Get Goof Juice gamersupps.gg/... This is the greatest budget rant of All Time Get a Starforge PC starforgepc.co... Merch moistglobal.com/ Comics badegg.co/
This is the answer. Rich people don't like losing money. So to think they'd be good with billions in lost investments to let a bunch of people push messages, is not how they operate.
Money laundering happens in the entertainment industry but claiming every flop or bad project is an intentional conspiracy gives way too much credit to the average entertainment producer. Most of this is greed and speculation, outright ignoring the global inflation rates. Everything costs more, and you're getting a lower quality product in EVERY industry.
hi, i work in the industry as a set dec. streaming has allowed the "executive producer bubble" to become incredibly inflated, where most of the money goes directly to them just for slapping their names on it. usually more than the actors or other above-the-line talent. it's not sustainable and it's killing the industry.
As a professional CG artist that works in TV and commercials with a lot of friends in film, it means a lot for someone like you with your huge profile to bring these topics to light. It is a big moral boost to see people out of the industry bubble talking about this shit. The trend is always less time, less money, and more work.
The original knives out movie had a $40 million dollar budget. The new one coming out is $210 million. It’s a murder mystery movie, why do you need that much? Don’t say it’s the cast because knives out 1 had a star studded roster, including 2019 Chris Evans who was at the height of marvel at the time. I have no clue
I agree with the sentiment, but that's not a good example when keeping in mind the Yen to Dollar value, how overworked and underpayed the team was, plus japanese work culture in general, movies like District 9 or The Creator could be more on the line, 30mil and 80mil budget respectively and they both look spot perfect
hey! ex film producer here, i will say when movies are made, a TON of the money gets wasted on useless things that don't get put towards production of the show. for example, i remember one Producer I worked with had his sports car hit in the parking lot, and he used the money from Production to pay for the fixes, which was just disguised as "set dec" in accounting. There was another time when the director was craving krispy kreme donuts during pre-production, so we ended up buying 6 boxes for the guy. Movie and show productions also usually cover all gas bills for all the crew members and cast, while they're on the show, even if the bill is from the weekend. All those little spending sprees add up after awhile, especially if it's a large production. not to mention actors get paid SIGNIFICANTLY more than you think they do and take up a huge amount of the budget depending on how many you have. I'll never forget the first time I saw what we were paying a D-list actor for being the lead in our Hallmark movie lol. I'm not saying there's nothing sketchy going on, because i've seen my fair share of sketchy. but there's absolutely a TON of money that doesn't get put towards making the show better. good vid as always tho
As a professional animator - I thank you for constantly bringing these topics to the limelight. They really need to look at the budgets of the most successful projects of the past. Each LotR films had a budget under $95M, adjusted for inflation and its still well under $130M...so there's no way it could be going to other production costs other than lining the pockets of the top dogs who don't really do any of the work aside from laughing on their way to the bank. Some of the most successful projects of the past couple years have all had modest budgets in comparison to the ones you mentioned...Arcane - $90M total, Barbie $145M, Super Mario Bros - $100M, Oppenheimer - $100M, Joker - $55M...it definitely puts into perspective where money was actually spent more wisely and projects where it wasn't. Other than physical production costs, things that count towards budget are transportation, location, insurance, wardrobe, catering, accommodations/hotels, but excludes marketing - which is a whole OTHER can of worms. They need to stop giving the cast avocado toast ffs lol...the other thing that can inflate this is also that when shows are pitched to networks, they bid on the project to own the rights to the production. It was pitched at $200M but Bezos outbid with $250M, thus inflating things further to become untouchable to the production going to earn success elsewhere. But I can confirm, with absolute certainty, that it definitely is not trickling down to the people who do all, what the execs would consider the "grunt work" (animation, VFX, writing), which is what actually makes a project what it is. Not the money, and definitely not the time to achieve the tall demands.
If anything, it seems like Hollywood is in Hustle mode and some are just pocketing the big money going around for streaming content. This is why ppl saying "Go woke go broke" don't understand its not about getting the money back from sales. These ppl already got the money and are walking away with it regardless.
To give even more context, the movie Sound of Freedom was made on a $14 million dollar budget completed in 2018. It was bought up later by the director, pitched to Angel Studios and $5 million was raised by Angel Guild members of Angel Studios for marketing. That $5 million was all crowd funding BTW. That film grossed over $258 million worldwide by the end of it's theater run. It is one of 2023's top 10 movies of the year. Technically that is a blockbuster hit film.
What's the union like for those workers? >.> Can you help me understand why the film industry went on strike and did not help with fair pay for them? D:
Do you have any advice for getting an agent when I'm done writing my feature movie script? I've spent years making sure the title and premise stand out in the competition. I've read that like a lawyer they take a percentage of it being sold and you don't have to pay upfront. Then I've seen in the case of Smile it was the writer's first movie and he was given the job of director as well! If a screenwriter is that invested in the world does show the executives that they could be the director or assistant director?
It's like how pop songs would have 20 writers and 10 producers and the lyrics would just go like, "Uh uh I like that, uh." through almost the entire song.
Terminator 1 had a budget of 6,4 million at the time (it'd be around 78 million nowadays) and is one of the best movies of the 80s. It does show how efficient the money was spent, something we don't see today.
100% on point. A girl I went to high school with got a job for a big company as a visual effects artist. She ended up quitting, despite the pay being good, all because of being overworked. She said she had a beautiful apartment, a great car, and a good amount of money, but she was sleeping in her car because going home wasn't even worth it. She said there was no point in getting paid well if she didn't even have the time off to spend any of it. She's doing much better now working in healthcare, despite going to university for art and landing her dream job.
Also, my 12 year old begged me to watch Moonfall with him, so I did. Absolutely a great bad movie, but I think I offended my son by laughing during it.
Ouch… if I ever get my job as a composer, I legit would only ever quit to be a housewife. Too bad we live in a time where all artists are being choked out and having to deal with piracy.
@@wolfetteplays8894 yeah, I think the biggest issue was her mental health declining from overwork. She didn't have time for literally anything except sleeping and working. When one project was finished, another one had already began. I still do a little dance when I see her name in credits of the movies she worked on, though hahah
She sounds smart, landed her dream job realized she didn't like the workload while still being super successful then her Plan B is WORKING IN HEALTHCARE? jesus.
i'm just gonna pull the same thing you probably did to this video and assume that this comment is about the minecraft movie. like bro did he even talk about the minecraft movie like at all please correct me if i'm wrong 😭 if ur gonna make slop verified account comments at least skim through the video
Some context would help here. For example Breaking Bad cost roughly $3 million per episode, with 62 episodes that's about $182 million, and that is considered expensive for cable. That truly does put the Citadel budget of $300 million for 6 episodes on a whole different level.
I need more context. Because how does Amazon manage to pump out these shows but cant fast track their popular IPs. Invincible, Reacher, the boys, the terminal list, etc.
@@josay3394 What do you mean fast-track? It seems like the people behind those shows (Invincible, The Boys) are intentionally taking their time. You can't rush quality. iirc Invincible got delayed between seasons because of COVID or the writer's strike.
@@josay3394 Maybe they aren't rushing them as much because they care about the popular IP's more and just need filler to keep people subscribed to prime?
The towering budget figures for both movies and series nowadays is surely mind-boggling. Considering how sometimes the final product doesn't seem to reflect such huge expenditures, it truly begs the question, "Where is all this money going?"
Can speak from direct knowledge, the VFX schedule for Those About to Die was insanely accelerated for how large the scope of work was and most of the “bad green screen” shots are actually shot using LED walls to save time on VFX because they “got it in camera” and it “looks good”.
It helps they all were and still are life long friends obviously some of its for the money but they were doing this shit before the game funniest show ever
@@Stars-Mine it was misleading, it actually cost $100 to make, my bad. And it means Rob, Charlie, and Glenn did it all themselves. Please note that I referred to the pilot episode
Budget: 150M Spread sheet: 120M for executive ‘bonuses’ 30M for talent, licensing, marketing, low level management, permits, space rental, film production, props, editing staff, vfx, and pretty much everything else
There's some kind of money laundering going on deep within Hollywood. They're definitely trafficking something either drugs or people. That or they're just throwing money to the DOJ to prevent Trump from winning.
