Jump to content

Eric Atreides

PAPA NOL∀N'S TENƎꓕ | August 26 internationally. September 2 "in select US cities" | 75% on RT after 228 reviews

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, keysersoze123 said:

That is euros. So around $224m. That makes it super exciting. There has to be Sci-fi angle to this. Just plain action movie won’t cost so much. Plus it does not have big stars who have to be paid upfront.

Looks like the budget before tax rebates - if so budget after rebates is probably closer to $180m - the usual.

 

The biggest payout is post budget - Nolans usual 20% of B.O. (on top of his budgeted $20m payday)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



9 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

Looks like the budget before tax rebates - if so budget after rebates is probably closer to $180m - the usual.

 

The biggest payout is post budget - Nolans usual 20% of B.O. (on top of his budgeted $20m payday)

The sign of a True Artiste ( in french spelling) and Auteur.

Get the Tens of millions Of Benjamin Franklins while you can.

Edited by The Futurist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

Looks like the budget before tax rebates - if so budget after rebates is probably closer to $180m - the usual.

 

The biggest payout is post budget - Nolans usual 20% of B.O. (on top of his budgeted $20m payday)

Also quite a few films with no sci fi angle have cost what Tenet will  cost.

The obsession some people have that this is somehow a sci fi film in disguise is amusing. Like Nolan never did non sci films before "Dunkirk".

Link to comment
Share on other sites





7 hours ago, redfirebird2008 said:

That budget seems pretty crazy. Guess we'll see if he can validate their trust again. 

Tbf, I don't really see it as crazy. Time and time again he's made them a lot of money, even with decently risky projects (Dunkirk being a big one). They are clearly right to have faith in him from a commercial perspective alone.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites







59 minutes ago, Jayhawk said:

Tbf, I don't really see it as crazy. Time and time again he's made them a lot of money, even with decently risky projects (Dunkirk being a big one). They are clearly right to have faith in him from a commercial perspective alone.

If Dunkirk had cost $200M you wouldn't be saying that. I don't quite know how they made that so cheap. Dunkirk was not a gigantuan hit on the same level as say Inception. But yes obviously all the tentpole films so far have been successes. :) 

 

Was anyone expecting this not to be a 150m+ type tentpole ? Judging by reactions on here...

 

Edited by Avatree
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any movie Nolan does these days is going to have a fair degree of risk to it but he just needs to make the best movie he can and the audience should come. If it's good, I don't see why this makes less than Dunkirk (presuming this is a more mainstream concept), but if it isn't, well...it could have a nasty trickle down effect for him

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites





33 minutes ago, Avatree said:

If Dunkirk had cost $200M you wouldn't be saying that. I don't quite know how they made that so cheap. Dunkirk was not a gigantuan hit on the same level as say Inception. But yes obviously all the tentpole films so far have been successes. :) 

 

Was anyone expecting this not to be a 150m+ type tentpole ? Judging by reactions on here...

 

I mean, yeah, that's why it was made at a lower budget. It's a logical fallacy to say if something had cost more than it did it wouldn't be a success. Like, obviously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





1 minute ago, Jayhawk said:

I mean, yeah, that's why it was made at a lower budget. It's a logical fallacy to say if something had cost more than it did it wouldn't be a success. Like, obviously.

But it looks like any other $200M movie and marketed like one. The budget of a film has very little if anything to do with its box office i.e. people would not be twice as likely to watch Dunkirk if they knew it had twice the budget.

 

Unless Dunkirk had much smaller marketing costs (dont think it did), i think its fair to say that just in terms of box office it was not that great compared to some of Nolan other films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Just now, Avatree said:

But it looks like any other $200M movie and marketed like one. The budget of a film has very little if anything to do with its box office i.e. people would not be twice as likely to watch Dunkirk if they knew it had twice the budget.

 

Unless Dunkirk had much smaller marketing costs (dont think it did), i think its fair to say that just in terms of box office it was not that great compared to some of Nolan other films.

I guess that's fair, but I think that is just smart budgeting/filmmaking from Nolan. While I agree it wasn't as big of a success as some of his other films, it did make a nice profit for the studio which I'm sure are just fine giving someone like him a home if he keeps delivering high quality films that gain them prestige and most importantly, a real return on their investment.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites







Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.