BAFTA Awards: What ‘Artist’, Dujardin, Streep … 
64th BAFTA Awards Winners: ‘The Artist’, Meryl … 
BAFTA 2012 Preview: Very British Affair Takes On … 
RECORD-BREAKING WEEKEND! 4 Films Open $20+M: ‘The … 
Remembered: Jennifer Hudson To Perform Whitney Houston … 
Live From NY, It’s Jean Dujardin On 
R.I.P. Whitney Houston 
TOLDJA! Indomina-BET Buy Sundance ‘LUV’ 
Midnight Madness For ‘Breaking Dawn’ DVD 
Saoirse Ronan Bigger Teen Action Queen 
WME Signs Writer-Director Jon Kasdan 
‘Glee’s Jane Lynch Joins Indie Film Comedy 
Universal Revives ‘Dracula Year Zero’ With … 
Jodie Foster Sending Mel Gibson Film ‘The … 
‘Roseanne’ Reunion: John Goodman To Co-Star In … 
UPDATE: Closing Arguments Conclude In Golden Globes Trial; … 
Series Adaptation Of ‘Legion’ With … 
Lionsgate Calms Investors With Talk About Charlie Sheen, … 
Ridley Scott Commits To Next Direct McCarthy’s … 
Marvel Studio’s Tim Connors Defects To Legendary As … 
UPDATE: Warner Bros Lawyers Dig In Garbage Over ‘The … 
By now you’ve seen all the continuing Internet chatter claiming Avatar is The Most Expensive Movie Ever Made. It all started with a recent Time magazine report in an article about 3-D. Expectedly, a Fox insider claims, “it’s not near that …yet.” So the Fox powers-that-be were relieved when James Cameron’s rep complained, and Time altered its article which mentioned the pricetag not once but twice: “The original version of this story misstated the cost of the film Avatar as being in excess of $300 million. The correct figure is in excess of $200 million.” Amazing since news outlets usually hate being humiliated by issuing corrections. But I say to Fox: what’s the big deal?
Sure, we all remember when any movie budget over $100 mil used to make Hollywood faint. Then $150 mil induced a cold sweat. But then during the sequel-crazed 2007 summer of the high rollers, the moguls weren’t even blinking at figures above $250 mil (Spiderman 3) and $300 mil (Pirates Of The Caribbean 3). But this is 2009, and Avatar is James Cameron and filmed in 3-D with motion capture technology (which reportedly adds 15% to a film’s production cost), and a mega-tentpole with great buzz. So even if it does wind up costing $300+M, and I bet it will, remember that Spidey 3 and Pirates 3 both sucked yet set records and still made $890M and $960M respectively worldwide.
Loading ...
It’s James Cameron — who gives a shit. The guy may scream and rant the way Michael Bay does, but he’s a perfectionist. He is one of the very few directors who has been successful at changing the “mode” of cinema. (Some others have been Murnau, Hitchcock, Kubrick, Spielberg and Fincher)
He may be spending 100, 200, 300 million on his pictures, but we only have to spend $10 to go see it. You really get your money’s worth with Cameron every single time. These were the exact same complaints we were hearing while “Titanic” was in production — and we all know what happened when THAT film was released….
Why issue a correction?
Studios tell outright lies all the time over movie budgets, and with Avatar, it’s two years since principal photography started so the interest charges rack up.
Hands up if you believe its cost less than $300m?
Never doubt James Cameron.
With the money they earn from Avatar, Fox will be able to finance several more Street Fighter and Dragonball movies.
James Cameron is seriously the only director I won’t get mad at for having a budget over $200m let alone $300m in this economy.
Spidey3 and Pirates3 were also sequels with proven track records…
Ah, Nikki. You’re correct and yet it’s all about context. We’re approaching 10% unemployment, having bonus fiascos, etc. Sounds like the execs don’t want to be seen as “not penny pinching” — for fear of scandal… and isn’t it possible that making the most expensive movie ever right now would produce scandal?
Yeah, “making the most expensive movie” ever in a time of economic scandal would smack of excesses right now, whether or not it was.
With Cameron at the helm, of course you’re going to have high budget costs. It goes with his massive ego.
With Cameron at the helm, you’re also going to have a great movie.
I’ve had inside sources tell me that the cost is closer to $465m if you include the R&D for pre-production.
Please send your non tax deductible check or money order to:
Avatar Relief Fund
PO Box 000
Mount Olympus
Those top 5 percent earners can use their credit card.
In addition, donation buckets will be set up at all Archlite theatres starting April 1st.
I’ll have you know Miss Finke that Avatar only cost us $299,999,999.99 million and not one penny more. So tell your terrorist pals at Time magazine to stop slandering our good name. Thank you.
Smithers! Release the hounds on Miss Finke and Time magazine.
Spiderman 3 and Pirates 3 were also household names, and sequels to proven franchises. Avatar is largely a fanboy film at this point- and high concept science fiction to boot.
I’m not going to bet against James Cameron, but you’ve got to touch on a lot of marketing quadrants to make your money back on a $300 million movie. Sure, “Titanic” was expensive, but it was a PERFECT film from a marketing perspective: Leo for the ladies, Cameron spectacle for the men, historical for the old folks, and a tween-friendly PG-13 rating. “Spiderman” pulled fanboys and families alike with a cheery, accessible style and a character everyone knew. “Pirates” – it was a fun Disney movie about Pirates, with Johnny Depp thrown in to hook women of all ages. Can “Avatar” – a film with none of the above – do the same? Only if the technology is as whiz-bang revolutionary as Cameron claims (given Cameron, it probably is), and even still its going to have to work for the money. “Watchmen” proved that fanboys alone do not a blockbuster make, even if the movie can “fuck your eyeballs”.