They need to replace all the budget people in hollywood with shady real estate brokers and slum lords. I can GUARANTEE you those dudes will get the cost of filming down to unprecedented levels. They wouldn't pay a nickel to replace a light bulb.
If they can save that much and they are shady, why wouldn't they just make up the same high budget like everyone else is doing, so all the left over money they save to unprecedented levels goes straight to their pockets? this isn't going to solve anything and wouldn't be surprised it's what's actually happening lol
@@MattSuguisAsFondAsEverrr Yeah, most foreign countries have the technical knowledge on how to make a really good movie with a limited budget. Hollywood is just so used to having so much funding.
i work in the industry as a sound technician and as a foley artist- it's going to the producers. even if it makes a tiny bit that's still making money, they've inflated their role so much for the mere idea like of having themselves be loosely involved. charles isn't hitting the nail DIRECTLY on the head but he's definitely hitting it for sure, it's not going into the production or casting or anywhere that matters and it has to be stopped. like it literally is a cookie clicker "press here for more money" for producers and it's ruining livelihoods, there has to be some economic point getting ruined, and it's strangling the industry
@@ryang9113what are you talking about? It’s like this in literally every single industry on planet earth. Ground level employees do the hard work while executives do minimal work and take the lions share of the profits. There is no other reason besides the powerful can, so the powerful do.
@@Jack.Ashford okay so walk me through this circle... Producer doesn't actually contribute money. Movie is budgeted for 200 mil payed by studio. Movie makes 30 mil. Studio loses 170 mil. What exactly did the producer get paid and why?
Look at Dune 2, a blockbuster with a high profile cast, an in-demand director, the most famous film composer of the past 2 decades, and high quality special effects. Cost under 200mil, modest marketing campaign, and massive social media impact. Better than 99% of the 200mil+ blockbusters of the last decade. Its 1000% money laundering. No way the same company made The Flash spending almost double Dune 2's budget for it to look like that. The money isnt going into effects (obviously), not even as close as stacked of a cast to pay, and thats what we get??? Its definitely money laundering.
This situation is basically the idea of, "If we just shove a massive number in the budget and use celebrities for actors, people will think it's good.", It feels like only 15 percent of that budget goes into these modern movies. It's probably why i stopped going to theaters.
20 dollars for a drink, 20 dollars for no refill bucker of popcorn, 8 dollar candy treats. the whole thing is a scam these days the only thing i see getting out of it is dumping 100 bucks on 2 hours of something im gunna scarf down before the movie starts, then accidently nap 40minutes in, and end up just buying the 5 dollar disc out the trash bin in walmart.
ya, there's only a good movie to see in theaters once every few years... before Oppenheimer the last time i went to a theater was for deadpool 2 and before that was the force awakens, but i had free tickets for that
@@MarcosSantos-dj6lkno? They’re being paid as an executive producer. Whether or not the job actually produces anything doesn’t matter. I do all the work under our VP, he just has signing authority, but still makes 3x me
It’s not as sinister as yoy think. They probably have to pay consultants 200k to say yes to an approval of one items from the set. Capitalism has bred this beast where at every single step of any good or services, someone wants a cut.
I used to work as a sound mixer for a large ad agency and we'd be paid super well and put up in nice hotels, then when the job was over, the Director would tell me how he, the producers and ad execs went out to dinner and spent 40,000 dollars because they were 40K under budget at the end, these were 2011 dollars too. Wine at restaurants can rack up the bills... Strip Clubs get put on expense accounts as a "meal"... The above the line stuff in Film and TV is what gets dumb and unethical. Hell, Rick Litvin at NYU's undergrad Film School tells his summer filmmaker workshop students to form "mafias". He tells his undergrad students that too. Which was crazy for me to hear because I grew up around old italian mafia people in SF who assured me to never join a mafia....
Charles, if you read this please pin. It's important. A CLOSE family member of mine was one of the animators for Godzilla x Kong. I can report that Charlie is dead on. Deadlines force the animators to pump out unfinished garbage. You know how the Godzilla vs water snake thing fight was actually pretty cool, but then just randomly ended way too fast? That was purely a deadline thing. All of the animators hate it. On top of that, they work off of contracts that are basically week to week. Not only are they forced to put their name on garbage, they're kept in constant suspense about whether or not they will have a job next week. It's insane.
I mean if the animators keep picking up those AWFUL conditions, why would the executives change shxt? animators are enabling this so at the end of the day if you don't like the conditions but still do it it's your fault
@@Yuuki_Asunaexcept its real life and if you’re a professional animator, I’d be more concerned about making sure my bills are paid and family fed then sitting at home standing on principle. Maybe we should blame the exploiters and not the exploited.
As a plumber on a job building a new apartment complex... they were pumping heat in the buildings so the paint wouldn't get messed up during the winter... I overheard the superintendents talking saying it cost 35-40k a month. Meanwhile... I was making 44k a year.
When you get high-budget movies, the producers spend an exorbitant amount on hiring "star power" names, and advertising. Only to instruct the staff to do what they can with the remaining budget. Because the crew is going into all this with a mindset of "Oh, there's 100M here, we can do this." Only to find out halfway through production that there's no money left so the CGI they wanted to put in post-processing ends up being bare-bone dog poop, like the Black Widow movie. This is why Ryan Reynolds said that he wants stricter and smaller movie budgets, which in turn forces the crew to get creative. And if they don't get creative, they should get fired for being inadequate.
@@AUTTP_Loid-q8f why do these bots even exist? like what’s the point of glorifying pedophilia and Nazism, it does absolutely nothing and gets everyone nowhere.
Knives out 3 budget being $210 is insane. This is just insane. You need maybe a handful of settings for the Knives Out movies at best, and unless you are filming in the Taj Mahal there is greed and probably money laundering going on.
Glad to see people finally bringing up this topic. I had made a podcast episode talking about some of this stuff while breaking down the Hollywood strikes and the way money is distributed, and here's some of what I said there: "The MCU's newest release THE MARVELS has a budget of around 270 million dollars, but 55 of that was actually a subsidy from the UK so they only really had to spend around 215 million. But did they even spend that much or is there some fancy accounting involved? John Cusack, the star of Say Anything, tweeted during these strikes that though Say Anything had been quite successful, he learned about ten years ago that Fox claimed a loss of 44 million on the film. He said, "The film cost about 13 million to make - and money spent to release was minimal at the time - 30 years in - that film lost millions every year! A neat accounting trick don't ya think?" But he's totally right. This is what Seth Macfarlane joked about at the 2013 Oscars when he said that because of the massive success of 2012 movies that ran up to almost 11 billion at the domestic box office, studio accountants never had to work harder to prove nothing made a profit. His joke still holds up today because that's what these companies do. They have producers and executives that siphon money away into their personal bank accounts or keep it for the company rather than admitting they're able to pay their employees a livable wage. Why do y'all think movies these days have such massive budgets? Yes, there's inflation, yes there's new technology, all this other stuff, but also it's way easier to steal money from a 200 million dollar budget than it would be to do so from a 13 million dollar budget and properly account for the missing cash. You really think THE MARVELS needs a higher budget than three out of five of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies? Those movies had to deal with ships on the ocean, which is some of the most difficult stuff to film and VFX, and on top of that, they had to CGI the skeleton crew and the Davy Jones locker crew. The most expensive Harry Potter came in at 250 million, and that was mostly because of actor contract renewals. So with 270 million, what the hell did THE MARVELS use its budget for? It's not even two hours long. I'm not saying that this movie in particular had some sketchy stuff going on behind the scenes, but the same argument can be used to apply to a lot of movies with massive budgets that feel like they don't really need that budget." Since then, I've also seen the ridiculous amount of money Marvel's paying RDJ to come back and that's a tactic Netflix uses as well, shelling out millions upon millions to get A-List actors to get people to watch their trash original movies. The best producers will find a way to produce a film for as little as possible while everyone gets paid fairly, but most producers in Hollywood simply aren't interested in that, they care more about tax write-offs, government subsidies, and stuffing their own pockets. Also if anyone's interested in learning more about the plight of VFX workers, there's a great short documentary on TH-cam called Life After Pi that talks about the financial troubles of the effects company behind Life of Pi despite having critical acclaim for their work.
