It's more than double the other three openers combined and 10m more than Deathly Hallows and At World's End.

It's 60m more than Iron Man 2, Prince of Persia, Toy Story 3 and Robin Hood.

It, is the most expensive film this year, and not sure, but, all time of disclosed budgets?

Fuck me, but, this will not be more profitable than PATF by a longshot, hell, Delgo will be more profitable.

Actually, BOM has At World's End at $300 million.

http://admin.boxofficemojo.com/movies/? ... bbean3.htm

They aren't real trustworthy, pretty sure it was 250 each.

AWE's budget it known as $300m. That's just how it is.

It just moves ahead of Spider-man 3's $258m to be the 2nd largest budget of all-time.

Well that just sucks.

No wonder Disney have cut Bruckheimer down. 300m for what exactly? It was filmed together for goodness sake.

Not to mention the 150m on G-Force, 200m on Prince of Persia and 150m on Sorcerer's Apprentice.

How much was the first Pirates made for? Maximum should've been 65, 150, 85 for the three mentioned.

COTBP had a budget of $140 million.

DMC and AWE were given a $450 million combined budget. With DMC's buget being approx. $225 million, AWE's should have been approx. $225 million as well, but overruns pushed it to $300 million, and Gore even had to supply his own talents on the guitar for one scene.

It's said that filming in the sea (probably any large body of water really), and having any water special effects causes budgets to skyrocket. And if I remember correctly, the DVD special features on DMC or AWE stated a storm destroyed part of the set during filming, too.

Thanks for the info.

It's real hard to find reliable budgets anywhere.

Also, I don't think it's fair for Tangled to have a reported 260m budget. It would mean it would be the second most expensive movie, but where is Avatar? All that cost just written off. If Avatar can write off over 200m in expenses surely Tangled can get rid of at least 100m of it too.

From what I remember Avatar still costs 230m. They were including marketing numbers as well and thus it looked huge then. Even before the release both studios and JC were claiming that it is not the costliest movie but they wanted to take that ride since it added more publicity.

The next stunner:

$90m THE NUTCRACKER 3D

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/ne ... 5322.story

According to notfabio it made around 10k on 42 theaters on Wednesday ($238 per theater)

230m with marketing costs? Don't be so naive. For what it was its marketing costs at minimum had to be at least 100m so what Avatar cost 130m?

That's even stupider than Tangled. Who is behind this? Freestyle? Will it send them into bankruptcy?

I don't think it's going to go wide next weekend and it has 0% on RT, worst reviewed film of the year.

avatar with marketing included probably cost north of 700m (400m production, a good portion of the unreported amount coming out of JC's pocket, than all the tricky tax breaks.) (150m marketing budget in the us, film wasn't marketed constantly but whenever it was the push was heavy.) (150m-200m marketing budget internationally)

It's not just delayed, I think it will never work. At least until some major changes in legislation with regard to entertainment industry. Hollywood accountants can do whatever they want. HP5's profit statement says it's $167 m in the red, while making over $900 m WW.

You know that's the thing with accounting. WB (the producer) lost $167m, but at the same time they had to pay a distribution fee to WB (the distributor) and WB (the distributor) had a huge profit with HP - but you don't see the balance sheet of the distributor, just the one for the producer...

Yeah, but WB (the company) didn't lose a penny. That's fucking standard transfer pricing mess + Hollywood accounting shit. Fucking capitalists...

That number is probably going to make Nutcracker 3D one of the biggest bombs and money-losers of all time. It's joining the company of films such as Cutthroat Island, The Alamo, Town & Country, and Pluto Nash

$237m for Avatar sounds fine. Apart from the effects there was nothing. Cheap location with tax cuts, pretty cheap fx studio (from what I gather), hardly any actors. And did Cameron take any money up front at all?

It's pretty much the same deal as with LOTR. That was very cheap being a fairly revolutionary effects vehicle even for being three films shot back-to-back.

There's no way in hell it would have cost $400m to produce anyway.

Read the post properly.
They were including marketing numbers as well and thus it looked huge then

If you still did not understand what I meant was the previous figure had included marketing costs and that is why it was looking huge. Previous figure being $500m

$42m THE WARRIOR'S WAY

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/

I always seem to post this whenever the POTC budgets come up, but I have an off-the-record source -- who I completely trust and has no reason to either inflate or deflate the numbers -- that says DMC and AWE cost a combined $600m+. Production budget only.

But you'll never see those numbers quoted in print. It's really really hard to get accurate numbers, especially on high-profile big budget movies.

From your post there's only one figure and no way to tell you were referring to the 500m figure. Read your own post again I'm sure you'll see it.



That's another flop right there. It may but it won't bring it less than 3m OW though a total below 10 is certainly within its reach.



That's not too far off though is it? AWE as people corrected me cost 300m and DMC 250 so it's only 50m more. Disney should be pissed at Jerry though, yes, maybe it's hard to film on water/seas but the way he racks up costs is incredible. 150m for G-force? What in that movie was worth that much? I've already said Inception looked better than TSA as well for just 10m more. I still remember someone saying they spent a million dollars removing a Coca Cola can from the Star Trek enterprise- that's the kind of needless costs that probably plague Jerry's productions.

^ Yeah, now people are coming around to the POTC budgets, but I remember floating those numbers a year or two ago and having them categorically dismissed. (If I remember right, it was something like in the $630m range for both...)

The crazy thing is, even with those budgets, it was totally worth it for Disney to make the films... they're responsible for far more income than just theatrical/DVD/cable TV revenues.

That is very high number for TWW. Even with OS release (if they decide to) it won't break even.

$150m TRON LEGACY

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118028384