The massive disparity of film costs and incomes
Discussion
Is there anyone here with an understanding of the film industry?
Often when watching a film at home I'll check its Wikipedia entry. The bit I find really odd is the huge disparity in cost of making films and how sometimes even pretty good films have seemingly low incomes from their cinema release.
Clearly if there is a lot of on-location work, elaborate sets or large amounts of complex CGI that will push the production costs up, however at the other end of the scale how did 'Weird' get made in 2022 in America for only US$8M? Did everyone have to work 'pro bono'?
When it comes to cinema release, do producers sometimes say, "We've got our money back, that will do"? It often seems like there is a glass ceiling between earnings on the big screen and the production cost, which only a few films, such as 'The Full Monty', 'The Blair Witch Project' and 'Four Weddings and a Funeral' manage to break though.
At the other end of the scale, Blockbuster films have budgets in the hundreds of millions of dollars, yet have incomes (hopefully) to match. Is a large chunk of that budget related to the publicity and worldwide distribution, or is it mostly in the making of the film?
Often when watching a film at home I'll check its Wikipedia entry. The bit I find really odd is the huge disparity in cost of making films and how sometimes even pretty good films have seemingly low incomes from their cinema release.
Clearly if there is a lot of on-location work, elaborate sets or large amounts of complex CGI that will push the production costs up, however at the other end of the scale how did 'Weird' get made in 2022 in America for only US$8M? Did everyone have to work 'pro bono'?
When it comes to cinema release, do producers sometimes say, "We've got our money back, that will do"? It often seems like there is a glass ceiling between earnings on the big screen and the production cost, which only a few films, such as 'The Full Monty', 'The Blair Witch Project' and 'Four Weddings and a Funeral' manage to break though.
At the other end of the scale, Blockbuster films have budgets in the hundreds of millions of dollars, yet have incomes (hopefully) to match. Is a large chunk of that budget related to the publicity and worldwide distribution, or is it mostly in the making of the film?
Edited by GliderRider on Sunday 9th June 11:26
It blew me away when I first started doing extra work in film and telly productions, the sheer scale of people involved for what could be a relatively tiny scene.
For example, worked one day on a recent Netflix sci-fi series in 2022, one day filming at a Mayfair restaurant.
Hire of venue
Insurance
Transport/logistics
Security
Catering
Crew (lighting/camera/hair & make-up/wardrobe/directors/continuity etc.)
Extras: We all had to have a fitting for '80s wardrobe a few weeks prior at £100 or so for the day. Plus hair & wardrobe on these days.
Filming, all day probably £200 or so. 150 of us.
There are more costs obviously, but these are just off the top of my head for the day.
Then add in all the post-production costs, editing, special effects etc for this one scene.
Probably just over a minute of actual film that makes it to the finished production costs so much money it's mind-blowing.
That's one example.
Worked on another very big Netflix show and the whole day's filming in Central London with hundreds of people involved ended up on the cutting-room floor.
It's insane the costs that are involved and I'm amazed that so many productions can even break even.
For example, worked one day on a recent Netflix sci-fi series in 2022, one day filming at a Mayfair restaurant.
Hire of venue
Insurance
Transport/logistics
Security
Catering
Crew (lighting/camera/hair & make-up/wardrobe/directors/continuity etc.)
Extras: We all had to have a fitting for '80s wardrobe a few weeks prior at £100 or so for the day. Plus hair & wardrobe on these days.
Filming, all day probably £200 or so. 150 of us.
There are more costs obviously, but these are just off the top of my head for the day.
Then add in all the post-production costs, editing, special effects etc for this one scene.
Probably just over a minute of actual film that makes it to the finished production costs so much money it's mind-blowing.
That's one example.
Worked on another very big Netflix show and the whole day's filming in Central London with hundreds of people involved ended up on the cutting-room floor.
It's insane the costs that are involved and I'm amazed that so many productions can even break even.
Lots of low budget films are made with either deferred salaries or profit sharing. Or they simply didn't spend a lot. It's ultimately pointing a camera at a bunch of talking people.
