Iron Man & Hulk 2 Financing already in place.

Advanced Dark

Avenger
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
17,587
Reaction score
1
Points
31
I was just reading Latino Review's coverage of this recent Marvel news and found this little bit that I didn't see anywhere else:

Arad said the intent is to use the $525 million Merrill Lynch debt facility to finance "Iron Man" and the "Hulk," even though those titles were not among the 10 listed when the deal with Merrill Lynch was struck last spring.
 
how, i thought that money was for the other films?
 
^ You have to understand how it works. Marvel has 525 million to draw from. They're not making all 12 films in one year. So say they make Hulk 2 and draw 150 million for the budget and ad budget. As the movie makes money they replenish the credit line. Within in a year or two they should have it covered plus any profit they make. So they could make 20 films off the credit line if they could make them and they were all profitable. They would still have plenty of money to make 3 or 4 more films and by the time they get to film 3 or 4 they will have already paid back for films 1 & 2. Just like a credit card.
 
Advanced Dark said:
^ You have to understand how it works. Marvel has 525 million to draw from. They're not making all 12 films in one year. So say they make Hulk 2 and draw 150 million for the budget and ad budget. As the movie makes money they replenish the credit line. Within in a year or two they should have it covered plus any profit they make. So they could make 20 films off the credit line if they could make them and they were all profitable. They would still have plenty of money to make 3 or 4 more films and by the time they get to film 3 or 4 they will have already paid back for films 1 & 2. Just like a credit card.
no way will they risk 150mill on Hulk 2...but i get what your saying
 
150 million for Hulk 2 with the ad budget is nothing. The ad budget could run 30-50 million easily. Ghost Rider cost 120 million and doesn't have near the merchandise potential as the Hulk.
 
Advanced Dark said:
150 million for Hulk 2 with the ad budget is nothing. The ad budget could run 30-50 million easily. Ghost Rider cost 120 million and doesn't have near the merchandise potential as the Hulk.
i really wish they would give Hulk 2 150mill, that would be awesome.
 
^ Well the credit line authorizes films with up to a 165 million budget. I wouldn't be shocked if they even gave Hulk 165 million that would include the ad budget. It's not that much money for a film of this scope and required F/X.
 
Advanced Dark said:
^ Well the credit line authorizes films with up to a 165 million budget. I wouldn't be shocked if they even gave Hulk 165 million that would include the ad budget. It's not that much money for a film of this scope and required F/X.
but this would be one of their first films, i think they would take it a safe route, minimize the budget as much as they can so it would be less of a risk
 
^ Hulk is a safe bet to make it's money back. The first film did and it was very dark and not so suitable for kids. This one will be way more "fun", not as dark, and more of a Hero film with a popular villain. The international market is playing a much bigger factor now. No problem. Now a 150 million dollar Hawkeye film would be a problem.
 
Advanced Dark said:
^ Hulk is a safe bet to make it's money back. The first film did and it was very dark and not so suitable for kids. This one will be way more "fun", not as dark, and more of a Hero film with a popular villain. The international market is playing a much bigger factor now. No problem. Now a 150 million dollar Hawkeye film would be a problem.
i guess marvel could risk 165mill, they do get alot from the merchendising too
 
Wow, Iron Man and Hulk are really moving fast. :eek: Not that I'm complaining of course.
 
Good.
They should start production soon hopefully.
 
Kid Flash! said:
Good.
They should start production soon hopefully.

Proably Iron Man production would start in early 2007, though Hulk needs a director. I like Zak Penn but but as a director I think taking on Hulk 2 might be way to big for him. I'd rather see him direct the X-Men spin-off. I really liked Ang Lee's style but he over analyzed the character that's biggest "repeat audience" is kids. Imagine Guillermo Del Toro doing The Hulk with a big budget. He's been held back by low to mid-size budgets all of his career and did wonders. I can't imagine what he'd do with 100-150 million at his disposal.
 
Sweet, I didn't see that in the article, nice catch.
 
