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

[tonytr87]

14 hours ago, Valonqar said:

Jackson is a warm film-maker, Villeneuve is cold. Dune movie needs warm touch to be rewatchable. Sure, fans will show up, and some GA too, but will they come back and spread the word or is it gonna be one and done? I can't imagine an icy movie to have repeat viewing. So it shouldn't be like BR2049 with a sleepwalking lead, drab tone and clinical visuals. 

 

Also, having seen both Dune adaptations very recently, I don't think that framing them as Irulan's recount of events did them any favors, with just her face doing exposition dump or just her voice. I think that Jackson's FOTR prologue was much more effective. Show >>> tell. Or do both if you have to.

GTFO

[Valonqar]

9 hours ago, tonytr87 said:

GTFO

no, you do. BR2049 bombed so clearly more people were put off than attracted to it. no matter what perosnal attacks you launch, that won't change the fact that the movie bombed aka failed to justify its budget and bring audience to cinemas. There. 

Edited March 27, 2019 by Valonqar

[Steele131]

9 hours ago, 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)

Lmao

[terrestrial]

4 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

no, you do. BR2049 bombed so clearly more people were put off than attracted to it. no matter what perosnal attacks you launch, that won't change the fact that the movie bombed aka failed to justify its budget and bring audience to cinemas. There. 

Its an short before all wents sour / probably shortly before an apocalypse movie, not everyone's cup of tea. The mood of the population there is not a funny / good one, neither the whole movie.

I think the budget was too high for that reason alone plus some other small in comparison details.

It was a great movie for most of the audience that actually likes this kind of movie (niche), with a way lower budget no one would speak about a bomb, as it is respected and high rated by critics and audience alike. All ratings at RT / IMDb are at least 8/10, even the top critics have an 8.11/10 average.

 

In most cases a bomb has a reason also in quality, I think in this case its more the combination niche, budget, BO finals (and maybe a bit advertisement too).

That is why I do not like the term bomb very much, it does not differentiate.

 

If you look into the adjusted results, its not that far away from Blade Runner adjusted (dom).

But the budget does not mirror that. See adjusted dom, its roughly times 3.

Budget of $28m times 3 ... should have been $84m, and not $185m

$84m budget... also probably more sense making for an R-Rated movie anyway

(also Rutger Hauer + Olmos were both unforgeable in it, maybe a reason for the slight differences in ratings too, I've seen then varying reactions to Sean Young and Hannah)

 

Quote

Blade Runner	Blade Runner 2049
Domestic Release Date	Jun 25, 1982	Oct 6, 2017
Production Budget	$28,000,000	$185,000,000
Opening Weekend Theaters	1,295	4,058
Maximum Theaters	1,325	4,058
Theatrical Engagements	6,803	18,595
Domestic Opening Weekend	$6,150,002	$32,753,122
Domestic Box Office	$32,656,328	$92,054,159
Inflation Adjusted Domestic Box Office	$94,577,698	$92,054,159
International Box Office	$6,686,584	$167,303,249
Worldwide Box Office	$39,342,912	$259,357,408

In addition: out of those  that did actually watch earlier on Blade Runner.... which version?

There is a reason why which fan likes which version. means not a fully committed fandom also.

[Valonqar]

Agreed that budget was too high but, then, if they approved that kind of budget, they should have made the movie more appealing to attract enough audience to justify the budget. Which means more accessible style of film-making or at least an actual star in the leading role. I don't think that, for example, The Revenant is more accessible essentially, but it was a huge blockbuster. So star and/or style do matter when budget is over certain limit and, no, that does not mean dumbing down. 

[terrestrial]

1 minute ago, Valonqar said:

I don't think that, for example, The Revenant is more accessible essentially, but it was a huge blockbuster

disagree.

Many audience do not like Sci-Fi, some for other or the same reasons fantasy

A lot of people prefer material that is based in a real world on earth.

To be left behind as dead,... every soldier, every hunter.... can relate to that as a possible situation for themselves or bcs they know old stories, where it happened.

Including the person the movie is about.

Blade Runner then had stars, names,.... didn't help much either

 

Stars can help, director can help,... but if the story isn't what people prefer,... usually very difficult. Exclude a huge part per niche, even more so. What can help, if stars, diectors,... are involved who have a name for the extremer stories,... if it a bit unusual.

