aabattery Posted October 7, 2017 Author Share Posted October 7, 2017 1 minute ago, Subzero said: To be honest, not Sure why WB went with this re-make. Not like the first one was a cult classic hit with everyone. The First one barely made the $$ back from what I recall...if they had kept the cost down this would of been ok. Although this is a little slightly lower then what I was expecting but it's fair .... it's one of those classics that not too many younger generation knew about. WB didn't. Alcon did. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, Webslinger said: To play devil's advocate to some degree, there were numerous comparisons that pointed toward a higher opening for Blade Runner 2049: TRON: Legacy, Mad Max: Fury Road, and Prometheus. All films that seemed geared more toward film buffs than a more generalized action-hungry audience, and all opened above $44 million. That being said, I still see it having solid legs and a healthy overseas run, so it won't be a dud in the long run. Those are all movies/franchises sold heavily on action and thrills. BR is a moody art movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPink Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) Data is data. How we interpret that is difficult. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that the level of pre-sales would indicate a higher opening than what it's translating into currently. The problem with Blade Runner is that it's showing signs of frontloading at a level not really seen before outside of the top tier superhero films. Not many would have predicted that but now we have a reference point for the future. We use this to guide our frame of reference for the future and move on. Edited October 7, 2017 by MrPink 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 13 minutes ago, Squadron Leader Tele said: But why say this when GREEN LANTERN (for example) didn't mean the death of CBMs? With Star Trek Beyond flopping, Blade Runner bombing, and Apes and Alien underperforming, the outlook isn't exactly positive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aabattery Posted October 7, 2017 Author Share Posted October 7, 2017 Just now, MrPink said: Data is data. How we interpret that is difficult. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that the level of pre-sales would indicate a higher opening than what it's translating into currently. The problem with Blade Runner is that it's showing signs of frontloading at a level not really seen before outside of the top tier superhero films. Not many would have predicted that but now we have a reference point for the future. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) The only data we can gather from this is that if it's my favorite movie of the year after I walk out of it, it'll either underperform or flop Edited October 7, 2017 by That One Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WrathOfHan Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 1 minute ago, John Marston said: With Star Trek Beyond flopping I prefer the term "underperformance" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookie Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 3 hours ago, WrathOfHan said: Who said this was going to be younger skewing, again? I'm 22 and I was probably the youngest person in the theater so those numbers do not surprise me (although it was the same with the last two Bonds and they still did huge so...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandias Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 25 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said: Gokira is back? Now all we need is for davinci to appear and tell us Blade Runner flopped because it didn't have enough black people in it. I didn't read this article but I think davinci might've got a gig over at wired Like its predecessor, 'Blade Runner 2049' reduces white women to tired archetypes and sidelines nonwhite characters https://t.co/ggDHi0qHhZ— WIRED (@WIRED) October 7, 2017 1 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmnerdjamie Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 4 minutes ago, MrPink said: Data is data. How we interpret that is difficult. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that the level of pre-sales would indicate a higher opening than what it's translating into currently. The problem with Blade Runner is that it's showing signs of frontloading at a level not really seen before outside of the top tier superhero films. Not many would have predicted that but now we have a reference point for the future. We use this to guide our frame of reference for the future and move on. Same thing happened to Pacific Rim. The fanbase went... on Thursday night. Everyone else went "Eh." The former is who this data interprets to represent how the latter will act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPink Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 FWIW, I find pre-sale data from an entire theater chain more reliable than a theater report or the number of seats sold at my screening or whatever. It's tangible and spread out over an entire population. It failed us here. But that speaks to the extreme anomaly level that we're seeing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookie Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 18 minutes ago, Squadron Leader Tele said: But why say this when GREEN LANTERN (for example) didn't mean the death of CBMs? Green Lantern looked like garbage and was garbage and still opened to over $50m tho. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 9 minutes ago, filmnerdjamie said: Those were just the fans (people like us) buying up tickets for first day screenings. Again... proving my point how full of shit presales reports are. Then they get pushed out publicly to present a narrative of how well a film will do... by comparing it to another. It's bullshit. Happened so many times now, people need to wake up and stop taking those as the Gospel. Not sure people need to wake up (I mean nothing about any of this matter), but that said the comparable used were not bad choices (Apes hold franchise, sequel, old audience, Sci-fi), Arrival was non sense yes but Denis, Dunkirk was not a bad one either if we assume Nolan fanbase, and it must be compared to other movies, the number alone would mean nothing. Those advance pre-sales are just a small number of a box office total run or even first weekend, and the multiplier will vary a lot from entry to entry, they are still one of the best metric outthere, but like everything regarding tracking how it will play versus what bank of comparable is obviously prone to errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said: I prefer the term "underperformance" It didn't even double its budgt. It flopped something like War for the Apes is an underperformer. Didn't make as much as predicted but still made enough to be profitable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 5 minutes ago, John Marston said: With Star Trek Beyond flopping, Blade Runner bombing, and Apes and Alien underperforming, the outlook isn't exactly positive And yet there's counter-examples like THE MARTIAN, GRAVITY, ARRIVAL, etc. Talking about any movie being the death of a genre seems unwarranted to me. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subzero Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 1 minute ago, WrathOfHan said: I prefer the term "underperformance" Cough... Valarian is Flopping, it took that term to another level. Granted I didn't find it that bad .... but I guess to many they disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 1 minute ago, cookie said: Green Lantern looked like garbage and was garbage and still opened to over $50m tho. Yeah after awful reviews, and terrible buzz it still opened pretty well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 ANNIHILATION is gonna be the next meltdown in this area. People taking about 100-150m for it... it'll be lucky to make 1/3-1/2 that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolioD1 Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 i think a big concern for audiences, and why they didn't come out to see this, is that they feel like they missed the 2047 blade runner movies in between the first and this one. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, Squadron Leader Tele said: ANNIHILATION is gonna be the next meltdown in this area. People taking about 100-150m for it... it'll be lucky to make 1/3-1/2 that. (my more realistic prediction is actually $90M but I always go big for the clubs) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