M Night Shyamalan's movies are almost always super cheap and make insane profi. Even if they aren't hits, he makes them for so little that it still makes good margins
My favorite show, the Expanse, is speculated to cost about 2-5 million per episode, which garnered 6 seasons before they ran out of budget. There are 62 episodes, so on average it would have cost 217 million dollars FOR SIX SEASONS. There are still three more books that have yet to be adapted into the show, yet this money goes to waste on citadel, which costs more for one season
The expanse is my favorite series as well and it's tragic that we don't know if we'll ever get the last few seasons. But to be honest I'd much rather it ends on a high note instead of getting the GoT season 8 treatment. Edit: I believe they decided to leave it at that cause they were not sure of how they'd handle the time skip. Aging the actors 30 years and making it look realistic seems like a difficult task and it'd skyrocket the cost. They could always change the actors but that'd make me (and probably many other fans) feel a lot less attachment to the characters.
Yeah idk if we'll ever see it finished since it was a niche show with expensive production :( at least the books ended the story perfectly, and the show ended on a good note. Maybe one day they'll reboot it, really hope so
@@enmanuel1950Thats not the main reason, unfortunately money is the main issue, its very expensive and isnt mainstream despite its quality. The timeskip coukd probably just be shortened to 20 or 15 years if they were really concerned about the big gap. Less time passes in the show than in the books anyway
I think this hits Charlie even more than us. The man has 1.2 million views in 7 hours, and he uses a camera, a light and a Mic, and after 20 minutes of filming, 2 hours of editing attracts more viewers than some movies in 6 weeks, he didn't even need to leave his room hahahaha....I would never thought this would be possible, I LOVE IT! Power to the people!
Thats a great take on it! Charlie an stream for hours and just be a honest genuine average dude and people flock to him. Wearing all white and the facial hair. I think he just maybe modern internet Jesus. Guiding all us back towards common sense and enjoying life.
Movies have always cost a lot to make. LOTR Return of the King had a budget of $94 million (not accounting for inflation). The difference is that the money is being used properly: on good VFX, good actors, GOOD WRITERS. Most suits just think that the problem gets solved by throwing money at it, which is a lesson they seem unwilling to learn (they will never get fired cause the people below them will).
I've watched a YT essay that argued that fantasy/historical movies tend to eat up a lot of money and nearly never turn a profit simply because of all the decoration, background actors, and outfits. It's not like you can grab a chair from IKEA and pretend it's a viking's throne or whatever.
I mean LOTR has huge casts, big actors, huge sets, huge production, huge VFX/sound, and so on - it makes sense that it would cost a lot. Its proportional I guess. What doesnt make sense is Rings of Power having a billion-dollar budget, and its garbage.
Don't forget LOTO and other old great shows/movies had PRACTICAL effects, which are way more expensive. Now they don't even do practical effects, just cheap CGI.
Throwing money at it is how you get good actors, vfx and writers. That is why LOTR had a 100mil budget and was good. The problem is the money is very obviously not being used for the movies.
@@aviannte Pretty much. Hollywood exists as a business, after all. LotR is the Miracle Trilogy because, when you really look at the circumstances surrounding the films, they *should not Work*. The better part of a decade spent on pre-production, a gimped budget and a demand for Two films (they only got a third, and the extra budget, because some people at New Line literally had to argue that "Three stories = three films", all dumped on the shoulders of a guy best known for B-movies at best at a time where Fantasy and Historicals were out of fashion.
I work in the industry myself too as a camera operator sometimes I question what the hell are we even shooting and why are we shooting this stuff. The rates get lower as more seasons go on for shows and me and my friends are always wondering who is actually skimming from the top
Saw (2004) 1.2 m = 102 million worldwide INSANE soundtrack and plot twist ! Honorable mentions: "Dead Silence (2007)" "The Mist (2007)" "Silent Hill (2006)"
It’s why James Wan has so much money to produce and fund movies, because Saw can make movies for dirt cheap and profit so much too. Even the latest movie was done for cheap and not only did phenomenally well profit-wise but also had the best reviews of the franchise
I went back and watched Ang Lee's Hulk film recently. This movie came out in 2003 with a budget of 130+ million and it looks like every penny went into the movie. A movie made in '03 has better effects, cgi, and writing than movies made 20 years later.
I think most of the very high budget shows/movies come from giant studios like Amazon and Disney. They have more then enough money to fund these projects so they just dump a giant amount into them. I think the lack of quality and passion we see from these projects comes from lack of creative control and time crunches. It also doesn't help when were paying actors $90 million for just one project.
Sometimes the lack of quality comes from just hiring the wrong people to have creative control. They're throwing garbage at the wall to see what sticks and dumping lifechanging money x1000 at it
I make cartoons by hand and I charge 2k per minute of film. Get a few ppl like me and we'd have it done in a year or so for a few hundred thousand lol. They are over paying for all the wrong things. Plus dang I'm about to begin filming a trailer for a movie I wrote. And we do NOT have 100 mill budget. Nowhere close!
The worst part is that we have all this massive budget for these things but they aren't actually using it for the movie or show. Imagine the 150 million dollar shows we could have seen if they managed to use those funds appropriately.
Why The Acolyte "costs" so much: reshoots. Poor management, actor sickness, etc. caused a boat load of reshoots which are an absurdly easy way to make your budget go through the roof.
I work in advertising and marketing for streaming services. I can’t stay this is the issue across the board, but from my place and the conversations I’ve had with executives and people deep in the business, the two issues are 1) trying to keep the ratings and views from the pandemic and 2) is shareholders, or strictly speaking the American corporate politics surrounding them. What I understand from several people in the industry, is that everyone knows the current streaming model/production models are not sustainable. The reason why it’s not stopping is the same reason you never see caps on CEO paychecks despite constant backlash that they’re paid too much. Investors and shareholders see a streaming company spend an obscene amount of money on a show, they invest. They see a company market a tv show with a pre-pandemic budget (which is sustainable), it looks like the company is not doing well. It’s all a dance to make the company look like it’s doing really well even if it’s going to run into problems down the road. And CEO’s can’t really stop it because then they look bad asking for less budget the next fiscal year. In general, American corporations are very short sighted and aim for the quickest buck even if it means future losses, as opposed to other capitalist countries that aim for steady profit far down the road. Again, I am only speaking from my experience working in the field.
That tracks. I was working for a company that was dominating competitors in the US because we were the only American company that was working on a 10, 15 year+ plan and all our competitors were planning quarter to quarter. We had this luxury because we were never going public. This kind of planning and remaining private is unheard of in the industry but the results were extremely apparent. Until US investors start rewarding long-term planning instead of short, destructive bursts of money, this is going to keep eroding industries. Then you'll end up with little monopolies where the standing business were able to actually prioritize long-term planning for whatever reason.
Just like democracy, America does capitalism literally the worst in the world while still just about being able to call it self a free market democracy.
It’s either money laundering or lack of money consciousness. I keep hearing stories of how RoP had therapists on set or how Matt Damon was paid an INSANE amount of money for that ‘Air’ movie, about $40 million. So I’m leaning more towards people don’t know how to have conscious spending.
Sometimes it's just frivolous spending. Maybe when you don't actually care about the show/film you're making, it's awesome to get to splurge some studio money and play billionaire for a while. Sometimes it's The Producers.
The majority of the money in a lot of movies actually goes into advertizements, with some of these though it seems like they're not even really doing that
I’ve been telling for years, there’s gotta be some money laundering scheme going on. These movies and series have gargantuan budgets, but the product itself seems to be way, way cheaper.
how much is an average employee in the industry make a year? 100k? how many employees work on these projects? how long do they take to make? do the math. millions $$$.
My brother and I were talking about this. He said that we’re getting the real life story of The Producers. Where a producer can make more money from a flop than a failure. If a play flops, nobody cares about seeing the budget. But if it succeeds, they review everything including the budget. Basically if a producer makes a flop, they can pocket the rest of the money for themselves and nobody cares because he produced a flop. If he tries to the same scam to a successful play. He will be investigated for embezzlement. TL;DR producers are producing flops of popular I.P to embezzle the budget
Except now we have so many flops that people are starting to look at their budgets and how much money is being wasted lmao. Too many cooks always spoil the broth.
VFX artists should get paid more than the A-List celebrities. Anyone who’s done animating, rigging, and 3D design knows how much work it is to get even 30 seconds of footage.
@@majorpwner241 Just because you watch bad movies doesn’t mean every movie out there has bad VFX. Please try your hand at making something even close with a time crunch and you will understand.
