>Studio: Hey Villeneuve make us some half assed sequel so we don't loose the rights
>Villeneuve: *makes film of the decade*
What did he mean by this?
>Studio: Hey Villeneuve make us some half assed sequel so we don't loose the rights
>Villeneuve: *makes film of the decade*
What did he mean by this?
Because he's not a hack, he genuinely cares
>it flops
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Alcon - the production studio behind BR2049 - is probably going to go bankrupt over the flop of BR2049
LMAOOOOOO
All kinos flop
Passion. If they genuinely give a shit more often than not the end product is infinitely better.
>no ugly ass niggers and trannies either
WE WERE NOT WORTHY
I feel like it was worth it.
The original flopped too. Only retards genuinely thought it would be a financial blockbuster. I'm just happy it exists.
>>Villeneuve: *makes film of the decade*
citation needed*********************
>how much it earns means how good it is
Pathetic.
"Producers Broderick Johnson and Andrew Kosove — who met at Princeton University before convincing FexEx founder Fred Smith to help them launch the film company Alcon Entertainment 20 years ago — are candid. They admit that Alcon's future depends on Blade Runner 2049, the sequel to Ridley Scott's sci-fi epic that hits theaters Oct.6. "This is a chips-in-the-center-of-the-table exercise," says Kosove."
hollywoodreporter.com
source?
It doesn't look like a disastrous flop...It's gonna make 300 million+ at this point
You gave money to this guy. How do you feel about funding anti-white propaganda, goy?
Um, think again sweetie :)
>film of the decade
>half assed sequel
But Blade Runner 2049 was just that.
it has nothing to do with how good it is or now. it is just that the studio who put up the $$$ for movie is probably going to go into bankruptcy.
Name one better
In America... burgers are literal chink tier turboplebs.
>B-B-B-BUT ITS KINO!!
>source?
see
Direct quotes from the producers of the movie and article cites it will need over $400 Million to break even.
.... i can't!
> and article cites it will need over $400 Million to break even.
The article doesn't cite anyone.
>Insiders say the movie will need to clear $400 million at the worldwide box office to be considered a win.
So it's not gonna be a win. But with 300 million it's gonna break even
>still talking about hillary clinton a year after the election
nobody cares, fuck off Sup Forums
Certified Copy
>'film of the decade'
>is only understood by the 50 percent of the population that has XY chromosomes
It just doesn't make good business sense.
Am I supposed to feel bad about this?
The film was still fucking amazing, and it will end here. We won't get a third film about the replicant rebellion or anything like that, we have this and the original and they're both fantastic.
This is the best bid budget Hollywood production of the century so far bar none, I don't need any more.
Not to hate on br2049, because I did enjoy watching it, but once you remove the veneer of the great visuals and atmosphere that mimics the original classic, you're left with a shoddy script, that was poorly directed. Roger Deakins and Dennis Gassner did a wonderful job with the movie, it's a shame that they didn't get a director worthy of the material.
>300 million it's gonna break even
you literally making up shit in your head while an article from the Hollywood Reporter with quotes from the producers of movie and its own sources say otherwise. It needs over $400 Million to break even. And it is not even going to get close to that unless it vastly overperforms in China.
Wasn't it Sony?
>It needs over $400 Million to break even.
Nowhere in the article does it say that you stupid fuck. How about you read the quote I posted it. And insider doesn't mean anything, yes usually films need to make double their budget to break even, everyone knows that.
Isn't it similar in case if the original one?
the 'insider' is the one of the producers who doesnt want to go on record with the writer of the article. and even if it wasn't, that 'insider' is more credible that a nobody obssessed over a film that he creates fantasies in his head on film board on Sup Forums.
or it's just a hollywood insider , someone who knows how much return investment you need.
You don't seem to have a grasp on the english language, the qoute says it needs 400 million TO BE CONSIDERED A WIN. That means that they made good amount of money compared to what they invested in so they can continue to fund other projects. IT DOES NOT SAY 400 million to break EVEN
>emoji movie
>then dark tower
>now this
How can sony keep going like this? are their tvs and ps4s really selling well or something?
i know english.
UNDER $400M - Lost as in losing $$$
OVER $400M - Win as in making $$$
The same difference as being in the red or being in the black. You dont seem to know English. Use your head, if the movie had a production budget of $150M, unless you believe there was no marketing budget and all those TV commercials you saw on TV were for free, a break-even of amount of $400M is plausible.
