Maybe that snippet of info about Thomas Newman returning wasn‘t wrong after all.
The rumour that Craig and Mendes don‘t get along anymore might be wrong, however.
Both men are seasoned veterans of tv, film and theatre, if i’m honest, i don’t think either would take on set frustrations personally, especially as both know the stressful circumstances that befell SPECTRE’s production far better than “insider source close to top bosses” I definitely don’t see them chucking in 15 years of friendship and three highly successful collaborations over it.
Having said that, I do think its the studio that’s the delay rather than waiting for Mendes - especially as the other two times we had exactly the same gap between films (02-06 then 08-12) was due to MGM’s partner search…
I can’t see Mendes ever coming back - Don’t know that he has anything more to add.
Villeneuve would be cool and I’d love to hear a Johann Johansson Bond score (I know he was replaced on Blade Runner by Zimmer et al… but I think that might be the studio interfering and him not wanting to do a Vangelis tribute act) - Dune I believe is all set up and ready to go at Legendary, Villeneuve also producing.
Villeneuve saying he can’t talk about it but it’d be a deep pleasure to direct a Bond film.
1 Like
I wouldn’t mind for sure
I’d bet they are trying to nail down Villeneuve and the 19 release date is to give him time to work on the script (as well as nailing down distribution). He may have his own ideas, which will require some time to flesh out post Blade Runner duties. There’s too much noise around this and his answers indicate something is up but he just can’t talk about it. Clearly he wants to do it, and if Eon and Craig want him as well it’s just a matter of adapting the schedule around his diary.
Okay, I just came back from the cinema. Blade Runner 2049 really is THAT good. Also, it’s probably the most beautiful peace of cinematography I’ve ever seen, so fingers crossed for Villeneuve. And Roger Deakins.
I think having Deakins along with Villeneuve is key.
Villeneuve is good at telling story through action and tone - show, don’t tell, as they say. No one ‘shows’ better than Deakins; he’s the magic ingredients in everything he works on.
If i had to choose between the two, i think i’d honestly choose Deakins (with whatever director). But Deakins & Villeneuve would be wonderful.
Current headlines:
Prediction:
With Blade Runner 2049 performing well below industry expectations, I predict that Villeneuve’s clout will also take a hit that could very likely create some studio hesitation to financially back a film of the scope and scale of Dune. Therefore, Villeneuve will need to take on a project that propels his box office bankability.
The perfect antidote would be Bond 25.
Thoughts?..
It would be a fantastic combination. I don’t want to get my hopes up though.
Honestly, I can’t deciede which option I’d choose. Let’s hope for both of them.
As for Blade Runner 2049 poor box office performance, I don’t know what did the studio expect. It’s not a blockbuster material after all. It’s a movie for die hard science fiction fans or those who appreciate artistic qualities of the film. It’s definitely not a movie that a casual viewer can have fun watching (I mean theoretically they can, but you know what I mean).
Haven´t seen it yet but definitely want to. The disappointing box office seems to be caused by the lengthy running time (equaling less showings per day) and the film hitting mostly the interest of the older male audience. Which is disturbing, proving that the only audience that can get movies to open as big as they need to these days are teenagers and twentysomethings. And those largely don´t have any interest in something that is more challenging.
Maybe films like these will only work as tv projects for a niche, on Netflix & co.
Since the reviewes for BLADE RUNNER 2049 were stellar, the box office will not diminish Villeneuve´s status at all. And the film could recoup its budget worldwide. The US box office has become less important anyway.
As for DUNE - yes, the hunger for more complex science fiction might not be big enough for that. So, I suspect that DUNE might get pushed back or even put on ice, resulting in Villeneuve to be free to do BOND 25.
I don’t think the film is underperforming so much as the tracking overestimated it. In terms of box office returns this was always a huge risk.
Having seen the movie I can tell you it is equally as good, if not better, than the original. Well worth seeing if you liked the first film. If you’ve never seen Blade Runner I would highly recommend seeing the first film before jumping in with “2049.”
Deakins’ cinematography is superb, as expected, and looks great in IMAX.
