Please read the article a the link and help with a break down (percentages are fine) of the financial rubric of a movie. The numbers being tossed around are silly and there is little supporting documentation. It is hard to believe the stars being discussed are being tossed when the overall numbers being thrown around. What are the spiffs and residuals accruing to the so-called stars.
Unless there is rediculous amounts of lab time for special effects I struggle with the numbers.
Independence Day director Roland Emmerich sent shockwaves through Hollywood when he declared that the film's star Will Smith was “too expensive and too much of a marquee name” to star in the sequel, scheduled to come out in 2015..............With a budget rumoured to be in excess of $400m (£260m) including marketing, it was being touted as this year's John Carter. When the sci-fi adventure bombed last summer Disney boss Rich Ross resigned from his post; the film reputedly lost $200m. The worry was that Pitt's name alone could not sell the picture. In the end, the opening weekend saw the Pitt film take home more than $60m at the American box office and $117m worldwide. The dire pre-release predictions meant that what were in modern blockbuster terms quite ordinary numbers were painted as a success, with suggestions there might be a sequel.
While on the surface the numbers looked good for Pitt they did not quite mask the new reality in Hollywood that views star-vehicle blockbusters as a risky commodity. ................http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/art/features/the-last-action-heroes-have-tom-cruise-will-smith-and-brad-pitt-lost-their-mojo-8677002.html
This is very recent and has been generating some discussion.
For a big summer effects movie, 1/3rd to 1/2 of the overall budget can be spent on the Vfx.
Hollywood for a while thought if Tom Cruise, Will Smith, ect ect ect was in the movie it would be a blockbuster hit. Not the case, so why pay them???
when we say the same thing about welfare recipients, you cry like a wounded buffalo Sopchoppy
It's their money, they spend it how they like. Truth and honesty have nothing to do with it. - Mr Jr
"“A radical is one who advocates sweeping changes in the existing laws and methods of government.” "
Their past performance gets movies greenlit and presold.
There are some great examples of this - First Knight.
It stars Richard Gere as Lancelot, Julia Ormond as Guinevere, Sean Connery as King Arthur and Ben Cross as Malagant.
If you dig even deeper into the casting choices, you start to see that each major player locks in a foreign market. By attaching people attached to a screenplay who come with what are assumed to be audiences that follow them into the theatre, you can sell the distribution rights BEFORE the movie is made. First Knight was, I believe, a break even movie, before it was shot.
We're in the process of doing this right now with three films. One of which, we're reshooting a character to add more celeb.
I agree though, that the future will a mix of huge studio films and tiny ones. Its super hard to make a 30 million dollar movies - 2-15 is easier as well as 70mil and up.