What a complete fucking moron.
So if you waste two years of your live and put in 150 million dollars... but you get 151 million that's a win?
Please fucking kill yourself
I honestly don't know what Sony was thinking
>$180m budget sequel to a cult classic
This movie was dead on arrival
Lets all just appreciate the fact the film somehow exists. It's kind of like a miracle movie.
says the idiot who thinks distributors & studios get 100% of the box office gross at the theaters (the cut is around 50%). Or that TV commercials cost no $$$. Tell me how a movie with a reported $180 budget (which was brought down to around $150M with tax credits) and around $50M - $100M marketing budget is supposed to break even at $300M.
Kill yourself you fucking idiot.,
> and around $50M - $100M marketing budget
Source : Ass
People don't produce movies to BREAK EVEN. If he says 400 million to be a win, that means at 400 million they made enough money to justify the investment and the years spent.
To break even it's considerably less, maybe 300 million maybe more I don't know
It's a 3 hour r-rated slow paced niche film.
Anyone who isn't 18 has now been limited in seeing it, and college students aren't going to go on Friday at 8 to see a 3 hour long slow movie.
It simply doesn't have wide appeal, which is good because that's how it stays good
>He thinks one studio paid for the whole thing
Its sad that the movie is more or less bombing, but atleast we won't get a sequel
>Source : Ass
hollywoodreporter.com
The average marketing budget for a summer blockbuster is $100 Million and higher. Batman Vs Superman's marketing budget was closer to $200Million. $50 Million is the market budget for mid-sized budget movie, so I used the $50M to $100M as my range which is reasonable.
My source : Hollywood Reporter
Your source : your fanboy obsession that your movie flopped.
Literally the only things the original had going for it were atmosphere and rutger hauer.
The difference here though, is that in the original, everything else isn't simply mediocre, they are actively bad, especially the acting.
Plot twist: Ridley Scott decides it'd earn good money if it was made by him and directs sequel with full scale replocant rebels fighting for freedom led by Deckard's daughter. Also, xenomorph cameo.
I don't see any proof just dumb speculation and inability to grasp the English language, or how any enterprise or how articles are written
>when the ebic nolanesque plot twist hits
how does he do it Sup Forumsros?!?!!
>we won't get a sequel
If Scott wants one he'll get it
Remember he wants this to be a franchise with a prequel and everything
if a movie makes $300M at the box office, how much do you think the studio gets and how much do you think the theater gets? (see picture). Do the math and tell me how BR2049 breaks even at $300M once you add in the marketing budget.
In case you didnt know, studios dont own theaters. Theaters like AMC, Regal, etc are separate companies and dont show movies for free. Stop being stupid you dipshit.
ME : Actual facts
YOU : Nah nah Nah, everybody is lying. Nothing is correct. #'s are lies and what applies to every other movie somehow doesnt apply to this movie.
>ME : Actual facts
You don't have facts though, you posted one article with speculation from unnamed insiders and another article about speculation from other movies. You have no idea what the marketing is, and you pretend not to know english and that A WIN somehow means BREAKING EVEN. Two completely different things. Any enterprise exists to make PROFIT not to break even, so a WIN is making enough profit to justify the investment
Are you retarded or something?
So in other words
"BR2049 doesnt have to follow the same rules that every Hollywood movie does, so its financial situation is different because I am obssesed with the movie and dont want it to viewed a failure"
Still havent answered this question - "if a movie makes $300M at the box office, how much do you think the studio gets and how much do you think the theater gets? (see picture). Do the math and tell me how BR2049 breaks even at $300M once you add in the marketing budget. :
>Studio execs: Oh no, he is making a kino. What do we do?
>exec: fire his music guy, get Hans on the phone
>exec: He already mailed us the soundtrack yesterday
>still kino of the century with extremely fitting ambient music
Seriously though. How could it have been made profitably?
>pg13
>2 hours
There ya go
Like the movie on the trailer.
>chasan
>hackan
>bullet dodgan
>punchan
>assplosan
>flying car driftan
CHRIST, SOMEONE NEEDS TO STOP HIM
SHOULD I go for a 3rd time to see it??
I kinda want to at a quiet dead time..
>BR3
>war movie with MUH REBELLION vs eevil hummies
put it in the bin pls