My biggest issue with modern TV is the stupidly low episode counts of each season! Now we get shorter & shorter seasons, some with multiple month "breaks" splitting a season in half, just to artificially extend them! And that's to say nothing about how long it takes between seasons! It used to be your get a new season at the same time each year. Now, you may be waiting 2+ years! We don't need to go back to 22+ episode seasons, but these 8 episode or less ones need to stop.
I have no problem with 8 or less episodes, but then it's absurd to expect that I have to wait for another season for at least 2-3 years. Do you remember Squid Game? People will still watch, but they have already fumbled the bag.
I would strongly disagree with you if the content was really good. Shows like The Honeymooners and Fawlty Towers have been timeless largely BECAUSE of the low episode count (they focused on quality over quantity). Good thing I don't actually have to care (I always wait for shows to be canceled, then buy them on physical media and binge watch them).
That's why I give up on modern tv shows. I loved season 1 of Invincible and by season 2 finally dropped I quit caring and moved on. This has been a problem for a long time now it's also why I gave up on Dexter after season 2.
- Halo, STD, and NuTrek, bankrupted Paramount, putting them almost 16 billion dollars in debt before Skydance took over. Halo has already been cancelled with other shows on the chopping block. - The issue with films is that the directors/producers/staff that are hired. They get surprised that the audience somehow doesn't like what's being made and are forced to do reshoot after reshoot pushing the expenses even higher. Indy 5 failed due to the expensive constant reshoots, with Captain America 4 and Snow White expected to auto-fail or break even because they didn't properly plan the movie/shows to begin with and pushed their budgets through the roof. - The entertainment is being made for 1% of the audience with little to no consumer base to support it. - Sheer audacity and ego. These producers/directors are hired to ignore what the audience wants until it's too late and the show fails, such as The Marvels.
Paramount was financially struggling long before they made those shows so I doubt those were the ones that caused them to sell to Skydance. Paramount had been courting acquisition for years
Little bit of A, little bit of B. Having producers/directors/writers that only care about leaving their mark really is hurting modern entertainment. It's also money laundering tho. A lot of people are making a lot of quick money off of these failures.
Also another problem is that (this mostly applies to Marvel) they hire directors who only done low budget indie movies and then give them the gig to do a $200m superhero blockbuster despite have little experience in working with genre filmmaking or CGI.
Movie studios give completely unreasonable timelines and working conditions and pretend that if they throw 200 million dollars at the problem then it’ll look great. You can pay a painter all the money you want but they still won’t paint the Sistine Chapel in two weeks.
Christopher Nolan produced Oppenheimer on a budget of $100 million-a film directed by one of the greatest filmmakers of our time, featuring a superstar cast to tell the story of one of the most important humans in the history of our species. Not to mention, audiences got their money's worth with just over three hours of some of the finest cinema in recent memory. These studios deserve nothing more than to be taken out back and put down in the cold, wet rain if all they are going to produce on these bloated budgets is uninspired, second-rate, run-of-the-mill, spiritless nonsense that no one cares about and no one asked for.........AND YOU CAN QUOTE ME!
A good movie is not determined completely by how much money spent on production, it’s about mainly determined on good writing, something films seem to lack recently.
Another example is Star Citizen. For a game with a budget $700M USD and well over 10 years of semi-active development, Star Citizen is a buggy, unfinished, near-unplayable waste of time and energy, I struggle to even comprehend where all that cash actually went.
@@striker8961 it’s relative in this case and completely justified usage but I visualize large sums of money by seeing how much every single American would have paid for a thing and in this case it’s about 23 cents
@@striker8961 it isn't a lot of money in terms of a movie budget for something as high profile as Aliens... $80m for a house? Sure, that's a lot of money :)
Same is happening in gaming. My only idea is that they are doing it to appeal to shareholders, like "look, we are making this huge, sooo expensive show, it will blow everyones brain, pls giv mor muuneh" and shareholders wil then give them money but those studios have actually not idea how to utilize these absurd mountains of buckaroos so they waste it.
tbf, i feel like it makes a bit more sense for gaming. the highest end titles usually have massive dev teams (bigger than most movies) and they're (almost) all being paid for the entirety of that game's development cycle, a cycle which is usually much longer than it is for most movies.
tbf, i feel like it makes a bit more sense for gaming. the highest end titles usually have massive dev teams (bigger than most movies) and they're (almost) all being paid for the entirety of that game's development cycle, a cycle which is usually much longer than it is for most movies.
Ngl, when I saw initial Acolyte press shots, the sets and makeup made me believe it was a XXX parody. I had no clue it was an actual Star Wars release.
I actually thought the Acolyte was okay. Not great though, which it should have been for the time & money spent. The fight scenes were well done & I think Amandla looks great. Despite what people are echoing nowadays I think she was good in the role.
I felt like this for unthinkable. 15mil and 80% of the movie is spent in one room torturing one guy for half of that time. I think it was a good movie, but what all did they spend 15 million on??
Aliens (1986) was made for $18 million dollars, Terminator (1984) cost $6.4 million. I know they are old but even for the time they were very cheaply/efficiently made and look at the results. Also, Godzilla Minus One was insanely cheap and was absolutely amazing. It's sick whatever is going on.
You forgot to account for inflation ... In reality, Aliens cost is $53 million in current value and Terminator expenses reached $19.76 million, that's definitely not the same numbers even though we're far from today's excesses where garbage is made en masse
Well adjusted for inflation Terminator would cost about 80 million and Alien about 240 million if they had been remade today with the same techniques and expenditures. But still, these movies are classic masterpieces, and nowadays that money is barely enough for a forgettable show
No one can convince me the majority of this money, the literally tens-hundreds of billions pouring in to so many things like trash TV shows, is not oil money from out east.
The way Matt Damon explained was that basically streaming ruined the movie industry. At first actors would get paid basically half to a quarter of there full payment upfront, then make the latter half later off of dvd sales and theater sales. So in order to have star power without those two things not really being a major factor, they have opted to take the full payment up front. So where someone would’ve made 50 mil upfront then another 50 later, now the one actor take the full 100 mil.
Mate i think you missed the point here. This means the performers are not worth the salary they are getting. Outside of Tom Cruise and lately the Rock, the movie star has lost its charm.
@@futurehofer1564 Man I don't want to stick up for Tom Cruise but his blockbuster resume is absurd. It's like 40 years of big movies. And unlike The Rock, some of them are actually decent. Like Jerry Maguire, or Top Gun. Some of them are actually really good movies, like Collateral or Born on the 4th of july
You would think the corporate execs would try to reduce cost to make films and tv shows profitable. If the budget ain’t going to the film to pay for writers, VFX, costume or practical effects, it’s obviously going straight to the exec’s pockets. I hope there’s a big investigation into this so we can see it all come to light.
As someone that used to work in production for many years, a big part of the added cost is the inflated labor unit costs for above the line crew and dept heads for below the line crew. When I was submitting budgets, I’d have to put in the average cost of labor around 1200/day/person cost while only paying the majority of the crew around 250-300/day. Money in the bank for people at the top. For reference, if that was the cost alone without overtime for a large tv show crew, which depending on the scale, could be as high as 150+ crew per day for a 90 day run, that’s around $16M. That’s realistically not accounting for the above the line rates either
Reminds me of this great Siskel/Ebert exchange about Stargate: Siskel: "Did you hear this movie had a budget of 40 *million* dollars?" Ebert: "Boy, they must've had some great lunches."
I love that you talked about how overworked vfx artists are. Whenever I see a movie with shoddy vfx, I always say “welp, this is a cash grab.. execs clearly didn’t care about the quality enough to let the vfx team finish their work”
Yeah I didn't think anyone thought it's because the effects artists are bad at their job... first thing I think is they clearly didn't get enough time or money to finish this. But maybe I'm just more in tune with stuff like that
As a person that doesn't watch shows or movies, I always get reminded of the existence of many shows and movies and i somehow have absolutely no clue about a huge portion of the shows and movies released in the last 2-3 years
they're paying the producers, directors, and actors insane salaries. 20 mil for actor #1 for 5 episodes (4 mil per episode), 30 mil to actor #2 (6 mil per episode), 30 mil to director, 20 mil to producer #1, and 20 mil to producer #2. that's 120 mil on some of the most useless people alone, while the crew gets pennies.
