How in the hell do you spend 80 million to make a film like spanglish?
And thats not even counting marketing,with marketing the films production goes up to over 100mill!
Each LOTR film cost 90-95 million to make and this one cost 80!
| World of KJ http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/ |
|
| WTF? Spanglish cost 80 million to make! How? http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3144 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | neo_wolf [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | WTF? Spanglish cost 80 million to make! How? |
How in the hell do you spend 80 million to make a film like spanglish? And thats not even counting marketing,with marketing the films production goes up to over 100mill!
Each LOTR film cost 90-95 million to make and this one cost 80! |
|
| Author: | Algren [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Adam Sandler's wages 
|
|
| Author: | Riggs [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
| Good Question.
|
|
| Author: | Eagle [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
It is still likley to turn a profit. Not suprising with the cast, they could have thought they had a Meet the Parents type hit. Plus the "Spanglish" factor should have given it a good WW gross. |
|
| Author: | Michael. [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 6:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Adam Sandler is an expensive actor, James Brooks didnt come out of hiding for nothing either. And the cinematography for this film would be quite expensive. The talent invovled was all top teir. But i still highly doubt it cost the BOM figure of $80m. |
|
| Author: | publicenemy#1 [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 6:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yeah, most of it comes from the stars. Look at Something's Gotta Give, it's budget was 80 million as well. http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=som ... tagive.htm |
|
| Author: | MovieDude [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 6:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The budget's actually closer to 100 million. |
|
| Author: | Michael. [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 6:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Where did you get that figure? |
|
| Author: | Eagle [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I assume he factored in projected advertising costs. |
|
| Author: | sako [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I thought that was odd aswell, but 50 first dates cost 75m. |
|
| Author: | MovieDude [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Eagle wrote: I assume he factored in projected advertising costs. No, from the interview I read in the New York Times with Brooks. (They said 90 million before reshoots) |
|
| Author: | Goldie [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
- Sandler's salary - Everyone else's salary - Wasn't it filmed in Beverly Hills - is that expensive - Renting those 2 houses - probably for months had to be expensive also. |
|
| Author: | Eagle [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sux for them then, since it hasn't even grossed 40 million Domestically yet. Regardless it should do well internationally, and turn profit on DVD. |
|
| Author: | sako [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Eagle wrote: Sux for them then, since it hasn't even grossed 40 million Domestically yet. Regardless it should do well internationally, and turn profit on DVD. Yeah, DVD's help a lot. I doubt it will make a huge porfit, probably just enough so that it would lose the studio any money or gain them any. |
|
| Author: | Eagle [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Seabiscuit made about 150 million on DVD. DVD is a cash cow. |
|
| Author: | Michael. [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Im buying this dvd, just because the cover is pretty and has my favourite actors on the front  How fickle i am
|
|
| Author: | Eagle [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 7:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I am undecided, but I think I may buy it as well. |
|
| Author: | El Maskado [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 8:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
How much are you willing to wager that more than 50% of the budget was due to Adam Sandler's salary. I think he gets something like 30-40 million per movie |
|
| Author: | Michael. [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 8:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Adam Sandler would probobly get $25m tops I think he probobly even dropped his salary for Spanglish |
|
| Author: | wertham [ Sun Jan 09, 2005 9:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Any way you slice it, Adam Sandler's salary is a joke. He's arrived at around the same place Jerry Lewis found himself in 1968. Audiences are losing interest in him already, because a) he has no talent b) he isn't even funny anymore And Spanglish is bound to be a big money loser for its investors. Same goes for Ocean's 12, Life Aquatic and even Lemony Snicket for that matter. |
|
| Author: | Erendis [ Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I guess Hollywood has very established, and expensive, union labor for cameras, crew, assistents, make-up, hair, stunts, costuming, lighting, catering, port-a-potties, and whatever else. It must cost millions for a standard six week shoot, no matter what celebrities you're filming. And then there's a separate set of costs for post-production people too. And that doesn't include the big-name writers, directors, or cast, all of whom are expensive divas compared to people like us. No wonder Weinstein & Co moved the whole Cold Mountain shoot to Romania. |
|
| Author: | Jeff [ Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Eagle wrote: I am undecided, but I think I may buy it as well. Did you see the film? If not, I'd recommend at least renting it beforehand. Adam Sandler was good in it, as was Paz Vega, but Tea Leoni spent the majority of the movie whining or crying (or both). It was slightly humorous and entertaining at times, but not for the entire film. I'd rate it as a 5.0/10 or a C+ |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|