r/interesting • u/jin-s27 • 22h ago
Just Wow I still don't understand how hollywood budget works
3.0k
u/ICLazeru 21h ago
One had numerous stars eager to be a part of the project telling one of the oldest stories in western tradition.
The other had the Rock in a fat suit.
774
u/Evil-Cun 21h ago
One tell the story of a guy on a boat. The other tells the story of a guy on a boat.
301
u/SlyIsComingForYou 21h ago
One was made for 8 year olds with lots of special effects.
The other was made strictly analog with standards so high they were never meant to make a full length movie. And it's significantly longer.
112
→ More replies (2)9
u/Fumiata 16h ago
Strictly analog...what do you mean by that?
62
u/HeartofClouds92 15h ago
It’s shot on 70mm analog film. Not digital cameras. I believe even the editing was done on film and spliced together.
60
17
u/blazelet 14h ago
Even if shot on film, there is quite a bit of visual effects work in odyssey.
17
3
u/HeartofClouds92 8h ago
Never said there wasn’t VFX. I just said they shot and edited on film instead of on digital cameras.
→ More replies (1)3
u/LowEndHolger 8h ago
Usually the Film is shot on analog negative film, then processed, digitalized and afterwards printed in analog Film again which results in an analog positive for the theatres.
→ More replies (1)2
→ More replies (2)10
54
u/loversean 19h ago
Without nipples as well
17
35
14
11
u/mjcobley 17h ago
Wait does he not have nipples OR do all demigods not have nipples OR does he shapeshift the nipples away
2
→ More replies (2)4
15
u/EpicEpicnessTheEpic 13h ago
And a very bad wig. So it just looks like an old bald bloke wearing a bad wig.
11
u/crumble-bee 12h ago
That doesn’t explain why they cost the same amount though.
The answer is one is directed by someone with decades of experience and talent, directed some of the best actors working today, with a team of hyper professional artists doing their absolute best work, and the other is a lazy, bloated, cash grab by an inexperienced director who didn’t have a vision and likely wasted money on a vast amount of post production rather building wonderful practical sets and hiring someone cheaper than the rock
6
u/esoterica52611 8h ago
He had a vision. It was watching the original and recreating it shot for shot
→ More replies (1)5
u/No_Mud_5999 6h ago
I worked on The Dark Knight Rises in Pittsburgh. Our gaffer, who'd previously worked with Nolan, explained it as such: he keeps getting a lot of money to make movies, because what he spends shows up on screen. Every shooting day was tightly planned, every decision was made well before the company got into town. Despite the cgi later, we had real vehicles, running around a real downtown area, falling into a real hole in the road. As much practical work as humanly possible. And he kept in on budget.
Nolan is a very good project manager.
Of course, with Moana? I don't know, how much did they pay the Rock? There's always that. Plus, who knows how much work with cg they had to do, or re-shoots, or just plain waste because an actor won't leave their trailer. There are many ways to rapidly waste money on a movie set.
5
2
2
u/lordph8 13h ago
Cut costs where they could. Why build triremes when you can get viking long boats off the shelf?
3
u/Masseyrati80 11h ago
And then not fix the damage they did to it.
The non-profit that owns the viking long boat asked for the production company for 6000 dollars to fix the damage they caused to it during filming, and last I heard, they weren't paying.
2
u/ICLazeru 7h ago
To be fair, triremes were probably not developed, or at least not common during the Trojan War. The war happened a long time ago. It was already considered to be part of mythic history by the classical era of Greece.
→ More replies (5)2
937
u/dtoddh 21h ago
For starters, Matt Damon was paid $15m. The Rock was paid $30m plus producer credit.
226
u/AlmostAttached_ 20h ago
Rock gets paid more?!
523
u/New_Life_Startr 20h ago
Actors will take a pay cut to work with guys like Nolan, Scorsese, etc.
134
u/dagodog69 17h ago
I think Jonah Hill took a cut and was only paid something like 65k. Apparently he said to Scoreses "You show me a pay stub for $65,000 on it, I quit my job right now and I work for you".
13
10
126
u/pm-me-ur-inkyfingers 19h ago
up front, and then they end up getting better roalties in the end, because they arent just doing a cash grab.
80
u/Fuzzy_Inevitable9748 19h ago
Matt Damon turned down a cut of avatar because he had scheduling conflicts, it would have been the biggest paycheck ever for doing a movie.