Just because ‘fanboys’ are largely the only ones paying attention so far doesn’t mean this will have that limited of appeal. I think it likely that this movie will be nothing less than astonishing and probably a watershed film for all the best reasons. You don’t get that something like Avatar isn’t conceived first in terms of marketing, branding and how much it costs. Too many people still forget that it’s better to come up with the idea and then figuring out how to pay for it instead of the other way around – - – but we all know what creatively bankrupt people focus on don’t we?
This recession is the best thing that has happened to the movie industry in a long time. In times of economic peril and global uncertainty the movie industry has thrived. Yes people may be losing their jobs now, but we will be seeing incredible advances in cinematic story telling in the near future. Have you guys forgotten that WWII brought us Citizen Kane? It is time for the industry to go to the next step and it will. People want an escape from the scary reality of our times and movies provide it.
Come on, this is Cameron. If he spends it, it’s on screen and the technology behind it will help revolutionize the industry again. I just wish he look a working more, maybe with properties like Pyramids of Mars which is basically just a storyboard for the next big summer tent pole.
Whatever “Avatar”‘s cost may be when it’s finished and released for the world to see, there’s a lot riding on Cameron to deliver a quality product and bring in “Titanic”-sized numbers. If it underperforms, then Fox will be (rightfully) leery to greenlight Cameron’s next film.
I’d wish people would stop treating Cameron like he’s a perfect human being. He’s not and like every other human being (and director in Hollywood for that matter), he makes mistakes. Cameron’s been very lucky to have three well-performing mainstream films in a row, but if it doesn’t fulfill both critics’ and audiences’ expectations the studios aren’t going to bow down to his wishes.
I know he’s had “Avatar” in the pipeline for well over a decade, but with technology getting cheaper, shouldn’t be closer to $200 million rather than over it? Just putting it out there. (But if “Avatar” delivers and is a huge success I will gladly eat my words.)
You know what’s going to be spectacular about this movie? When it makes, like, 14 million on its opening weekend.
Seriously…not to be crude but this just stinks of “who the fuck cares”? I’m sorry but it does.
Re: :Cameron…ha ha ha…i’m really looking forward to Fox marketing this as a “James Cameron” movie..to whom? their moms?
No stars, no franchise, a “big name” director that the important demo has no associations with, a sucky concept…
if they decide “Avatar” isn’t a sexy enough title they should market it as “Heaven’s Gate.”
Um… Time issued a correction because they made a factual error. That’s how journalism works. They wrote $300 million when the correct figure was $200 million. Thus, they have a duty to correct the mistake. It’s this kind of ‘who cares if we’re right as long as we’re right in spirit’ attitude that has infected every walk of life, from politics to journalism. Time made a minor mistake, and they behaved liked grown ups and corrected it.
So what if it costs more than the GNP of a third-world country? Taxpayers like you and I aren’t going to pay for it unless we buy a ticket to see it in the theater or purchase it on DVD or Blu-ray when the time comes. If Fox wants to spend $300 mil on a James Cameron film, let ‘em. Chances are pretty damn good that the money will be up on the screen and the film will most likely be as entertaining as Cameron’s other works.
Maybe this is why Chernin moved on. This movie is going to be a financial disaster and Wolverine and Night at the Museum won’t be enough of a bailout. That studio will in trouble this time next year.
Every time the budget for AVATAR is published Rothman and Gianopulos go mental. Remember, this is a film that was greenlit with a public budget of $200 million. Further, Cameron is as close to a sure thing as this industry has and Fox should be commended for ponying up the coin to support his unique vision.
That said, paranoia and histrionics are standard operating procedure on the Pico lot and there is no hiding for anyone now. Word has it that the “much vaunted” Fox marketing machine is stumbling and can’t figure out how to market this thing. How happy do you think that makes Lightstorm?
Rothman will chew his tongue off – and Gianopulos will just chew and chew and chew – until this movie opens… and if it works, Chernin will, of course, take credit for it. This is just starting to get interesting…
Avatar…Ishtar. Hmm?
“This movie is going to be a financial disaster”
They said the same thing about Titanic.
Not that I think that this is going to be as huge as Titanic. Titanic was a one of a kind thing.
Anyway, it’s too early to predict anything about Avatar, since we haven’t seen as much as an actual still from the movie. The trailer will tell us a lot more.
Avatar will be huge.
It’s a love story set on an alien planet with huge, mindblowing action and revolutionary visual effects. And directed by one of the most recognizable and esteemed tentpole directors working today.
I’ve heard the trailer will be on Wolverine. I’ll bet people will walk into the next showing just to see it again.
Well, remember that it’s not like $300M is going into Cameron’s pocket. It’s being SPENT. Considering all the effects and technology this movie is going to have, probably 300-400 people are being employed by this production in one form or another (sub-contractors and the like). And they are spending that money at coffee shops, restaurants, etc, etc. Yes, I know there are some people involved getting loads of money, but that still leaves loads for the “little people”.
I for one hope more studios make big, epic productions. It’s moving money from corporate coffers out to people who work for a living.