The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011)

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
User avatar
Posts: 21411
Joined: June 2010
Location: All-Hail Master Virgo, Censor of NolanFans
CaliKid329 wrote:The budget for the movie was $100 million wasn't it? So marketing was more then $131 million?


I find this very hard to believe.
You do realize that they didn't get 128 million from the foreign income right? They got at most somewhere around 70 million perhaps.

User avatar
Posts: 4533
Joined: June 2011
Location: Lost Angeles
RIFA wrote:
CaliKid329 wrote:The budget for the movie was $100 million wasn't it? So marketing was more then $131 million?


I find this very hard to believe.
You do realize that they didn't get 128 million from the foreign income right? They got at most somewhere around 70 million perhaps.
Wait what?

User avatar
Posts: 21411
Joined: June 2010
Location: All-Hail Master Virgo, Censor of NolanFans
Well, for one thing, they don't even get 100% of the domestic revenue. The biggest share they get is from the opening weekend. Each weekend that passes by makes them loose more money. Why do you think they fight for first weekend bombs? Just for the show off? No.

You have another problem with how the contracts are handled. Big studious could get like 70 to 80% of the domestic revenue which will guarantee them big bucks. However, if the movie doesn't sell or you have a low budget film, the studio will get a lesser percentage (somewhere around 50%... probably even lower)

Foreign revenue is even more difficult. Studios rarely take close to 60% and it happened in really special occasions. (Ex. Avatar). The rule is somewhere around 40-45 percent.

So based on this... The studios gained from TGWTDT somewhere around $110 - $120 mil from the box office. Add the dvd/blu-ray sales and rentals and other articles... could lead to another $100 mil. That's not a good sign for them.

EDIT: So basically if the budget for a movie is big. The revenues should be double the investment at least for the studios to still be interested in a sequel. For a low-budget movie they should get at least 3 or 4 times the investment. That's why Blair Witch was successful or Paranormal Activity and Saw and studios kept releasing sequels. Low-budget films with revenues about 20x times the investment? That's huge.

Posts: 90
Joined: March 2012
Blair Witch showed how effective an online viral campaign can be. Must have felt sooo good to be the producers at the end of all that craze.

Meraxes wrote:Blair Witch showed how effective an online viral campaign can be. Must have felt sooo good to be the producers at the end of all that craze.
Was there even internet in 1999?

Posts: 55632
Joined: May 2010
solo2001 wrote:
Meraxes wrote:Blair Witch showed how effective an online viral campaign can be. Must have felt sooo good to be the producers at the end of all that craze.
Was there even internet in 1999?
How old are you? :think:

m4st4 wrote:
solo2001 wrote: Was there even internet in 1999?
How old are you? :think:
Old enough.
Image

User avatar
Forum Pro
Law
Posts: 17001
Joined: July 2010
Location: Moonlight Motel
Image

User avatar
Posts: 3203
Joined: November 2011
Image

The end still makes me sad

Posts: 90
Joined: March 2012
The ending was such a cliche unfitting for Lisbeth's character. The Swedish ending is way cooler.

Post Reply