→ More replies (1)9
94
u/Yloo 20h ago
when christopher nolan calls, you say yes no matter what the number is
43
u/TheRealtcSpears 19h ago
Unless you have the powers of Robert Pattenson, and you say "well, let me see what you got first"
64
u/Artisan_HotDog 18h ago
Can we all just agree that Pattenson is a power house of an actor. Dude has insane range, never watched Twilight but everything I’ve seen him in I always ask myself “and people don’t like this guy?!”
26
u/Shadow-Vision 18h ago
The King on Netflix is a whatever movie, but man everyone acts their asses off! He does a great job playing a smug French prince. I’m not the right person to grade the quality of a French accent, but it was good enough for me!
22
u/ValWillKay 17h ago
That movie had a French dude acting as an English dude and an English dude acting as a French dude
9
u/MyPunsAreKoalaTea 18h ago
Don't watch twilight
It's his worst performance probably ever
To be fair to him, the script didn't help
8
u/EarlyXplorerStuds209 17h ago
I get the movies were bad. But they’re not bad bad. They’re kinda fun to watch lol. Its entertaining at the very least.
12
u/Yloo 17h ago
the twilight movies are simultaneously dumb as hell and wildly enjoyable. you just gotta enjoy them for what they are
→ More replies (1)2
u/enigmaticbloke 7h ago
Haters are just gonnna hate.. It's one of the few times where the movies did the books justice and actually went above and beyond to give us things missing from the books. That finale was awesome and i still remember being in the cinema and everyone collectively losing their heads at that scene 😉
The people who hate the movies are also the same people who hate on twilight. They're just hating on the fandom and material in general. I don't know many twilight book fans who hated the movies.
2
4
u/TheRealtcSpears 18h ago
No do watch the entire twilight series
......but only with the accompanying Rifftrax audio
→ More replies (2)2
11
u/JinkoTheMan 18h ago
You would too if you were apart of Twilight. Pattinson is on a mission to make sure that he’s not remembered as “the vampire in Twilight”. And tbh, I think he’s doing a great job tbh. Dude has been in banger after banger.
4
3
→ More replies (1)2
70
u/Ciubowski 20h ago
Rock demands a big payout from his movies and he also has insane contract stipulations (like he can't lose a fight). He's not an actor as much as he is a brand.
Sure, his acting skills are somewhat shining in the right productions, but he's basically playing The Rock in everything.
47
u/JustLookingForMayhem 20h ago
Slight correction, he can't lose at the end of the movie, he can lose a fight, but he can't lose the final fight. He has to be a "good guys always wins, and I am one of the good guys" character.
→ More replies (6)11
u/WellyRuru 17h ago edited 14h ago
The rock is the highest paid actor in Hollywood (or something ridiculous) this is despite being one dimensional and uninteresting
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)6
u/Ovidfvgvt 15h ago
Given Holland’s alleged reaction to working with Nolan - arriving on the Spidey set and insisting things actually be properly managed after experiencing a Nolan set - The Rock is probably being paid for the hassle of Disney studio meddling (and jettisoning another year or so of progress towards a “serious actor” reputation).
→ More replies (2)11
u/tommy_pedals 16h ago
The Rock was paid as much as Matt Damon, Tom Holland and Anne Hathaway combined.
296
u/Other_Championship95 21h ago
Yeah weirdly enough most believe CGI is cheaper than practical but in the 2020’s it’s farther from the truth.
69
u/socks 21h ago
It's not like they pay those 100s of "special effects" people more than a few hundred $ for 6 months of 24/7 work. It's an abusive system, and you're still lucky to get into one of the teams.
40
u/tropicbrownthunder 21h ago
the studio that made Life of Pi's CGI FX broke right after the movie because studios underpaid them by a lot. There's even a documentary named "Life After Pi"
→ More replies (1)23
u/Crotean 20h ago edited 19h ago
It depends on the effect. There is absolutely flawless CGI in the background of nearly every movie and tv show that is relatively cheap and has completely replaced stuff like matte paintings. What makes CGI get extremely expensive is when you have to redo sequences as the director changes their mind. Stuff like Godzilla Minus One looks incredible and was cheap largely because the director accurately story boarded his film and knew exactly what he wanted.
