season. That said, I fully expect some movie to move out of the way. Most likely Uncharted gets a less crowded month. Unless they deem it next Jumanji as someone pointed out. 

 

P.S. December isn't necessarily sign of confidence. Mortal Engines got the same date. Remember what happened?

On 8/3/2019 at 7:44 AM, Valonqar said:

Mortal Engines may be shit but it was heavily advertised on Jackson's name and LOTR. It didn't help because previews were shit. Likewise, BR049 had "visionary director" and all that hype jazz and it bombed because previews were boring af and the original movie probably put a lot of people to sleep. In the end of the day, it's previews that make or break OW. Nolan may be a boxoffice draw but he just has the most hype-worthy previews for his movies so that really helps. 

 

IMO, Dune should take different approach from BR049. Instead of icy visuals, show warm human interaction, worms and action. People flock to movies if characters are likable. Nobody in BR049 was likable least of all in the trailer since accent was on cinematography. That appeals to movie buffs but not to GA and Dune is too expensive to shun GA.

On 8/4/2019 at 1:52 AM, The Futurist said:

Really can't believe how blind some of you can be.

Villeneuve can't do fun even if his life depended on it.

He propably is one of those who truly think this is a curse word at the movies.

This movie will live and die depending on its tone.

Somehow I doubt Villeneuve will do some soul searching and discover he has some JJ Abraams or James Gunn in him.

Also, can you  make a fun version of Dune, Villeneuve or not ?

I don't know ...

And by fun , I don't necesseraly mean jokes ( ah ah big worms, so funny), but making a movie entertaining, engaging, with a sense of adventure, with likable characters.

All traits absent frm Villeneuve's filmography.

His movies are engaging but certainly not in the pop corn way.

 

Dennis, are you gonna make your Dune movie for movie buffs & yourself or for audiences ?

Or strike a miraculous balance between both.

Your move, Dennis.

On 8/4/2019 at 6:59 AM, reddevil19 said:

I think it 100% is on him if it flops. It's not an easy source material to adapt and none of his movies - good as they may be - are crowd pleasers. As such, if Dune is more akin to BR49 (i.e. beautiful cinematography, great effects, but overlong, plodding, with unmemorable characters) it may very well be a better movie than a more action-heavy loose adaptation, but I can easily see it flopping. 

 

Marketing might be able to cut a good trailer to attract more people OW than BR49, but if the movie doesn't connect with audiences beyond that it will flop and, again, that's 100% on Villeneuve. 

On 8/6/2019 at 8:04 PM, Rebeccas said:

Cinephiles and sci-fi fans are definitely going to see this, but with Spielberg's West Side Story and the Disney Cruella movie, I have a hard time seeing this appealing to families that often drive the holiday box office season. 

 

I guess it'll all depend on if they budgeted this accordingly. The story really does require a lot of money to work, but at the same time, anything close to $200m spent would basically guarantee this flops or at least makes it very hard to make any profit to justify sequels. 

On 11/3/2019 at 7:38 PM, Alli said:

OMFG   I just found out my old arch nemesis Jon Spaiths (the genius behind The Mummy 2017) is involved with writing this. 

 

It's cursed!!!

On 11/5/2019 at 2:03 PM, John Marston said:

this is going to bomb huge. Hope they decided to make the movie feel standalone so it will be more satisfying

 

 

Who's the flop now?

 

 

Spoiler

I'm not done btw. But the multi-quote capping means I'll have to wait a little later

 

[Eric Prime]

BTW shout out to @The Panda and @lorddemaxus and some other dudes I can't remember right now for always being on this movie's side since Day 1. You're the only friends I need in this sad, miserable world.

[Menor the Destroyer]

26 minutes ago, ZackM said:

But this completely ignores the importance of the theater experience.  Which is a massive part of the equation.  Why restrict the visual medium based on the story telling format?  A trilogy on the big screen is the best way to tell this story.

Yeah, this movie worked much better on the big screen than I think a TV series would. I don't see why it's so important that we have some big bombastic ending for a movie. 

[Hatebox]

I don't think you've quoted me but I was certainly among the 'I think it'll be good thanks to its director but won't make much profit' crowd.

 

And, to be fair, that's not exactly wrong so far. With Schrodinger's HBO Max it can't be called either a flop or a smash. Unless WB reveals how much money it thinks the film being on the service made them. Which they won't. 

 

 

Edited October 26, 2021 by Hatebox

[Last Man Standing]

8 minutes ago, Eric Atreides said:

BTW shout out to @The Panda and @lorddemaxus and some other dudes I can't remember right now for always being on this movie's side since Day 1. You're the only friends I need in this sad, miserable world.

Hey, I was riding hard with this movie too, just took a break from the board for a while so I wasn't really present early in the thread.

[MrGlass2]

On 7/16/2018 at 10:57 PM, MrGlass2 said:

So happy that Hollywood is willing to lose money to fund great movies.

On 1/8/2019 at 8:56 PM, MrGlass2 said:

Let's face it, this will be one of the best movies of the decade - and a bomb.

Happy to be at least half-right.

On 1/8/2019 at 8:56 PM, MrGlass2 said:

Hopefully both parts will be shot at the same time.

[4815162342]

While I see the logic of this as a big budget miniseries, I think a two part film is a good compromise.

 

This film ended well on the right inflection/turning point in Paul's journey.

 

I had some issues with a couple characters getting short shrift (Thufir, Yueh, Piter) but that would only really amount to a few extra scenes here and there. Nothing that'd require a miniseries treatment. A couple minor quibbles with world building details that were skipped over but again, it wouldn't take much time to cover those 

 

[SchumacherFTW]

15 minutes ago, Eric Atreides said:

BTW shout out to @The Panda and @lorddemaxus and some other dudes I can't remember right now for always being on this movie's side since Day 1. You're the only friends I need in this sad, miserable world.

The erasure of poor @Plain Old Tele

[ZackM]

What are the chances we get an extended cut of the movie at some point?  There seems to have been a lot cut for time, but I'd happily consume a 3-3.5 hour version.

[Lucas]

1 minute ago, ZackM said:

What are the chances we get an extended cut of the movie at some point?  There seems to have been a lot cut for time, but I'd happily consume a 3-3.5 hour version.

Denis has so far said no about an extended cut.

[filmlover]

@Eric Atreides you'll also be pleased to know that while I was waiting in line for the IMAX to start letting people in this girl a couple of spots in front of me was talking out loud about about how much she was excited to see this just for Timothee. Between that and both this and The French Dispatch conquering the box office on the same weekend you have officially won!

[The Panda]

54 minutes ago, Eric Atreides said:

BTW shout out to @The Panda and @lorddemaxus and some other dudes I can't remember right now for always being on this movie's side since Day 1. You're the only friends I need in this sad, miserable world.

DUUUUUUUUUUUUUNE