SpeedballLives said:
I don't see why it takes 200 million dollars to make a film like Superman Returns, and it "only" took 113 million to make Star Wars Episode III.
Lots of answers there
First and foremost , the VFX.
While it is true that Ep 3 may be bigger in scope in terms of VFX , i think the complexity of the VFX in SR make it more difficult.Like i said in my previous post here , creating a flying human being is much more difficult.You have to create a realistic digital double who has to perform all things that a normal human can't do.
Second , the fact that Ep 3 was filmed almost entirely on a blue screen also plays a role here.
SR has is filmed tradionally with a real set . All these things need to be built .
With a blue screen set , you just say okay this is approx. how big the shot is going to be so we need this amount of space for the actors to move in. Just paint the entire set blue.
Done.
And also the shorter shooting schedule that you have with a blue screen shoot. Normally when you shoot a movie with real sets , you need to reset everything after a take to film that shot again. That could take up hours sometimes. With a blue screen shoot , that time is reduced drastically .
And so because you have less costs due to sets not being built ( there are more things ...) you can spend that money also into the VFX budget ; in the case of SW i think almost 90% of the budget went into the VFX.
Third the time factor plays a role here too.
It's obvious to any person who follows the production of movies , that creating VFX requires time. It takes time to render images . Although technology has come along since the days when those "simple looking " VFX shots of the T-1000 in Terminator 2 required pretty much the entire ILM staff to work on those shots , there is still this immense pressure to meet deadlines.
When a long time is taken to create those VFX , the cost is reduced drastically.
This might be explained due to the fact that studios tend to give VFX firms an incredible short time to create highly detailed VFX scenes . And that apparantly causes the budgets to skyrocket. Compare a movie like the Matrix Revolutions and X3. Matrix revolutions had big and huge VFX sequences , bigger then anything in X3. yet the budget of X3 was somewhere around the 200 million mark whereas that of reloaded was around 140.
Answer was simply the Post. prod schedule. X3 was given a post. prod schedule of ( i think) 9 months whereas matrix revolutions had a combined post prod. scedule of 4 years ( if you count the work done on reloaded as well).
Even with Lord Of The Rings. Return Of The King had a post. prod. schedule of 3 years.
With SR it was no different. It had a post. prod period of less then a year whereas Ep 3 had a post. prod period of 1.5-2 years.
And we aren't even talking about the fact that movies like Ep 3 are building on the software and technologt they created for their previous movies. With Superman , they had to start from scratch.
And finally , yes lucas owns ILM. He can make his workers do almost unreal amounts of VFX , simply because he owns ILM.
If you've ever watched the making of documentary of Return Of The King , you'll see just what kind of pressure WETA had to endure with Peter Jackson.
Those guys would literally spend up to 20 hrs or even sleep at WETA in some cases , just to get the VFX done.It's unreal , but it did pay off.
So it can be a blessing if you own you're own VFX company in that you can basically make you're employees work that much harder in order to create those VFX.
BUuuuuuuttttt , again you're still limited to what you can do if the images just aren't delivered on time. You can stand behind you're employee with a whip but if the computer doesn't render the image fast enough , you're just screwed. Which is also why it can be a big help when you give multiple studios you're VFX shots.
) and 3) again having lots more money for the VFX without skyrocketing the budget.
