Dark Knight - 185 mio. budget?! WTF?!
12-19-08, 06:13 AM
#1
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Thread Starter
Dark Knight - 185 mio. budget?! WTF?!
According to IMDB, Dark Knight has an estimated budget of 185 mill.
Either IMDB is wrong, or I am simply a fool. I have NO idea how a movie like that could cost $185 000 000. I realize it's expensive to make a big movie, obviously.
But can someone explain how the heck it runs up to 185 million? I seriously can't reason how or why. Special effects were nothing ordinary, and while the movie was long (2½ hours) many scenes were shot in small environments and settings featuring only a few people.
A movie like T2, which is a much bigger movie than Dark Knight (esp, considering its time, 1990) cost what, 100 million back then? Adjust for inflation and you're still not approaching Dark Knight. Alexander was 150 mill., and again a bigger movie.
I honestly can't think of why Dark Knight would cost any more to make than so many other action movies.
Outrageous actors salaries? That's an easy way to bump production costs.
Either IMDB is wrong, or I am simply a fool. I have NO idea how a movie like that could cost $185 000 000. I realize it's expensive to make a big movie, obviously.
But can someone explain how the heck it runs up to 185 million? I seriously can't reason how or why. Special effects were nothing ordinary, and while the movie was long (2½ hours) many scenes were shot in small environments and settings featuring only a few people.
A movie like T2, which is a much bigger movie than Dark Knight (esp, considering its time, 1990) cost what, 100 million back then? Adjust for inflation and you're still not approaching Dark Knight. Alexander was 150 mill., and again a bigger movie.
I honestly can't think of why Dark Knight would cost any more to make than so many other action movies.
Outrageous actors salaries? That's an easy way to bump production costs.
12-19-08, 07:29 AM
#7
DVD Talk Hero
According to IMDB, Dark Knight has an estimated budget of 185 mill.
Either IMDB is wrong, or I am simply a fool. I have NO idea how a movie like that could cost $185 000 000. I realize it's expensive to make a big movie, obviously.
But can someone explain how the heck it runs up to 185 million? I seriously can't reason how or why. Special effects were nothing ordinary, and while the movie was long (2½ hours) many scenes were shot in small environments and settings featuring only a few people.
A movie like T2, which is a much bigger movie than Dark Knight (esp, considering its time, 1990) cost what, 100 million back then? Adjust for inflation and you're still not approaching Dark Knight. Alexander was 150 mill., and again a bigger movie.
I honestly can't think of why Dark Knight would cost any more to make than so many other action movies.
Outrageous actors salaries? That's an easy way to bump production costs.
Either IMDB is wrong, or I am simply a fool. I have NO idea how a movie like that could cost $185 000 000. I realize it's expensive to make a big movie, obviously.
But can someone explain how the heck it runs up to 185 million? I seriously can't reason how or why. Special effects were nothing ordinary, and while the movie was long (2½ hours) many scenes were shot in small environments and settings featuring only a few people.
A movie like T2, which is a much bigger movie than Dark Knight (esp, considering its time, 1990) cost what, 100 million back then? Adjust for inflation and you're still not approaching Dark Knight. Alexander was 150 mill., and again a bigger movie.
I honestly can't think of why Dark Knight would cost any more to make than so many other action movies.
Outrageous actors salaries? That's an easy way to bump production costs.
Flying your entire crew to Hong Kong to shoot IMAX sequences is expensive, flipping a semi on a closed Chicago street is expensive, filming in Chicago is expensive, creating a giant tank-like mobile is expensive, creating a useable two wheel vehicle is expensive, hiring Chris Nolan, Christian Bale, and Heath Ledger is expensive, having composers make music specifically for your movie is expensive, having a large cast of extras is expensive, closing down buildings is expensive, shooting at night costs extra. IMAX isn't cheap. Blowing up a building is expensive.
Town and Country cost $100m to make and Pirates of the Caribbean 3 cost $300m, figure those out. Terminator 2 cost $102m in 1991 which is about $154m adjusted for inflation, and imo, the visuals in that look cheap by todays standards so ehh.
Last edited by RichC2; 12-19-08 at 07:35 AM.
12-19-08, 07:35 AM
#8
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
I agree, $180m is pretty low for a movie of such scale. Still trying to figure out how Pirates of the Caribbean 3 cost $300m, even after the sets got wiped out.
