$40m Scream 4
$10m Atlas Shrugged (does look much cheaper though)

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

Great budget for both movies (Rio and Scream4), they will definitely turn to positive this weekend itself (including OS takings)

$150m THOR

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review ... iew-179283

Yeah but Thor I don't think Thor has standard tentpole appeal. Given this tough marketplace I see it doing about 50/120m so not a great budget, and I doubt it'll do much OS either.

I could be wrong as I don't study it as much, but I don't think will do well OS. Both Iron Man movies did less OS than US gross and they had large bits that take place across the world and a more well-known character/comic book. Thor just seems really niche and I can't picture being a big WW appeal. It'll make more than Watchmen OS but I'm guessing not much over 100m.

Agreed that this is a standard tentpole budget for Thor....still it doesn't look like one. Atleast the trailers haven't shown that....I have seen some rushed up money shots, but nothing exciting. They are depending on WOM for this to have better legs but I think that could be a serious flaw in marketing. So considering the marketing and the appeal domestically this is a little bit more than expected budget. I seriously doubt that this will cross 350m WW...which would mean profit from the theatrical run. Though with DVD sales and merchandise sales I think it will turn to a profit.

As said, fantasy movies tend to perform abnormally well overseas. With good reviews and an ad campaign that's building some solid momentum I could actually see Thor doing very well. Certainly much better than what many people were initially predicting when it was first announced...

And I wonder how much Water for Elephants costs. Francis Lawrence's past two movies cost a reported $100 and $150 million a piece. With a period setting, ample use of CGI, as well as actual big animals, I bet this didn't cost a penny less than $75 million.

actually the whole trio was paid like 6 mil total ( according to vanity fair's list of top earners )

Reese got 3 mil Pattinson 2 and Waltz ... well you do the math

given that they agreed on such low salaries mean budget was probably kept down

A couple month ago Variety wrote 2 for Reese and 1.5 for Pattinson.

I still find that hard to believe.

I agree as well the number definitely looks less. The movie looks way more expensive than $40m.

I don't see the appeal of Reese at all. I saw the trailer for WFE last night in the theater. Reese lost some weight, but damn is she ugly now. She was chubby cute before at least, but she has such unappealing face lines now.

$25m MADEA (must be Tyler Perry's most expensive movie yet...)

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

They all (including Francis) took a big pay cut for WfE. The head of Fox and couple of the producers discussed the budget on that "In Development" program on cable. Rob Pattinson has also talked about the budget a few times being right around the cost of the first Twilight ($37 million) so $40 sounds about right.

That's still a very good budget for Madea

Fast Five - $125M

Link - http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-c ... 2764.story.

Hmm definitely a big jump from the previous installments....though the series has gotten bigger specially in OS markets, which should easily bring money for the studios. Domestically I see it crossing this mark but not going great miles from 150m

$30m HOODWINKED 2
$8m PROM

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

$20m DYLAN DOG

http://www.imdb.com/

LOL at DD...it is going to be another financial disappointment. Good for HW2 and GREAT for Prom

If my area is concerned there have no trailer attached to any of the movies at all. I don't even think the comics were as famous elsewhere...so I don't think it will have much in OS markets specially when summer movies will kill it

The comic's Italian.

$35m SOMETHING BORROWED
$21m THE BEAVER
$7m JUMPING THE BROOM

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