Then add in your insurance contracts, fuel and shipping costs for all your sets and props. It’s not that hard to conceive in 2024. Fuxking eggs are 2x the cost that they were 4 years ago why wouldn’t a movie be 20x if it’s entertainment which is not a necessity
![HIWWHEE | OHM [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OJJLtTLqLag/mqdefault.jpg)
Its 100% money laundering no way youre spending 200m on the worst show ever
That money goes somewhere it shouldn’t, for real
This is the answer. Rich people don't like losing money. So to think they'd be good with billions in lost investments to let a bunch of people push messages, is not how they operate.
I'm not sure, look at two and a half men🤔
Insanely wild
Money laundering happens in the entertainment industry but claiming every flop or bad project is an intentional conspiracy gives way too much credit to the average entertainment producer. Most of this is greed and speculation, outright ignoring the global inflation rates. Everything costs more, and you're getting a lower quality product in EVERY industry.
hi, i work in the industry as a set dec. streaming has allowed the "executive producer bubble" to become incredibly inflated, where most of the money goes directly to them just for slapping their names on it. usually more than the actors or other above-the-line talent. it's not sustainable and it's killing the industry.
I always thought producers funded the movie and got most of the returns... So who is the budget money coming from then?
@@Dustin-m4z yeah I'm confused
@@Dustin-m4zThat’s the impression I had too
So capitalism?
What is it about streaming that has allowed this to happen versus how it was traditionally?
Also, MOST of the money goes INTO the pockets of the wealthiest executives involved with whatever project is profitable.
Where do the money come from?
@@Kamala__Harriis The studio and people investing in the film.
Report the bots
Dont forget the increasingly expensive monthly subscription
@@billweir1745 don’t forget about the loans :)
As a professional CG artist that works in TV and commercials with a lot of friends in film, it means a lot for someone like you with your huge profile to bring these topics to light. It is a big moral boost to see people out of the industry bubble talking about this shit.
The trend is always less time, less money, and more work.
Could be tax write off
The original knives out movie had a $40 million dollar budget. The new one coming out is $210 million. It’s a murder mystery movie, why do you need that much? Don’t say it’s the cast because knives out 1 had a star studded roster, including 2019 Chris Evans who was at the height of marvel at the time. I have no clue
@@Thomasfoolery69and they offered Ryan and Shawn more but they wanted to do a lower budget like they did with the first 2
What are you even talking about, cherry picking at its finest
@LinusBleacheley-s6d Ngicela ukubuza, sikhona isizathu esithize njengoba usho lawo mazwi owashoyo? Ngoba ngiyethemba ukuthi awukuqondi lokho owukushoyo.
@@Thomasfoolery69was eating it up😂
@@nation0724 it´s UTTP bot, don´t interact just report
Godzilla Minus One cost 15 mil and was a masterpiece. Stop bloating the budgets and pretending that’ll make it quality.
But...how else are they going to launder money?
true
the movie embarrassed Hollywood
I agree with the sentiment, but that's not a good example when keeping in mind the Yen to Dollar value, how overworked and underpayed the team was, plus japanese work culture in general, movies like District 9 or The Creator could be more on the line, 30mil and 80mil budget respectively and they both look spot perfect
@@MusberAUTTPw
hey! ex film producer here, i will say when movies are made, a TON of the money gets wasted on useless things that don't get put towards production of the show. for example,
i remember one Producer I worked with had his sports car hit in the parking lot, and he used the money from Production to pay for the fixes, which was just disguised as "set dec" in accounting. There was another time when the director was craving krispy kreme donuts during pre-production, so we ended up buying 6 boxes for the guy. Movie and show productions also usually cover all gas bills for all the crew members and cast, while they're on the show, even if the bill is from the weekend. All those little spending sprees add up after awhile, especially if it's a large production. not to mention actors get paid SIGNIFICANTLY more than you think they do and take up a huge amount of the budget depending on how many you have. I'll never forget the first time I saw what we were paying a D-list actor for being the lead in our Hallmark movie lol.
I'm not saying there's nothing sketchy going on, because i've seen my fair share of sketchy. but there's absolutely a TON of money that doesn't get put towards making the show better. good vid as always tho
Please tell how much that actor made! I've always been interested in that aspect of the industry.
So essentially, a night with a high end hooker can be written off as some lie like “crew overtime.”
ex film producer = "used to hang out with Epstein".
Bet you and Charlie go to the M.r. B3@st island with Kris Tyson and Delaware.
@@claudius_drusus_ did you miss your medication time?
So i guess it’s not cliche to say that movie directors always have that infamous snack table on set somewhere huh? 🤣
Fiscal responsibility is being overlooked in the rush to create content with high visual appeal, albeit often without substantive quality.
As a professional animator - I thank you for constantly bringing these topics to the limelight. They really need to look at the budgets of the most successful projects of the past. Each LotR films had a budget under $95M, adjusted for inflation and its still well under $130M...so there's no way it could be going to other production costs other than lining the pockets of the top dogs who don't really do any of the work aside from laughing on their way to the bank. Some of the most successful projects of the past couple years have all had modest budgets in comparison to the ones you mentioned...Arcane - $90M total, Barbie $145M, Super Mario Bros - $100M, Oppenheimer - $100M, Joker - $55M...it definitely puts into perspective where money was actually spent more wisely and projects where it wasn't.
Other than physical production costs, things that count towards budget are transportation, location, insurance, wardrobe, catering, accommodations/hotels, but excludes marketing - which is a whole OTHER can of worms. They need to stop giving the cast avocado toast ffs lol...the other thing that can inflate this is also that when shows are pitched to networks, they bid on the project to own the rights to the production. It was pitched at $200M but Bezos outbid with $250M, thus inflating things further to become untouchable to the production going to earn success elsewhere.
But I can confirm, with absolute certainty, that it definitely is not trickling down to the people who do all, what the execs would consider the "grunt work" (animation, VFX, writing), which is what actually makes a project what it is. Not the money, and definitely not the time to achieve the tall demands.
If anything, it seems like Hollywood is in Hustle mode and some are just pocketing the big money going around for streaming content. This is why ppl saying "Go woke go broke" don't understand its not about getting the money back from sales. These ppl already got the money and are walking away with it regardless.
To give even more context, the movie Sound of Freedom was made on a $14 million dollar budget completed in 2018. It was bought up later by the director, pitched to Angel Studios and $5 million was raised by Angel Guild members of Angel Studios for marketing. That $5 million was all crowd funding BTW. That film grossed over $258 million worldwide by the end of it's theater run. It is one of 2023's top 10 movies of the year. Technically that is a blockbuster hit film.
What's the union like for those workers? >.> Can you help me understand why the film industry went on strike and did not help with fair pay for them? D:
Do you have any advice for getting an agent when I'm done writing my feature movie script? I've spent years making sure the title and premise stand out in the competition. I've read that like a lawyer they take a percentage of it being sold and you don't have to pay upfront. Then I've seen in the case of Smile it was the writer's first movie and he was given the job of director as well! If a screenwriter is that invested in the world does show the executives that they could be the director or assistant director?
Just out of curiosity? what lind of animation? Like pixar animated type movies or like Digital effects? 🤔
This recent situation is reminding of that scene in The Boys when A-Train said that his movie must be good because it’s expensive.
I'm starting to think The Boys is pretty inescapable when it comes to real life commentary.
@@devonjeffers5898 Pretty much, especially towards season 4. We're living in the parody dimension
True, true, but have y- AYO what the fck is up with the bots
“Why doesn’t the audience like it? We spent 250 million dollars on this” -Smiling Friends
@@sanderzphillipscommentary as subtle as a brick.
In the opening credits there's several names listed as "Executive Producer". They do nothing, they add nothing, they take all the money.
so money laundering
It's like how pop songs would have 20 writers and 10 producers and the lyrics would just go like, "Uh uh I like that, uh." through almost the entire song.
@@GlassesnMouthplateslmao i don't listen to music so now im just curious which one you might be referring to
And they always say **** run Hollywood
Hmmmmm I wonder
@@commanderwyro4204 that's not how money laundering works retar d🤣🤣
Terminator 1 had a budget of 6,4 million at the time (it'd be around 78 million nowadays) and is one of the best movies of the 80s. It does show how efficient the money was spent, something we don't see today.
