Fox spent $150m on Blade Runner 2049?
Not WB and Sony?
Oops! Sorry my mistake;
The "BR 2049" production companies were: Warner Bros. · Columbia Pictures · Alcon Entertainment.
I'll add a couple of PSs to my above posts!
Maybe he's had his day. It's not just him. I wasn't a fan of Avatar, which also felt self-indulgent and far less original/creative than its director thought it was (Fern Gully in Space, anyone?). I also wasn't keen on Spielberg's recent stuff. I think the Hollywood machine is being held back by this tenacious crop of old men who aren't letting new talent (take Alien 5, for instance).
Originally, the Alien movies were a springboard for new talent. What are the chances of a first time director getting his or her hands on a new Alien movie now? Practically zero.
The problem for Hollywood and big budget serious science fiction films is that not very many directors can do it and make a profit.
That is why Hollywood is looking for the few directors who have a proven track record with serious science fiction movies.
There is huge pressure because studios don't like to lose money.
As a result, many directors (some big names) either stay away from those projects and often why new directors aren't given the job.
- Take David Fincher. "Alien 3" was a horrible experience for him and since its release he wants nothing to do with the franchise or the genre. With newer directors the studio will often interfere and some directors don't want to deal with that.
- Serious science fiction movies are expensive making it hard to make a profit compared with a low budget indie film.
So, serious science fiction movies often flop.
- This is why imo Tarantino hasn't done serious science fiction.
Back to "BR 2049", it looks like it will be a flop.
- Other famous serious SF movie flops?
"Sunshine", "Children of Men", "Star Trek: Nemesis", "Cloud Atlas", "Life" and so on.
Or serious science fiction which had so so box office performance.
"Edge of Tomorrow" with box office at only 2x its production budget.
Same level of performance with "Chappie".
* Cameron, Spielberg, Nolan, Abrams and Scott all have had serious science fiction films that made money.
It makes sense that when the studios are considering funding a serious science fiction movie that those directors with a proven track record would be considered.
Looks like Ridley may soon be leaving the franchise behind again (thankfully): https://movieweb.com/alien-franchise-over-ridley-scott/
Imo, that's not what Ridley said. If he does a sequel to "Covenant", it would be in the Alien franchise.
- It just would not have the Xenomorph (or very little of it).
Why? The fanbase is split. One group of fans did not want the Xenomorph back (see Jay Bauman, in the Red Letter Media review).
Instead this part of the fanbase wanted another film more like "Prometheus" (with Engineers and very little about Xenomorphs).
- I know that a lot of fans hate "Prometheus" (I've argued with a lot of them over the years, LOL) but again, the fanbase is split.
Anyway, we'll see what the studio decides.