Spiderman 2 budget: $210 million
Superherohype.com
superherohype.com is saying that the info was in the LA Times business section. $210 million?!? I can't even fathom where it's all spent, but I hope the movie is good. It says in today's LA Times in the business section in an article about Sony Pictures that Spider-Man 2's budget is $210 million. That would top the highest-budgeted film to date (or so we think), Schwarzenegger's "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines", which carried a $200 million production budget. |
The webs are made of rare Japanese silkworms, which is a big part of it.
|
It's higher than that.
|
Well it was at least $35M to buy Toby McGuire a personality.
|
Originally posted by devilshalo It's higher than that. speaking of which. You should e-mail that script sometime.. ;) |
Beggin for a threadcrap but I must resist since I am more likely to get suspended than most users.
|
That's insane.
Imagine, 100 low budget films could be made with that money instead. I'm sure a few out of that bunch would end up being much better than this film could be. I'm sure this movie will make it's money back and will be enjoyable. But it won't win my respect. On a happier note, one could hope that $20 million of that budget went to kirsten dunst to secure her to take her clothes off for us. |
I can't even fathom where it's |
Yes, but if this movie makes even half what the original did it'll still be fairly profitable. 400 million plus another 350 or so worldwide. They'll probably be ok.
|
|
Man... sadly I doubt it'll be any more impressive... Spider-man #1 was $135m and to be perfectly honest... it didn't look it.
|
Just seems so enormous. I'm guessing a lot of it is going to the people involved instead of into the movie, but it can't be that much going just to salaries. Still, when you make the money Spiderman did, it should do fine and that's all that really matters, the money (at least to studios).
|
You'd think for $210 million they could throw in Tom Cruise and Tom Hanks for good measure. Hopefully all that money goes into better CG this time around (and better costumes).
|
That's crazy. I'm one of the minority who thought that the first one sucked. I'm glad I didn't actually pay to see it. I definitely won't be paying to see the sequel.
http://www.ameritech.net/users/dvdtalk/rome.gif |
Originally posted by Jackskeleton speaking of which. You should e-mail that script sometime.. ;) |
Originally posted by RichC2 Man... sadly I doubt it'll be any more impressive... Spider-man #1 was $135m and to be perfectly honest... it didn't look it. |
http://upload.pzind.com/upload_files/gotcha.gif |
Originally posted by Jackskeleton ah yeah.. I mean the script as in the HTML script.. yeah.. that's it.. http://upload.pzind.com/upload_files/gotcha.gif |
Originally posted by immortal_zeus That's crazy. I'm one of the minority who thought that the first one sucked. I'm glad I didn't actually pay to see it. I definitely won't be paying to see the sequel. http://www.ameritech.net/users/dvdtalk/rome.gif |
Cool, maybe the CGI and costume design (green goblin was terrible) will be better this time.
|
Cool, maybe the CGI and costume design (green goblin was terrible) will be better this time. |
Originally posted by immortal_zeus That's crazy. I'm one of the minority who thought that the first one sucked. I'm glad I didn't actually pay to see it. I definitely won't be paying to see the sequel. |
WOW. 210. . .that is just crazy.
|
Wow, I didn't know so many people in this forum didn't like the Spider-Man franchise. I thought there so much gushing when it first came out.
Well, I'm guessing that the money went to more SFX to be done in a timely manner. I'm guessing that the first movie the FX were rushed. So, I guess throwing it more money should help. |
A little off-topic but not really as I read the whole article in the LATIMES.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...71,print.story And it's been in the trades lately that they're going to cut jobs at Sony... After delivering her first full-blown business presentation to corporate bosses in New York two weeks ago, Sony Pictures Entertainment Vice Chairwoman Amy Pascal received an unexpected response: a hug from Sony Corp.'s normally reserved chairman, Nobuyuki Idei. Pascal outlined a three-year plan to cut hundreds of jobs and slash costs by tens of millions of dollars at Sony Pictures' movie studio and other units, which was precisely what Idei wanted to hear, according to a person familiar with the meeting. The Tokyo-based chairman had mandated that all of Sony's businesses tighten operations to help boost the corporation's depressed earnings and depressed stock price, and was clearly glad to find one of his key Hollywood executives on board. "He responded to the tone and spirit of Amy's presentation," the source said. Yeah, well that just sucks. Funny tho how the articles goes on to say: Last year's "Spider-Man," Pascal's biggest hit, cost a dizzying $175 million to produce but became a runaway success, with an estimated profit of at least $500 million for the studio. Yet Pascal is now talking as much about financial responsibility as creative flair — largely because the studio has been under mounting pressure from corporate overseers to end a cost spiral that has already pushed the budget for next year's "Spider-Man 2" to about $210 million. Pascal and her fellow vice chairmen are part of an executive committee set up by Stringer this spring to monitor spending and cut production and marketing costs. In keeping with the new austerity, Pascal acknowledges that she overspent in the past, most notably on last summer's sequels to "Bad Boys" and "Charlie's Angels," each of which cost $130 million to make and tens of millions more to market. "These were all profitable movies for this company, but not as profitable as I wanted them to be," Pascal said. "The mandate is to increase the margins." Yeah yeah yeah.. Pascal overspends and keeps her job. Yet hundreds of hardworking people will lose theirs. Gotta love Corporate America. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:13 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.