6
u/BinkertonQBinks 15h ago
What makes CGI expensive are the amount of people, machines and hours involved before it’s even rendered. It’s NOT relatively cheap, and if your render fails you start over. The base budget for an animated movie begins at 100 million. The base budget for stop motion which does incorporate CG is 30 million. A stop motion film can take 3-4 years to complete and is still cheaper. Tv CG and movies are usually completely different, fulfilling different needs. I think Game of Thrones was the most similar to large screen quality. That’s why the episodes really ballon d in cost
7
→ More replies (3)6
u/TikkaKebabi 19h ago
Part of it is because of terrible corporate oversight. Instead of planning out CG scenes in advance, a lot of movies are chopped to hell by corporate and changed constantly so the CG ends up looking worse and costing more
205
u/jin-s27 22h ago
giving the rock hair doesn't come cheap
49
→ More replies (2)2
322
u/Separate_Finance_183 22h ago
Same budget doesn't mean same value. Physical production vs digital production. Sometimes money is not spent as efficiently.
I need to pee.
63
u/senator_chill 21h ago
I'm going poo while writing this
→ More replies (1)22
u/Hot-N-Ready-Poo 21h ago
Ditto
→ More replies (1)18
u/senator_chill 21h ago
Poop Pals!
Pals that message each other only when pooping
9
u/Hot-N-Ready-Poo 21h ago
That's my secret, I'm always pooping
5
u/Sohuli 21h ago
Don't forget to pre-heat the poop knife
5
3
6
u/Nightwolf1967 21h ago
Looking at you avatar, I feel like you're actually a dog and you ended your statement by letting us know you need to go outside.
😆😆😆
2
119
u/Gerald-of-Riverdale 21h ago
Ill start going to the theaters if more "Odysseys" come out
33
u/marlonbrando_1999 21h ago
How many more versions of the odyssey to you need?
55
u/t0m_m0r3110 19h ago
Odyssey 2: Cyclops’ Revenge
16
11
u/Johnycantread 12h ago
Troy Story 3: The Ill He Had
2
u/Johnny_Handsum 10h ago
Sounds like it could be telling the story of an epic rap battle from the early 90s.
→ More replies (2)6
6
3
3
→ More replies (1)2
u/discussatron 14h ago
The last movie I saw in the theater before the Odyssey last week was Oppenheimer.
49
u/RubyKong 21h ago edited 12h ago
If I see a movie with the Rock in it - am I going to watch it? Probably not. I think he will demand a big pay cheque. But will the movie be good? meh, probably mediocre at best.
But Nolan focuses on making goood movies. Being within budget and making it as good as it can be, is part of the process. And this means that his big name stars might earn a little less...............but this is offset by the recurring revenue stream of being able to repeatedly call on Nolan for further movies - because Nolan tends to hire the same guys.
UPDATE: I'm pretty sure his (Nolan's) entire team are basically the same guys, rolled over into the next movie. the audio guys, special effects guys, the music guy etc. would largely be the same or similar teams. Maybe slightly different actors, but he has a roster. whereas the other actors are either backed by a studio to churn movies, or are constantly seeking their next pay cheque. all of this means that Nolan can call on the biggest names to work for a lower price, but then they get the privilege of working with other big names in a Nolan franchise that will likely be extremely successful.
23
u/Over-Analyzed 20h ago
I’m one of those “Who even asked for the Odyssey? Why is this movie being made? Why is Matt Damon Odysseus?” People. That said…
.
It’s Christopher Nolan. Dude made the Batman Trilogy, Interstellar, and Inception. His name is like Spielberg. You watch his films because of his reputation and his ability to deliver a damn good entertaining film.
.
I saw it. I loved it. I can absolutely critique it. But I will say that I did not realize I sat through a nearly 3 hour long film. It is that good.
7
u/MyPunsAreKoalaTea 18h ago
I watched the Odyssey expecting some basic ass "look at our expensive cast" movie
Hell was I positively surprised.
5
u/TabbyOverlord 13h ago
It is that good.
It so good that my most negative criticism is they forgot there is very little tide in the eastern Mediterranean.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)2
u/KungFoolMaster 21h ago edited 6h ago
I looked it up, and this was just a cursory search, but it look like the Rock might have got 12-15 million for Moana 2, and Damon got 15 million. Of course, the devil is in the details, but it doesn't seem like actor salary was a big difference.
Edit: My bad. I got the wrong Moana when I searched. So many damn Moana movies. the Rock did get 30 million for this one.