The Revenant did have the same budget, the possible audience had a bigger pool. Still risky, as really high. And incl distribution costs, probably not gotten all back per theatrical run.

No real additional income beside HV. Blade Runner versions .... maybe a bit more chances in the very long run per double packs or collector boxes or so. Starting point deeper than Revenant there too.

I think I have even seen figures of Blade Runner.

 

28 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

made the movie more appealing

in that case you will loose the majority of the exsisting fan-base

[Valonqar]

I love Dune book but I don't like Dune movie and Dune mini. However, I adore Children of Dune mini because it made the story accessible to TV format. So I would be perfectly happy with accessible Dune movie. Accessible =/= sacrificing intellect

[terrestrial]

5 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

Accessible =/= sacrificing intellect 

 

14 minutes ago, terrestrial said:

in that case you will loose the majority of the exsisting fan-base

Sadly that does not exclude those reactions as a possibility, people who are fans of 'intellect' content can be as narrow minded as ... whoever is actually famous for being narrow minded. Like some of the more extremer CBM fans....

'Pure', not the same, lacks.... ,...

[Valonqar]

So we are talking about purists. But but Tom Bombadil. I understand. I also think that they are rather rare and most fans adjust if the spirit of the source is intact. 

[terrestrial]

23 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

So we are talking about purists. But but Tom Bombadil. I understand. I also think that they are rather rare and most fans adjust if the spirit of the source is intact. 

Depending on the material / fandom, I think the intellectual called ones (or those who see themselves at such) can react stronger to such changes, as in % of the fandom.

My husband, my brother, all of their friends,.... are academic artists (diplome or however that is called in English)

1. not one has the same POV about art.

2. all of them seem to think they are the ~ Judge about what is art.

3. all of them react way over the top, if something is not 100%, especially in the early years after being finished with the art academy. Gets better when older

Like: I say if a project is 99% like I planed / aimed for... still excellent, a small detail not like I wanted, but probably no one will realise it anyway beside me, as I know it is there.

My brother... withint the first 10 years or so will have said: its garbage.

Later: its mostly garbage

Even more later (like 20y later) grumbl I'll survive it grumbl grumbl....

[Valonqar]

Haha , that's a a great example and I agree. That's how it works. Some people will never let go, while others either accept right away or it happens eventually.

[dudalb]

On ‎3‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 10:02 AM, Telemachos said:

It's a big info dump but I wouldn't call Irulan's spoken prologue confusing.

Almost everybody I knew, when the film came out, who had not read the Herbert novel were as confused as hell.

That might be a problem; it's clear as a sort of reminder to people who read the novel,but if you  have not read the novel it does not explain much. Granted, Exposition is always a tricky thing,but it does not help that Lynch has never been much concerned about exposition.

[Plain Old Tele]

36 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Almost everybody I knew, when the film came out, who had not read the Herbert novel were as confused as hell.

That might be a problem; it's clear as a sort of reminder to people who read the novel,but if you  have not read the novel it does not explain much. Granted, Exposition is always a tricky thing,but it does not help that Lynch has never been much concerned about exposition.

 

I can see how the movie itself is confusing in places. But the prologue is really very straightforward. Admittedly it's spoken and not words on screen -- perhaps it was harder to grasp when heard as opposed to reading.

 

A beginning is a very delicate time. 

Know then that it is the year 10,191. The Known Universe is ruled by the Padishah Emperor Shaddam IV, my father.

In this time, the most precious substance in the universe is the spice Melange.

The spice extends life. The spice expands consciousness. The spice is vital to space travel.

The Spacing Guild and its navigators, who the spice has mutated over 4,000 years, use the orange spice gas, which gives them the ability to fold space. That is, travel to any part of universe without moving. 
Oh, yes. I forgot to tell you — the spice exists on only one planet in the entire universe.

A desolate, dry planet with vast deserts. Hidden away within the rocks of these deserts are a people known as the Fremen, who have long held a prophecy that a man would come, a messiah who would lead them to true freedom.

The planet is Arrakis, also known as Dune.

[dudalb]

1 hour ago, Telemachos said:

 

I can see how the movie itself is confusing in places. But the prologue is really very straightforward. Admittedly it's spoken and not words on screen -- perhaps it was harder to grasp when heard as opposed to reading.

 

A beginning is a very delicate time. 

