MovieChat Forums > Blade Runner 2049 (2017) Discussion > NYGAHH!! nearly 3hours!! no wonder it fl...

NYGAHH!! nearly 3hours!! no wonder it flopped!!


just like Avatar, Titanic, Interstellar, LOTRs, TDKR and BvS

reply

[deleted]

And your point is?

reply

That the film's generous length isn't necessarily detrimental to it's commercial success...

I tend to agree, while 2049's pacing is much slower than those movies, I think the biggest reason for it's middling commercial success is that it is a philosophical hard(ish) sci-fi movie... That's never going to be very popular...

reply

Probably could have edited 25 minutes out without too much difficulty, and gotten the run-time down to 2:15 or so. That probably would have helped with the middling commercial success.

Great and important movie, but given the nature and fanbase...not for everyone.

reply

None of those were a flop except for BvS.

reply

BvS made almost 900m lol

reply

So you are saying BvS was not a flop?

reply

it would've been had it cost about 500m to make. but it didn't

reply

BvS is still a flop considering it had Batman and Superman. BvS only made 52 million more than Wonder Woman. Its pretty much a flop.

reply

I consider BvS a flop, even if mathematically it didn't flop. TDKR, a solo Bat movie, managed to make over 1 billion. Next you have a movie that features three of the most iconic heroes, yet it's not capable of reaching 1B.

reply

Everyone knows it flopped.

reply

Exactly, how the hell is Avatar a flop?

reply

Yeah, none of these is a flop...

reply