Terminator Salvation: Box Office Prediction/Discussion

[Alonsovich]

haha....I'm still amazed that this film had a shooting budget of 200 million with FX.

After I saw the film it looked like maybe 125 million budgeted film....but 200 million. What was Alan Horn and Robinov smoking there?

Nothing... 'cause WB put just 60 million... you should ask the guys from Sony who put the rest...

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

The movie looked like a 200million dollar film to me.

 

[Lord Blackbolt]

did anyone see the new commercials with a huge number 1 on it... saying its the Number 1 action movie of the weekend. Kinda grasping at straws.

 

[LostSon88]

Um...studios do that all the time.

In the past, comedies that technically, open up number 2 at the box office end up with tv spots claiming its the "#1 comedy of the blah blah blah"...

Its not grasping at straws, its common practice.

 

[Kanon]

"No 1 movie that is not Night at the Museum 2!"

 

[terry78]

This summer, Next Day Air is the #1 black comedy movie of the year...after Madea Goes to Jail...but still, pretty damn good!

 

[Dark Knight]

Nothing... 'cause WB put just 60 million... you should ask the guys from Sony who put the rest...

I didn't know Sony financed the rest?

Wow. So it looks like WB's will make some sort of profit if they only put 60 million down?

 

[Dark Knight]

The movie looked like a 200million dollar film to me.

Superman Returns sure as heck didn't look like a 200 million film though huh?

t:

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Superman Returns sure as heck didn't look like a 200 million film though huh?

t:

lol. Stop trying to get me to bash that movie here!

 

[JaD]

Superman Returns sure as heck didn't look like a 200 million film though huh?

t:

If you watch the Requiem for Krypton on the DVD, holy crap you'll see where that money came from

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Both Superman Returns and Terminator Salvation "looked like" $200 million productions. End of discussion. Get back on topic.

 

[Octoberist]

Nothing... 'cause WB put just 60 million... you should ask the guys from Sony who put the rest...

So Sony did the majority of the financial backing?

 

[M.O.Steel]

i thought it looked like 200 mil used.

(i agree that SR didn't)

 

[Doctor Jones]

Superman Returns is what you call money well spent.

 

[JaD]

Superman Returns is what you call money well spent.

*hurries to agree before basherz interfere*

Fantastic sets, SFX, and the overall film. Agreed.

 

[LostSon88]

The film looked beautiful, no doubt.

but...200 million and Superman didn't even throw a punch.

That's sums up my feelings on SR.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

The SR arguement threads are that way.

 

[LostSon88]

Relax...it was only 4 short posts on SR.

Moving on.

 

[M.O.Steel]

i don't think there's anything wrong with bringing it up along with other movies. this is a BO discussion, if other movies are used to prove a point, then i think its ok.

 

[Dark Knight]

If you watch the Requiem for Krypton on the DVD, holy crap you'll see where that money came from

I did....and it's too bad the Return to Krypton scene wasn't in the final cut. Don't want to talk about SR here....but if studios are going to spend 200 million to make a film, then it better blow the audience away and be epic like Lord of the Rings style and make a profit. Otherwise keep the budget below around 125-150 million and make that money work so the chances of making a profit are better. I liked SR and Salvation, but for cryin out loud 200 million to make those films?

Ridiculous and unnecessary. It's all about budget discipline.....

 

[Episode29]

I did....and it's too bad the Return to Krypton scene wasn't in the final cut. Don't want to talk about SR here....but if studios are going to spend 200 million to make a film, then it better blow the audience away and be epic like Lord of the Rings style and make a profit. Otherwise keep the budget below around 125-150 million and make that money work so the chances of making a profit are better. I liked SR and Salvation, but for cryin out loud 200 million to make those films?

Ridiculous and unnecessary. It's all about budget discipline.....

...says the dude with zero film production experience.

 

[dark_b]

Oh yeah....if crap Marvel films can get a sequel....then why can't the Terminator with a lower budget?

explain.

and of course name those crappy 200 millions marvel movies

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

People can whine and b**ch as much as they want but unless Salvation has something like Pirates 1 legs a lower budget sequel aint ever coming out.

A s**tty remake in 10 to 15? Yeah. But a sequel to Salvation? Hell no!

 

[dark_b]

Both Superman Returns and Terminator Salvation "looked like" $200 million productions. End of discussion. Get back on topic.

if you didnt know that the cornfields were CGI you wouldnt know that they spend money on CGI for that. so you would think its real.

i think people always look on the obvious CGI scenes. but today almost every shot has some CGI inside. from painting out wires,backgrounds replacing,changing a car, clouds in the sky for a more epic look,extra smoke,lens flares.then of course every shot gous through color grading(color correction).
and so on.
did it look like a 200 movie? SR . if you know what is CGI then it did because they replaced a lot with CGI. even the little kid running was CGI.

paying arnold is in the official budget? because this was not cheap. paying him only to scan hes face and use it. then of course ILM had to make those shots.

wonder if CGsociety will talk about making Arnold since it is a cameo.

 

[Alonsovich]

So Sony did the majority of the financial backing?

WB put 60 million for the domestic distribution rights. Sony put 100 million for the international ones. Co-prodution basically. They did the same with T3, where WB put 50 million and Sony 100. Majority of the movie was financed that way.