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.
Tom Cruise and J.J. Abrams Reunite for 'Mission Impossible 4'
'Big Top Pee-Wee': The Original Benicio Del Toro Wolfman
Spin-ematical: New on DVD and Blu-ray for 2/9
Watch This: Brilliant Oscar-Nominated Short 'Logorama'
Chris Nolan to Lead 'Superman' Reboot!?
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg)
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
12-15-2009 @ 1:56AM
SHE said...
I can give an answer to that question.. There are plenty of people who have created things just for their films (be it animation or live action), but I shall only mention the most profound ones...
The Lumiere Brothers. They designed...well what do you know a FILM CAMERA along with a projector that was anywhere from 16 fps to 25 fps... Without the Lumiere Brothers...I don't think Cameron would have had the camera in the first place to make his films.
For all those that study film, Cameron's name doesn't even hit the notes. Pretty pictures doesn't mean he has the stuff to back it up. Last I checked his abyss movie was a complete flop and to all the majors in my school...this movie looks...bad (then again our eyes are far more trained for that).
True...a lot of film grads know just the same as he does...
Cameron makes films like one who is fresh out of film school and doesn't know the art of film, but he has a bigger budget to enrapture his audiences with glowing prettiness and sex.
And the second reason as to why Titanic sold so well...is because as my film teacher said, "People are stupid."
To put it simply...common people don't want complicated actually thought driven material. They want entertainment, sex, and/or action. Many top films aren't based on the drive of knowledge but what audiences like to look at, feel emotion and not have to think about.
Not to say that thought-driven films don't make it to the top...just that they less often do so to the predictable ones...Of course now every film is pretty predictable to do me.
Once you take a class in it, the teachers do mean it when they say, "You'll never be able to look at film the same way again."
12-15-2009 @ 1:18PM
Jim said...
SHE:
Uh, actually, I HAVE a diploma in film and television production, admittedly its only a College degree, not from USC, or UCLA, or some other institute of higher learning. I know all about the Lumiere Bros and their Train film that scattered the populace in 1896. and Georges Melies, the French Magician who made the first SciFi film in history. Need a prompt? 1902. speaking as a ' COMMON' person , who, believe it or not, graduated from a film program. I don't hold Mr. Cameron up as the living embodiment of the Auteur Theory ( consult your coles notes for definition. so let's go through what I said in response to your rather patronizing comments:
The Lumiere Bros are indeed the fathers of Film there's no disputing that fact. As there is no disputing the fact that James Cameron and his brother have pioneered underwater camera technology that allows the film maker to have total control of the camera without being tethered, and combined with the 3D digital process, gives the camera complete freedom of movement . Don't believe me? You might want to look up Camerons' documentaries on the Bismarck, which employed this technology to great effect. I know its a rather prosaic subject matter but still......
-Abyss being a complete flop. Okay, you've got me there. The original theatrical version of the film made no sense, was Close Encounters underwater. However, when the DIRECTORS CUT was put out on DVD, showing just how much was cut out for running time, the film as a whole was greatly improved and reviews on DVD state that. Also, I don't know about you, but for examples of building suspense and tension in a scene, the sequence with 2 of the characters trapped in a submersible with only one diving suit is pretty textbook, albeit in a ' Populist' form.
' Cameron makes films like someone fresh out of film school, Doesn't know the Art of film, and makes pretty pictures because of the inflated budgets he gets'....Okay, well, as far as I know , Mr. Cameron learned film the hard way, Working for Roger Corman, king of the B films, along with other directors such as, hmmmm....Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppla, George Lucas, John Milius, and countless others who put in time and actually made films when noone else would take a chance on them. I'd Consult Mr. Corman's Autobiography ' How I made 1500 films and never lost a dime'.
' People are Stupid',,,,now, there's a valid value judgement about which you can base an arguement on. I suppose if Mr. Cameron had shot it in Black and White, Handheld, used Subtitles, and threw in outrageously unsubtle symbols every other scene, and then Aimed the film at 1.5 % of the population who would ' get it', he'd be an artiste to reckon with...oooops, did I judge someone there? Apologies.
