The Official Budget & Box Office Thread

[Weadazoid]

Wow that should leave a distate in everyones mouth so expect less not more in terms of SFX

great..perfect...this pretty much garuatees Zod or perhaps a totaly humaniod brainaick that barely shows off any technorganic in nature views

Forget about a robotic or visualy stunning Brainiack at this point, and forget about the same kind of leap forward we saw from Spiderman to Spiderman 2, or X men to X men 2 cause it just won't be there in terms of the budget.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Wow that should leave a distate in everyones mouth so expect less not more in terms of SFX

great..perfect...this pretty much garuatees Zod or perhaps a totaly humaniod brainaick that barely shows off any technorganic in nature views

Forget about a robotic or visualy stunning Brainiack at this point, and forget about the same kind of leap forward we saw from Spiderman to Spiderman 2, or X men to X men 2 cause it just won't be there in terms of the budget.

I think you're looking at this wrong. Money doesn't make good special effects. Creativity and talent make good special effects. X2 cost around $120m yet can stand right next to Superman Returns as far as effects go. In terms of action, X2 has more and it's better.

Superman Returns cost so much because of the scope. Singer wanted a superhero epic on a biblical scale.

 

[markaudette]

Weren't there some gimbels and flying rigs made specifically just for SR? These are part of the reason the budget for SR was so big and is also why the sequel will also be be slightly less expensive to produce.

There's the flying rig and the giant gimbal built for the jet sequence. They can pull those out for another use. That should save them a lot of cash.

 

[The Question]

Wow that should leave a distate in everyones mouth so expect less not more in terms of SFX

great..perfect...this pretty much garuatees Zod or perhaps a totaly humaniod brainaick that barely shows off any technorganic in nature views

Forget about a robotic or visualy stunning Brainiack at this point, and forget about the same kind of leap forward we saw from Spiderman to Spiderman 2, or X men to X men 2 cause it just won't be there in terms of the budget.

Perrsonally, I don't really want a robotic Brainiac. A green skinned Brainiac with cybernetic implants sticking out of his body (most notebly the three red circles on his forehead), and possibly a semi-visible techno/wire pattern to suggest that he doesn't have veins, but instead wires. Aside from that, his powers could be mainly centered around telekinesis, telepathy, and energy manipulation. The first two require mainly practical effects, and the second requires minimal CGI.

 

[matthooper]

Creativity and talent make good special effects.

But that is the problem. A total lack of creativity and talent for the new vision of Superman. A bigger budget got us Superman Returns, more money would not have made it any less mediocre.

As far as the sequel goes, they could spend $400 million, but as long as Singer and the writing team from Superman Returns are on board, more money won't make a bit of difference.

 

[Maze]

But that is the problem. A total lack of creativity and talent for the new vision of Superman.

Opinion .

i think the contrary.And i totally agree with Kevin.

 

[Weadazoid]

I think you're looking at this wrong. Money doesn't make good special effects. Creativity and talent make good special effects. X2 cost around $120m yet can stand right next to Superman Returns as far as effects go. In terms of action, X2 has more and it's better.

Superman Returns cost so much because of the scope. Singer wanted a superhero epic on a biblical scale.

I agree but X 2 was made some time ago.

and in an age where the sequal is supposed to be far more eye poping.

Look at the difference from Spiderman 1 to 2, look at the difference from Pirates 1 to 2.

I think most fans expect that and it takes money

is Batman TDK going to cost less then 150 Million to make? some how I doubt it, they will probubly give Nolan a bigger budget this time around because of the success of the first film.

so the question is..with a smaller or nearly the same budget..was SUperman a Success?

 

[Maze]

Well , i think that the first pirate was better.More inventive in all areas.

(and that saying a lot as i think the first one was so so .. )

 

[KaptainKrypton]

Weren't there some gimbels and flying rigs made specifically just for SR? These are part of the reason the budget for SR was so big and is also why the sequel will also be be slightly less expensive to produce.

There's the flying rig and the giant gimbal built for the jet sequence. They can pull those out for another use. That should save them a lot of cash.

Not to mention the fresh sets for Smallville, The Daily Planet, The Fortress, The Krytponian Ship, New Krypton, and The Gertrude (w/gimball). Let's not forget about the R&D costs for flying and the suit. Not only did these things have to be built from scratch, but they were also designed from scratch. In Spider-Man 2, they only tweaked the design of the suit a little bit and the FX technologies were a little more finely honed as Dykstra and his team at Sony had already dealt with the same kinds of tasks as in the first film. The Daily Planet, The Krypton Ship (unless the footage from SR is used), and The Gertrude will not even be in use the second time around. They probably won't have to spend nearly as much because they've already used/designed a great bulk of the sets, as well as the suit and flying FX.

 

[Maze]

I agree but X 2 was made some time ago.

Yup but X2 was made one year before Spiderman 2.

So yes Spiderman 2 had way more cgi and stuff ..very spectacular ,nice and all ..but personnally i found that not only there was too much of it ,it was often too long (the aunt May Octopus scene for example was too long , and i was bored ) but i didn't find it very involving ..

I prefer shorter ,and more visceral action scenes.

