• Secure your account

    A friendly reminder to our users, please make sure your account is safe. Make sure you update your password and have an active email address to recover or change your password.

  • Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

X3' Budget: Into Hugh's and Halle's wallet?

Walks Unseen

Civilian
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
Points
1
X-Men: TLS had a $210 million dollar budget making it the most expensive movie made (according to Wikipedia). Where did all that money go? The special effects were great in X3 but I wouldn't say they were better than Stas Wars: Episode 3's special effects (which had a $125 million budget). Not to mention their weren't that many special effects shots, when say, comparing it to King Kong ($200 million budget). So where did all their budget go to. I think alot of it went into the hands of Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry and the probably the director and producers as well. Perhaps TLS wopuld have been a better film if more of the money had gone into the actual production. I dont know maybe I'm wrong, but it just seems a little odd that the most expensive movie made didn't have more to offer in special effects and set pieces than any other film with budgets in the 100 million dollar mark.
 
Yes, two people out of a cast of 50 sucked up the entire budget. :whatever: Good lord, get some perspective people.
 
Specter313 said:
Yes, two people out of a cast of 50 sucked up the entire budget. :whatever: Good lord, get some perspective people.
Of course!

They each got 105 million a piece. :o Then smeared it in their own feces then rubbed it in James Marsden, Anna Paquin, -insert name of actor of character who was done wrong in X3- faces. :o
 
And Superman Returns had a bigger budget, less stars, and not the greatest or most special effects either.
 
you don't need that much yo do a good x men movie- most think x1 was better and that only had around 75 mill. don't blame a poor movie on money - its the writers and directors
 
Most of the budget went to ALL of the actors.

Actors who aren't especially cheap to hire:

Hugh
Halle
Patrick
Ian
Kelsey
Anna

And the rest:

Famke
Aaron
Shawn
James
Ellen
Dania
Vinnie

And more that I'm sure I'm forgetting. So yes, a lot of the budget went to actors' salaries, which is part of the reason more sequels are a massive if. But in no way are Halle and Hugh responsible for anything you just accused them of. Get a grip.
 
Here's an idea Unseen, how about the fact that Fox needed to get a movie done in less than a year, for whatever reason. That could drive up costs, maybe?!?
 
Actually, the budget was 168 million. 40 million is a huge difference.
 
No it wasn't, we know it was definitely over 200.
 
Walks Unseen said:
X-Men: TLS had a $210 million dollar budget making it the most expensive movie made (according to Wikipedia). Where did all that money go? The special effects were great in X3 but I wouldn't say they were better than Stas Wars: Episode 3's special effects (which had a $125 million budget). Not to mention their weren't that many special effects shots, when say, comparing it to King Kong ($200 million budget). So where did all their budget go to. I think alot of it went into the hands of Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry and the probably the director and producers as well. Perhaps TLS wopuld have been a better film if more of the money had gone into the actual production. I dont know maybe I'm wrong, but it just seems a little odd that the most expensive movie made didn't have more to offer in special effects and set pieces than any other film with budgets in the 100 million dollar mark.

Oh my Lord.... Stupidity walks the earth with a new name...

It didn't have much to offer in special effects, you say??? Were you facing the wrong way in the auditorium? :whatever:
 
the budget wasn't that high. I'm agree in some points with the first comment. there are other films with more and better effects.
 
I remember reading a recent article saying Halle's current paycheck is $14 million per picture. I don't know if this counts for ensemble pieces like X-Men...she might've got payed less then her usual asking price. :confused:

xmenfilesfan05 said:
Here's an idea Unseen, how about the fact that Fox needed to get a movie done in less than a year, for whatever reason. That could drive up costs, maybe?!?

We definitely should take this into account, for the large budget. Having to get things done quick raises costs. Plus, X3 had ten visual-effects houses working on the film. If production had a much longer time, then maybe they could've kept it down. But 10? That had to be more expensive in the long run. Even X1 and X2 had multiple effect houses working on the films, but I think had even more.

..and lets not get started on the size of that cast, lol. I can understand why the budget was so high. The budget price might include marketing/ promotional costs as well (not sure), and that tends to get pretty pricey, too.
 
X-Maniac said:
Oh my Lord.... Stupidity walks the earth with a new name...

It didn't have much to offer in special effects, you say??? Were you facing the wrong way in the auditorium? :whatever:

Can you go a day without insulting someone? You were just banned not too long ago. With the way you're going I'll be very happy to see you banned again.
 
xmenfilesfan05 said:
Here's an idea Unseen, how about the fact that Fox needed to get a movie done in less than a year, for whatever reason. That could drive up costs, maybe?!?

Which is their own fault. If Fox had locked up Singer and their actors they wouldn't have had to rush to get a film done. So that was their own stupidity there.
 