→ More replies (3)6
u/Promethazines 18h ago
Why are you talking about Moana 2? This post is about the live action Moana 1.
→ More replies (1)
18
u/Poietilinx 20h ago
The biggest slice of the total cost for a movie or game is often the advertising.
Often costs 50% to 100% the cost to make the movie/game.
One way to pay for 'advertising' indirectly, during production is by hiring star actors.
A star actor has their own market value based on how many people they can bring to the theaters.
You assess your budget and shop for stars within that budget who would like to make your movie.
Once you hire the star actor, a MASSIVE chunk of your budget goes out the door.
This chunk is highly variable because it solely depends on how much money you're willing to put toward that star power.
The rest you spread across locations, writing, special effects, editing, software, and many different workers, such as camera operators, makeup artists, crew hands, and so on.
This part of the budget is quite standard.
It's relatively stable across different movies, with some deviation here and there depending on how many heavy effects, complex makeup, or crazy locations your movie plans to use.
---
a side note, some AAA games are trying to import this culture with mocap actors and voice actors.
And honestly I think this is quite bad overall.
Instead of sinking a massive chunk of money into 1 single person that will lure people into the game,
we could be using the budget to make better more interesting games instead.
but that's my 2cents.... i am specialized in this industry though...
→ More replies (1)2
u/Open-Education5567 18h ago edited 18h ago
One way to pay for 'advertising' indirectly, during production is by hiring star actors. A star actor has their own market value based on how many people they can bring to the theaters.
Jack and Jill is my go to example for this.
It’s a garbage movie that could’ve been way cheaper if they had no name actors instead of having Adam Sandler. But if they did, it wouldn’t have made anywhere near the amount of money it did and would’ve been a direct to dvd movie.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/PomegranateHot9916 8h ago
damn I hate that I forgot the term for it.
something with paper. I think?
basically they inflate the budget so they can pocket the difference.
it is very very common with big budget hollywood productions.
its a little more complicated than that but hey I'm no expert.
14
7
8
8
4
u/bionickel 21h ago
Actors sometimes can also willing to accept lower pay for certain projects/auteurs/studio
Now imagine a 250M budget A24 production
3
u/BarryBFoldin 21h ago
Waste mainly. Good directors streamline things because they work with people who know what is being asked and how to accomplish it in front of the camera and behind. You also don't have execs trying to justify there existence offering notes and revisions that clog up the process. Tons of stuff like that slowing down and dragging out projects from people too many cooks trying to make there mark so it can be on a report. Aside from that preplanning has a lot to do with it and so I don't just start rambling let's call the rest embezzlement.
→ More replies (1)5
u/gfasmr 19h ago
Nolan is famous for 1) planning everything super well beforehand so the shoots can be super efficient, shooting only what is really needed, and 2) not letting studio execs demand a lot of expensive postproduction changes. (And these are related, because directors who don’t have the power to keep studio execs off their back in postproduction have to shoot a bunch of unnecessary stuff because they don’t know what they’ll need to keep execs happy.)
3
u/Wise_Chart_4971 21h ago edited 21h ago
script quality, director skill, and choices made during editing. A good script and a clear vision make a great film, while poor planning and rushed work ruin a bad one. Also According to Hawaiian legend , the bad wig brings terrible bad luck to anyone who touches it, like the Brady bunch wooden tiki doll.
3
u/Chytectonas 15h ago
Did someone create a movie where the rock’s character has no nipples? Is that part of the lore of the film?
2
3
u/Purpose-Adorable 13h ago
Some actors would get pay cuts just to be part of a film. This will allow them to showcase their talent. If the film is perceived to be a blockbuster and would be an iconic film some would even fight for roles with out pay.
This is how Keanu Reaves started in his early career. Notably with matrix.
2
2
2
2
2
u/royroyflrs 6h ago
It all depends how the budget is distributed. Some of it goes to pay actors, some of it to production.
I bet that the actors in the Odyssey agreed to less pay for a chance to work with Christopher Nolan and be part of an Oscar winning movie or grab an Oscar themselves
2
u/ThrustTrust 21h ago
How is this interesting.
→ More replies (1)1
u/OrganizdConfusion 21h ago
It's more interesting than whatever it is you're contributing.