Speaking as a twenty-something…I prefer more artistic films with strong visual metaphors and multi-layered narratives that asks questions, challenging people’s views on society and themselves. Thing is though, my parents were art lecturers, and I’ve spent a lot of time in my life at galleries and with artists, which may have something to do with that, so I may not (read: am not) a marker for what a mass audience enjoys, regardless of age.
The thing is, more artistic films always perform like this. Look at the first Blade Runner, if the studio thought it would be be like Marvel opening weekends (and even that’s only now, Iron Man, Thor and GOTG, the best reviewed of their series starters were all slow burns of profit) this is on them for having unrealistic expectations, not the artistic director making an artistic film that’s in a series started by an artistic film.
The size of an opening weekend only indicates how good the films marketing was and nothing else. Christopher Nolan, whose work tends to go for the more artistic and cerebral approach, would not be a big name if he hadn’t made a trilogy with the very sellable character of Batman - and Batman Begins DIDNT open huge, it was a slow burn in profit with incredible reviews.
Also twenty something here - can’t wait to see Blade Runner 2049. I think they thought with Harrison Ford and Ryan Gosling they could open it big with that alone. It was never going to be a $100 million opener - top expectations could have been maybe $50M - so I’d say this is on the low end of what they expected rather than something shockingly low. But hey, maybe the studio will blame Rotten Tomatoes for its poor performance…
1 Like
Well, the 20somethings on this site obviously have great taste.
But if tracking has been too high for “BLADE RUNNER 2049”, the industry will only conclude that it was the movie´s fault to live up to those expectations.
It remains troubling, for me, at least, that with the advertising, the stellar reviews and Ford & Gosling doing extensive press, this film could not open to at least 40 million dollars.
Not enough audiences wanted to see this film, that´s the sad truth here.
1 Like
It’s a niche film - a stylised tech noir sequel to a stylised tech noir that, whilst well known, has not actually been watched by that many. However I agree that (wrongly) the film itself will be blamed for a poor domestic opening weekend in a year where ALL domestic box office receipts are down.
The sad truth about Blade Runner 2049 is that it has almost no appeal to anyone who hasn’t seen the first film, most women, and anyone under the age of 40, barring a few young sci-fi aficionados on here!
Having Gosling in it is irrelevant. People want to know what they are seeing. And when you look at the trailers there is no sense of plot. At all. It just looks pretty.
I’m looking forward to seeing it since I’ve since the first one and liked it but otherwise I’m not sure what the studio was hoping for. The first one flopped and so will this.
I don´t want to have this thread degenerate into a “BLADE RUNNER 2049”-thing - but let me say this: after seeing the film I really don´t want Villeneuve for BOND 25 anymore.
This film is his director´s cut, as he pointed out, and I blame him for totally misunderstanding what made the original BLADE RUNNER so special and effective. The previous Villeneuve films which I liked a lot did not need a straight plot. This one did. And of course every Bond film desperately needs one.
Villeneueve has many great ideas and trusts those to look magnificent because a genius like Roger Deakins is able to create the right images. And BR2049 does look splendid, yes. The actors are wonderful. But… the film´s pacing is so tiresome that the ideas conveyed lose their power fast. The film´s plot begins to wander around, trying to catch all the ideas but loses its way completely before degenerating into a final act that is more TERMINATOR 5 than what the film actually tries to do.
There´s so much wrong here that could only be explained with massive spoilers so I won´t get into that right now.
But again, I have to say I will be very worried should Villeneuve get BOND 25, and if he does I strongly hope that EON will not allow him the freedom he had on this film.
For those who want a glimpse of what I mean I direct them to this ScreenRant-article which I agree with a lot: http://screenrant.com/blade-runner-2049-boring-mystery/
Also, let me publicly eat my hat and apologize when I accused the young audience who did not want to see this film. I was so much looking forward to BR2049 and got even more excited by all the critics who raved about this film.
The truth is, for me: people went to see it and word of mouth quickly let interest fade away again.
Villeneueve is too busy, he won’t be able to do Bond. He’s doing Dune now.
I completely disagree with your comments about Blade Runner 2049. I thought the pacing was pretty much spot on like the original. So was the mood, the atmosphere. They knocked it out of the park. Personally, I thought it was a great movie. Brilliant, really. You really can’t make a sequel to Blade Runner and do any better than that in my opinion.