Critical acclaim doesn't always translate into box office success. Despite a Rotten Tomatoes score of 87%, a Metacrtic rating of 81 and 5 Oscar nominations,
Blade Runner 2049's poor performance has all but canceled the vague discussions of a possible third installment.
Was it the film's marketing that kept it from meeting early tracking estimates? If director Denis Villeneuve would have had his druthers, Harrison Ford's return as Deckard would have been kept a complete surprise.
"Listen, as a film director I would love to keep everything a secret, I would love the audience just to trust and come to the theater having not seen anything of the movie. Because of course, when you design the film you try to create surprises, tension… at the end of the day it would have been tough because everyone knew that Harrison was on the project, but yes, the answer I would have loved the audience not to know how he appears, where he appears, yeah."
Original
Blade Runner director Ridley Scott thought
the reason 2049 flopped domestically wasn't due to the film's the marketing, but because of its 163-minute runtime. "It’s slow. It’s slow. Long. Too long. I would have taken out half an hour."
Did you catch Blade Runner 2049 in theaters? If the film goes on to sweep the Best Cinematography, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Production Design and Visual Effects categories at the 90th annual Oscar Awards, should WB re-release the film in theaters? Should a re-release have a reduced runtime? Share your thoughts in the usual space below.
About The Author:
CBM writer for a decade+.
Follow MarkJulian on:
