‘Blade Runner 2049’ Crashes at Box Office With $31.5 Million

Despite critical praise and optimistic tracking, Warner Bros./Alcon/Columbia's "Blade Runner 2049" has crashed hard at the box office, grossing just $31.5 million in its opening weekend from 4,058 screens against a reported budget of $150 million.

It's a tough fall for the Denis Villeneuve-directed sequel to Ridley Scott's classic sci-fi noir. Before the weekend, the most conservative tracking estimates had this film matching the $45 million opening earned in 2015 by "Mad Max: Fury Road." Instead, "2049" is falling short even of the "$36.1 million made earlier this year by Scott's "Alien: Covenant," which tanked in subsequent weeks after all the hardcore "Alien" fans saw the film on opening night.

Now signs are already pointing to "2049" suffering a similar fate. After making $12.7 million on Friday, including $4 million from Thursday previews, revenue fell 11 percent on Saturday to $11.4 million. "Blade Runner 2049" is proving to be a very front-loaded film, as the original's cult fanbase packed early screenings while mainstream audiences have been slow to buy tickets.

This in part explains the discrepancy between the film's A- grade on CinemaScore and the lack of word-of-mouth we've seen among mainstream audiences. The CinemaScore demographic breakdown was 71 percent male and 86 percent over the age of 25, with 63 percent over the age of 35. For a generation of hardcore film buffs -- mostly male -- who remember seeing the original "Blade Runner" in theaters, "2049" was an event release. But for other demos, this film doesn't seem to have struck a chord, even with Ryan Gosling in his first wide release since "La La Land."

This weekend's other new releases also performed below pre-weekend expectations. Fox/Chernin's "The Mountain Between Us" took second place this weekend with $10.1 million from 3,068 screens against a $35 million budget and pre-weekend projections of $11-13 million. Lionsgate's "My Little Pony: The Movie" came in fourth with $8.8 million from 2,528 screens against projections of $10 million. Both films had an A- on CinemaScore, but "MLP" had a Rotten Tomatoes score of 57 percent while "Mountain" had a 46 percent score.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/...spartanntp

[Edited 10/13/17 10:00am]

that a movie is considered 'crashed' @ 31.5 Million is really sad

They provide a good analysis on what happened, and I have to admit, I thought Blade Runner 2049 was coming out in November. I wonder how many other people just missed the release date?

[Edited 10/16/17 8:09am]

I skipped it this weekend because as much as I liked Prisoners, I absolutely hated Arrival.

The love from critics actually didn't do much to sway me this time around as I feel the state of movie criticism is in the toilet right now. Certainly, a lower level of intellect in the reviewer world as EVERYONE has a youtube channel or blog and calls themselves a "movie critic" skewing the Tomato-meter.

The Internet has watered down what it means to be a movie critic and certainly lowered the bar. Not to say 2049 is a bad movie, just that I will not rush to go see it.

[Edited 10/8/17 14:45pm]

The original BR was a flop too. It's visually stunning to look at, but it is a VERY flawed movie story and direction-wise.

There is a lot to admire for us film fanatics, but for the general audience, it's a pretty miserable movie-going experience.

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

EmmaMcG said:

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

The original BR was a flop too. It's visually stunning to look at, but it is a VERY flawed movie story and direction-wise.

There is a lot to admire for us film fanatics, but for the general audience, it's a pretty miserable movie-going experience.

I'd have to disagree with you that the original was very flawed. Sure, nothing is perfect but I think that the original Blade Runner is as good as sci fi will ever get. The Final Cut is anyway.

A lot of fans of the original are quick to point out that it is a very flawed movie. Myself included.

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

EmmaMcG said:

Ugot2shakesumthin said: I'd have to disagree with you that the original was very flawed. Sure, nothing is perfect but I think that the original Blade Runner is as good as sci fi will ever get. The Final Cut is anyway.

A lot of fans of the original are quick to point out that it is a very flawed movie. Myself included.

Even more fans think the original is one of the greatest sci-fi films ever made looking at the average user scores on both Metacritic and IMDB--both north of 8.0. Very flawed movies don't score that high.

JoeyC said:

Wow. Disapointing to hear. I've heard nothing but good reviews. Regardless, I'll wait a few day and then head to the theater and see it.

once I get over this flu

sexton said:

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

A lot of fans of the original are quick to point out that it is a very flawed movie. Myself included.

Even more fans think the original is one of the greatest sci-fi films ever made looking at the average user scores on both Metacritic and IMDB--both north of 8.0. Very flawed movies don't score that high.

for that matter, it was #69 on the 2012 sight and sound poll, right up there with sunset blvd & night of the hunter. clearly some people out there rate it highly.

i'm not one of them, mind you. i think it's a visual showstopper, a genuinely innovative, visionary movie that changed how we thought movies could look, but i've always found myself slightly removed from & bored by the story. but it's clear to me there's a solid contingent of admirers out there who hold it as a great movie, a masterpiece.

[Edited 10/8/17 20:55pm]

A select few films can be very flawed and still be considered great. The original Star Wars for example.

Hudson said:

A select few films can be very flawed and still be considered great. The original Star Wars for example.

