How can Animation be SO expensive.

[micdavis]

Was looking around boxofficemojo.com looking at movie grosses.

Weekend Box Office Results for December 24-26, 2010 - Box Office Mojo

I noticed that "Tangled" has a budget of $260 million.

My understanding is Mojo does not include advertising budget in their budget estimates.

So HOW in hell does a movie with NO practical builds AT ALL, cost $260 MILLION dollars?

 

[CTF]

Because it takes multiple people to do the job of one: one actor vs. five animators.

 

[micdavis]

So it must have the best Animation EVER!!!

That's just ridiculous.

Sounds like an accounting game to me.

 

[CTF]

Wasn't your buddy, John Lassester, a producer on that show? He can't be cheap.

Yeah, creative accounting, for sure; but don't forget, it's not just one guy sitting at a computer tapping some keys... it's a whole lot o' people sitting at computers tapping keys.

 

[micdavis]

Surely that can't compare with building sets, props, transportation, craft services, lights, sound, etc.

If it does, then it isn't worth it.

 

[CTF]

They still have to build "sets," "props" and "costumes," ya know. And lighting is still a hell of a process, digitally (that's why there's more than one TD).

 

[exoray]

So HOW in hell does a movie with NO practical builds AT ALL, cost $260 MILLION dollars?

Man hours... Pushing a mouse or swinging a hammer both incur labor hours...

 

[cboath]

Man hours and don't forget hardware (computers) and rendering time, etc.

Plus, lots of voice actors don't come cheap.

I'm not sure of film resolution these days, but 90 minutes at 1800 frames a minute (30 frames a second) equals about 162,000 frames. Rendering 162k frames at something like 3500x1700 isn't quick. Wouldn't surprise me if the average was upwards of 30 minutes a frame. If so, that's about 81,000 hours or 3,375 days. Gott have lots of hardware to crank it out. Plus, it's not like they only ever render it once, either...

 

[Alan Cross]

The budget was probably portioned out over the course of a year or more... how long did it to make Tangled? Seems like animated films take awhile. Two years maybe? Possibly longer...

 

[rundown]

one word, rendering!!

You need a badass renderfarm to be able to render all the animation on time. And everybody needs to have licenced programs wich estimated cost 4000USD per program. Then there is the marketing. Posters, commercials etc. Even the lady that gives cofee!
Everything needs to be payed!

 

[Jedifyfe]

I have heard that there is more to it than this. I worked with a person that owns an audit company that specialized in auditing the big studios.

Here is how it was explained to me.

A studio makes a movie.
They borrow the money from themselves to make this movie (with interest)
That movie is budgeted, let's say $100 million. But really it reall cost $50 million to make
The movie only makes $90 million at the box office
The studio profited $40 million PLUS writes the movie off as a "loss" since it was budgeted and "cost" $100 million.

This is directly from the owner of the audit company that just got a BIG studio to fork over $30 million to the IRS.

 

[pandatrooper]

Don't forget about marketing dollars. I worked in TV / Film and gaming for 16 years. Sometime if they don't communicate the actual figures of the "real budget", they can combine both together.

Think about how much TV, print, web, social media, radio, etc costs are. This could easily be hundreds of millions of dollars in advertising. That Super Bowl ad for movie X = cost of TV time for 30 seconds can be astronomical.

Also, don't forget about voice acting budget. Actors and agents catch on that this is big business nowadays. It's not just actor X's voice, but also the promotion, lifestyle, interviews and cache they bring with them.

 

[micdavis]

BoxOfficeMojo does not include MARKETING in their budget numbers.

Sorry just don't buy it. It's got to be BS.

 

[Jedifyfe]

BoxOfficeMojo does not include MARKETING in their budget numbers.

Sorry just don't buy it. It's got to be BS.

See my post above...

Also read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting

 

[Drewid]

Everyone knows they do this, but usually the padding of the budget is kept within reasonable limits. This one is just begging for an audit.

 

[micdavis]

I guess that's what set me off.

I mean $260 MILLION DOLLARS.

Just not right somehow.

Since some compensation is based on points, etc., how come the unions haven't leaned on this kind of nonsense?

 

[nickytea]

Mojo's numbers are weird. Sometimes it seems like they include marketing, sometimes not.

 

[wannab]

I guess that's what set me off.

I mean $260 MILLION DOLLARS.

Just not right somehow.

Agreed!

Over a quarter billion (for a long shot no less)! No efin' way it cost anywhere near that - audit time!



Doug

 

[Nwerke]

Avatar-level numbers for a Pixar-style movie? C'mon. Mic's completely right and so is Drewid. If this isn't a misprint, then Disney's begging to be hauled over the coals.

 

[cboath]

one word, rendering!!

You need a badass renderfarm to be able to render all the animation on time. And everybody needs to have licenced programs wich estimated cost 4000USD per program. Then there is the marketing. Posters, commercials etc. Even the lady that gives cofee!
Everything needs to be payed!

The stuff they use is probably 7k per or more. Those editing suites can be astronomical in price.

What they render on can cost, too, and not just per computer, but per CPU. People with 5,000 machine arms (which exist, and larger exist) have to pay out the a-- to license up.

For this to hit 260, it has to have marketing. Pixar spends years on their flicks and they don't hit that level without marketing, least not that I recall.

Granted, George got the ultimate hometown discout on the prequels, but it cost more to make any prequel than Tangled and There's no way that 1999 money is 1/2 the value of 2010 money. All the prequels budget were 140M ish.