And it had been pretty much the same movie (same script, cast, score, FX/imagery, run time etc - actually a lot of BR2049 felt like a Nolan film anyway - esp the Zimmer BWHAAH! score) Would it have made much difference to the box office?
I'm thinking BR2049 being promoted as 'from the director of TDK trilogy and Inception' might've added at least 100m to the ww box office
I think Nolan would have cast it better, thus bringing in a lot more bucks.
shareIf the story had been different *and* Gosling hadn't been involved, I'd have been more interested in this film. I have trouble seeing Gosling as anything more than goofy, sweet, and a bit dim. I know he's played diverse roles, I just don't find him believable in those parts.
shareI agree, Gosling was a big mistake. He just can't carry a film like this.
shareNo. The moment I learned about some of the absurd things Villeneuve and team did with the plot in this film, I rolled my eyes and labeled it Do.Not.Watch.Ever.
I loved the original. Where BR2049 took the story not only enrages me philosophically, it enrages me from a logical vantage. My respect for Villeneuve was already low based on what he did to the magnificent short story upon which Arrival was based. That film was a travesty. It shouldn't, therefore, have surprised me that he would do similarly gimmicky, shallow, tone-deaf things with the Blade Runner story, but in my naiveté, I just couldn't imagine people would stand back and let such a thing happen.
Ah well. Each day I live and learn brand new ways in which human beings are terribly disappointing.
what absurd things are those?
shareHow was Arrival a travesity?. It was very faithful to the story
shareI made a promise to myself to stop being a bitter fleck of bile on this film's discussion board. I see evidence that the people involved in this project approached it with sincerity and respect. For me to go on criticizing the end result of their efforts to make a thoughtful big-budget movie is not only unproductively rude--because this board is filled overwhelmingly by people who enjoyed the movie--but thoroughly wrong-headed. In an era when most studios would roll their eyes at investing in a project like this, Villeneuve and Alcon tried to make the type of film that appeals to audience members like me. Common decency dictates I should thank them for their efforts and end it there.
I can't keep my promise to stop being a vomit-drop here if I tangent into criticisms about a different movie Villeneuve directed. I think the best thing I can do is offer my sincere praise for Ted Chiang's "Story of Your Life" and encourage other people to read it. It's one of the finest short pieces of fiction I've read in the last two years.
Aristide, if you sincerely welcome a discussion about Chiang's sublime story and the ways it differed from Arrival, I'd be happy to do that either on Arrival's board or via PM. Please forgive the horrid pun: that story gives me life.
You could stop being an asshole.. thats a start.
shareJesus Christ, you sound pretentious AF.
shareWell, it already has all the Nolan signature elements:
orange and teal filters? check.
ridiculously unnecessary bad cgi? check.
boring, non descript drum based soundtrack? check.
lame jokes on every scene to appeal to the lowest of intellects? check.
It's only missing Leonardo Di Caprio and Marion Cotillard.
maybe the cast would've been different
Tom Hardy - K
Anne Hathaway - Joi
Marion Cotillard - Luv
Jessica Chastain - Joshi
Joseph Gordon-Levitt - Wallace
Matt Damon - Sapper Morton
Michael Caine - Mister Cotton
You know me, being content with the casting - I was more pleased with Ryan’s performance than I initially expected to be - and overall film, I have no “this is how it could have been better if Nolan had directed it” complaints.
So on to the topic. If Nolan’s name was attached to this film would it have proven to be a much bigger success at the Box Office? I’m afraid to say... yes, it’s quite possible. A lot of people, including Nolan fans, thought the “unexciting looking” Dunkirk was going to underperform/flop, and we know how that went....
A big reason why Blade Runner 2049 didn’t do so well was probably because general audiences weren’t familiar with the original. Throw in 2049’s running time, the fact it gave out very few details in regards to what’s it about, the name of a director who isn’t as well-known as Nolan... and it’s no surprise it flopped. While it’s somewhat irritating because Villeneuve created a perfect (or near perfect) sequel imo, you gotta admit Nolan’s name attracts interest in a film. So with him on board and the film being exactly as it is, I do see it making another $85-100 million.
god, i hate this crap. no offensive, but this is beyond stupid. if nolan had directed it, then it would not have been "pretty much the same movie".
the movies had a bad box office result, because of "word of mouth". it just did not live up to it's predecessor in any way.
if they had simply taken the script and made it unrealted to bladerunner, that would have helped quite a lot, since as a standalone it was not a bad movie, but as a sequel the whole story would have had a better stand as it had before this film.
If Nolan directed it would have been overrated trash. Nolan has a couple good movies under his belt where as Denis has yet to make a bad movie. Denis is 100% a better filmmaker than Nolan. It’s not even close.
shareIf Nolan directed, the characters would be 10x more forgettable.
share