The Dark Knight how in the world did this movie cost $180 million?

[Mr. Credible]

i mean, seriously? $180 million? where did it all go? there was hardly any cgi in the movie, and not a lot of big expensive set pieces/toys/etc... and i doubt bale, ledger, oldman or eckhart's paychecks were THAT big.

transformers was budgeted at $140 million, and it had tons of cgi, and some of the best to date as well. hellboy 2 was only $85 million, and is one of the most lusciously beautiful movies i've ever seen. iron man only cost $140, too.

anyone have any idea how this movie was so damn expensive? i just didn't see it on the screen.

 

[Caladbolg]

I saw a bit of it when the copter crashed and all. I didnt find that too necessary.

 

[bkey]

I'm sure the trip to HK made the cost go up some.

 

[Manosman]

they used real stunts, on location shooting in chicago and hong kong, imax camera's that they had to invent rigs for, these things cost a lot of money.

 

[The_Raganork]

Also I'm sure they had to probably pay the city of Chicago...explosives, renting places to shoot at.

$180 does seem like a lot too


Could they be including the viral?

 

[Rorschach II]

there was hardly any cgi in the movie

 

[TLH]

They the final Joker climax of the film on the construction sight of Trump Tower Chicago. I suspect it wasn't cheap to delay construction for a couple days of shooting.

 

[Fanticon]

why in the world did this thread even start?

 

[IrishFightin]

Yeah, Cost them about 17 million just to film in chicago, They had to remove parts of lower whacker. So the swat vans could go off.

It makes sense.

Alot of the locations too, such as Hogn Kong, cost alot.

In all seriousness, The IMAX equipment costs a ****load.

The cameras themselves are a couple million apeice.

Filmstock ( 3 minutes) is about 300 grand, thats before development.

 

[PixelMagic]

The Dark Knight had tons of CGI. It was just so well done it went by unnoticed. Did you think Two Face was makeup? His face was CG. Here is a rundown of effects by someone who worked on it. He said there were 700 CG shots...

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost.php?p=5272206&postcount=41

 

[Roessnakhan]

I don't think flipping semis is cheap. :P

 

[Mr. Credible]

what? there wasn't.

two face was probably the biggest one, and it was a very good effect, but even then, i hardly think it cost more than a few million for what little screen time he had. everything else (characters, vehicles, locations) were obviously all real. there may have been a digital batman thrown in during a few of the flying scenes.

i mean, action and cgi are undoubtedly the most expensive things to do. but there just wasn't a lot of big action in this movie. just a few car chases and fist fights, really.

 

[hegele]

i mean, seriously? $180 million? where did it all go? there was hardly any cgi in the movie, and not a lot of big expensive set pieces/toys/etc... and i doubt bale, ledger, oldman or eckhart's paychecks were THAT big.

transformers was budgeted at $140 million, and it had tons of cgi, and some of the best to date as well. hellboy 2 was only $85 million, and is one of the most lusciously beautiful movies i've ever seen. iron man only cost $140, too.

anyone have any idea how this movie was so damn expensive? i just didn't see it on the screen.

i don't think you know much about the cost of film production...

I'm surprised anyone would say this to be honest. This film had likely the most epic scope in recent years and cost a hell of a lot less than Spidey 3 or Superman Returns

 

[DeaDheaD]

what? there wasn't.

two face was probably the biggest one, and it was a very good effect, but even then, i hardly think it cost more than a few million for what little screen time he had. everything else (characters, vehicles, locations) were obviously all real. there may have been a digital batman thrown in during a few of the flying scenes.

i mean, action and cgi are undoubtedly the most expensive things to do. but there just wasn't a lot of big action in this movie. just a few car chases and fist fights, really.

I think you are missing the cemi-flip, airplane pick up in hong kong, Chicago was 45 mil alone to to shoot there, plus Nolan doesnt believe in a second directing team, they blew up 3 buildings, filming in Hong Kong and London, and the Imax cameras........plus paying Caine, Freeman, Eckhart, Oldman and Bale is not going to be cheap.

 

[hegele]

i mean, action and cgi are undoubtedly the most expensive things to do. but there just wasn't a lot of big action in this movie. just a few car chases and fist fights, really.

again. I don't know if i can take you seriously now. Not a lot of big action???

Also, when they use special effects in the IMAX shots, they are doing more than half than they would normally have to. HD transfers are usually 2k and sometimes 4k, with IMAX they had to render it in 8k, so more than twice the amount of effort was required in those comp shots.