Tax write off exists 😂😂
THIS IS A BOT!
100% on point. A girl I went to high school with got a job for a big company as a visual effects artist. She ended up quitting, despite the pay being good, all because of being overworked. She said she had a beautiful apartment, a great car, and a good amount of money, but she was sleeping in her car because going home wasn't even worth it. She said there was no point in getting paid well if she didn't even have the time off to spend any of it.
She's doing much better now working in healthcare, despite going to university for art and landing her dream job.
Also, my 12 year old begged me to watch Moonfall with him, so I did. Absolutely a great bad movie, but I think I offended my son by laughing during it.
That's because healthcare is an even bigger scam then movies
Ouch… if I ever get my job as a composer, I legit would only ever quit to be a housewife. Too bad we live in a time where all artists are being choked out and having to deal with piracy.
@@wolfetteplays8894 yeah, I think the biggest issue was her mental health declining from overwork. She didn't have time for literally anything except sleeping and working. When one project was finished, another one had already began. I still do a little dance when I see her name in credits of the movies she worked on, though hahah
She sounds smart, landed her dream job realized she didn't like the workload while still being super successful then her Plan B is WORKING IN HEALTHCARE? jesus.
As soon as they said it was live action, everyone knew it would suck.
Seems a bit too early to judge things doesn't it?
Its cuz we got like 1 or 2 good live action thingies and they all forgot there are 40 years of extremly bad ones xD
@@jeremydale4548don’t worry it’s just some verified chud commenting early for clout
i'm just gonna pull the same thing you probably did to this video and assume that this comment is about the minecraft movie. like bro did he even talk about the minecraft movie like at all please correct me if i'm wrong 😭 if ur gonna make slop verified account comments at least skim through the video
bro is talking about a movie that wasn't even discussed on the video
Tell me you haven't watched a video without telling me
Some context would help here. For example Breaking Bad cost roughly $3 million per episode, with 62 episodes that's about $182 million, and that is considered expensive for cable. That truly does put the Citadel budget of $300 million for 6 episodes on a whole different level.
I need more context. Because how does Amazon manage to pump out these shows but cant fast track their popular IPs. Invincible, Reacher, the boys, the terminal list, etc.
@@josay3394the Industry is allergic to money and good ideas
Justice for the greatest amazon show, Patriot
@@josay3394 What do you mean fast-track? It seems like the people behind those shows (Invincible, The Boys) are intentionally taking their time. You can't rush quality. iirc Invincible got delayed between seasons because of COVID or the writer's strike.
@@josay3394 Maybe they aren't rushing them as much because they care about the popular IP's more and just need filler to keep people subscribed to prime?
The towering budget figures for both movies and series nowadays is surely mind-boggling. Considering how sometimes the final product doesn't seem to reflect such huge expenditures, it truly begs the question, "Where is all this money going?"
This out of control situation is out of control
Out of the world Control
This out of control situation is insanely unhinged
The control is out and just got worse
This out of control situation is out of control situation is out of control
This out of control comment under this out of control video is truly an out of control of all time.
Can speak from direct knowledge, the VFX schedule for Those About to Die was insanely accelerated for how large the scope of work was and most of the “bad green screen” shots are actually shot using LED walls to save time on VFX because they “got it in camera” and it “looks good”.
its true, i was the led wall.
@@fookoff8660Thank you for your service.
Always Sunny is the longest running live action sitcom in America and the pilot cost $200. They're laundering that money
It helps they all were and still are life long friends obviously some of its for the money but they were doing this shit before the game funniest show ever
It is one of the best sitcoms
Saying it cost 200 is misleading. It means a lot of people were straight up not paid for their time... because they werent.
@@Stars-Mine it was misleading, it actually cost $100 to make, my bad. And it means Rob, Charlie, and Glenn did it all themselves. Please note that I referred to the pilot episode
You couldn't have chosen two worse shows to compare to lol
Budget: 150M
Spread sheet:
120M for executive ‘bonuses’
30M for talent, licensing, marketing, low level management, permits, space rental, film production, props, editing staff, vfx, and pretty much everything else
"someone who is good at the economy please help me budget this. my studio is dying"
You could make 66 Godzilla Minus Ones with the budget of Rings of Power. There's clearly some shenanigans going in Hollywood right now.
There's some kind of money laundering going on deep within Hollywood. They're definitely trafficking something either drugs or people. That or they're just throwing money to the DOJ to prevent Trump from winning.
Not really, since inflation, and there probably wouldn't be enough people to help make all those to begin with, but we get your point yeah
Right now you said,, ALWAYS
Why Hollywood obsessed with the devil though
@@michaelmccarthy2369literally has nothing to do with 200 million dollar movies
They need to replace all the budget people in hollywood with shady real estate brokers and slum lords.
I can GUARANTEE you those dudes will get the cost of filming down to unprecedented levels.
They wouldn't pay a nickel to replace a light bulb.
If they can save that much and they are shady, why wouldn't they just make up the same high budget like everyone else is doing, so all the left over money they save to unprecedented levels goes straight to their pockets? this isn't going to solve anything and wouldn't be surprised it's what's actually happening lol
😂😂😂
Producers: Into my pocket
our local historical film _general luna_ only costed 80 million....PESOS. at the time that's like less than 5 million dollars...and it popped
@@MattSuguisAsFondAsEverrr Yeah, most foreign countries have the technical knowledge on how to make a really good movie with a limited budget. Hollywood is just so used to having so much funding.
i work in the industry as a sound technician and as a foley artist-
it's going to the producers.
even if it makes a tiny bit that's still making money, they've inflated their role so much for the mere idea like of having themselves be loosely involved.
charles isn't hitting the nail DIRECTLY on the head but he's definitely hitting it for sure, it's not going into the production or casting or anywhere that matters and it has to be stopped. like it literally is a cookie clicker "press here for more money" for producers and it's ruining livelihoods, there has to be some economic point getting ruined, and it's strangling the industry
If they aren't contributing anything of value, why would any portion of the budget go to them?
@@ryang9113what are you talking about? It’s like this in literally every single industry on planet earth. Ground level employees do the hard work while executives do minimal work and take the lions share of the profits. There is no other reason besides the powerful can, so the powerful do.
@@ryang9113 Executives are the ones funding the movie in the first place which is why they get the bulk of the profit
@@Jack.Ashford okay so walk me through this circle... Producer doesn't actually contribute money. Movie is budgeted for 200 mil payed by studio. Movie makes 30 mil. Studio loses 170 mil. What exactly did the producer get paid and why?
Good ol' capitalism 😌
Look at Dune 2, a blockbuster with a high profile cast, an in-demand director, the most famous film composer of the past 2 decades, and high quality special effects. Cost under 200mil, modest marketing campaign, and massive social media impact. Better than 99% of the 200mil+ blockbusters of the last decade.
Its 1000% money laundering. No way the same company made The Flash spending almost double Dune 2's budget for it to look like that. The money isnt going into effects (obviously), not even as close as stacked of a cast to pay, and thats what we get??? Its definitely money laundering.
This situation is basically the idea of, "If we just shove a massive number in the budget and use celebrities for actors, people will think it's good.", It feels like only 15 percent of that budget goes into these modern movies.
It's probably why i stopped going to theaters.
20 dollars for a drink, 20 dollars for no refill bucker of popcorn, 8 dollar candy treats.
the whole thing is a scam these days the only thing i see getting out of it is dumping 100 bucks on 2 hours of something im gunna scarf down before the movie starts, then accidently nap 40minutes in, and end up just buying the 5 dollar disc out the trash bin in walmart.
ya, there's only a good movie to see in theaters once every few years... before Oppenheimer the last time i went to a theater was for deadpool 2 and before that was the force awakens, but i had free tickets for that
Theaters have nothing to do with it, it's Hollywood producers
Hardcore Henry cost only like 2 mil. Limitations breed creativity, with unlimited budgets, studios think they can just throw money at their problems
Most of the money is going to executives that do absolutely nothing to make the movies or shows.
is kind money laundering if they are doing nothing why the money is going to them?
@@MarcosSantos-dj6lkmy sibling in moist, have you just discovered the concept of capitalism? that's usually how it works.
