ITT: Movies you're pretty sure were money laundering fronts

ITT: Movies you're pretty sure were money laundering fronts

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=8fXd2rc77ms
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

I don't think this one is even debatable

Battlefield Earth

Also the most boring fucking movie I've ever seen. Only movie I ever fell asleep watching in theaters.

For scientology, money laundering and genuine passion projects are pretty much indistinguishable.

Doom. 60 million budget. it's basically a bottle episode in space with 3 characters

...

...

i liked this movie

...

They probably blew at least half the budget on acid

How do you launder money with movies?

>bad moobee mayk monee

lots of soap

...

...

It's the most debatable one yet, dumbass.
Wiseau already had millions and legitimately wanted to be the next Tennessee Williams. Out of all of the shit movies here, there's enough to know that The Room was nothing more than the result of a brain damaged multimillionaire with a dream.

Biggest money laundering fronts ever

I remember being 16 and convincing my parents that Sgt. Pepper wasn't a Bee Gees album because of this trash.

>60 million budget
I think maybe 10% of that showed, and 75% of that was Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.

This turned out alright, but only by accident.

Basically making a movie lets you shuffle around a ton of money to any number of different outlets under various guises. For example, Adam Sandler shit (while not money laundering since it's legit corp money) is used to divert funds to him and his buddies by skimping on production and inflating wages across the board (Jack and Jill is a great example of this). In a money laundering situation, money can be taken in from illegal means and spent on aspects of production that lead to the same place that it came from, "cleaning" the money with some residual loss. Another sketchy thing is intentional movie bombs, in which a studio funds a movie that will actually lose them money and report that as a loss so they can dodge more in taxes than they lose. Hollywood is sketchy as fuck.

...

"Foreign" investors from countries which don't give a shit about keeping track of their people's finances, and Uncle Sam doesn't care as long as he gets his cut.

>Another sketchy thing is intentional movie bombs, in which a studio funds a movie that will actually lose them money and report that as a loss so they can dodge more in taxes than they lose

That's literally how Uwe Boll was able to make bomb after bomb for over a decade until the governments he was doing it in closed his tax loopholes. Uwe was making himself and his friends rich and was basically just farting in front of a camera

Uwe Boll has taken home a shitload of money thanks to German law. Not necessarily money laundering, but he's definitely a scam artist posing as a director.

Too much budget showed. I'm chalking that one up to an honest mistake.

pretty fuckin baller cast on that poster though my dude

If a studio gives you 50 million budget you have to use their "recommended" production teams and accountants.

>implying this movie isn't pleb filter

Ignore him, he's a pleb.

...

Filmed in digital and film

...

...

Legitimately Adam Sandlers best movie.

since no one here seems to know how money laundering works i guess i will have to explain

actually nevermind i just realized i have no idea how they do it

but generally you would open up a pizza place and send in money to the bank on a weekly or daily basis but then instead of sending the change from the register you would send them stacks of drug money and the bank wouldnt report you either because cash is sent to a cash handling company ala loomis or wells fargo, and if they ratted on their customers they wouldnt have any customers

if the police snoop around and ask the bank for your records, which they are obligated to keep for years or maybe decades, they will see that your pizza place made 100.000 dollars on a monday, which doesnt make any sense and then they pull you in front of a judge

all of Steven Seagal's movies

how do you think he got the millions to begin with

you need to already be rich in order to justify making a laundry movie

I was thinking this but the budget looks too low.

Will Sasso deserves a much better career, shit's depressing.

Wait they made a second one of these?
Fuck the mid-late 2000's had so many shitty Shrek ripoffs, not to mention Shrek 3 being such a letdown.

That came out in 2011. Also financed by Weinstein's.

Wait they actually waited 6 years to make a sequel to that shit? Bravo Harvey, nice $30 million animation quality.

youtube.com/watch?v=8fXd2rc77ms

Speaking of sequels to shitty animated flicks
>that fucking title

...

>In February 2006, author Timothy Sexton wrote an article titled "Hoodwinked: A Postmodern Examination of the Dangers of Runaway Capitalism" for Associated Content, in which he posited that Hoodwinked! was one of the first postmodern animated films and also carried political undertones. He argued that the relative nature of truth was shown by revealing deviations from the original fairy tale as the film explored the story from each of the central characters' points of view. Calling Hoodwinked! "the most subversive movie released nationwide since Fahrenheit 9/11",[72] Sexton went on to interpret the film as a critique on the free enterprise system. He drew comparisons between the film's villain and the typical American business owner, going so far as to say that the character was "clearly based on people like Bill Gates and Sam Walton".[72] In Sexton's view, the film exposed the flaws of capitalism, showing that if left unregulated, business owners will establish monopolies and eliminate competition.[72]