|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on Jun 21, 2019 22:32:42 GMT
What was the production budget for this before the reshoots? Because the movie just doesn't look very expensive, it doesn't look like it had a budget of 200 million, the movie looks small and small scaled. Genosha, the mansion, the buildings they have used shouldn't take a lot of money.
While the previous movies had Cerebro, the subbasement, X-Jet, helicopters. The only thing really new is the space setting which lasted like 5 minutes. Most of the characters are in casual clothing as well. The movie isn't vfx heavy compare to X3.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Jun 21, 2019 22:38:04 GMT
I believe I read it was 170m before reshoots 200m after...
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jun 22, 2019 1:20:37 GMT
I believe I read it was 170m before reshoots 200m after... That falls in line with what I had heard that it was between First Class's $160m and Apocalypse's $178m.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jun 22, 2019 1:48:55 GMT
What was the production budget for this before the reshoots? Because the movie just doesn't look very expensive, it doesn't look like it had a budget of 200 million, the movie looks small and small scaled. Genosha, the mansion, the buildings they have used shouldn't take a lot of money. While the previous movies had Cerebro, the subbasement, X-Jet, helicopters. The only thing really new is the space setting which lasted like 5 minutes. Most of the characters are in casual clothing as well. The movie isn't vfx heavy compare to X3. I think if you look at the cast it does look very expensive, I doubt you were getting Lawrence for less than 8 figures this time out, McAvoy & Fassbender maybe around the same number, easy 7 figures for Hoult, Turner, Chastain & Evan Peters maybe more if re-shoots exceeded an agreed upon time permitted for them.
Also comparing it to last stand, given inflation Last Stand would be a $275m budget today, so yeah they spent like the equivalent of $75m more on Last Stand than Dark Phoenix, and depending on how much they had to redo the movie that ups the cost whilst reducing the quality meaning instead of lots of VFX through out they would be better suited using it more as needed instead of just going ah look pretty like sometimes blockbusters will do.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Jun 22, 2019 1:51:28 GMT
What was the production budget for this before the reshoots? Because the movie just doesn't look very expensive, it doesn't look like it had a budget of 200 million, the movie looks small and small scaled. Genosha, the mansion, the buildings they have used shouldn't take a lot of money. While the previous movies had Cerebro, the subbasement, X-Jet, helicopters. The only thing really new is the space setting which lasted like 5 minutes. Most of the characters are in casual clothing as well. The movie isn't vfx heavy compare to X3. I think if you look at the cast it does look very expensive, I doubt you were getting Lawrence for less than 8 figures this time out, McAvoy & Fassbender maybe around the same number, easy 7 figures for Hoult, Turner, Chastain & Evan Peters maybe more if re-shoots exceeded an agreed upon time permitted for them.
Also comparing it to last stand, given inflation Last Stand would be a $275m budget today, so yeah they spent like the equivalent of $75m more on Last Stand than Dark Phoenix, and depending on how much they had to redo the movie that ups the cost whilst reducing the quality meaning instead of lots of VFX through out they would be better suited using it more as needed instead of just going ah look pretty like sometimes blockbusters will do.
was going to bring up the cost of cast and inflation but you handled it.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jun 22, 2019 1:56:36 GMT
I believe I read it was 170m before reshoots 200m after... Yes clearly not meant as a blockbuster because Kinberg said so. Eh Khalil?
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Jun 22, 2019 2:00:19 GMT
I believe I read it was 170m before reshoots 200m after... Yes clearly not meant as a blockbuster because Kinberg said so. Eh Khalil? Any movie over 150m is pretty much meant to be a blockbuster. It will need 300m just to break even on production budget. At 170m they would need 340m for production budget break even and need 550m+ to make a good profit theatrically.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jun 22, 2019 2:02:39 GMT
Yes clearly not meant as a blockbuster because Kinberg said so. Eh Khalil? Any movie over 150m is pretty much meant to be a blockbuster. It will need 300m just to break even on production budget. At 170m they would need 340m for production budget break even and need 550m+ to make a good profit theatrically. Guaranteed before everything went tits up.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jun 22, 2019 2:07:34 GMT
I think if you look at the cast it does look very expensive, I doubt you were getting Lawrence for less than 8 figures this time out, McAvoy & Fassbender maybe around the same number, easy 7 figures for Hoult, Turner, Chastain & Evan Peters maybe more if re-shoots exceeded an agreed upon time permitted for them.
Also comparing it to last stand, given inflation Last Stand would be a $275m budget today, so yeah they spent like the equivalent of $75m more on Last Stand than Dark Phoenix, and depending on how much they had to redo the movie that ups the cost whilst reducing the quality meaning instead of lots of VFX through out they would be better suited using it more as needed instead of just going ah look pretty like sometimes blockbusters will do.
