The numbers just aren’t adding up for “Blade Runner 2049.” Currently sitting at $248 million, the blockbuster sci-fi sequel reportedly needed to make $400 million worldwide to break even. The film, which cost $155 million before marketing, is expected to lose upwards of $80 million for production company Alcon Entertainment and the various investors who backed the picture. It’s all a bit mystifying for a movie that was so well received by critics, and even director Denis Villeneuve is still puzzling it out.
“I’m still digesting it,” told Yahoo Entertainment during a Facebook Live interview. “We had the best [critics’ reviews]. I’ve never had a movie welcomed like that. At the same time the box office in the United States was a disappointment, that’s true, because those movies are expensive. It will still make tons of money, but not enough.”
“I think because maybe people were not familiar enough with the universe. And the fact that the movie’s long [its run time is 2 hours, 44 minutes]. I don’t know. It’s still a mystery to me. I make movies — I don’t sell them,” Villeneuve continued.
Well, it remains to be seen if the movie will wind up being profitable — probably eventually once home video, VOD, and cable monies start rolling in — but the filmmaker does acknowledge some criticisms that have been rumbling since the movie opened. The nearly three-hour running time has been a bone of contention for some, while it’s arguable that the show-don’t-tell marketing — which included hiding that Ryan Gosling is a replicant, even though it’s revealed in the opening moments of the movie — did “Blade Runner 2049” no favors.
Villeneuve will likely continue to unpack all of this as he moves on to his next movie. While has been rumored for James Bond, the director told us “Dune” has his focus right now, and you can forget about David Lynch‘s 1984 adaptation — this one will be pure Villeneuve.
“David Lynch did an adaptation in the ’80s that has some very strong qualities. I mean, David Lynch is one of the best filmmakers alive, I have massive respect for him,” he said. “But when I saw his adaptation, I was impressed, but it was not what I had dreamed of, so I’m trying to make the adaptation of my dreams.”
“It will not have any link with the David Lynch movie,” he added Villeneuve. “I’m going back to the book, and going to the images that came out when I read it.”
Frankly, that’s exactly how we want “Dune” to be delivered — a new vision, from a filmmaker with endless imagination. Watch the full conversation with Villeneuve below.
![Pinterest](https://pinterest.com/pin/create/button/?url=https://dev.theplaylist.net/denis-villeneuve-dune-blade-runner-2049-20171116/&media=https://cdn.theplaylist.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/14231050/denisbladerunnervilleneuve-Ryan-Gosling.jpg&description=The nearly three-hour running time has been a bone of contention, while it's arguable that the show-don't-tell marketing did "Blade Runner 2049" no favors.){kind=link}
“I make movies, I don’t sell them” seems like an absurdly arrogant attitude to bring these days.
Umm, no. He did his job. He made a great movie. It’s really all he’s hired to do. He’s not a marketer.
I’m dreading his version of Dune, I love the books and am desperate for a good TV/movie version, This hack isn’t the man for the job though. Blade Runner 2049 was actually really disappointing. As just a film it was /OK/, but as a sequel to Blade Runner, it was terrible. There were some nice in-jokes and references, but overall low-brow junk masquerading as high-brow gold (it was directed by Villeneuve, so I really shouldn’t have expected better, the only thing he’s good at is making stupid people think they are clever). Everything seemed forced and unnatural. The plot was trite and cliched, and everything was very predictable. Totally a wasted opportunity ;^<
Once again, ummmm, no. He’s one of the best filmmakers working right now. You missed the movie. And even if it was mediocre, he’s got three or four home runs under his belt already. Respect.
The only other Villeneuve movie I’ve seen was the truly horrible Arrival, at least BR2049 wasn’t as bad as that, but I’m assuming you are probably including that in those ‘home runs’. Arrival proves more than anything what I said about his only talent is is making stupid people think they are clever, perhaps that’s why you like him so much ;^/
Review “Prisoners,” “Sicario” and “Incendies” and then apologize.
I will have a look, but even if they are fantastic, that wont change my opinion of BR2049 or Arrival.
WTF? Not telling the audience beforehand of the twists and turns is considered a box office liability? I don’t understand. I myself was overjoyed that I knew nothing of the BR 2049 plot when I saw the film. I learned from this film that I should stop reading reviews and watching trailers altogether. It’s much better to experience the film and let it unfold as the filmmakers intended.” I have a perfectly sound reason as to why BR 2049 wasn’t a global hit: Most of the population are morons who flock to Fast And Furious sequels.
Btw, most of the aicn guys are over at The Man Who Saved Movies now in case you didn’t know.
Thanks. Didn’t know. You know they banned me for the most innocuous comment. Right after Harry was slapped with the sexual harassment charge I commented that I never trusted him, not since his glowing review for Armageddon. And they banned me!
They banned most of the regulars for similar reasons.
Started fresh, did they? A reboot. Like Josh Trank’s Fantastic 4.
Good analogy.
Hi, the new site is up at filmgoblin(dot)com now if you want to check it out.
Many thanks!
You’re welcome!