Know then that it is the year 10,191. The Known Universe is ruled by the Padishah Emperor Shaddam IV, my father.

In this time, the most precious substance in the universe is the spice Melange.

The spice extends life. The spice expands consciousness. The spice is vital to space travel.

The Spacing Guild and its navigators, who the spice has mutated over 4,000 years, use the orange spice gas, which gives them the ability to fold space. That is, travel to any part of universe without moving. 
Oh, yes. I forgot to tell you — the spice exists on only one planet in the entire universe.

A desolate, dry planet with vast deserts. Hidden away within the rocks of these deserts are a people known as the Fremen, who have long held a prophecy that a man would come, a messiah who would lead them to true freedom.

The planet is Arrakis, also known as Dune.

I think you might be on to something. It reads fairly clearly, but verbally, might go just too quickly to grasp.

Anyway I am a big fan of "Show, Don't tell or if you have to tell, show at the same timeL which PJ did with FOTR.

Lynch certainly is a unique filmmaker,and I like a lot of his stuff but I think he was just the wrong choice for Dune,

Lynch likes to confuse people  to get a response (and boy, did he overdo it in "Inland Empire"), and when you are dealing with a world which a lot of viewers know nothing aobut, that is not a good choice.

I have a love hate affair with Lynch. Loved "Blue Velvet" and "Mullholand Drive" (as well as Twin Peaks) but thinks at times his idiosyndcires go over the line into incoherency.

 

[terrestrial]

21 hours ago, dudalb said:

I think you might be on to something. It reads fairly clearly, but verbally, might go just too quickly to grasp.

Anyway I am a big fan of "Show, Don't tell or if you have to tell, show at the same timeL which PJ did with FOTR.

Lynch certainly is a unique filmmaker,and I like a lot of his stuff but I think he was just the wrong choice for Dune,

Lynch likes to confuse people  to get a response (and boy, did he overdo it in "Inland Empire"), and when you are dealing with a world which a lot of viewers know nothing aobut, that is not a good choice.

I have a love hate affair with Lynch. Loved "Blue Velvet" and "Mullholand Drive" (as well as Twin Peaks) but thinks at times his idiosyndcires go over the line into incoherency.

 

you never worked in a building site as the boss of production for custom made equipment and more, with guiding also up to 20 extraneous companies also working there,..... learning only there that 'someone' had changed details without informing anyone.... a few hours before the TV aired grand opening..... (aka, I still have no idea why ppl say it was difficult to understand, follow, or confusing)

Edited March 28, 2019 by terrestrial

[lilmac]

On 3/26/2019 at 6:20 PM, Steele131 said:

Can you blame him tho? He makes quality films every time, not his fault they don’t make money. Sometimes films just aren’t destined to make money. 

 

Dune has way less baggage too. It won’t be rated R. I highly doubt it will be close to 3 hours. It’s not a sequel to a 40 year old film no one saw. You can go into this without knowing anything. This being from from legendary also helps, they specialize in genre films, they will market it better. I don’t know how much this will make but I know we will get a great film. If an alright Alita film can make 400M, if Mad Max can make 375M. I think that’s the minimum. Guess we will see

I like your optimism. I feel a bit better now. Hopefully the OS market makes this profitable. 

[tonytr87]

Prisoners, Sicario, Arrival all made money. Let's stop this narrative that his movies have all been flops or some BS. Blade Runner 2049 was his first financial disappointment. 

[The Futurist]

8 hours ago, tonytr87 said:

Prisoners, Sicario, Arrival all made money. Let's stop this narrative that his movies have all been flops or some BS. Blade Runner 2049 was his first financial disappointment. 

Thet were small and medium movies.

 

Villeuneve still has to prove he can convince Joe & Jane his movies are watchable.

[terrestrial]

3 hours ago, The Futurist said:

Villeuneve still has to prove he can convince Joe & Jane his movies are watchable.

But not with a material like 'the unfilmable' Dune

[TimmyRiggins]

Roth writing the script (although his script was edited down since it was 200 pages long) is a great omen. About Villeneuve, I haven't seen anything prior to Prisoners (or Enemy, only one I don't like), but he is a truly great director but I agree his films are pretty cold, but then again, the source material dictates that. Until he does a film that requires warmth, and emotion (2049 had some of that, but it's rather distant), well, we won't know.