Jurassic World 4 | July 2, 2025 | Gareth Edwards to direct

[Lucas]

Very possible and likely Edwards is just going for the classic "one for them, one for me" maneuver. But also I completely buy that he would drop everything for a chance to do Jurassic Park, like he said.

[Belakor]

At least the VFX and CGI are going to be top notch, which is one of the selling points for this franchise, so it´s a good start for once.

I also think Gareth has some passion about the franchise.

[dudalb]

14 minutes ago, Lucas said:

Very possible and likely Edwards is just going for the classic "one for them, one for me" maneuver. But also I completely buy that he would drop everything for a chance to do Jurassic Park, like he said.

He could kill two birds with one stone here.

I am sure that after what happeened with the last director, that Edwards and Uni are on the same page about what JP4 should be.

[ThomasNicole]

Honestly? Best choice possible

 

Since Universal clearly doesn’t give a shit about the movie, just the release date, they really needed a studio guy, and they’re usually boring and awful and couldn’t create a single strong image even if their lives depend on it.
 

Gareth is one of the few studio guys that can deliver scale and scope in mesmerizing ways visually, he actually knows how to shoot movies on a impressive technical level even if he doesn’t have a strong personality or narrative skills.
 

If they give a very simple and functional script to him, Gareth can easily do the best of these movies since Spielberg just because he can create spectacular imagery and well, this is a franchise that lives and dies on spectacle. 

[Claire of Themyscira]

Maybe Gareth is the ONE SPARK this franchise needs.

 

 

I have faith in him because I enjoyed Godzilla and loved Rogue One. ❤️

 

[HummingLemon496]

What will the budget of this movie be? Apparently Fallen Kingdom has a $449M budget

[KP1025]

3 minutes ago, HummingLemon496 said:

What will the budget of this movie be? Apparently Fallen Kingdom has a $449M budget

 

Forbes has the exact figures after tax credits. Dominion I can understand due to the pandemic, but I have no idea why Fallen Kingdom needed to cost so much more than the first Jurassic World. 

 

Quote

Perhaps the biggest driving force was the reimbursement from the UK government. The financial statements reveal that Fallen Kingdom received a $84.5 million (£68 million) tax credit with a further $64.1 million (£51.6 million) handed to Dominion.

 

This gave Fallen Kingdom net spending of $431.6 million whilst Dominion's costs came to $264.5 million. 

 

[HummingLemon496]

Fallen Kingdom made $222.8M profit according to Deadline with the $170M budget. If the budget is actually $449M, then subtracting the difference means it literally flopped with a $56.2M loss. I guess Fast X is no longer the highest grossing flop.

Edited February 23 by HummingLemon496

[KP1025]

23 minutes ago, HummingLemon496 said:

Fallen Kingdom made $222.8M profit according to Deadline with the $170M budget. If the budget is actually $449M, then subtracting the difference means it literally flopped with a $56.2M loss. I guess Fast X is no longer the highest grossing flop.

 

Even with the actual budget being over $400 million, I would find it hard to believe Fallen Kingdom didn't turn a profit after tripling the budget. Deadline did estimate the participation fees were $200 million for Fallen Kingdom, which seems too high to me. They estimated the same category at $80 million for Dominion even though it was that film that had the big cast reunion.

[HummingLemon496]

6 minutes ago, KP1025 said:

 

Even with the actual budget being over $400 million, I would find it hard to believe Fallen Kingdom didn't turn a profit after tripling the budget. Deadline did estimate the participation fees were $200 million for Fallen Kingdom, which seems too high to me. They estimated the same category at $80 million for Dominion even though it was that film that had the big cast reunion.

Well even then it would suck to just get a small amount of profit out of a $1.3 billion grossing film just because of an insane budget

 

I don't get it. . .how TF did it go from $170M to $450M Lmao??!?

Edited February 23 by HummingLemon496

[KP1025]

17 minutes ago, HummingLemon496 said:

Well even then it would suck to just get a small amount of profit out of a $1.3 billion grossing film just because of an insane budget

 

I don't get it. . .how TF did it go from $170M to $450M Lmao??!?

