Is the 'Avatar' Budget Approaching $500 Million?
Filed under: Action, Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Fandom, Distribution, Exhibition, 20th Century Fox
Talking about film budgets is a tricky thing. Talking about the budget for Avatar is an even trickier thing. I recently mused about how Fox's huge gamble had caused four highly-anticipated films in China to flee from its shadow, poising the film on the precipice of a perfect storm of box office success in China that no previous film had been privy to. In doing so I invoked the ire of a good number of commenters, all of whom felt my budget-returning extrapolation from the news that Avatar is set to dominate in 80% of China's screens during its biggest blockbuster season wasn't just a wrong hypothetical, but downright ignorant.
While I still stand by the point of that post - that the hitherto unseen convergence of all the elements behind Avatar's release is going to see unprecedented box office in China - I'll concede that there is no chance that the film makes its budget back from China alone; not with the New York Times now claiming that the film's price tag is breaching the half-billion mark. As with all things budget, however, this number isn't as simple as it looks.
The $500 million is NYT's combination of the estimated $300 million it cost to actually produce the film, the approximately $150 million Fox plans to spend on global marketing alone, with the remaining $50 million being a cushion for the cumulative costs some of the film's partners have already ponied up (such as Avatar Day, whose bill was footed mostly by IMAX). However, even if their newly estimated number is accurate, that doesn't mean that Fox is on the line for the full half-billion.
The NYT goes on to estimate that as much as 60% of Avatar's production budget was funded by the combined investments of Dune Entertainment and Ingenious Media. Neither of the private equity firms have confirmed the exact amount of their fiscal claim to James Cameron's effects extravaganza, but this kind of outside behavior is nothing new in this reborn economic climate in which studios have begun to minimize their risk involved with a film by partnering with others with deep pockets. The upside to this is it allows Fox to roll the dice on an original film property starring no A-list actors in a genre that has proven, for Hollywood, largely resistant to innovation. The downside is, even if the film does gangbusters, Fox' profit reaping is diluted between itself and the aforementioned deep pockets.
That said, Fox has apparently been hedging their bet this whole time. Regardless if the film cost $300 million or $500 million, it's going to take months before its success or failure can begin to be accurately measured. That's why the studio plans on dropping the ace up their sleeve that is Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakuel on Christmas Day. The previous Chipmunks outing brought Fox a sizeable $217 million box office haul in the US, with a bonus $143 million from around the world. So whether Avatar explodes out of the gate or not, a few CGI chipmunks should help bouy the studio's balance sheets until there is enough data to reflect if their gamble on what may be the most expensive movie ever made was brilliant or foolish.










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
11-09-2009 @ 10:38PM
Jerald Brewer said...
Who cares? Is it going to cost me more $$$ to see it now? I remember when TITANIC was being made critics began reviewing the budget b4 the movie came out (& I think hoping it would tank). Cameron puts the $$$ on the screen out of respect (or love) of his audience. Yes, I'd rather see the $$$ in my bank account, but I'll be there opening weekend.
Reply
11-09-2009 @ 4:44PM
Jim said...
Let's see now, oh YEAH, here it is.....Media predicting the disaster of James Cameron's upcoming film, with the highest budget in history, secretive and troubled production, no way in hell its going to make back its cost.....oh, WAIT....you're talking about AVATAR...I thought the media was still droning on about Titanic!!....If James Cameron had a dollar for everyone who ever doubted him, his films, or his artistic cred, well let's just say that he could probably actually RAISE the Titanic ( or what's left of it anyway) you know the best thing about the whole media calling the Titanic a disaster? the fact that it went on to make over a BILLION dollars world - wide, and I loved watching Cameron shove all of those negative words down the throats of those who tried to score points off him.
Now , about Avatar....Its quite possible that his reach has exceeded his grasp, we won't know until release day. But I woudlnt' bet against him. Yes, he's arrogant, and an egomaniac, but with one difference: He can BACK UP everything he says, he knows more about the nuts and bolts of filmmaking than any of those precious film school grads, and he, with his brother, when they need a new piece of equipment for their films...they DESIGN AND BUILD IT. Name another major filmmaker that does that. I for one am looking forward to Avatar. Does it look like it covers new ground thematically? nope, but name the last big Bugdet Hollywood release that does. I'm also looking forward to all the doom and naysayers and online criticos who are right now consulting their thesauri for variations on how to shred this film. and I'm sure that Mr. Cameron will give that all the due attention it deserves, and then flip the newpaper page and get on with life.
Reply
11-09-2009 @ 7:08PM
Booby Jones said...
Yeah, people are probably attacking it unfairly, but the fact that it looks like Thundercats: The Movie doesn't help much. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, but I still think the characters look silly.
If anything I think that Avatar has shown how much movies have changed since he made Titanic, but not because of the technology, but because the budget is now close to 500 million and no one even seems to notice.
Reply
11-09-2009 @ 7:38PM
Serious Jones said...
You know, the only reason why Titanic really made a billion dollars was cuz of Celine Dion right? 'm serious
Reply
11-13-2009 @ 9:59PM
Ken said...
How could this movie possibly cost $500 million??? The effects look good but not super-good, and the story seems paper thin.
Reply