@@MarcosSantos-dj6lkno? They’re being paid as an executive producer. Whether or not the job actually produces anything doesn’t matter. I do all the work under our VP, he just has signing authority, but still makes 3x me
i love capitalism
Yep, it’s straight up money laundering on top of extra pocket change if whatever show they produce actually makes a profit
1:58 now that I think about it, it could be money laundering
It’s not as sinister as yoy think. They probably have to pay consultants 200k to say yes to an approval of one items from the set. Capitalism has bred this beast where at every single step of any good or services, someone wants a cut.
@@nuudelz3711not even that, they can use it at the end of the year on their taxes for losses, so they can pay less at the end or pocket more.
@@nuudelz3711its almost painful to decide which one is worse
@nuudelz3711 you say that as if that wasn't always the case
Yeah this horrendous and I’m saying Big Budget Movies going extinct by 2026
I used to work as a sound mixer for a large ad agency and we'd be paid super well and put up in nice hotels, then when the job was over, the Director would tell me how he, the producers and ad execs went out to dinner and spent 40,000 dollars because they were 40K under budget at the end, these were 2011 dollars too. Wine at restaurants can rack up the bills... Strip Clubs get put on expense accounts as a "meal"...
The above the line stuff in Film and TV is what gets dumb and unethical. Hell, Rick Litvin at NYU's undergrad Film School tells his summer filmmaker workshop students to form "mafias". He tells his undergrad students that too. Which was crazy for me to hear because I grew up around old italian mafia people in SF who assured me to never join a mafia....
Thinking like bureaucrats, that they have to use up all the money they have or else they won’t get as much next time.
Mafias?
@@KM-hk8tc a group of students who watch eachothers back, and all participate in the crimes so they all benefit and nobody rats anyone out (in short)
The Blair witch project was filmed with a budget of 60k back in 1999, and made 250 million at the box office. Which was outrageously successful!
Charles, if you read this please pin. It's important.
A CLOSE family member of mine was one of the animators for Godzilla x Kong. I can report that Charlie is dead on. Deadlines force the animators to pump out unfinished garbage. You know how the Godzilla vs water snake thing fight was actually pretty cool, but then just randomly ended way too fast? That was purely a deadline thing. All of the animators hate it. On top of that, they work off of contracts that are basically week to week. Not only are they forced to put their name on garbage, they're kept in constant suspense about whether or not they will have a job next week. It's insane.
I mean if the animators keep picking up those AWFUL conditions, why would the executives change shxt? animators are enabling this so at the end of the day if you don't like the conditions but still do it it's your fault
How much do they make per contract? Just a ball park
@@Yuuki_Asunaexcept its real life and if you’re a professional animator, I’d be more concerned about making sure my bills are paid and family fed then sitting at home standing on principle. Maybe we should blame the exploiters and not the exploited.
@@Yuuki_Asuna Tf else are they supposed to do, starve?
@@Yuuki_Asuna being anti animator is a wild take, tbh. Why don't you just quit your job and find another one?
As a plumber on a job building a new apartment complex... they were pumping heat in the buildings so the paint wouldn't get messed up during the winter... I overheard the superintendents talking saying it cost 35-40k a month. Meanwhile... I was making 44k a year.
and now you regret not being a journeyman wet paint
When you get high-budget movies, the producers spend an exorbitant amount on hiring "star power" names, and advertising. Only to instruct the staff to do what they can with the remaining budget. Because the crew is going into all this with a mindset of "Oh, there's 100M here, we can do this." Only to find out halfway through production that there's no money left so the CGI they wanted to put in post-processing ends up being bare-bone dog poop, like the Black Widow movie.
This is why Ryan Reynolds said that he wants stricter and smaller movie budgets, which in turn forces the crew to get creative. And if they don't get creative, they should get fired for being inadequate.
Wait till he watches the Minecraft movie trailer lol
it Sonic movie 2.0
Anything with jack black is gonna be woke and left wing propaganda…it’s an immediate NO from me
@@MW92.I wonder if this guy's a conservative...
@@UndeadlyBat lmfao
@@UndeadlyBatGuarantee it 😂
I sure hope that if minecraft gets a movie one day they dont cast hollywood actors left and right like uhh Jack Black as steve or something.
@gloter-f3jHES RIGHT HERE OFFICERS 👮🏾♂️
About that...
@@AUTTP_Loid-q8f why do these bots even exist? like what’s the point of glorifying pedophilia and Nazism, it does absolutely nothing and gets everyone nowhere.
"You will take Jack Black as Steve and you will be happy that we didn't use Chris Pratt again." Hollywood, probably.
And the first trailer just came out for it... who wanted this?
Knives out 3 budget being $210 is insane. This is just insane. You need maybe a handful of settings for the Knives Out movies at best, and unless you are filming in the Taj Mahal there is greed and probably money laundering going on.
210? It is flopping, then.
New mission impossible is costing 400mil +, due to submarine problems.
@@CATDHD JESUS! Almost have a billion is insane!!
Glad to see people finally bringing up this topic. I had made a podcast episode talking about some of this stuff while breaking down the Hollywood strikes and the way money is distributed, and here's some of what I said there:
"The MCU's newest release THE MARVELS has a budget of around 270 million dollars, but 55 of that was actually a subsidy from the UK so they only really had to spend around 215 million. But did they even spend that much or is there some fancy accounting involved? John Cusack, the star of Say Anything, tweeted during these strikes that though Say Anything had been quite successful, he learned about ten years ago that Fox claimed a loss of 44 million on the film. He said, "The film cost about 13 million to make - and money spent to release was minimal at the time - 30 years in - that film lost millions every year! A neat accounting trick don't ya think?" But he's totally right.
This is what Seth Macfarlane joked about at the 2013 Oscars when he said that because of the massive success of 2012 movies that ran up to almost 11 billion at the domestic box office, studio accountants never had to work harder to prove nothing made a profit. His joke still holds up today because that's what these companies do. They have producers and executives that siphon money away into their personal bank accounts or keep it for the company rather than admitting they're able to pay their employees a livable wage. Why do y'all think movies these days have such massive budgets? Yes, there's inflation, yes there's new technology, all this other stuff, but also it's way easier to steal money from a 200 million dollar budget than it would be to do so from a 13 million dollar budget and properly account for the missing cash.
You really think THE MARVELS needs a higher budget than three out of five of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies? Those movies had to deal with ships on the ocean, which is some of the most difficult stuff to film and VFX, and on top of that, they had to CGI the skeleton crew and the Davy Jones locker crew. The most expensive Harry Potter came in at 250 million, and that was mostly because of actor contract renewals. So with 270 million, what the hell did THE MARVELS use its budget for? It's not even two hours long. I'm not saying that this movie in particular had some sketchy stuff going on behind the scenes, but the same argument can be used to apply to a lot of movies with massive budgets that feel like they don't really need that budget."
Since then, I've also seen the ridiculous amount of money Marvel's paying RDJ to come back and that's a tactic Netflix uses as well, shelling out millions upon millions to get A-List actors to get people to watch their trash original movies. The best producers will find a way to produce a film for as little as possible while everyone gets paid fairly, but most producers in Hollywood simply aren't interested in that, they care more about tax write-offs, government subsidies, and stuffing their own pockets.
Also if anyone's interested in learning more about the plight of VFX workers, there's a great short documentary on TH-cam called Life After Pi that talks about the financial troubles of the effects company behind Life of Pi despite having critical acclaim for their work.
The movie Split is a good example of movies not needing a ton of money for them to be good. Only $9 million for that movie and it made $278 million.
majority of that 9 mil goes to McAvoys incredible acting
But people love to hate M Night
split is not that good
M Night Shyamalan's movies are almost always super cheap and make insane profi. Even if they aren't hits, he makes them for so little that it still makes good margins
That movie was carried by one amazing actor so
My favorite show, the Expanse, is speculated to cost about 2-5 million per episode, which garnered 6 seasons before they ran out of budget. There are 62 episodes, so on average it would have cost 217 million dollars FOR SIX SEASONS. There are still three more books that have yet to be adapted into the show, yet this money goes to waste on citadel, which costs more for one season
The expanse is my favorite series as well and it's tragic that we don't know if we'll ever get the last few seasons. But to be honest I'd much rather it ends on a high note instead of getting the GoT season 8 treatment.
Edit: I believe they decided to leave it at that cause they were not sure of how they'd handle the time skip. Aging the actors 30 years and making it look realistic seems like a difficult task and it'd skyrocket the cost. They could always change the actors but that'd make me (and probably many other fans) feel a lot less attachment to the characters.
