Cost to make Lord of the Rings: Return of the King: $94 million in 2003

Cost to make Lord of the Rings: Return of the King: $94 million in 2003

With inflation that would be 123 million in 2016.

Cost to make Ghostbusters (2016) was 144 million.

How is this possible?

>Bronson cost 150k pounds to make.
>nearly a thousand bronsons could have been made with the ghostfemkino budget

Why does his wife's son look just like him except black? Is he his real father and his wife is black? Never got this.

He wanted to get some of that black frog ass.

it's actually becoming increasingly common to have extraracial children.
Basically they take a semen sample from the man, modify the genes to implant those that controls attributes like skin pigmentation and then use the modified sperm to impregnate the woman.
The process is expensive but the result is a child that is biologically the offspring of both parents, but black.

Thank god. I hope the white race is gone soon.

Catering.

One extra a day was sacrificed to feed this Elder Evil.

>cost of making a movie
>bout treefiddy
>cost of marketing
>6 gorillion

those memes don't write themselves you know

NO IT ISN'T shut up Karl

Well OP was just talking production costs, not acquiring franchise rights, marketing, etc. LOTR also made a ton through other markets like dvd sales, toys, etc.

This is why Mel Gibson says not to watch capeshit. A responsibly managed film production with a skilled crew can be surprisingly cheap. Hollywood is a disgusting bloated mess.

John Carpenter hasn't been able to get work in years but you can bet your ass nobody involved in Ghostbusters is going to be hurting for work any time soon.

CGI cost more now :-/

pretty sure that's just the money they gave jackson, he put money of his own in the series because he really liked LotR and dind't want to fuck it up, also if i remember correctly they told him to make two movies and he asked for 3 instead

CGI is cheaper and more realistic than ever. It's just that even great CGI looks like shit compared to a mix of practical effects and editing.

Good time to give an update 2bh.

>$126m domestically

Hollywood accounting

No it doesn't, most of it is outsourced to the cheapest tender, just see that slave shit that happened with sausage party or what goes on in Korea and what is starting to happen with animation in India.

The Producers explains this phenomena quite easily.

>How is this possible?

Sony are the most incompetent studio in the business.

because fat ugly black woman cant compete with based new zealand landscapes

>Watching beautiful, ephemeral Aussie Cate

or

>A bunch of annoying yank dyke cunts

And the studio still claims LotR hasn't shown a profit.

Sony is not owned by jews unlike the other studios.

Might be because all the sets and props and costumes had already been made and designed for the previous movies?

I would imagine just doing all the casting and pre production is incredibly expensive

Movies are used for laundering money.

Just looked into this issue

Jesus christ Hollywood accounting is amazing.

Greedy actors (or actresses) with attorneys able to secure money with the studios convinced they'll need someone known to sell the movie.

Meanwhile the vfx staff keeps getting dirt cheap worked like mules because they're no-names that can be replaced with the lowest bidder.

Pretty much this. Thats why the Marvel Movies look so much better back when they started up. Now that everyone in those franchises is a big name, the CGI has taken a bit of a toll in the quality department.

because they're frogs

Also, I feel it is important to mention that when Peter Jackson made the latest LOTR movies he literally housed hundreds of vfx staff in New Zealand to live there for several months during production. He literally had staff taking turns sleeping, and eating while the other continued production. A giant factory of vfx staff working 24/7.

Just mentioning that Peter Jackson actually took care of the vfx crews, better than most.

The production of the three movies represented a not insignificant increase to new Zealand's GDP.

You can't sell 25,000 percent of anything.

You don't remember correctly. Jackson went to New Line and said he could do it in two movies, but they told him it was three books, so he should make 3 movies.

Actually statistically actors are getting paid less on average now.

Hollywood does it partially to look good in public. If you watch the end credits for big blockbusters, sometimes they'll say "this film created 50808012401 jobs" (which is true, but lots of those were only created for the making of that specific movie - the film industry is full of super short-term contract jobs). That statistic helps them in the lobbying arena where ungodly deals are being made to benefit the industry.

pic related

>Cost to make Ghostbusters (2016) was 144 million.

What? No Way!