JustABill said:
Of course!

They each got 105 million a piece. :o Then smeared it in their own feces then rubbed it in James Marsden, Anna Paquin, -insert name of actor of character who was done wrong in X3- faces. :o

I hope you all read the article about Sean COnnery playing Gandlaf in LOTR before you flmae the guy.... they guaranteed him 15% of the Box Office... only a measly 450 million would've been pocketed by him alone.... Hugh and Halley could have had similar deals on a smaller scale but the cast did suck up a lot of the budget...
 
FaT_tONle said:
I hope you all read the article about Sean COnnery playing Gandlaf in LOTR before you flmae the guy.... they guaranteed him 15% of the Box Office... only a measly 450 million would've been pocketed by him alone.... Hugh and Halley could have had similar deals on a smaller scale but the cast did suck up a lot of the budget...

Did you think about that before posting it? First, that would mean he wasn't paid until after the movie has stopped playing in theaters, because you can't figure out how much he would have made until then. Which would then mean that the money he is paid comes out of the box office receipts, not the budget. So, there goes that theory. Next, we've already been over the fact that a good chunk of the budget would be going to the cast. Anyone with any kind of brain power should be able to figure that out with a cast this size. But to blame it on one or two people is just dumb.
 
LastSunrise1981 said:
Can you go a day without insulting someone? You were just banned not too long ago. With the way you're going I'll be very happy to see you banned again.

Pot. Kettle. Black.
 
If i remember correctly a long time ago,a report came out with how much each person cost.
Halle Berry got 20-25 million, Hugh Jackman got 15-18 mil, Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan got around 12-15, Famke 9-13 mil, Anna, Shawn, and Aaron 5-8 mil, and James got 2 mil.
 
LastSunrise1981 said:
Can you go a day without insulting someone? You were just banned not too long ago. With the way you're going I'll be very happy to see you banned again.

So says the person who was also banned not too long ago and who tried to rejoin under a bogus identity.:whatever:
 
X-Maniac said:
So says the person who was also banned not too long ago and who tried to rejoin under a bogus identity.:whatever:

I wasn't banned so how about i say it. Can you chill out and go a day without strutting around as if your superior to everyone else. :)
 
Boba_Fett_123 said:
At this point I'd be happy if you were both perm-banned. :o

Why would you be happy if i were banned?

I've brought a lot of intelligent argument and information to this forum. Even if there are 'heat of the moment' things in there too.

I find your post offensive and way out of line.
 
Specter313 said:
Yes, two people out of a cast of 50 sucked up the entire budget. :whatever: Good lord, get some perspective people.

JustABill said:
Ha.

That is all I say to this thread. :o

The way you 2 go about i'd swear you put blood sweat and tears into this movie.

You ppl think you can learn to take things without being so deffensive offensive. Talk about painting it all black and white.

How about you go back and re read the post. :)

Walks Unseen said:
X-Men: TLS had a $210 million dollar budget making it the most expensive movie made (according to Wikipedia). Where did all that money go? The special effects were great in X3 but I wouldn't say they were better than Stas Wars: Episode 3's special effects (which had a $125 million budget). Not to mention their weren't that many special effects shots, when say, comparing it to King Kong ($200 million budget). So where did all their budget go to. I think alot of it went into the hands of Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry and the probably the director and producers as well. Perhaps TLS wopuld have been a better film if more of the money had gone into the actual production. I dont know maybe I'm wrong, but it just seems a little odd that the most expensive movie made didn't have more to offer in special effects and set pieces than any other film with budgets in the 100 million dollar mark.

The guy has a point so much money put into the movie and yet the effects matched up against lower budget films.

And if you read carefully it sounds like this is just a theory he's putting out there he's not actually blaming Halle and Hugh for grabing "budget" money.

In the end a certain percentage of budget money ends up in the cast Spectre. ;) The Studio doesn't magically make back all the money from the budget and have a savings account for the actors. :D. So i'm sure they have to keep in mind what actors are being payed.

And let's face it 2 big name actors don't come cheap, i'm not saying they are the reason for anything just that they don't come cheap.

But to be honest i don't think Hugh or Halle's pay roll affected the movie in anyway as far i'm concerned it was the obvious rushed production (where the money was lost IMO).

Edit- and before anyone says anything yes i know the budget doesn't go to actors at first. :o
 
X-Maniac said:
Why would you be happy if i were banned?

I've brought a lot of intelligent argument and information to this forum. Even if there are 'heat of the moment' things in there too.

I find your post offensive and way out of line.

ROTFLMAO!!!


:whatever:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
200,686
Messages
21,786,682
Members
45,616
Latest member
stevezorz
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"