The Groundhog Day derivative Happy Death Day ruled the weekend box office with a total of $26.5M, absolutely wrecking Blade Runner 2049 in its second weekend. If you're Blade Runner, this is a continued problem as you still cost $150M to make and still had an abysmal opening weekend one week ago.
Speaking of Happy Death Day, I'd be totally OK with this movie (and whatever success it achieves) if the ending were a twist wherein it was revealed Bill Murray had never escaped his repeating day all those years ago and now, out of boredom, murders the same college coed who happens to matriculate in Punxsutawney.
Maybe Blade Runner 2049 was just positioned poorly--maybe this film should have aimed for a summer release. Maybe Friday the 13th in early October was just prime positioning for a playful horror movie. Maybe sci-fi really is dead--but then again, the Star Trek franchise endures (yes--its recent iteration has seen diminishing returns, but is still largely profitable); Dr. Who still rules British television; and Star Wars is still Star Wars.
Is it the absence of a franchise or recent history (and thus fan base) that doomed Blade Runner 2049, a sequel that took 35 years to deliver? Perhaps they should have played up the Ridley Scott 'universe' connection to Alien.
So why didn't you see Blade Runner 2049? It's a beautiful movie and worth the big screen experience, but audiences aren't biting--what kept you away?
via destructoid http://ift.tt/2gn6LhQ