A Breakdown of $200+ Million Budgets

Galactus

Devourer of Worlds
Joined
Sep 1, 2000
Messages
16,277
Reaction score
1
Points
31
Posted: Monday May 15th, 2006 6:16pm
Source: The Wall Street Journal
Author: Garth Franklin



One of the most difficult things to ween out of any filmmaker or studio is a film's budget. More often than not they generally underestimate the amount by a good 20-30%, and of course it almost always never includes development costs or marketing/publicity expenses - an amount which can be as high as the film itself.

This past weekend though, The Wall Street Journal surprised everyone with a breakdown of some Summer movie budgets for the newest club on the block, the $200+ million epic. Amongst their estimates:

"Spider-Man 3" - $250-$300 million
"Superman Returns" - $261 million
"King Kong" - $250 million
"Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest" - approaching $225 million
"X-Men: The Last Stand" - $210 million

How they got the numbers remains unsure but for the most part they do seem rather spot on with the word through the grapevine rather than the on the record statements.

Officially X3 cost $165m, Kong cost $207m, and Superman has drawn conflicting amounts ranging from $190m to $250m. In Superman's case its not sure whether that amount includes the $45-65 million in development costs accumulated over nearly ten years before Bryan Singer came onboard.

Also, Spider-Man 3 is still shooting so there's no telling how much higher it will go, whilst Pirates is being worked on to the last minute and may climb further. Pirates will be balanced though with the third film which will obviously re-use much of the elements from the second one and save on costs - by how much though is uncertain
 
I'm suspect they also took the millions used for the failed superman projects in the final budget number.
Still it makes you wonder whether alot of those movies will even make profits given the enormous budgets.

I mean officially Kong cost 207 million and now it's 250 million.
Even for single budget films , ifind those numbers to be extraordinary high !
 
Strange numbers.

As I know, Kong officially had $207m budget and SR have $185m budget.

Dont believe it.
 
Well, studio's could give out lower numbers in order to look like they made a profit. I mean, it's possible.
 
Downhere said:
Well, studio's could give out lower numbers in order to look like they made a profit. I mean, it's possible.

Probably.
 
Man, Spider-Man better have those mofos pummelling the bad place out of each other, showcasing every extent of their powers, AND coming out of the screen to ask if I want a beverage and deliver to me in one fell swoop for that budget.

Nothing angers me more than a movie with a large budget that has no eye candy whatsoever. What did you spend it on, catering?
 
terry78 said:
Man, Spider-Man better have those mofos pummelling the bad place out of each other, showcasing every extent of their powers, AND coming out of the screen to ask if I want a beverage and deliver to me in one fell swoop for that budget.

Nothing angers me more than a movie with a large budget that has no eye candy whatsoever. What did you spend it on, catering?

MI3 had some excellent catering. I saw a show on it on the Food Network, lol.
 
terry78 said:
Man, Spider-Man better have those mofos pummelling the bad place out of each other, showcasing every extent of their powers, AND coming out of the screen to ask if I want a beverage and deliver to me in one fell swoop for that budget.

Nothing angers me more than a movie with a large budget that has no eye candy whatsoever. What did you spend it on, catering?

i agree, the budget forspiderman 1, leaves you wondering where the bad place did all the money go?!
 
boyscouT said:
Anyone else in AWE at Spider-Man 3's budget!?!?!?!?!?

:eek::eek::eek:

S-M3 will last 30 seconds.

The first 28 seconds for the studio logos (Columbia, Marvel...)

The last two seconds will consist of the words "SUCKERS!" flashing on screen, as Sam Raimi heads for the airport with four suitcases full of cash. :o :D
 
GoldenAgeHero said:
i agree, the budget forspiderman 1, leaves you wondering where the bad place did all the money go?!

probably the bridge and warehouse scene.
 
TheSumOfGod said:
S-M3 will last 30 seconds.

The first 28 seconds for the studio logos (Columbia, Marvel...)

The last two seconds will consist of the words "SUCKERS!" flashing on screen, as Sam Raimi heads for the airport with four suitcases full of cash. :o :D

lol. :up:
 
Raimi - "I'll teach them to write off The Gift as a typical horror flick. I got Katie Holmes to strip down for Christ's sake!"
 
terry78 said:
Raimi - "I'll teach them to write off The Gift as a typical horror flick. I got Katie Holmes to strip down for Christ's sake!"

lol. Keep them coming,lol.
 
Spider-Man supposedly cost $139m, and looks like it cost no more than $80m.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen supposedly cost $78m, and looks like it cost $150m+.
 
Cinemaman said:
Strange numbers.

As I know, Kong officially had $207m budget and SR have $185m budget.

Dont believe it.

Well you've got to add the marketing cost and all that stuff, but since that's kinda like an additional cost (you don't see that on the screen), they didn't added those numbers.
 
TheSumOfGod said:
S-M3 will last 30 seconds.

The first 28 seconds for the studio logos (Columbia, Marvel...)

The last two seconds will consist of the words "SUCKERS!" flashing on screen, as Sam Raimi heads for the airport with four suitcases full of cash. :o :D

People will still pay to come back and see it again ;)
 
I know the official number for both Spider-Man 2 and Titanic was $200 million but they cost more than that.

Anyway, they're probabilly just including the estimated marketing costs on that article to make the numbers look bigger.
 
The SM3 number is awe inspiring and scary.

I'd laugh so hard if it said SUCKAS and showed Sam Raimi and cast and crew getting on a private jet flicking us off then boom the end.

I would then pay again to see that brillance and knowing SM fans they would defend it is as brilliant.

But then a year later would call it a raping of their childhood after freeze framing all 35 seconds of it frame by frame on their $30 DVDs then.
 
Kevin Roegele said:
Spider-Man supposedly cost $139m, and looks like it cost no more than $80m.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen supposedly cost $78m, and looks like it cost $150m+.


that's cause League was shot in a foreign country where a US money went a much longer way.

Spiderman...was mostly filmed in US...higher shooting costs. That's why most big blockbusters don't really shoot in America much.

If Superman returns was shot in America...it's budget would have probably be doubled
 
GoldenAgeHero said:
that wasnt even real! all of that was on set.


Yes...and we all know Sets cost no money to make.... along with the hundreds of extras they had the pay....of course.....that's all cheap :rolleyes:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,547
Messages
21,757,961
Members
45,593
Latest member
Jeremija
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"