$10m is not the budget, that's how much Lionsgate paid for domestic rights...

Hmm. Any idea on the budget for The Choice then mark?

Why does the budget even matter? The more important figure is the one above. You can now correctly gauge Lionsgate's return. Budgets never allow us to do that as accurately.

Deadpool's budget is apparently $58 million. It will be a huge huge huge success.

I don't believe it.

The budget? Or that it'll be a huge success.

The Hollywood Reporter, Variety and Deadline reported it.

The budget.

AlFrom the getgo this was the project that was supposed to cost a fraction of huge superhero tentpoles. The director, whom a colleague of mine interviews, said the budget was well below $100 million and those are all reputale sources. Having seen the film, there is no reason to doubt that it cost more.

That's a GREAT budget for Deadpool. After Fantastic Four's debacle I believe Deadpool will bring in $$$ for Fox.

No one posted last week's openers:
Deadpool-58m
How to Be Single-38m
Zoolander 2-50m

This week:
Risen-20m
Race-5m
The Witch-1m

Good budgets for Race and The Witch, indie studios: Focus and A24 will definitely make a profit.

Zoolander 2 should make a loss worldwide.

Zoolander2 will loose money from this opening and I don't think it will make much in OS markets.

Very nice for all three openers this week they should all be profitable.

Race and The Witch numbers are once again not budgets, but aquisition costs...

Gods of Egypt-140m (However Lionsgate pre-sold rights worldwide and had filming tax breaks, so their exposure was reduced to around 10m)
Triple 9-20m
Eddie the Eagle-23m

Gods of Egypt won't lose the studio money, but they probably won't make a huge profit either. Atleast not enough for a sequel to be financially feasible. Lionsgate is looking for blockbusters to replace Hunger Games and this isn't it.

Triple 9 and Eddie the Eagle budget's are just fine for what they are. Will most likely break even in the long run.

Selling the rights to worldwide meaning worldwide distributors bought the movie in place of leasing it? How does that work? If this is hugely profitable why don't all movies just do that, I mean I understand a lot of movies make more if they are with the studios and some the distributors worldwide might not be keen and their respective markets won't enjoy it. Still certain movies that would otherwise make stinker could still be sold earlier to reek benefits.

That's an amazing budget really. Too bad it didn't have a very good opening, but such budget seem like smart film making to me. From the trailers the film looks great, too bad it isn't greatly received.

Also a great budget, and it makes me wonder why it's so necessary to make a film like White House Down for 150m+

V:

$60m London Has Fallen
$35m WTF

LHF has a lower budget than OHF so that's decent. WTF could have done with a little less considering the cast doesn't get a big paycheck.

That's a good budget for LHF. Even though it will drop domestically it should still be quite profitable with OS numbers.

It's basically a way a company hedges it's bets. If it bombs then you are not very exposed to it. If it hits however, you lose out on big profits. It's generally how indie studios or former indie studios funded their productions. New Line used this model til WB took over and absorbed the studio.

Basically the movie is sold to local distributors all over the world before production and those funds are used to then make the movie.

Thanks for that. So you sell to local distributors even before the production begins. Interesting.

DLH:

$250m BvS
$18m MY BIG FAT 2

DLH:

$1m HELLO, MY NAME IS DORIS

$250m for BvS, I'm sure they spent another $200m+ on WW marketing.