Describing a film as a very flawed masterpiece is in my opinion an oxymoron. Star Wars is a very good movie, but I don't consider it a masterpiece.

good that it crashed; hollywoood never learns to stop putting out garbage or remakes (of remakes of remakes), and their magic words 'reboot' and 'franchise' ( a franchise is soupposed to be an independant Mac Do, not a movie)

Hope a few big studio failures will follow.
And that they will start making real movies again.

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

I think if you look at really great films, most have some flaws but are overall amazing in most respects. That’s true for Citizen Kane, Dr Strangelove, 2001 ASO, etc.

I love Blade Runner but it’s not running on all cylinders like the obove examples. And it’s been well documented that the studio meddled with RS and his vision. And that meddling shows, even with all the work done on it over the years with the existing footage to try and deliver a more coherent and cohesive film.

Criticism doesn’t take away from he greatness of the film.

Some flaws, yes. But's that's different from saying a movie is very flawed which to me contradicts greatness.

TheFman said:

This makes me concerned about Villenueve's future project...DUNE! It's a tough film to make, and I think the audiences will stay away from that too. I was hoping BR2049 would be a massive hit, just to keep the good buz aroud his name for Dune...

I watched it last night.......was it better than the original? Nope, but I will say some of those scenes were visually stunning and that CGI Rachel was incredible.....more convincing than the CGI Leia in Rogue One (2016). However the story left me with some burning questions especially about Wallace's employee Dr Ana Stelline.......for someone who knows so much, the answer to his ultimate quest was working for him the whole time! Anyway it was a solid effort and I give it a 4 out of 5 I will most definately get this on Blu-Ray

EmmaMcG said:

The financial success of a movie means very little to me but in cases like this, I do think it's a shame that more people didn't give it a chance. I'm a huge fan of the original movie and its many different versions (the Final Cut being my favourite) so I was very disappointed to see that a sequel was in the works. I'm generally of a mind that classics like Blade Runner don't need sequels or remakes but I decided to give the new movie a chance and I'm happy I did. It really is a brilliant movie and one well deserving of following on from the original. It captures the look and feel of the original and still feels fresh and new. Not only that but it makes you see the original in a different light. Now, that's not always a good thing. The Matrix sequels did that and almost ruined the original movie's impact but with Blade Runner it's different. Because it works. It doesn't undo the good of the original, it adds to it. I won't spoil anything here because it's the kind of movie that you need to see without prior knowledge of the plot but needless to say, you feel for Deckard and Rachael in a new way. You see them in a different light. The big question is not "is Deckard a replicant", it's bigger than that. Plus, Ryan Gosling is really good and I never thought I'd say that.

I was going to see it anyway, but thank you for this review.

I'm picking this up today

I saw the movie yesterday

I saw it two days ago and liked it, I didn't love it like the origina,l but it was a good movie that left me with a feeling that humans don;t exist anymore in 2049 and that every human being you see is a replicant, inlcuding Wallace and Deckard.
I saw the original as a 9 year old in the theater in 1982 and absolutely loved it with the voice over and the happy ending. To this day that version of the movie is my favourite and not because it's better than the Workprint/Screener/Director's/Final cut, but it was the first version I ever seen and blew my mind. When I watch Blade Runner these days I always watch The Final Cut version but every once in a while I'll pop in my old VHS tape of the original theatrical version just for kicks.

JorisE73 said:

I saw it two days ago and liked it, I didn't love it like the origina,l but it was a good movie that left me with a feeling that humans don;t exist anymore in 2049 and that every human being you see is a replicant, inlcuding Wallace and Deckard.
I saw the original as a 9 year old in the theater in 1982 and absolutely loved it with the voice over and the happy ending. To this day that version of the movie is my favourite and not because it's better than the Workprint/Screener/Director's/Final cut, but it was the first version I ever seen and blew my mind. When I watch Blade Runner these days I always watch The Final Cut version but every once in a while I'll pop in my old VHS tape of the original theatrical version just for kicks.

SPOILER ALERT

I liked it.
I needed to see it on the big screen no matter what.

I also did not love it.

.

They really blurred the lines between humans and replicants.

And that the lead character is a replicant, I think made his journey not so interesting.

He was too stiff.

This was one of those questions about 'when does life begin' or 'can they have a soul'

I immediately thought of Data from Star Trek the Next Generation. That was his journey.
Data did it better.

The humans were boring, the replicants did not have any character.

Except for the Nexus replicant Sappar Mortan : and Dekkard

The imagery was not 'magical' overall like the original
I did like the billboard characters that interact with people to sell their product

.

When you look at the character of the original in all it's forms from life of the city, the sounds, the replicants mechanical evil/innocence, the old fashioned-ness of the humans etc this 2049 Universe pales.

.

I would love to 'visit' the original universe, not the 2049 universe

.

I watched the original last night.

[Edited 10/16/17 6:34am]

But reading through the Art of Blade Runner 2049 made the movie much more interesting and gives a lot of background, that helps look at the movie differently.

.

For example the First scene with the Nexus Replicant was written during the original movie, they just didn't know how to fit it in the story line.

.

I love that a Rachel makes an appearance

None of these 2049 replicants come even close

They all miss the 'androidness' of the others and of course the childlike danger they exude