Blade Runner 2049 | October 6, 2017 | Villeneuve directs | Full Trailer on Page 40

[junkshop36]

Sitting in the theater watching the trailers and my son and I are the only people in the theater lol

 

TLJ trailer is playing. 

 

Never been in a theater with nobody else 

[Hatebox]

Come to think of it, it's perhaps more remarkable that a studio spent 150m on a virtually action-free 143 minute sci-fi movie than spending 30m on Mother.

[Macleod]

5 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

Come to think of it, it's perhaps more remarkable that a studio spent 150m on a virtually action-free 143 minute sci-fi movie than spending 30m on Mother.

Well, it's not "a studio"...is it?  Alcon upstarts funded a significant portion of this, and Sony funded some other parts...and Warner Bros. picked up distribution rights for the U.S., correct?  So no one's in for the whole chunk of change...as is the case for most major Hollywood films these days.

 

Hollywood is nowhere...or elsewhere...and split amongst multiple investors.

[MrPink]

9 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

Come to think of it, it's perhaps more remarkable that a studio spent 150m on a virtually action-free 143 minute sci-fi movie than spending 30m on Mother.

 

@WrathOfHan

[Barnack]

10 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

Come to think of it, it's perhaps more remarkable that a studio spent 150m on a virtually action-free 143 minute sci-fi movie than spending 30m on Mother.

Was not just one studio too, but a production company spending their money on it helping Sony a lot for the financing and WB taking the domestic distribution, there is many project a bit or about has remarkable in a whole risk wise, Blade runner, Wolf of wall street, Silence, Cloud Atlas, etc... but they involved very long process to get the money and complex financing with many players (and some lot of shady money like Wolf), maybe MadMax Fury Road (specially if those over 200m rumors budget are true).

 

For blade runner for example:

Blade Runner 2049 cost a net $150 million to make, and was co-financed by Alcon and Sony (each committed to spend $90 million before rebates and tax incentives brought down the budget). Alcon owns the film; Sony will release it overseas and get a slice of the profits. Warners is handling the film domestically and will get a fee per its deal with Alcon. "We're confident Alcon has delivered another hit," Warner Bros. chairman-CEO Kevin Tsujihara says in a statement. Insiders say the movie will need to clear $400 million at the worldwide box office to be considered a win.

 

Spending 90M before tax credit by Sony, is a nice move for a studio for sure, but they received a lot of help (and people do not like to praise anything they do or anything Rothman is involved, people talked about this more from WB angle when it is an independant made, Sony financed movie).

 

What was special with mother!, was having just Paramount (and Darren company) logo when the movie started that is getting really rare now a day outside Disney projects, no question/notes, very fast greenlight process and the studio taking all the risk on a movie like that. 

 

Thinking about it, Sony can still be seen has more remarkable, even with the franchise sequel factor, 90m + intl P&A on a movie like that (that has a 150m budget) is a big deal.

Edited October 6, 2017 by Barnack

[RichWS]

54 minutes ago, junkshop36 said:

Never been in a theater with nobody else 

 

Happened to me with Mother last week and I was so happy. 

[Hatebox]

24 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

Come to think of it, it's perhaps more remarkable that a studio spent 150m on a virtually action-free 143 minute sci-fi movie than spending 30m on Mother.

Typo: 163 minutes. Even crazier.

[Steele131]

The score was amazing...

[LonePirate]

36 minutes ago, Steele131 said:

The score was amazing...

 

I just returned from BR2 and I, too, though the score was excellent. The cinematography was superb as well. The directing was solid. The acting was serviceable but unremarkable. Wright and Hoeks were the best of the bunch. The writing was fine, at least what there was of it. The effects were interesting, especially during that one scene involving three characters about the 2/3 point in the movie. However, the film is in desperate need of some editing. A good 45-60 minutes could have been cut, especially the numerous, long, silent tracking shots. Not only that but Leto's character would not have been missed even if all of his scenes had been left on the cutting room floor.

 

Overall, I found it to be a good film, though not a great film. It is certainly skewing very old, although that's a bit tough to judge from a Friday matinee.

[Ms Lady Hawk]

I saw this movie and I don’t know whether WOM will carry the day for it. The movie is very dark and it is waaay too long, which gives it a sluggish feel. I think Ryan Gosling is a fantastic actor and he does well in everything. Robin Wright was also strong in her performance. Jared Leto’s role was brief and unremarkable. The movie gets a 2/4. It was just okay. Nothing more! 

[MrGamer]

I enjoyed it, but I agree it needed some hardcore trimming. Outside of that, everything else was top notch. 

[junkshop36]

Overall, I thought it was good but not great. 

 

The score, sound and cinematography were all top notch

 

Directing was solid as was most of the acting. The only character that really stood out to me was Love. 

 

Story was pretty good 

 

Definitely needed some trimming, especially in the middle of the movie. Too many loooong pauses and characters just staring into space. I think if they could have gotten it down to about 2:20/2:25 it would have flowed a little better and still told the same story. 

 

Also, I wanted a little more Ford lol

 

Like I said, I thought it was good but that there were a couple of things that held it back from being great. Still like the first better

 

B

[Ryan Reynolds]

my matinee show was almost empty

[Steele131]

 

[IronJimbo]

Allo.. this is Deni

 

Deni really made this film his own, he really does have an unique style.

Seen 3 deni's in cinema now.

I assume the reason why the original blade runner composer was dropped was because he didn't agree with Deni's heavy bass style.

Deni movies always play HEAVY bass for dramatic effect and I like it, really helps make a spectacle out of the film.

 

 

The film had many fantastic scenes which is what makes great films memorable. The water fight scene was mesmerising and was one of the most beautiful things I've seen in Cinema. The film was beautiful.

 

allo.. this is deni

Edited October 7, 2017 by IronJimbo

[Wonder89]

Masterpiece

[Sam]

It's a very beautiful, well-directed movie but I guess I just find it hard to be emotionally invested in movies these days so I felt like something was lacking. 

 

Gonna try for a second viewing to make sure where I stand. 

[wildphantom]

For me this movie is a kind of miracle. I thought it nigh on impossible that a sequel could ever be made that could hold a candle to the original. Yet here we are and it’s as good as it in my opinion.  I say that as a super fan of Scott’s film. 

 

I feared it would be a solid, well made, but modern film. Yet it turned out to be Blade Runner through and through. The way it felt, the editing, the 70’s vibe in the way it told its story. I thought it was amazing. I’m so happy with it. 

 

Box office wise, like I said in the weekend thread, I’m not surprised. If you haven’t seen the first then you’re not going to see this. ALOT of people haven’t seen that first movie, no matter how iconic it is. 

Those people will file this under ‘yeah I really need to see that first one, then I’ll watch this’. 

 

Like the first it will stand the test of time. I think this is one of the great films of this decade so far. 

[Lucas]

Yep, better than the original.

[Jonwo]

I think despite the dissapointing OW, this will have a strong afterlife.