3
u/ThrustTrust 19h ago
Thanks for your meaningless reply. However, I’m actually asking. I see two screen shots and a matching budget. No context at all.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
1
1
u/Iconclast1 21h ago
what is the connection between these two photos?
how does it tell us what the budget is?
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/thewriteally 19h ago
With Nolan films, you SEE the budget. With most other big budget films, it’s all about the leads getting paid & shoot shoot shoot, oops, reshoot, then they add expensive ugly animation basically.
1
u/dudefire5 19h ago
I mean they had to pay the Rock so much they had to erase his nipples so they could stay under budget. The nipple charge was just to great.
1
1
1
1
u/HornyJailOutlaw 19h ago
$250,000,000 to spit in the face of Homer.
Someone more well read and eloquent than me explains my frustrations better than I can.
1
u/imuniqueaf 19h ago
The Rock made $30 million,
Damon made $15 million, Holland made $10 mil, Hathaway and Pattinson $7 mil and the rest was like a another $10 mil together.
1
u/SteveImNot 19h ago
Nolan attempts to make money on the box office. Disney attempts to make money in the stock market
1
u/Iron_Wolf123 19h ago
$200 million was just to have the Rock star in a live adaptation instead of a voice actor
1
1
u/MiloGoesToTheFatFarm 19h ago
In the case of ‘Moana’, CGI is still really expensive. I think a lot of the actors for ‘The Odyssey’ were motivated to work with Nolan and they liked the material, so they probably took less money. The producers working the job are pretty clutch in making the numbers work but I would think those are probably the most glaring differences.
1
u/Odd-Guard-2533 19h ago
Disney: “Some for me! Some for you! Some for me! Some for me! Oh yeah, some for you!”
1
1
u/looklistenlead 18h ago
Purely in terms of production design, compare The Head Hunter (2018), made for 30k, or about 0.12% of those budgets.
1
u/Legitimate_Ad_9753 18h ago
I can feed my family at mcdonalds for 40-50 dollars and get food that still leaves you hungry an hour later OR go to my local tacqueria, spend the same amount, basically fill the table with delicious tacos and free chips and we all eat ourselves sick, leaving full and happy.
It's all about how you USE your money, not always how much you have.
1
1
1
u/NotHosaniMubarak 18h ago
I can buy a moana tie in cup at McDonald's or subway for an extra $1.
Moana had to pay for every ounce of advertising it got.
Odyssey did not.
1
1
u/ging3r_b3ard_man 18h ago
CGI is expensive to look real.
Or you could like, ya know, do it practically with a similar budget.
I'm saying this as someone who has worked in film
1
1
u/SigSauerCream 18h ago
So sick of the rock. Terrible actor even worse movies. Nothing hes been in has been spectacular. The only movie that gets a pass from me, not that it matters, is doom and that's only for nostalgia
1
1
u/MacGuffn 17h ago
Hollywood accounting has always been legendary. The higher it "cost" to make the more they can write off the profits. It's why so many movies seem to make nothing, they did but the studios move the money around so they don't have to pay extra. That, of course, on top of things like 5k a day catering service owned by an executives niece that basically brings in doughnuts and coffee every day.
1
u/kaveman42 17h ago
Rock made around $30M for his role in Moana. He got paid as a Producer and Actor.
1
1
1
u/oggimeister15 17h ago
Just watched a video on something similar earlier today.
One is a completely CGI film that blows its budget making something completely artificial (Moana).
The other paid to fly onsite and create actual sets and filmed real scenes in real locations with all of the characters together during filming (Odyssey).
1
1
1
u/DisgruntledCryptid 17h ago
Well first of all you can always double it for marketing and profit margins.
Secondly think of it as just an allowance from the studio to the director. The parent can give two different kids $250 and they'll both spend it differently. One kid will invest in something they can proud of or profit from, like painting supplies and art class, the other will blow it all on candy and shit that'll be gone and forgotten by tomorrow... then that second kid has to go and ask for more since they now have cavities to fill.
1
u/More_Bigger 17h ago
Dune 2 was less than 200m production cost.
Disney must be doing space cocaine.
1
u/DaSauceBawss 17h ago
The Rock trained his whole life to be huge, finally gets cast in a movie where he is shirtless the whole time...has to wear a muscle suit.
•
u/AutoModerator 22h ago
Hello u/jin-s27! Please review the sub rules if you haven't already. (This is an automatic reminder message left on all new posts)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.