Now who's the director gonna be? I asked Zak Penn if he's even up for the job or if he has any preferences for director...and I'm waiting for an answer.
 
Advanced Dark said:
^ You have to understand how it works. Marvel has 525 million to draw from. They're not making all 12 films in one year. So say they make Hulk 2 and draw 150 million for the budget and ad budget. As the movie makes money they replenish the credit line. Within in a year or two they should have it covered plus any profit they make. So they could make 20 films off the credit line if they could make them and they were all profitable. They would still have plenty of money to make 3 or 4 more films and by the time they get to film 3 or 4 they will have already paid back for films 1 & 2. Just like a credit card.

Marvel wouldn't have to put up the Print & Ad money. That would be handled by the distributor, which is upposed to be Paramount, I believe?
 
Avi Arad said they're paying for all the prep costs before the film starts rolling adn the credit line will pay them back for it...then they pay back the credit line as they make profit. Why would the distributor pay for the marketing?
 
Advanced Dark said:
Avi Arad said they're paying for all the prep costs before the film starts rolling adn the credit line will pay them back for it...then they pay back the credit line as they make profit. Why would the distributor pay for the marketing?

Because that's what a distributor does. They cover making prints and advertising costs, because distributing goes hand-in-hand with promotion. Print and Ads having nothing to do with prep costs, but come after the film is completed. And generally, for a film as big as the Hulk, P&A would be a minimum of 30-50 million. The distributor also takes their P & A money back first. Although in this case, because Marvel would be making such a substantial investment, I'm sure they'd work out a better deal for recoupment.
 
Dragon said:
Because that's what a distributor does. They cover making prints and advertising costs, because distributing goes hand-in-hand with promotion. Print and Ads having nothing to do with prep costs, but come after the film is completed. And generally, for a film as big as the Hulk, P&A would be a minimum of 30-50 million. The distributor also takes their P & A money back first. Although in this case, because Marvel would be making such a substantial investment, I'm sure they'd work out a better deal for recoupment.
aww crap, so universal are going to do it again?
 
Sava said:
aww crap, so universal are going to do it again?

Not necessarily. If the rights are back at Marvel, they can choose who will distribute. And even if it is Universal, if Marvel is financing the production, which is the biggest amount of money at risk, Universal would be less squeamish since their risk wouldn't be more than about 50 million, versus the 170 million for Hulk 1.

On a side note, I'll say on thing. I'm alot more excited about an Avengers film if Marvel can put Cap, Thor, Ironman and the Hulk in it with no copyright issues.
 
Dragon said:
Not necessarily. If the rights are back at Marvel, they can choose who will distribute. And even if it is Universal, if Marvel is financing the production, which is the biggest amount of money at risk, Universal would be less squeamish since their risk wouldn't be more than about 50 million, versus the 170 million for Hulk 1.

On a side note, I'll say on thing. I'm alot more excited about an Avengers film if Marvel can put Cap, Thor, Ironman and the Hulk in it with no copyright issues.
i hope its not the Ultimates :(
 
Dragon said:
Not necessarily. If the rights are back at Marvel, they can choose who will distribute. And even if it is Universal, if Marvel is financing the production, which is the biggest amount of money at risk, Universal would be less squeamish since their risk wouldn't be more than about 50 million, versus the 170 million for Hulk 1.

On a side note, I'll say on thing. I'm alot more excited about an Avengers film if Marvel can put Cap, Thor, Ironman and the Hulk in it with no copyright issues.

Yes necessarily. Universal still maintains distribution rights for the Hulk sequel. That's a fact, but it's just distribution rights.
 
Advanced Dark said:
Yes necessarily. Universal still maintains distribution rights for the Hulk sequel. That's a fact, but it's just distribution rights.

But that's not forever. Eventually the rights will run out, just as they did for Ironman and Newline. And even if the film was made within the existing contract, Universal might choose to opt out. They didn't do too well on the first film, you'll recall.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"