 

It's crazy. Though we never got an official number for Jurassic World, so I wouldn't be surprised if it actually cost more than $170 million. Speaking of inflated budgets, it was also recently revealed TFA cost even more than Fallen Kingdom with a cost of $446.6 million after tax credit.

 

[Brainbug]

2 minutes ago, KP1025 said:

 

It's crazy. Though we never got an official number for Jurassic World, so I wouldn't be surprised if it actually cost more than $170 million. Speaking of inflated budgets, it was also recently revealed TFA cost even more than Fallen Kingdom with a cost of $446.6 million after tax credit.

 

 

You want to tell me Rise of Skywalker cost 416M?? That turd cost 416M??

 

What the actual donut is Hollywood doing?? Do they just like to throw money away?

Edited February 23 by Brainbug

[WittyUsername]

We always hear conflicting reports about a movie’s budget. I imagine there’s some Hollywood accounting nonsense going on. 

[WorkingonaName]

6 hours ago, KP1025 said:

 

It's crazy. Though we never got an official number for Jurassic World, so I wouldn't be surprised if it actually cost more than $170 million. 

 

 

The catering budget for a Dinosaur must be pretty hefty. 

[PlatnumRoyce]

13 hours ago, KP1025 said:

 

It's crazy. Though we never got an official number for Jurassic World, so I wouldn't be surprised if it actually cost more than $170 million. Speaking of inflated budgets, it was also recently revealed TFA cost even more than Fallen Kingdom with a cost of $446.6 million after tax credit.

 

these numbers are misleading because they include hefty backend payments so they're not "production budgets" especially when talking about big hits (e.g. PotC4, which we know had a small budget than PotC3). Take "Foodles Productions" (Force Awakens) if you include all payments made through November 2015, it had a net (uk) budget of ~181M million pounds or ~225M USD. NOT 446.6M as this article implies. You get 446.6M because one of the biggest hits of all time has massive backend payments. 

 

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/08463295/filing-history?page=2 

 

A similar problem exists for JW sequels.

 

Quote

No Jurassic World 1 Numbers

No, but we still know it filed for ~40M of "QE" in Hawaii in 2014 https://files.hawaii.gov/dbedt/annuals/2016/2016-film-tax-credit.pdf and [___ missing Lousiana film credit] (it turns outInvertigo was a real Sony film that died pre-release)
Neither of these say "Jurassic World" but we know it was a big budget film that filmed on Kauai in 2014 and one such film filed for tax breaks. There are presumably tens of millions worth of missing funds but I really don't think JW1 broke the bank given these reports.

 

 

 

Edited February 23 by PlatnumRoyce
removed "invertigo" 98M LA spending anecdote

[PlatnumRoyce]

13 hours ago, HummingLemon496 said:

Well even then it would suck to just get a small amount of profit out of a $1.3 billion grossing film just because of an insane budget

 

I don't get it. . .how TF did it go from $170M to $450M Lmao??!?

You don't. If JW was filmed in the UK, you'd have another 100M-200M of "costs" from the studio paying people their portion of the film's profits. Grab the film's budgets around the time of the film's theatrical release to get a more apples to apples comparison.

Edited February 23 by PlatnumRoyce

[dudalb]

16 hours ago, ThomasNicole said:

Honestly? Best choice possible

 

Since Universal clearly doesn’t give a shit about the movie, just the release date, they really needed a studio guy, and they’re usually boring and awful and couldn’t create a single strong image even if their lives depend on it.
 

Gareth is one of the few studio guys that can deliver scale and scope in mesmerizing ways visually, he actually knows how to shoot movies on a impressive technical level even if he doesn’t have a strong personality or narrative skills.
 

If they give a very simple and functional script to him, Gareth can easily do the best of these movies since Spielberg just because he can create spectacular imagery and well, this is a franchise that lives and dies on spectacle. 

I have nothing agianst Edwards, but when Uni decided on a Summer 2025 release, it became a case not of who is the best choice possible, but a case of who is the best choice we can get  with that timeframe. A great many good choices were out because they had already signed the contracts for other films. 

[AMCTheater2000]

 

[emoviefan]

4 minutes ago, AMCTheater2000 said:

 

God that seems like a fast turn around for a vfx heavy movie like this.  

[kayumanggi]

That's not even a year.