For blockbusters the marketing spend can be 50-100% of the production budget again.
Film accounting is known to be a black hole all to itself.
If a studio decides they want their film to make a loss - to deny profit sharing or dodge some tax or whatever - then they'll make sure it officially has, no matter how much money it actually made.
For blockbusters the marketing spend can be 50-100% of the production budget again.
Film accounting is known to be a black hole all to itself.
If a studio decides they want their film to make a loss - to deny profit sharing or dodge some tax or whatever - then they'll make sure it officially has, no matter how much money it actually made.
Its fascinated me recently too.
Apparently when all was said and done the last Indiana Jones movie cost close to half a billion dollars.
The latest Mission Impossible movie has now ballooned in cost due to a mini sub which is essential to the plot, getting badly damaged in an accident. Reports are that its budget is now at $450 million and its not even finished yet so its now expected to comfortably beat Indiana and once the post production costs (marketing etc) are factored could get very close to the 3/4 of a billion mark.
It had better be good.
There are also rumours of dodgy accounting, jobs on sets that don't really exist and special effects that have been charged for twice on some of these recent blockbuster films. Easy to hide when the movies are taking a billion dollars, not so easy when they are taking substantially less than they have cost to make,
A few people could be hurried emptying their desks before the end of the year....
Apparently when all was said and done the last Indiana Jones movie cost close to half a billion dollars.
The latest Mission Impossible movie has now ballooned in cost due to a mini sub which is essential to the plot, getting badly damaged in an accident. Reports are that its budget is now at $450 million and its not even finished yet so its now expected to comfortably beat Indiana and once the post production costs (marketing etc) are factored could get very close to the 3/4 of a billion mark.
It had better be good.
There are also rumours of dodgy accounting, jobs on sets that don't really exist and special effects that have been charged for twice on some of these recent blockbuster films. Easy to hide when the movies are taking a billion dollars, not so easy when they are taking substantially less than they have cost to make,
A few people could be hurried emptying their desks before the end of the year....
Edited by The Hypno-Toad on Sunday 9th June 11:35
bloomen said:
Film accounting is known to be a black hole all to itself.
If a studio decides they want their film to make a loss - to deny profit sharing or dodge some tax or whatever - then they'll make sure it officially has, no matter how much money it actually made.
Hence why big actors want a share of the box office rather than profits. Some very big films have somehow not been profitable, when they clearly should be.If a studio decides they want their film to make a loss - to deny profit sharing or dodge some tax or whatever - then they'll make sure it officially has, no matter how much money it actually made.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounti...
See Hollywood Accounting.
Lots of smoke and mirrors, though having spent time in this industry, the production, distribution and promotion costs are staggering. As are the losses when a high budget production flops - which is one of the reasons for the levels of risk aversion that result in bland series of remakes.
See Hollywood Accounting.
Lots of smoke and mirrors, though having spent time in this industry, the production, distribution and promotion costs are staggering. As are the losses when a high budget production flops - which is one of the reasons for the levels of risk aversion that result in bland series of remakes.
Thank you for the replies so far.
Zaichik, that is a very informative link. I had no idea that the studios would so blatantly try to defraud the producers, actors, and writers. The Hollywood actors and writers strikes in the past year start to make sense now.
Vixen 1700, I concur on the sheer amount of the travelling circus that on location filming brings. My son did some film extra work which went from a projected two days up to eleven days. The cost overrun must have been eyewatering. One location near us, in addition to all the support units you listed, required hundreds of metres of temporary aluminium roadway to protect the common land on which it was filmed.
What would be interesting is some SWAG (semi wild ass guesses) of the costs as percentages of the whole. For example (and as someone outside the industry, I've probably missed plenty):
Writing
Casting
Finding locations/props
Wardrobe
Studio Filming
Outside Filming
Actors fees
Extras
Film makers fees
Filming support
Editing
Post production
Sound
Film score
Zaichik, that is a very informative link. I had no idea that the studios would so blatantly try to defraud the producers, actors, and writers. The Hollywood actors and writers strikes in the past year start to make sense now.