Flying your entire crew to Hong Kong to shoot IMAX sequences is expensive, flipping a semi on a closed Chicago street is expensive, filming in Chicago is expensive, creating a giant tank-like mobile is expensive, creating a useable two wheel vehicle is expensive, hiring Chris Nolan, Christian Bale, and Heath Ledger is expensive, having composers make music specifically for your movie is expensive, having a large cast of extras is expensive, closing down buildings is expensive, shooting at night costs extra. IMAX isn't cheap. Blowing up a building is expensive.
Town and Country cost $100m to make, figure that one out.
Flying your entire crew to Hong Kong to shoot IMAX sequences is expensive, flipping a semi on a closed Chicago street is expensive, filming in Chicago is expensive, creating a giant tank-like mobile is expensive, creating a useable two wheel vehicle is expensive, hiring Chris Nolan, Christian Bale, and Heath Ledger is expensive, having composers make music specifically for your movie is expensive, having a large cast of extras is expensive, closing down buildings is expensive, shooting at night costs extra. IMAX isn't cheap. Blowing up a building is expensive.
Town and Country cost $100m to make, figure that one out.
12-19-08, 07:43 AM
#9
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Thread Starter
Rich I get all the things you're saying. I'm just confused since there are many movies that are on a similar scale in terms of "epicness" that didn't cost 185 mio.
Actors salaries must have been a BIG part of Dark Knight.
Troy was 175 million. That felt like a much "bigger" movie than TDK.
PS - it doesn't matter if the visuals in T2 look cheap by today's standard. They were very big and expensive back then, and as a side note apart from the in parts dated imagery generally look MUCH better than all the crap we see today.
I'm surprised Pirates 3 was 300 million...how..the..hell :S
This is not an anti-Dark Knight thread, I am simply expressing how I am confused that the movie could cost so much - and expressing that it didn't FEEL like that "big" af movie.
Actors salaries must have been a BIG part of Dark Knight.
Troy was 175 million. That felt like a much "bigger" movie than TDK.
PS - it doesn't matter if the visuals in T2 look cheap by today's standard. They were very big and expensive back then, and as a side note apart from the in parts dated imagery generally look MUCH better than all the crap we see today.
I'm surprised Pirates 3 was 300 million...how..the..hell :S
This is not an anti-Dark Knight thread, I am simply expressing how I am confused that the movie could cost so much - and expressing that it didn't FEEL like that "big" af movie.
Last edited by Parcher; 12-19-08 at 07:45 AM.
12-19-08, 08:11 AM
#12
DVD Talk Hero
Rich I get all the things you're saying. I'm just confused since there are many movies that are on a similar scale in terms of "epicness" that didn't cost 185 mio.
Actors salaries must have been a BIG part of Dark Knight.
Troy was 175 million. That felt like a much "bigger" movie than TDK.
PS - it doesn't matter if the visuals in T2 look cheap by today's standard. They were very big and expensive back then, and as a side note apart from the in parts dated imagery generally look MUCH better than all the crap we see today.
I'm surprised Pirates 3 was 300 million...how..the..hell :S
This is not an anti-Dark Knight thread, I am simply expressing how I am confused that the movie could cost so much - and expressing that it didn't FEEL like that "big" af movie.
Actors salaries must have been a BIG part of Dark Knight.
Troy was 175 million. That felt like a much "bigger" movie than TDK.
PS - it doesn't matter if the visuals in T2 look cheap by today's standard. They were very big and expensive back then, and as a side note apart from the in parts dated imagery generally look MUCH better than all the crap we see today.
I'm surprised Pirates 3 was 300 million...how..the..hell :S
This is not an anti-Dark Knight thread, I am simply expressing how I am confused that the movie could cost so much - and expressing that it didn't FEEL like that "big" af movie.
When I watched the movie, I was sort of surprised they kept it under $200m with the rising cost of everything, the weak US dollar, inflation, etc; To each their own I suppose.Even more amazed they got anything out of 180
12-19-08, 08:27 AM
#14
DVD Talk Hero
Rich I get all the things you're saying. I'm just confused since there are many movies that are on a similar scale in terms of "epicness" that didn't cost 185 mio.
Actors salaries must have been a BIG part of Dark Knight.
Troy was 175 million. That felt like a much "bigger" movie than TDK.
PS - it doesn't matter if the visuals in T2 look cheap by today's standard. They were very big and expensive back then, and as a side note apart from the in parts dated imagery generally look MUCH better than all the crap we see today.