was going to bring up the cost of cast and inflation but you handled it. Also cant forget the infamous Hollywood accounting, you know the money they spent fucking with the Gambit movie was slipped into the budget of this somehow, same thing happened to MOS & Superman Returns which inflated the budget on both of those movies quite a bit iirc, that and paying that weird producer who demanded a robot spider and is adamant the sword goon from the 89 Batman made that movie $100m for that one scene, movies are so bloody odd.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jun 22, 2019 2:11:12 GMT
Yes clearly not meant as a blockbuster because Kinberg said so. Eh Khalil? Any movie over 150m is pretty much meant to be a blockbuster. It will need 300m just to break even on production budget. At 170m they would need 340m for production budget break even and need 550m+ to make a good profit theatrically. More like triple now due to how much international box office make up a movies revenue, and the shares from those theatres is a lot lesser than the 50% or so they get from US theatres, add in marketing cost and a movie typically needs to triple their budget or more these days to even begin sniffing profit.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Jun 22, 2019 2:12:18 GMT
was going to bring up the cost of cast and inflation but you handled it. Also cant forget the infamous Hollywood accounting, you know the money they spent fucking with the Gambit movie was slipped into the budget of this somehow, same thing happened to MOS & Superman Returns which inflated the budget on both of those movies quite a bit iirc, that and paying that weird producer who demanded a robot spider and is adamant the sword goon from the 89 Batman made that movie $100m for that one scene, movies are so bloody odd. John Peters. Hairdresser and Producer extraordinaire. Thanks Kevin Smith for letting us all know how fucked up Hollywood is.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Jun 22, 2019 2:15:47 GMT
Any movie over 150m is pretty much meant to be a blockbuster. It will need 300m just to break even on production budget. At 170m they would need 340m for production budget break even and need 550m+ to make a good profit theatrically. More like triple now due to how much international box office make up a movies revenue, and the shares from those theatres is a lot lesser than the 50% or so they get from US theatres, add in marketing cost and a movie typically needs to triple their budget or more these days to even begin sniffing profit. The only problem I have with adding Marketing in is we don't know what kind of deals studios has on the marketing side. They get millions for just 1 product placement. Also they get some value from partners making commercials for the movie. Like jeep for BvS. Not to mention Studios that own television stations. When Marvel buys ads on ABC, Disney, Espn. Marvel Studios is paying Disney for those commercials so they are paying themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Jun 22, 2019 2:21:10 GMT
Any movie over 150m is pretty much meant to be a blockbuster. It will need 300m just to break even on production budget. At 170m they would need 340m for production budget break even and need 550m+ to make a good profit theatrically. More like triple now due to how much international box office make up a movies revenue, and the shares from those theatres is a lot lesser than the 50% or so they get from US theatres, add in marketing cost and a movie typically needs to triple their budget or more these days to even begin sniffing profit. The Marketing Budget Estimate people use as a rule of thumb. Half to equal to Production Budget comes from people taking the number of TV and Print Ads for the movies and estimating on the average price of those ads. Which is logical rule of thumb, but that estimation doesn't take into account any of the other things that goes with Marketing.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jun 22, 2019 3:08:31 GMT
Also cant forget the infamous Hollywood accounting, you know the money they spent fucking with the Gambit movie was slipped into the budget of this somehow, same thing happened to MOS & Superman Returns which inflated the budget on both of those movies quite a bit iirc, that and paying that weird producer who demanded a robot spider and is adamant the sword goon from the 89 Batman made that movie $100m for that one scene, movies are so bloody odd. John Peters. Hairdresser and Producer extraordinaire. Thanks Kevin Smith for letting us all know how fucked up Hollywood is. That man deserves his Hollywood biopic. Come on, Streisand's hairdresser becomes a studio mogul with a robot bug fetish? Top it off with Kevin Smith writing the script.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jun 22, 2019 11:44:39 GMT
I believe I read it was 170m before reshoots 200m after... Yes clearly not meant as a blockbuster because Kinberg said so. Eh Khalil? I'm thinking what he meant when he said that was that it wasn't meant to be this overblown action summer popcorn movie, but something smaller.
I don't think Kinberg knows what a blockbuster is.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jun 22, 2019 14:48:30 GMT
Yes clearly not meant as a blockbuster because Kinberg said so. Eh Khalil? I'm thinking what he meant when he said that was that it wasn't meant to be this overblown action summer popcorn movie, but something smaller.
I don't think Kinberg knows what a blockbuster is.
Or a red herring for that matter .
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Jun 22, 2019 21:23:22 GMT
Let's not forget these incredibly accurate and high-quality uniforms that were developed for the film. They had to have cost a pretty penny.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Brundle - Martinfly on Jun 23, 2019 0:31:10 GMT
Let's not forget these incredibly accurate and high-quality uniforms that were developed for the film. They had to have cost a pretty penny. They looked very Nineties. I loved them. Still, the costumes at the very end of "Apocalypse" were perfect.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Jun 23, 2019 2:18:26 GMT
Let's not forget these incredibly accurate and high-quality uniforms that were developed for the film. They had to have cost a pretty penny. They looked very Nineties. I loved them. Still, the costumes at the very end of "Apocalypse" were perfect. They looked cheap to me. Not much better than this casual cosplay fashion line based on the X-Men: danikaxix.shop. The costumes that they were inspired by are more substantial, these look like bad knockoffs in comparison.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Jun 23, 2019 2:54:19 GMT
They looked very Nineties. I loved them. Still, the costumes at the very end of "Apocalypse" were perfect. They looked cheap to me. Not much better than this casual cosplay fashion line based on the X-Men: danikaxix.shop. The costumes that they were inspired by are more substantial, these look like bad knockoffs in comparison. Why does that cover remind me of Reservoir Dogs?
|
|