 

[Weadazoid]

I tbasicaly was to show how Dock Ock was a very worthy opponent to Spiderman, and I doubt anyone really thinks there was too much of it most fans really loved it.

Th Greatest things about Comics is the fight sequences and we need more movies to go for it all out in the ame sense Spiderman 2 went for it.


Short and viceral can work..but did you really think Wolverine vs Yuriko (Lady D) was short and viceral, the fight lasted a good while..different kind of fight required some CGI but not alot..but it still was far from short and viceral..well viceral but not short.

Thing is we need to see Superman have an all out battle with a Villain who can go tit for tat, that requires heavy steady CGI, seeing the villain dodge/absorb the punishment of the lazer eyes, and trade back with some incendiary of it's own

One thing is for sure we certainly are not going to see an Apokayptic alein invasion Darksiede style not with this budget forget about it.

 

[C. Lee]

The lower budget just means they don't have to spend money inventing new things (reuse leftover stuff from the first movie)....shoot as many new scenes (use deleted scenes from first movie in this one)...and make them learn to tighten things up and not be so wasteful.

 

[skruloos]

I tbasicaly was to show how Dock Ock was a very worthy opponent to Spiderman, and I doubt anyone really thinks there was too much of it most fans really loved it.

Too much of it? I would be in the party that agrees there was too much. Maybe if the CG was better I wouldn't care but there was too much bad CGI for my tastes.

 

[Showtime]

It was a CGI fest muddled with predictable dialogue.

 

[GreenKToo]

It will be fine.They are prolly gonna reuse most of the sets from S.R.,not to mention the return to krypton scene will most likely be used.I still think Darkseid is very possibe to do,but if not, its kool...Brainiac is awesome as well...

 

[Rob-el]

The lower budget just means they don't have to spend money inventing new things (reuse leftover stuff from the first movie)....shoot as many new scenes (use deleted scenes from first movie in this one)...and make them learn to tighten things up and not be so wasteful.

So true..they have the $10 million Krypton scenes that I'm sure will be used with a little tweaking. I can see it as the opening of the movie, we spend five minutes exploring the ruins of Krypton then Supes gives the "go home" command and his ship leaves but in the back ground we see something glow and get brighter and then starts to fly after Supe's ship - this will be the threat (Braniac?) for the next movie and they already have this almost already to go!

 

[fabman]

The fact is, Bryan Singer spent 10 million dollars for a scene which wasn't used in the movie... wasted money... that's what Bryan Singer doesn't have to do with this movie - waste money.

P.S.: Wouldn't it be interesting seeing the death of Superman in the Singer's second movie? The Kevin Smith script wasn't that bad and would've been better if it wasn't for Jon Peter ("giant spider...").

 

[dar-El]

Im betting that Mongul will be the villain in the sequel and not Zod. That way singer will avoid repeating the original films. Cos at the moment he's nowt but a ripoff artist.

 

[GreenKToo]

^ I could deal with mongul too...I think most of us agree that as long as Zod is not the main villian, we can deal with who ever..(as long as its no toyman hehe)

 

[JamalYIgle]

The fact is, Bryan Singer spent 10 million dollars for a scene which wasn't used in the movie... wasted money... that's what Bryan Singer doesn't have to do with this movie - waste money.

P.S.: Wouldn't it be interesting seeing the death of Superman in the Singer's second movie? The Kevin Smith script wasn't that bad and would've been better if it wasn't for Jon Peter ("giant spider...").

Yes because the studio made him cut down the films running time. Every movie has filmed scenes cut out. It happens, You can no more blame Singer than you can blame any other director.

 

[C. Lee]

Yes because the studio made him cut down the films running time. Every movie has filmed scenes cut out. It happens, You can no more blame Singer than you can blame any other director.

Unfortuantly it is the way of the boards. I have seen way too many posters who stick to their preconceived ideas about someone or something....and simply run with it...logic be damned.

 

[Super Kal]

but singer himself said the he himself cut it out... that doesn't tell me that the studio cut it out, but Singer did.

 

[Freddy_Krueger]

but singer himself said the he himself cut it out... that doesn't tell me that the studio cut it out, but Singer did.

Because he had to, for pacing's sake. It's not like its the first time numerous scenes have been filmed and then cut out. It's just the way editing works: what can we keep and still tell the story and what can we get rid of without hurting the film. $10 million or no, if it hurt the pacing then it shouldn't have been included in the film.

 

[skruloos]

but singer himself said the he himself cut it out... that doesn't tell me that the studio cut it out, but Singer did.

Have you ever tried making a movie? Sometimes a script is written and after it is assembled, you see the whole thing and not just the scenes out of context and you realize the film doesn't work as well as you'd hoped. Editing begins in the scripting, continues during production, and goes all the way through til post production. It happens all the time.

 

[dark_b]

Have you ever tried making a movie? Sometimes a script is written and after it is assembled, you see the whole thing and not just the scenes out of context and you realize the film doesn't work as well as you'd hoped. Editing begins in the scripting, continues during production, and goes all the way through til post production. It happens all the time.

but this doesnt sound good. you can not work 2 years and then ut something so big out.