I'm surprised Pirates 3 was 300 million...how..the..hell :S
This is not an anti-Dark Knight thread, I am simply expressing how I am confused that the movie could cost so much - and expressing that it didn't FEEL like that "big" af movie.
Actors salaries must have been a BIG part of Dark Knight.
Troy was 175 million. That felt like a much "bigger" movie than TDK.
PS - it doesn't matter if the visuals in T2 look cheap by today's standard. They were very big and expensive back then, and as a side note apart from the in parts dated imagery generally look MUCH better than all the crap we see today.
I'm surprised Pirates 3 was 300 million...how..the..hell :S
This is not an anti-Dark Knight thread, I am simply expressing how I am confused that the movie could cost so much - and expressing that it didn't FEEL like that "big" af movie.
i live in NYC and see what it takes to shoot a scene for law and order or a movie. first you need a permit, then you post signs in the area a few days ahead. then a whole fleet of vehicles comes out and parks for a few days to shoot a few minutes of footage. and a lot of people are needed as well. if you average $50 an hour pay and benefits and there are 100 people that's $5000 an hour. and this is for some cheapo shots in front of a courthouse or in the street with a few actors talking.
to shoot the action scenes in Chicago was probably very expensive. first you plan, simulate, test, test and test and then go to shoot and pray everything goes OK
12-19-08, 08:28 AM
#15
DVD Talk Legend
12-19-08, 12:53 PM
#17
DVD Talk Hero
Because most of the effects were 'physical'. When they didn't just shoot the action, they were using composites and whatnot. It's a lot cheaper (and lamer) to have a team of people, sitting behind a computer, creating the action on a computer.
Additionally, I think that everything was very well paid-for. You get what you pay for. Watching the movie, I got the feeling that they were allowed plenty of time to preplan an execute with precision.
Given the budgets of most modern tentpole releases, I think $185mil is very reasonable.
Someone asked if Parcher is German. If I'm not mistaken, he is from Europe somewhere, right? Don't quote me on that. But I seem to remember seeing that in the Other forum at some point.
Additionally, I think that everything was very well paid-for. You get what you pay for. Watching the movie, I got the feeling that they were allowed plenty of time to preplan an execute with precision.
Given the budgets of most modern tentpole releases, I think $185mil is very reasonable.
Someone asked if Parcher is German. If I'm not mistaken, he is from Europe somewhere, right? Don't quote me on that. But I seem to remember seeing that in the Other forum at some point.
12-19-08, 12:56 PM
#18
DVD Talk Legend
12-19-08, 01:14 PM
#20
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a sad thing to say, but $185 mill is very reasonable for a movie of this sort. Location shooting in a big US city, very little CGI (I figure it costs more to blow up a few real buildings than it is to blow up a model or do it on a computer), a large cast, and many scenes, etc. at that.
You'd be surprised by how much movies cost these days. The average big summer movie probably costs around $150-250 mill these days. Just for reference, Batman Begins cost $150 million 3-4 years ago. Quantum of Solace cost $200 mill. Spider-Man 3 cost $260 mill. It's all pretty crazy.
You'd be surprised by how much movies cost these days. The average big summer movie probably costs around $150-250 mill these days. Just for reference, Batman Begins cost $150 million 3-4 years ago. Quantum of Solace cost $200 mill. Spider-Man 3 cost $260 mill. It's all pretty crazy.
12-19-08, 01:15 PM
#22
DVD Talk Godfather
12-19-08, 01:17 PM
#23
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
12-19-08, 02:02 PM
#25
DVD Talk Limited Edition
1. CGI
2. Practical effects, stunts, explosions
3. Paying the main actors
4. Paying well over a hundred crew people for 3-4 months of their time
5. Paying over a thousand background extras over the course of the entire film, some of which probably worked for weeks and weeks on the film.
6. Marketing
7. Imax cameras and film (expensive)
8. Travelling to foreign countries with your crew/cast
9. Hiring big time composers
10. Etc...
It's actually surprising to me that it didn't cost more.
2. Practical effects, stunts, explosions
3. Paying the main actors
4. Paying well over a hundred crew people for 3-4 months of their time
5. Paying over a thousand background extras over the course of the entire film, some of which probably worked for weeks and weeks on the film.
6. Marketing
7. Imax cameras and film (expensive)
8. Travelling to foreign countries with your crew/cast
9. Hiring big time composers
10. Etc...
It's actually surprising to me that it didn't cost more.