 

[Mr. Credible]

i don't think you know much about the cost of film production...

I'm surprised anyone would say this to be honest. This film had likely the most epic scope in recent years and cost a hell of a lot less than Spidey 3 or Superman Returns

no, i just have common sense.

i know that a lot of movies shoot in locations like hong kong and chicago.

i know that this wasn't a big special effects movie.

and i know that from what was shown on screen, there was a lot of money wasted if this thing cost $180 million.

and i really don't think that this movie had 700 fx shots. 700 cgi AND practical effects stunts, together, maybe. hell, the matrix revolutions had about 1,000 cgi shots, and i think we all know that that movie was practically head to toe cgi, and it only cost $150 million to make.

sorry, my concensus is that nolan doesn't know how to properly utilize a budget.

i know this movie is the new fanboy wet dream, and i liked the movie quite a bit, too, and i know that it's like, blasphemy to say anything negative about it, nolan, heath or bale on this board, but still. this movie should not have cost this much. no way.

 

[bunk]

Ungh. This thread fails.

 

[Golgo-13]

Look at all the well known actors they got onboard this thing, even those with bit parts. They don't come cheap.

 

[bkey]

I'm not really sure why its a big deal that the movie cost $180 mil. If Nolan is bad at working the budget, who cares? They will be getting all their money back plus much much more.

 

[Batz]

someone mentioned it above, they used IMAX cameras to film what? 20-30 mins worth of footage, i bet that cost millions alone, not to mention they had to build their own rigs and modifly others to accomodate the cameras. hoping the IMAX footage is ace when i see it thursday.

 

[Mr. Credible]

I think you are missing the cemi-flip, airplane pick up in hong kong, Chicago was 45 mil alone to to shoot there, plus Nolan doesnt believe in a second directing team, they blew up 3 buildings, filming in Hong Kong and London, and the Imax cameras........plus paying Caine, Freeman, Eckhart, Oldman and Bale is not going to be cheap.

then they shouldn't have shot there. that's a ridiculous price to pay.

 

[bunk]

Look at all the well known actors they got onboard this thing, even those with bit parts. They don't come cheap.

Nah. The cast couldn't have been much more than that of Transformers... ha!

 

[Anjow1060]

As someone who's in the biz - a producer broke it down for me once when I asked the same question to him. The studio heads that greenlight the project get paid out of the budget just like the actors and directors. They take a gigantic slice for simply saying "here's your money, go make your movie" regardless of how good or bad it turns out. So they get a lump sum in addition to a stock in the film. So when this movie was greenlighted, they prolly needed a bit more budget for the new actors, all the practical and visual FX and then more money for the imax sequences (they said they wrecked one of the cameras and that the film costs more to have and get developed.)

So I think all of those things plus some greedy execs are the point.

Not to mention = when a movie is advertised as a "180 million dollar movie", people tend to think "Oh, a lot of money and time and care went into this. Must be a quality film that the studio believes in." Aka = subliminal marketing.

- Jow

 

[vanson]

there was lots of location shooting and proper use of cgi in it... well and the actors..
and because nolan directs nearly all scenes the productiontime is very long... filming begun in April 2007 and the wrap was november/december ...

"that would cost" :P

 

[hegele]

no, i just have common sense.

i know that a lot of movies shoot in locations like hong kong and chicago.

i know that this wasn't a big special effects movie.

and i know that from what was shown on screen, there was a lot of money wasted if this thing cost $180 million.

and i really don't think that this movie had 700 fx shots. 700 cgi AND practical effects stunts, together, maybe. hell, the matrix revolutions had about 1,000 cgi shots, and i think we all know that that movie was practically head to toe cgi, and it only cost $150 million to make.

sorry, my concensus is that nolan doesn't know how to properly utilize a budget.

i know this movie is the new fanboy wet dream, and i liked the movie quite a bit, too, and i know that it's like, blasphemy to say anything negative about it, nolan, heath or bale on this board, but still. this movie should not have cost this much. no way.

Ok... No. i work in film too and i'm sorry if this comes off as disrespectful, but it seems like in your point of view, if a movie doesn't have computer generated green monsters fighting in New York City or a bunch of CGI robots and iron men running around then they must have wasted their money? They shot this around the world, they have an ensemble cast full of academy award winners/nominees, they do things practically (which costs time, effort and money), they blow a million things up and became the first production to utilize IMAX 70mm film stock in a narrative feature.

I can't believe anyone with a straight face can say they didn't utilize their money efficiently when most blockbusters that have made this amount of money back its first weekend cost over 200 million.