American Gangster did 260m+ WW on a 100m budget, that was profitable. Kingodm of Heaven and Body of Lies were both borderline flops, but he's breaking about even on the flop to success ratio this decade when you factor in hannibal (huge success) gladiator (success) and black hawk down (mediocre).
Still, 200m is a much greater budget than Robin Hood needs. Iron Man 2 can be done for 170m but Robin Hood costs 30m more? Seriously?

Don't forget A Good Year (flop)...thiough I guess everyone forgot that film.

We were discussing his big budget films...

Actually all his films.

That $200/$237m for RH does not include advertising and marketing. Add $100m (at least) and you're looking at a $300m budget. $600m break-even point. I'd be surprised if RH makes half that.

Worldwide? It'll easily make more than half that. We're looking at $350+ million WW.

That said, it won't get close to $600 million of course.

No, $600 m isn't a break-even point. If you include those costs, then add other sources of income. Tax breaks, incentives, production ties. Not to mention TV and home video sales.

Well tax breaks are apparently included in $200 million already.

Even so, with other stuff included, it's gonna be profitable. Just get over your so called break-even points and all, because it's useless talk, unless you really know how the things work and what's behind the numbers. And you don't...

We put too much emphasis on box office, it's relative importance has lessened through the decades, the other big pillar of revenue generation has become home video. I'd wager that it's not so unusual nowadays with budgets ballooning (production plus advertisement) that a film barely breaks even if at all theatrically. Studios are factoring that in when deciding on a budget.

Star Trek, which gets viewed as a big success, probably didn't break even theatrically either.

I just recently read an article that the importance of movie theatres intake started to grow again (after 3D) and the importance of the home video market is decreasing (that was at an all-time high around 2003-2006).

Even so, home video is still a big chunk of the revenue for a studio.

Won't believe it until I see the Nielsen data. 3D is a fad that will go by, while home market is here to stay. And I don't know how come home video was at all-time high in 2003-2006, if it was before the Blu-ray and VOD rise. Give me numbers.

Sure. My point was, Universal will probably recoup their investment when all is said and done.

I'd go as far as to say big blockbusters are actually a pretty safe investment.


Wrong.

And I'll go as near as to say small shitty $1-flicks made for Blockbuster and Walmart shelves are much safer.

Historically documented fact.

That's where you're making a mistake, comparing the old cumbersome (to produce and show) and faulty 3D to modern digital 3D.

Who says they'll get a tiny profit? I bet they'll get a lot. Those guys probably know the shit better than we do, or they won't be where they are. If the budget is so big, there's surely a reason behind that, even if you don't see it. Stop playing studio execs here. If you are that smart, how come you all are not running the studios, production companies, theatrical chains, huh? Life's so unfair or you're just not that smart? I'd go for the latter. Sorry to dissapoint you, but you don't know a fucking thing, and don't even try to pretend you do.

Oh, really? It's all the same thing, just with a new technology applied, and that's it. The argument that 3D will destroy the traditional format is 50 years old. Didn't happen. Won't happen. When we'll get first 3D flops, this or next year, when the price for technology will go up, and as soon as 3D market share will start declining (and it will - it's just a matter of time), you all will come to this conclusion. Absolutely nothing shows that 3D is gonna force the regular format out of business. What's happening now is just a rush for easy money on a "new gimmick". I guess you should be old enough to realize that.

HA! If you think that most of business, ANY business, knows how to control a budget, then it's YOU who doesn't know a fucking thing! It's well-known FACT that almost every company in any industry in any part of the world has difficulty controlling budgets. That's how things work, son.

I believe that 3D is here to stay as soon as Woody Allen makes his next project in 3D...

Wrong. The new technology makes shooting in 3D relatively easy (and prices will only go down, as is the norm with pretty much any technology), the results look good (unlike the old anaglyph 3D) and for the first time the majority has a theater in their vicinity that is capable of showing movies in 3D. Seems like you are too old, clinging to the old ways, to realize that.

Studios do make mistakes....look what happened to New Line after The Golden Compass.

"Good" is relative. 50-year old 3D films also looked good. 50 years ago.

Prices for visual effects, as soon as they would become a norm, were supposed to go down as well. And yet the movie budgets go higher and higher. CGI was supposed to cut price of making animated films. Didn't happen. It's the supply and demand that primarily drive the price, not the cost of technology.

Sure. Just like it can happen with any other company. But their mistake wasn't the GC's big budget per se (although they did bite off more than they could chew). They sold the overseas distribution rights for a project aimed primarily at overseas markets. That was the way of financing the movie, but still the decision backfired badly in the long run. Plus, Nikki Kidman is a box-office poison not worth of $15 million paycheck (and man, she turned to be a horrible, horrible actress - who could have thought in the beginning of 2000s???), and the movie had marketing problems. Also, it was not just GC that drowned them - they had a lot of financial failures for a very long time. Last nail in the coffin.

Agree. Since most of them are not worth it anyway, the profit participation is much more effective. You shouldn't get those millions just because you put your ass into the film, without taking the financial risk. If the movie turned profit - you share it, if not - you share the loss. Should be that way. But won't. You have this shit called the guilds.