Speaking as someone who HAS taken said classes, even if I'm only still a ' COMMON' person, I'd say that in closing that I got a pretty fair dose of what it was like to be judged , not on content, but who I supposedly was. I appreciated the patronizing pat on the head, and I'd really like to sit and discuss Eisenstein and Bergman with you, but writing this has eaten up my break time, so in closing, I'll be in the local multiplex this weekend to enjoy Mr. Cameron's latest epic, and even if it flops, I'll appreciate his work, right alongside the Fassbinders, Wertmullers, Loaches, and all the other ' Elite' film makers that mouthbreathers like me can barely understand.
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
12-09-2009 @ 4:22PM
Matt said...
Cameron's supporters are forgetting the fact that in 1997 we were in the middle of a Titanic craze. Are we in the midst of an Avatar craze now? Is anybody going to buy Avatar action figures now on sale at Target? lol
Reply
12-12-2009 @ 9:53PM
Rowen Negrin said...
Quite obscene and extremely egomanical if you ask me. With the many situations in the world, that has or could have meaningful consequences for humanity, James Cameron and all involved seem to want a 4 Hour Viagra Experience. My company can produce a 24/7 renewable source of electricity and hydrogen with the desalinization of water as a kicker for less than US $10 million. Plus while doing this with our patented submersible 1.2 MW turbine for use in the Gulf Stream Ocean Current off SE Florida, USA and the Kuroshio Ocean Current off SE Japan will offset up to 13,000 tons each of CO2 emissions if compared to fossil fuel plants. rowen@gulfstreamturbines.com
Reply
12-13-2009 @ 5:26PM
mike said...
nothing about this movie makes me even remotely interested in seeing it.
Reply
12-21-2009 @ 4:37PM
Rob G said...
I haven't been to movie at a regular theater since Watchmen. And I'm looking forward to going to Avatar.
The best things I've seen in years have been the entire Lord of the Ring Trilogy, and the first Matrix.
I have a very nice Netflix adapted home theater complete with Buttkicker rumble pistons and Cerwin Vega speakers. If this thing can get me to go to a theater it is a money maker. I wish it was showing at the Cape IMAX.
Reply
12-19-2009 @ 3:44PM
Ecomike said...
Took the kids (19 and 21 YO kids that is, LOL, and me included, the big Kid) to see Avatar last night.
WOW! Dynomite movie! Don't miss it!
Avatar is now the costliest movie ever made by Cameron, and at the time Titanic was the costly movie ever made in history? The director of Terminator 1 & 2, True Lies, Titanic, and Aliens, James Cameron, has done it again, maybe his best movie ever. Made with a new generation of 3D filming technology that he developed doing underwater studies the last 14 years, developed by and for Cameron since his last movie, Titanic. The movie is incredible in so many ways! So real and life like, an entirely new alien world......nothing else like it, you feel like you are there. Outstanding cutting edge work like the first Star Wars movie was 35 years ago. Avatar has it all, romance, global conflict, action, morality, incredible beauty, ecology, and did I say ACTION! And so much more. This one is a game changer!
Titanic's production cost was off the scale at the time at $200 million and was feared it would hurt Paramount and Fox (loose money), but earned a record 1.8 billlion dollars since its release! Will this one break those records? I think so.
Hollywood is back folks, and taking no prisoners! No recession here, that is for sure.
Cameron wrote the story for Avatar before he produced Titanic, but did not have the camera and computer special effects capabilities he wanted (needed) to make the movie the way he wanted to make it. Seems he worked on created the new camera tech and computer software this past decade while doing underwater studies, since making Titanic, before tackling the making of Avatar. Talk about dedication.
Long story short, this a movie for the entire family. One you won't want to miss.
Reply
12-29-2009 @ 9:40AM
Mike said...
As of Dec 29 the film had a box office gross of 624 mil meaning by the highest estimates it is making a profit. Add on now the Avatar game, books, action figures, and other merchandising tie-ins (theme park ride on a flying beast?) and the studio and investors are doing ok.
Reply
12-29-2009 @ 6:05PM
Ray said...
I would have loved to have seen Avatar on an IMAX screen, but the nearest showing is over an hour away, whereas the nearest Stadium Cinema showing the film in 3-D (also in 2-D for those without depth vision) is about a mile away. I found the special effects impressive, the plot well crafted, and the action intense. It is so intense that I would not recommend it to anyone with a heart condition, and probably not to children younger than 12. Overall this magnificent film has set new technical and creative standards in cinema that are not likely to be matched in a generation.
Reply