Vixen 1700, I concur on the sheer amount of the travelling circus that on location filming brings. My son did some film extra work which went from a projected two days up to eleven days. The cost overrun must have been eyewatering. One location near us, in addition to all the support units you listed, required hundreds of metres of temporary aluminium roadway to protect the common land on which it was filmed.
What would be interesting is some SWAG (semi wild ass guesses) of the costs as percentages of the whole. For example (and as someone outside the industry, I've probably missed plenty):
Writing
Casting
Finding locations/props
Wardrobe
Studio Filming
Outside Filming
Actors fees
Extras
Film makers fees
Filming support
Editing
Post production
Sound
Film score
You missed a couple of really important ones for that list.
Re-shoots (especially digital effects)
Re-writes
Re-casting
Digital effects especially the latest trend for "de-aging"
Apparently several recent superhero movies have to have massive repair costs if half way through the filming the Studios have seen the footage and it just isn't working out. From all accounts Ant Man: Quantumania had to have huge amounts of re-shoots and replacement F/X shots as did Morbius, The Eternals and The Marvels and along with the Indiana Jones movie (which supposedly had one third of its original run time edited out and the middle third of the movie re-shot totally.) still didn't make any money.
And although they were much smaller budgets both the original Aliens V Predator and The Predator had large amounts of re-shoots and re-editing. AVP because they wanted to tone down the gore to get a 'better' certificate rating and The Predator because basically it was an even bigger clusterf
k than the film that actually got released.
And although not a movie, Disney+/Marvels She-Hulk cost $25 million dollars an episode for a 10 show season run. It has gone down in TV history for having the worse digital effects since The Scorpion King and scripts that were embarrassing beyond belief. The viewing figures were so bad towards the end that most people who watched it were only doing to so to see how bad it was.
Re-shoots (especially digital effects)
Re-writes
Re-casting
Digital effects especially the latest trend for "de-aging"
Apparently several recent superhero movies have to have massive repair costs if half way through the filming the Studios have seen the footage and it just isn't working out. From all accounts Ant Man: Quantumania had to have huge amounts of re-shoots and replacement F/X shots as did Morbius, The Eternals and The Marvels and along with the Indiana Jones movie (which supposedly had one third of its original run time edited out and the middle third of the movie re-shot totally.) still didn't make any money.
And although they were much smaller budgets both the original Aliens V Predator and The Predator had large amounts of re-shoots and re-editing. AVP because they wanted to tone down the gore to get a 'better' certificate rating and The Predator because basically it was an even bigger clusterf
k than the film that actually got released.And although not a movie, Disney+/Marvels She-Hulk cost $25 million dollars an episode for a 10 show season run. It has gone down in TV history for having the worse digital effects since The Scorpion King and scripts that were embarrassing beyond belief. The viewing figures were so bad towards the end that most people who watched it were only doing to so to see how bad it was.
Edited by The Hypno-Toad on Sunday 9th June 13:09
Edited by The Hypno-Toad on Sunday 9th June 13:16
Worked as a camera op on one of those reality courtroom shows once.
2 big TV studios, hundreds of crew, celebs, actors and real barristers on silly daily money and a real Judge.
Jed Mercurio was the writer, and rewriting every night.
2 weeks of filming, plus maybe a week prior of rigging and a couple of days after. Every day over ran thus a big overtime bill.
I made a blooming fortune.
There was also a massive wrap party for everyone at Soho House, free food and booze.
ITV, I think it was them, or Channel 4, dropped it. It was never shown as a rival broadcaster beat them to it.
2 big TV studios, hundreds of crew, celebs, actors and real barristers on silly daily money and a real Judge.
Jed Mercurio was the writer, and rewriting every night.
2 weeks of filming, plus maybe a week prior of rigging and a couple of days after. Every day over ran thus a big overtime bill.
I made a blooming fortune.
There was also a massive wrap party for everyone at Soho House, free food and booze.
ITV, I think it was them, or Channel 4, dropped it. It was never shown as a rival broadcaster beat them to it.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff