EXCLUSIVE: Even before The Hangover opened, executives at Warner Bros and Legendary Pictures had commissioned a script for another installment. Who knew it would take six months of headache-inducing negotiations to make it happen?
Finally, the participants have completed talks and are ready to sign deals to reprise. I’m told that Zach Galifianakis, Bradley Cooper and Ed Helms will each be paid in the vicinity of $5 million against 4% of first dollar gross. Director/producer Todd Phillips will be paid around $10 million against 10%. For Phillips, there are also escalators and bonuses that insure if the sequel does anywhere close to the original’s $467 million worldwide gross, Phillips will not make less than his income on the original. That meter is still running, and it has passed the $50 million mark.
Why was The Hangover 2 such a difficult deal to put together? It was a perfect storm of leverage: the three stars made less than $1 million collectively on a film that became Hollywood’s biggest grossing R rated comedy ever. Those stars did not have options locking them into a sequel. What they did have were teams of managers, agents and attorneys who negotiated together, determined about one thing: Warners and Legendary weren’t getting another Hangover unless the trio got paid well.
Warners didn’t make option deals with the cast because the studio never envisioned a raunchy comedy would become a juggernaut that begged for an encore. In fact, Warners’ uncertainty over Phillips’ casting choices were the reason the filmmaker gambled his upfront fee in exchange for slightly more than 15% of the film’s overall revenue that allowed him to make the movie for the $34 million budget ceiling that the studio established for that cast. At the time, only Cooper had any feature name recognition.
Cooper made slightly more than Helms and Galifianakis, but none made more than $300,000 to star in the original, I’m told. While Warners eventually cut each actor a $1 million bonus check right before sequel negotiations began, the cast was a bargain the first time around. So reps of the thesps were dug in for a long battle when the studio initially came to the table offering each actor $3 million against 1% of the gross, with a deadline attached. That deadline passed, and I heard that twice during the talks, Warner Bros chief Jeff Robinov walked away from the table and pronounced that the sequel was off.
Finally, the deal-making got done. The sequel’s still being honed, but an October start is considered likely if Helms can work things out with his NBC series The Office. The sequel will be considerably more expensive than the first film—upfront salary alone for the trio and Phillips is around $25 million, and the original costs $34 million all in. But even if the original budget doubled and Warners is paying over 20% of first dollar gross, I think this is a good bet on a film with an established audience that wants more. A studio that wanted to establish itself in comedy has a beachhead franchise, and most likely its big comedy for Memorial Day weekend, 2011.
UPDATE: Since many commenters asked, Justin Bartha, who played the missing groom in the original, will be back for the sequel. I have no idea what he will be paid. As for the writers, I believe the script is currently being worked on by Todd Phillips and Scot Armstrong, but there might be others contributing.


Can I plz be the first to say lightning don’t strike twice?
Agreed. The Hangover was one of those movies that caught on with the audience but I find myself wondering if they can recreate what made the film so much fun to watch. If they’re not careful it could turn into Evan Almighty.
You are not the only one. Other ELITIST SNOBS like yourself also CHOSE to dislike the movie even before seeing it, if you did in fact see it…
My thoughts exactly.
Even if it only retain half the audience of the first film it’ll still gross 250 mill, subtract the cost im sure the studio still comes out 50-75 mill in profit. Easy decision to say yes to this project if you ask me.
I am going to mark your words…..they should have seen this coming but noooo..This is Lala Land for you
Or once for that matter.
Silly thing to say. Many sequels do well. The sequel to Meet the Parents out-grossed the original by 200 million dollars.
Seriously – am I the only one who though the Hangover sucked? The coda was the only remotely amusing part. And half of that was relief, because the frat boy tedium was nearing an end.
Yes. You have bad taste.
I thought it was pretty good, nowhere near a comedy classic though. It became a phenomenon because of a simple concept and a perfect storm of luck — every other comedy last summer flopped. (Land of the Lost, Year One, Funny People…)
Yeah but those other movies either sucked or they were just ehh o.k. I can’t believe you mentioned Land of the Lost, that is perhaps the worst movie I have ever seen along with stepbrothers. I did not laugh through either movie.
I actually thought it was the funniest movie I’ve seen in a long time.
Course, I’ve seen ZOOLANDER a half dozen times. I think it’s necessary to admit that. I’m seeking help…
And as far as lightning striking twice…you never know. Odds are against them but the writers are strong. Some genius in a suit will suggest they tweak it with 3D in mind and add a Taylor Lautner co-starring role…
Most overrated movie of the last decade. I did enjoy it the first time I saw it…when it was called DUDE, WHERE’S MY CAR?
Count it! Vote Bob Weaver 2010
I thought it sucked, too. I have no idea what people are raving about. Zero genuine laughs. Storywise, it felt like one big narrative gimmick. Throw incongruous crap at the audience and then tediously weave them into a narrative whose implausibility we are supposed to accept because, man, those guys were wasted.
And, oh my god, there’s a naked chinaman in the trunk!! Stop, you’re killing me.
actually, i believe the guy was japanese.
Tigers and Tyson and roofies, oh my! That movie threw in everything but the laughs.
Agreed. I had a hard time finding anything worth laughing about in the film (that wasn’t already shown in the previews, and even then wasn’t all that funny).
I thought it was horrible and not funny. Ed and Zach are hillarous though in other ventures.
As an overall movie, yeah it did kind of suck — but it had some really great, fun components: Helms, Cooper and ZG are all worth paying big bucks to bring back.
And Todd Phillips’ deal on the first one? Whoever the agent was who made that for him needs to be given some kind of award.
Todd Feldman. Dude’s a shrimp but a monster negotiator.
Yes you are the only one
You are not the only one. Other ELITIST SNOBS like yourself also CHOSE to dislike the movie even before seeing it, if you did in fact see it.
So Johns, you going for a meme here, or what?
I agree, I thought it sucked too!!
The film made almost a half a billion dollars. So yes, you are the only one.
So did “Wild Wild West”
Yeah, but WIll Smith can brutally stomp a baby to death onscreen for 90 minutes and still make serious money.
Yeah, you are the only one.
Yes, you’re the only one.
No, you are not the only one. But then again, US humor is kind a strange kettle of fish to many other parts of the world.
No, my friend. There are many of us. It was slow and not that funny. Maybe late night on a cable channel you catch a scene or two. But then again, they make these movies because they know that is where it will end up and play forever. Nobody guessed it would be box office gold. But why not. Congrats to all.
Thank you.
i think ur a bell head with no sense of humor.secondly this is a movie that a guy can really laugh at, a movie full of surprises and creative characters.anyone who does’nt like this move is a stuck up snob!
you mean SURPRISES like when the nerdy guy finally stands up to his bitchy wife at the end and she storms off all flustered in the face of this changed man? you’re right, that was very surprising. nobody saw that coming (the moment her character was introduced).
Yes, you are the only one.
My husband and I thought it sucked too.
Your husband only said that to agree with you. He was cracking up inside. He is wipped. I know from experience.
[x] sweet truth
Yes you are the only fing one who thought it sucked.
Yes, you are the only one.
No, but the only one pretentious enough to throw around ‘coda’ and ‘tedium’ to demonstrate that this movie is SO beneath you
Since when is the word ‘coda’ pretentious?
Read a book, dude, or even a script.
Yes, you’re the only one. I hope your contrarian-ness keeps you warm at night, or maybe pays the bills.
It made 467 million. But, its probably your old or have no sense og humor. Probably some of column a and column b.
Yes, you are the only one.
I disagree. I am a snobby, hate-everything, bitter actor (especially bad comedies, which is most), and I thought the Hangover worked. Very funny from start to finish. I thoroughly enjoyed it. But to each his own.
You are not the only one
Seriously, you are the only one.
nope, AmITheOnlyOne?…you are not alone. but money rules.
Agreed. My girlfriend and I felt like we were the only ones not laughing in the theater. And we love comedies. Maybe we’re comedy snobs, but this movie was not it was all cracked up to be. Old school was waaaaaayyy better.
Terrible movie, but I completely laughed my ass of during the whole thing. I have no idea why, except it was goddamn funny. Go figure.
The three leads deserve every penny they can wring out of a sequel. I suspect the reason I laughed has less to do with the script (which honestly blew on paper) and more to do with the actors (and I’m pro-writer to a painful degree.)
You’re not alone.
I failed to see anything funny in that movie.
Yes, it was pretty weak/wildly overpraised.
However lucrative in our Jersey Shore world, at the end of the day, it’s Porky’s and Police Academy territory, nowhere near Animal House or Caddyshack.
Mike Fleming, you are kicking ass sir. I was wondering why this deal took so long.
Um, depend on lightning striking twice — regardless of whether the movie was lackluster (which it was). It may make slightly less, but it’ll still do ridiculous business. I’d say that’s a sure thing. I saw the movie the second weekend. People went wild for it. I can’t imagine those people going, “Nah, I think I’m going to skip out on this round.”
I need to decide now to see it right away or avoid it altogether because I missed it in theatres and by the time I caught up with it the marketing of it diminished unviewed portions of the film to roughly 5 minutes.
What about Justin Bartha?
Someone has to say it.
Warner Brother’s business affairs dept. is in the toilet.
They are the worst in town at this moment.
Deals take forever to finish.
Their people never get back to you with or without the information or response.
Warner’s is the last studio in town anyone I know wants to do business with right now because of this.
They are making the Fox business affair dept. look professional in comparison.
That’s a huge budget for a slideshow. The sequel IS going to be all photos, right?
AmITheOnlyOne probably is the only one. When I covered The Hangover two years ago it was the first comedy that I gave a 100 out of a 100. For what it was, a Vegas frat-boy movie it was perfect. I give the movie a 95. There was a storyline in the script where Cooper’s character wakes up with a sore ass and throughout the day he believes that someone took advantage of him. Warner’s probably didn’t want to stray into this territory so alas this was removed. They created a comedy franchise out of thin air. Give them their due.
I read the Lucas Moore version of the script as well and it was far from a 100. I was amazed by how nimble and fun the finished product was. Phillips/Garelick and the cast saved it.
I second that, Hangover bored the hell out of me. I couldn’t see what all the hype was for.
Yes, you were the only one.
Mike:
Nikki exposed the writing scandal last year.
Jeremy Garelick and Philips were apparently responsible for anything truly side splitting in the original. So, who wrote/is writing the sequel?
What’s become of the
Lightning never strikes twice, you’re right. I mean, the cast was locked in for a while now. Question is, who is brave enough to write/direct a sequel that will never live up to the first?
That’s all great, but what about the writers? Who is writing this?
Yeah sure this will open but it will sink and probably stink. What a stupid idea to make this into a sequel. Robinov is an idiot.
Most people who loved the HANGOVER that aren’t future/current/or former frat boys are just trying to say they loved it to seem “with it” and “current.”
The movie was bad. Played to lowest common denominator, but because it made money, everyone is forced to pretend like it was more than it was.
Most people who hated the HANGOVER that aren’t future/current/or former snobs are just trying to say they hated it to seem “cultured” and “superior.”
The movie was funny. Played to silliness and absurdity, but because it made money, snobs have to go out of their way to pretend that they’re smarter than everyone else.
The thrill is gone. The first movie had plot twists and a mysterious ending. Not sure if it can be replicated.
is the fact not relevant that all 3 actors have the same agent at caa?
The Right Coast, ‘Lightning Strike’ successes are a thing of luck in this business, The Hangover was a success because it had great hold throughout the summer thanks to a brilliant script and an even more superb cast. People loved this movie and will be lining up in the streets to see a sequel.
Yes AmITheOnlyOne, you are the only one.
Poor Justin Bartha. I hope he got something approaching the other three’s salaries. He was fantastic, too.
No he wasn’t. He was the odd one out. But luckily on the roof… best supporting was the technically escort…
re: AmITheOnlyOne
Yes you are.
Snark all you want to about the future of H2. Yes,I know rest stops on the highway to salary bloated sequel success are littered with the remains of overnight sensations who failed to read the script. Be Still! Can we just relax for a moment & bask in the current reflected glory of a creative (Todd Phillips) who gambled his upfront fee to hold out for his acting choices & won & still wins… on the first one. $51 mil, $52 mil, $5-5-5-3 mil, .
The fact that casting hilarious guys like ZG and EH was considered “risky” by the studio shows how out of touch they are with what makes comedy work.
How many times can the suits keep going back to the same “list” of pre-approved alleged B.O. draws and keep coming back empty handed before they start giving more casting freedom to the people who actually have their fingers on the pulse of who’s actually FUNNY.
No, I agree, it wasn’t all it was cracked up to be. Not sure why it was so successful other than the right movie at the right time. But I live in Las Vegas, so maybe that’s why I didn’t like it.
More detailed numbers on deals!! Great reporting.
And no point in debating Hangover’s merits or chances, it’s money in the bank for at least 2 more pics. That’s the great thing about mediocre pics that do extremely well (madagascar, ice age, xmen…)
Sure, it was lightning in a bottle but the writing was there. The characters worked and those three guys were absolutely charming together. People laughed their asses off and promptly told all their friends it was a “must see.” The sequel is gonna have a HUGE opening and the drop-off will hinge on how good the script/story is. If it’s any good, “they will come.” If is sucks, it’ll drop like a hot rock. Either way, Galifianakis and Helms will always be the biggest winners. Bradley Cooper was bound to become a movie star with our without “The Hangover” and Philips was already a winner. I’m already anticipating the chants of “please don’t suck!” when the trailer first hits theaters.
I heard the baby is holding out for $1.5 mil, 2% of the gross and wants to be able to keep the blublockers once shooting is done…a deal is likely if they can figure out a way to shoot around his naptime/feeding schedules and figure out a way to keep Bradly Cooper from hitting on his mom.
I thought it was pretty overrated but had it’s moments. I thought Old School is still his best movie. Straight comedies are so few and far between and Phillips keeps turning out good ones. How can a studio not trust a director who had so many films under his belt already?
Kudos to Phillips for gambling on the cast he wanted. I wish more studios would follow this plan instead of over-analyzing and over-paying. New talent is not the end of the world. It’s refreshing and lets the story speak for itself.
what about the baby? what’s his piece?
I will always have a passion for the movies, but it’s getting stupidly expensive. I think I dropped close to $20 for the ticket to see this. I’d be willing to shell out cash to see a sequel, but I think i’ll check screamincoupons first and see if i can get some tickets there.
HANGOVER 2 OMG i have to see it ! sounds FABULOUS !
What about Justin Bartha and Heather Graham? And any chance Mike Tyson will reprise his role?
==
Steve
As long as it starts with another Glen Danzig song, I’m there.
DO NOT LIKE BRADLEY COOPER AT ALL! Sorry for the CAPS but I had to express the uselessness of heir Cooper. Zack and Ed are great, don’t need Cooper at all. He is very unappealing and not likable.
Please stop YELLING, BOB.
Thank you AMITHEONLYONE! yes, “The Hangover” was mediocre at best. What saved the movie was the end credits which were hysterical. But all throughout the movie, i’m thinking “what the hell is so great about this”? Perfect timing for this kind of comedy in the summertime without competition for other similar comedies made this into such a huge hit. And these actors are SO replaceable! Does anyone really think that audiences went to see this film because of Zach or Bradley? Can they be replaced? yes!!! Good luck WB!
@youareright I can honestly say that I saw this movie SPECIFICALLY because of Zach Galifianakis. I had been a fan of his stand up for years.
I find it odd that people are failing to realize that there is a difference between a “good movie” and a “funny movie”. Was The Hangover a good movie? No. It was a little on the slow side and the premise was just plain stupid. Was it a funny movie? No doubt. The 3 leads carried the movie which was packed with enough one liners and gags to fill 2 comedies. If you didn’t find it funny, I’m surprised you watched it at all, as the type of movie it would be was CLEARLY laid out in the previews. But to each his own.
Loved the first one. I am a frat boy. I love the fact that I’m a frat boy. I don’t care what you think. I loved the movie. Looking forward to the second one, even though I doubt it tops the first one either.
I got a hangover just watching it. Terrible film on any level.
I SEE! You’ve worked the TITLE of the film into a pointed and clever CRITICISM of the film. Brilliant!
Have to agree with both Right Coast and AmI, movie wasn’t all that great.
They deserve everything they get. Good for them, for their representatives and their families. The movie made tons of money. That said, god damn, three mediocre actors. Each one. Imagine being in the biggest R rated film of all time and you walk down the street and nobody recognizes you. I was recently sitting down to a meeting with three entertainment professional and one of the “stars” was sitting near us. None knew who it was. A couple of close guesses but guesses they were.
Thank you.
I have NEVER commented on any board, but I must say I felt exactly as you do about the movie being unfunny. It doesn’t need a defense except it’s money-making history, so it doesn’t matter if we didn’t like it or get it. LOTS of people did… even thought that still doesn’t make it a good movie. LOL.
This movie completely sucked! Why anyone would spend another dime producing a sequel is beyond me. Seriously, the All-time worst movie ever!
The original was funny I’ll give it that but it was completely overhyped and people let their humor guards down. The sequel will make more money than the original only because people are still in stupid love with it. Good for these guys for wanting to get paid.
Wow that Robinov sure is a tough negotiator. He showed them who’s boss didn’t he? Next time Jeff walk away from the table three times or thrice as they say then you’ll see them beg for mercy!
The first was great … not sure what I think about a sequel. I feel like it ended very well. I’ll eventually Netflix it, I’m sure. But a trip to the theater where it’ll cost $15 for a ticket, candy and a drink? I doubt it.
I wholeheartedly agree. There were maybe 2 lol moments in the entire movie but the pictures in the end tricked peoples brains into thinking it was funny. Was no Swingers that for damn sure. Shouldn’t try so hard to be funny in the sequel (how to we outdo Mike Tyson??) but I’m sure all that hollyhood money will poison the well and it will suck.
yeah. you are the only one.
I’ve heard the sequel won’t be shot in Vegas. Even more so than the actors, Vegas really was the star of the original, with this film basically a blown out version of those cool and iconic ‘What happens in Vegas’ commercials.
Todd Philips is a complete genius for aping something that worked as well as those commercials did (as opposed to Tim Vaughan and Ashton’s middling interpretation of the marketing campaign). Be interesting to see what he does with the sequel.
Am I the only one wondering why Justin Bartha isn’t mentioned? Although he was gone for most of the movie, he was quite funny and surely they’re not going to get rid of him as he’s the one who brought the 4 friends together.
Am I the only one? probably. Now go watch The Matrix ‘Neo’
Only a top 10 comedy all-time. If you didn’t like the original, just kill yourself.
overrated film but good for them
Yes “amItheonlyone” you are the only one. the only one that I’ve ever heard say they didn’t like it. I laughed the entire time, and I’ve watched it at least 5 times. Plus the lines to come from it are endless and you can just say one line and it starts to snowball with tons of lines being thrown out there, totally hilarious!
That being said, not sure how a sequel will do. Better be really freaking funny.
Seriously – you are.
The Hangover wasn’t bad, it just wasn’t very good either.
Two things could have made it a much better movie, but then it would not have gotten made, cause the studio is too chickenshit to not spoonfeed an audience.
First thing, start the movie the morning AFTER they partied! Did we really need to see the 20 minute intro explaining who everyone is and what their one character trait is? I’m sure this info could have been delivered throughout the course of the film without having a boring 20 minute intro.
Second thing, END the movie right after they find that no name douche on the roof. Do we really need to see the aftermath and the wedding? No, we do not. It was boring and unnecessary.
But would a studio really do this? You know what, forget the studio, Philips and his cadre are such hacks, they wouldn’t have even suggested such a route.
But believe me, change nothing else about the film except that, and it would have been 100 times better. Still wouldn’t have been good, cause the third act was terrible, even if you take out the wedding.
“Philips and his cadre are such hacks”
BWAHAHAHAHA! Nice criticism for a guy who pocketed 50 mill. Doesn’t anyone on this site remember how Hollywood works?!! Where do you think you are!!?
If you put a movie together that makes half of a billion dollars, you are obviously doing the right thing. It may not have been earth shattering with all the hype that built up around it, but you throw up that kind of movie against a crappy Land Of The Lost redo and an even crappier My Life In Ruins cheese-fest on a summer weekend and you are bound to start off well.
Give the guy some respect, he knows what sells and makes more money than you. Oh, but you are smarter, huh? Hope that ego keeps you warm at night.
Why are people saying that they feel bad for the guy who played the groom? He probably worked for a week or two on the first movie and now has another job to look forward to, one he will probably be overpaid for considering his contribution to the first film. It’s not like he worked for months and months and is now getting screwed over!
AS, you’re an idiot. Restructure a $467mil film to narrow the market to ONLY frat boys and you think it’ll do better? The 20 minute “intro” sets up the stakes which ENABLE the comedy to be funny. And if you kill the wedding, there’s no resolution, and the tone of the whole film is changed. You’d be left with drunken morons with no redeeming qualities. What you’re describing is a completely different movie, one without any reach beyond the beer bong set. You kill the whole “What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas” dynamic. Thank God you weren’t the development exec on this one.
Did you just say “sets up the stakes,” and “redeeming qualities” in reference to a fucking silly comedy? Another question, are you the biggest douchebag on the planet?
The stakes? The fucking stakes??? What did you just get out of your Robert McKee seminar? I think the “stakes” are set up when, gee, I don’t know, THEY WAKE UP AND THE GROOM IS MISSING!
And what redeeming qualities were they given at the end? They were still drunken morons, except with some terrible “serious” bullshit thrown in. You think people love that movie cause of the wedding ending? “You know, up till now, I thought the movie sucked, it was just about these drunken morons, but now, after seeing 20 minutes of awful forced “drama,” I changed my mind. These guys actually have redeeming qualities, therefore I will now love this movie.”
Seriously you douchebag, it’s assholes like you that are responsible for the AWFUL, PITIFUL state of mainstream films these days. Keep talking about stakes and redeeming qualities you studio exec wannabe. Much like them, you have no clue what you’re talking about but say it with great authority.
But please, keep going on in your critical analysis of a shitty movie called The Hangover. Maybe you could let us know exactly how the stakes were set up in Hot Tub Time Machine while you’re at it.
The Hangover was cookie cutter Hollywood mediocrity at its worst, and defenders of such belong in Hell.
Wow. Somebody has got problems.
Hey, AS… when the studio execs with “no clue” pass on yet another one of your BRILLIANT scripts have you ever stopped to consider that maybe you are the one who is wrong? Not necessarily about structure or mediocre movies, but about what works in today’s market? Perhaps you need to bend a bit to play by the current rules of Hollywood.
Also, I only have your brilliant posts to go on, but you seem like a condescending douche with anger issues. Perhaps your meetings and pitches drip with douchiness too.
I’m just saying… something to ponder.
You no doubt fully believe that you have it all figured out, which will mean that any advice will fall on deaf ears. So go ahead, disregard everything and commence profanity laced response…
Do not sell these likable 3 and the quite gifted Phillips short… Lightning CAN be caught twice, sometimes is, we’ll all just have ti wait and see…
Simmons!!!
Sports Guy
By far the best thing about that movie is that it got my date so riled up that we ended up having some extra-special fun after the movie ended. Life imitated “art” that night.
But no, I am not interested in seeing a sequel.
I feel sorry for the guy that played the groom.
OK so clearly The Hangover was not the most well directed or well put-together film of all time. It was a comedy based on stupidity. But it was HALARIOUS! Even if the sequel is one of the worst films of all time, it will still have one of the biggest movie openings in a long time.
so long as due date is a smash, and it will be, the same frat boys that embraced that “frat boy tedium” should return in droves. as will their girlfriends. as will anyone else under the age of 35.
twittername: davidferino
I could hardly sit through the Hangover, and found it one of the most boring and non-amusing films of 2009. I just didn’t get it…nor do I get a studio giving the cast such an enormous amount of money upfront w/out taking on any of the risk? What am I missing? I don’t understand how that can continue in the internet world we live in today. Doesn’t WB have shareholders to answer to? This is a perfect example of why one should never invest money into an entertainment company, and why so many actors are out of work.
If you can’t figure out why a film that grossed nearly half a billion dollars worldwide would pay its creative team good money to make a follow-up for a built-in audience, then you probably shouldn’t be investing money in anything. What you’re missing is a basic understanding of the law of supply and demand.
Yes, out of 100 million people who watched it, you are the only doucher who thought the Hangover was no good. Congratulations.
Paging REVENGE OF THE NERDS II – NERDS IN PARADISE
Ok, let’s estimate the sequel will cost $70 million to produce. Add $30 million to cover the 20% over first dollar gross. That’s $100 million. Tack on $50 million for marketing and you have a film that would need to gross roughly $300 million to break even. If the film is as good or better than the sequel, it might double that figure in worldwide grosses.
Hey Genius,
If it costs $150 mil and grosses $300 mil, that means it doubled its money…not broke even.
Hey Genius, Earl C …. a studio only gets about 50% of box office from the theaters … so if it costs $150mil and grosses $300mil then yes, it breaks even.
Hey Genius. Earl C. You.
You do realize the theaters get a piece of the GROSS, right? The GROSS? In common shorthand, easy math, layman’s numbers, about 50%? Right? You brilliant fucking genius you?
At least we know what the C. stands for.
It will be very interesting to see how the numbers compare to Borat/Bruno. I see many similarities to the two projects…
WHERE’S ANY MENTION OF THE WRITERS?? You know, the actors & director couldn’t do shit without a good script for the very foundation of this movie. Give these talented men blank white pages, or stick a hack from Hanah Montana on to the sequel, and I guarantee the movie produced will die within 2 weeks after word gets around.
This is so damn typical – like THEY MADE THE MOVIE WITHOUT A SCRIPT? MAGIC ON THE SET?? The scriptwriters were Jon Lucas &
Scott Moore, and should have been invited back into the 2nd production with a hefty boost for their new work. But it’s so typical – EVEN OF YOU, NIKKI, AND I LOVE YOU. Good scripts don’t happen in improvisation – they spring from real talent. Give any of these characters 125 white pages and watch the crap they come back with. Then give those pages to Lucas & Moore, and you see a great difference. GOOD WRITERS ARE EVERY BIT AS IMPORTANT AS FINE ACTORS & A TALENTED DIRECTOR.
Just so you should know.
are you the guy who got dicked over on Up in the Air?
I would rather see Zach Galifianakis walk around for 2 hours with his Hangover buddies. That would be GREAT!
Amen to giving the writers their props! Whether you think it was truly funny or not, most people will have to admit that the script kept them hooked to the end. The WRITERS should have gotten the bonus! To write a sequel with any kind of similar pull will require some real magic, I bet, as the tiger is already out of the bag here.
I thought this was a great movie, cleverly funny. I would say it is up there with wedding crashers as an ingenious comedic film. It will be interesting to see how the sequel plays out, the film may have just been a “one hit wonder” kind of deal.
Except for laughing for 90 solid minutes the hangover sucked.
Yes, you are the only one. The Hangover was awesome. Apparently you hate comedy. You should become a film critic and go praise boring, crappy movies.
i thought it sucked hated it. but maybe nows there chance to make a good movie. i coould have wrote a better vegas bachlor party movie on a napkin, and shot it with a mobile cell cam.
I doubt it…there are about 6 grammatical errors in your comment alone. Extrapolate that to an entire screenplay and the only job you could book would be writing commercials for American Career College.
If the sequel was written before the first one was even released, sounds like some of the same goodness is going to happen.
Will baby Carlos be all grown up?
So they suffer another HANGOVER?
HANGOVER 2: HANG HARDER
If the studio hired me to do the poster campaign, I’d come up with something
along these lines for HangOver 2 — The H would be Capitalized and so would the O and then rising behind “Hangover” in bold would be a big number 2, and it would read:
“H 2 O”
bobby the saint –
Your arm must be really sore from patting yourself on the back so much for that “inspired” notion.
Saul Bass the Second you are not.
But thanks for playing.
And, oh, by the way…Hall and Oates have a bone to pick with you.
Poor “Doug” gets no love!
Sequel has a chance because they drew four fairly complete characters for a R-Rated comedy. For those knocking H1, rememember it was a comedy, and one without an ounce of pretense to be anything else. Did it have memorable lines and scenes? A score of them. We rooted for our hapless heroes plus enough jokes for a Zucker movie. You are not the only one, but they got a half a billion dollars out of the suckiest world economy in memory.
simmons
Credit for this film goes to Trip Vinson! why? because the story is based on his bachelor party! Does Trip get a piece of the action???
What does $5 million against 4% of first dollar gross actually mean? They get the 5 mil plus 4%?
That means that they get 5 million regardless of how the movie performs. Those 5 million are then calculated as 4%, which means that the movie has to make 125 M at the box office, before the points kick in. Let’s say the movie has a B.O. of 180 M, then the 4% would be…
7.2 M.
This is then calculated against the 5 M upfront.
So with 180 M box office, they would get the 5 M from the upfront, plus an additional 2.2 M.
First gross means that the B.O. number itself is the basis for calculation, regardless of how costly the movie itself can become.
It’s a very dangerous way of calculating for the studio itself, because – depending on the success of the movie – it just might happen that the studio itself finds the movie in the red, while the three stars and the director get rich off of it, which is what apparently happened with MI:4 and Tom Cruise.
As Fleming noted above in the article, 25 M are gone before they even start shooting anything. Let’s say the can keep the rest of the production budget in line with the original, then…
Production budget: 60 M
P & A budget: 50 M (roughly, that’s how much a mainstream comedy costs in marketing these days)
That’s a combined cost of roughly 110 M to make HO2.
Now, let us assume that the movie will make about as much as the first one in world-wide B.O., a bit more, maybe.
Let’s say it makes 500 M world-worde gross.
Half of that (roughly) will have to be given to the theatre chains.
Distributor’s gross is then 250 M.
However, as stated above, the poinst of all these folks are calculated against the pure B.O. gross, i.e. the original 500 M.
As stated by Fleming, the points come up to 20% of that.
That’s 50 M.
However, since their fees are calculated against that number, and that fee combined is 25 M, only an additional 25 M will have to be
deducted from the distributor’s gross. That makes that 225 M.
Now, what did we forget? Yes. The rest of the budget (not including that 25 M now, since we already dealt with that).
Distributor’s gross = 225M – (110 M – 25 M) = 225 M – 85 M = 140 M.
So, if (and that is a very big “if”) HO2 can get the same kind of success as the original, they all can still walk away with a lot of money. And I haven’t even counted DVD sales and other deals (because that is where it gets really complicated).
I hope I haven’t mis-calculated anything, but if I have, I apologise, it’s rather early in the morning here.
Thanks for the calculations. Seriously, that was really helpful.
Actually, I did mis-calculate (never do calculations before your third morning coffee, ahem).
20% of 500 M = 100 M
So the final calculations would have to be
Distributor’s gross = 250 M
Points – Upfront = 100 M – 25M = 75 M
The 75 M will have to be deducted from the distributor’s gross.
Distributor’s gross = (250M – 75M) – (110M – 25M) = 175M – 85M
Distributor’s gross = 90 M
(This is then before all other fees, interests, overheads etc. will have to be paid)
My sincerest apologies for what was a really stupid 1st grade math mistake. But the point is still the same. Deals like that can quickly turn a movie that looks great on paper into a big black hole for the studio.
A couple questions. Is this based on the domestic or worldwide box office total?
For example, the first brought in $467mil in worldwirde B.O. 4% of that amount is roughly $18.68 million. Let’s pretend(for an easy calculation) that HO2 brings in exactly $467mil as well. Would that mean each actor gets paid the $5mil, plus $13.68 more, for a total of $18.68m?
So almost everybody and their brother saw this movie, and so many of you thought it sucked? “Oh…we are just too “cool” to say we liked it.” What a joke. It was funny. Those of you claiming not to like it are just being contrarion…only because you have this platform. Get over yourselves.
Um, or maybe it just sucked.
Wait for the sequel, your little bubble will burst.
If you didn’t think this movie was funny, then you must have the personality of a shovel. The sequel is a no-brainer. It could bomb and still make them millions. Why get on here and post your opinion if you really didn’t like it or don’t care? I think that’s why your sense of humor is zero. You would rather get on here and debate this versus laughing. You might want to think of getting job in the white house, because you could definitely fit in with that unpopular group.
Reading your post it suddenly became clear to me why you liked Hangover and I didn’t.
Here’s a hint: it begins with a D and ends with a T and in between is IPSHI.
The people that did not think it was funny have no sense of humor. They are the people that laugh at canned humor. The a + b +c = funny kind of stuff. The real humor in the Hangover comes from its dialogue. Many of the jokes are easy to miss and are not just handed to you on a plate, you have to look for them. If you do not look you will not find them.
The people who thought it was funny are utter douchebags.
The jokes are easy to miss? It’s the Hangover dude, not the Coen Brothers, take it easy alright. The film was awful with a few funny bits, all in the trailer.
Don’t blame us cause you have no taste!
I thought the movie was overrated soo much of the movie i already saw in the previews. The Mike Tyson part turned out to be unfunny. The tiger part was stupid. Chinese guy jumping out of a car was stupid. The Cop part wasn’t funny at all! Hey let’s make a deal, if you let us tase you we’ll drop all charges! You could see the physical humor a mile away. The few funny lines were on the drive over, after that it was terrible.
Hated this movie…completely Satanic.
Appealing cast, but the film didn’t live up to the hype. But why should quality stand in the way of a return? Matrix, Shrek and Pirate movies, anybody?
I fell asleep; need I say more?
Maybe. Was it just now, or at the movie? Had you taken your pills that day? Did you get a good night’s sleep. Have a balanced breakfast? What was the weather like?
Don’t leave me hanging here.
I loved The Hangover, because it was pretty innovative in its structure, and put many new spins on the “good boys go bad in Vegas”. Sure, it clearly owed a lot to the Vegas sequences in “Go”, but it did more. It grafted the fairy tale structure onto the Vegas movie, with very good effect. Indeed, for those of you who read literature, it is obviously a retelling of “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”, with Gallifianakis as Puck. You might want to have your assistants give you coverage of that property. It was written by this hot, hot new writer named William Shakespeare.
The first was a great movie, but it SOOO doesn’t set up well for a sequel. You start getting into soap opera level unlikliness on doing anything remotely like that plot twice. Part of the reason “1″ worked so well was it had some believability to it –that will be really hard to recapture for the sequel. So I would not expect a Hangover 3. But hey, I’ve been wrong before.
From my perspective, however, I’m glad they’re doing it –at least the actors will have a payday commensurate with what they deserved from the first film, and I’m all for that. You rock, guys –congrats on getting the financial reward you deserve from it.
And maybe it’ll at least be okayish on its own, if not great. I don’t think WB will have too much trouble at least getting their money back with the guaranteed first weekend audience, so I’m not feeling too bad for them either even if “2″ isn’t a blockbuster.
Why the F is anyone commenting on here if they didn’t like this movie. It was funny. A lot of people agreed and it made a bunch of money as a result. I would compare it along the lines of the big lebowski really. It was just a good movie all around. Most of my friends parents and my own parents even thought it was exceptionally funny. If you hate this movie why would you bother posting here, just don’t go see the sequel.
The pitch idea was great, the execution serviceable, and it made a ton of money. That means it was a good film to the people who matter. The fact that it was boring and forgettable is irrelevant.
sdasd da
I waited till it came out on DVD to see it, I didn’t think it was that great the first time i saw it but after watching it again i laughed even more. It’s the exact opposite of ‘old school’, the more you watch it the better a movie you realize it is.
I think a third of those saying they “didn’t find the film funny” are development executives who were too busy shitting themselves that Warners made $467 million while spending $35 million.
Hard to laugh at a film that makes your track record look incompetent.
Of course, these are the same people who will be quick to bash THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT – “how did anyone find it scary.” “It was just a bunch of bad camera work.”
Better fight that under $1 million project that grossed $248 million, lest you be expected by those who hold the pocket books to have enough talent and taste not to have to burn through $100 million to net $10 million.
(And I’m sure that seat at Arclight for the Friday night showing of THE HANGOVER got awfully uncomfortable the more you anticipated that Monday morning conversation when your boss asked why Zach Galifianakis wasn’t mentioned much before)
The other half of “those who hated it” are your basic disgruntled writers. The type who sat there to determined to hate it because 1) they didn’t write it, 2) it had some element that directly contradicted what they had paid Robert Mckee $1,000 to tell them, and they didn’t want believe they got fleeced.
The final group of people who didn’t find it funny were watching it in the motion picture hospital and would have found it funny – if only their arthritis didn’t act up when they laughed, or if they had their vision, or hadn’t just had that last heart attack.
If you hated that movie, and didn’t think it was funny at all, you REALLY shouldn’t have a job in this business.
This film will blow the box office to bits…purely because of curiosity. At this point whether the film is good or not is irrelevant..it just has to be made…Lightning does not strike twice and it will probably not come near what the first one grossed…but loyal and curious fans will inflate the numbers..and even when people come out of the theater and say it was not as good…there are going to be those who want to see for themselves…these three characters have captivated the audience and their fans…so no one is going to take anyone’s word for it..thus the box office is going to get lit up in 2011
Let’s just say I’m over 55 and the last movie I saw in the theater and not on the home was screen was ‘The Royal Tenenbaums’. I watched ‘The Hangover’ on HBO last week and then watched it again a few days later with my wife. We both thought it was very funny. I’ll see HO2…when it’s on HBO.