I need to try that show. I was going to watch it and forgot.
@@King-O-Hell Go for it. It's amazing, especially season 3.
Yeah idk if we'll ever see it finished since it was a niche show with expensive production :( at least the books ended the story perfectly, and the show ended on a good note. Maybe one day they'll reboot it, really hope so
@@enmanuel1950Thats not the main reason, unfortunately money is the main issue, its very expensive and isnt mainstream despite its quality. The timeskip coukd probably just be shortened to 20 or 15 years if they were really concerned about the big gap. Less time passes in the show than in the books anyway
I think this hits Charlie even more than us. The man has 1.2 million views in 7 hours, and he uses a camera, a light and a Mic, and after 20 minutes of filming, 2 hours of editing attracts more viewers than some movies in 6 weeks, he didn't even need to leave his room hahahaha....I would never thought this would be possible, I LOVE IT! Power to the people!
Thats a great take on it! Charlie an stream for hours and just be a honest genuine average dude and people flock to him. Wearing all white and the facial hair. I think he just maybe modern internet Jesus. Guiding all us back towards common sense and enjoying life.
He is popular but you can't compare the two lol.. one is free & you can watch from your phone, one you have leave home and pay to watch.
@@Kenziebaby16 That a good point actually, I still think its amazing
Not to mention he was the star of the Hunger Games
@@badrmoubile9219 agreed, he is awesome!
I agree, budgets are so inflated now it’s absurd. The over reliance on special effects is absurd too.
90 to 200 million dollar budget is a WILD range. I can't even imagine buying something and not knowing if it was 90 dollars or 200 dollars
It was probably a speculation by other people. Most movies and shows show their budget idk why Halo's wasn't
If you've ever seen the Finnish produced "Sisu", its budget was only 6 million and it offers visuals on par with 100 million dollar shows.
Your channel is scary 😳
ONH
I eat the cotton candy from my walls
Also thinking about the Norwegian "Troll"
SUOMI MAINITTU PERKELE TORILLA TAVATAAN 💥💥✨💥✨💥✨💥‼️‼️
Movies have always cost a lot to make. LOTR Return of the King had a budget of $94 million (not accounting for inflation). The difference is that the money is being used properly: on good VFX, good actors, GOOD WRITERS. Most suits just think that the problem gets solved by throwing money at it, which is a lesson they seem unwilling to learn (they will never get fired cause the people below them will).
I've watched a YT essay that argued that fantasy/historical movies tend to eat up a lot of money and nearly never turn a profit simply because of all the decoration, background actors, and outfits. It's not like you can grab a chair from IKEA and pretend it's a viking's throne or whatever.
I mean LOTR has huge casts, big actors, huge sets, huge production, huge VFX/sound, and so on - it makes sense that it would cost a lot. Its proportional I guess. What doesnt make sense is Rings of Power having a billion-dollar budget, and its garbage.
Don't forget LOTO and other old great shows/movies had PRACTICAL effects, which are way more expensive. Now they don't even do practical effects, just cheap CGI.
Throwing money at it is how you get good actors, vfx and writers. That is why LOTR had a 100mil budget and was good. The problem is the money is very obviously not being used for the movies.
@@aviannte Pretty much. Hollywood exists as a business, after all.
LotR is the Miracle Trilogy because, when you really look at the circumstances surrounding the films, they *should not Work*. The better part of a decade spent on pre-production, a gimped budget and a demand for Two films (they only got a third, and the extra budget, because some people at New Line literally had to argue that "Three stories = three films", all dumped on the shoulders of a guy best known for B-movies at best at a time where Fantasy and Historicals were out of fashion.
Was eating a Crunchwrap supreme while I was watching this
I work in the industry myself too as a camera operator sometimes I question what the hell are we even shooting and why are we shooting this stuff. The rates get lower as more seasons go on for shows and me and my friends are always wondering who is actually skimming from the top
"I'm not short, I'm fun-sized" So outta pocket 💀💀💀
Charlie’s writers went hard on that one
Charlie is so sexy god made him short to give us other guys some chance
@@Sovietonion-1312its an old saying millennial used to always quip
How is that outta pocket, you mfs gentrify everything 😭
You just know Charlie is shorter than 5'6 when he keeps bringing it up. Poor guy can't be no taller 5'4, he's that fucking insecure.
Saw (2004)
1.2 m = 102 million worldwide
INSANE soundtrack and plot twist !
Honorable mentions:
"Dead Silence (2007)"
"The Mist (2007)"
"Silent Hill (2006)"
It’s why James Wan has so much money to produce and fund movies, because Saw can make movies for dirt cheap and profit so much too. Even the latest movie was done for cheap and not only did phenomenally well profit-wise but also had the best reviews of the franchise
You are a man of taste👌🏾I really miss the early 2000s era of horror. and I love the pfp 👽
The Blair Witch Project (1999) earned $100 million on a $50K budget. Nice profit margin there, even more so since the actors didn't get paid.
Terrifier 40k budget
I went back and watched Ang Lee's Hulk film recently. This movie came out in 2003 with a budget of 130+ million and it looks like every penny went into the movie. A movie made in '03 has better effects, cgi, and writing than movies made 20 years later.
I think most of the very high budget shows/movies come from giant studios like Amazon and Disney. They have more then enough money to fund these projects so they just dump a giant amount into them. I think the lack of quality and passion we see from these projects comes from lack of creative control and time crunches. It also doesn't help when were paying actors $90 million for just one project.
all this while the writers getting a gift card from amazon as pay 🤡
Sometimes the lack of quality comes from just hiring the wrong people to have creative control. They're throwing garbage at the wall to see what sticks and dumping lifechanging money x1000 at it
I make cartoons by hand and I charge 2k per minute of film. Get a few ppl like me and we'd have it done in a year or so for a few hundred thousand lol. They are over paying for all the wrong things. Plus dang I'm about to begin filming a trailer for a movie I wrote. And we do NOT have 100 mill budget. Nowhere close!
@LinusBleacheley-s6derm what.
charlie should put his webcam on his desk pointed up for one video so he looks like a giant
That would be great lmao i hope he does it just like for an intro at least
The worst part is that we have all this massive budget for these things but they aren't actually using it for the movie or show. Imagine the 150 million dollar shows we could have seen if they managed to use those funds appropriately.
TV Shows/Movies must be in the TOP 5 Best Money Laundering methods but surelly it cannot be the best right?
"the worst part is [the literal subject of the entire video]"
They're like 100 mil worth of licenses
that thumbnail charlie is the face i saw when i woke up to an aztec death whistle in my room a week ago
Why The Acolyte "costs" so much: reshoots. Poor management, actor sickness, etc. caused a boat load of reshoots which are an absurdly easy way to make your budget go through the roof.
I wonder how much the showrunner was paid and how much they paid her wife to be in this garbage?
And the actors probably cost more by the time the reshoots came around.
Actual, correct answer: Greed.
@@tanimal3964some unknown actor getting more than she deserves sounds like disney yea.
@@LAkadian Greed is correct but is also vague. We need to be aware of how the money is mismanaged.
I work in advertising and marketing for streaming services. I can’t stay this is the issue across the board, but from my place and the conversations I’ve had with executives and people deep in the business, the two issues are 1) trying to keep the ratings and views from the pandemic and 2) is shareholders, or strictly speaking the American corporate politics surrounding them.
What I understand from several people in the industry, is that everyone knows the current streaming model/production models are not sustainable. The reason why it’s not stopping is the same reason you never see caps on CEO paychecks despite constant backlash that they’re paid too much. Investors and shareholders see a streaming company spend an obscene amount of money on a show, they invest. They see a company market a tv show with a pre-pandemic budget (which is sustainable), it looks like the company is not doing well. It’s all a dance to make the company look like it’s doing really well even if it’s going to run into problems down the road. And CEO’s can’t really stop it because then they look bad asking for less budget the next fiscal year. In general, American corporations are very short sighted and aim for the quickest buck even if it means future losses, as opposed to other capitalist countries that aim for steady profit far down the road.
Again, I am only speaking from my experience working in the field.
That tracks. I was working for a company that was dominating competitors in the US because we were the only American company that was working on a 10, 15 year+ plan and all our competitors were planning quarter to quarter. We had this luxury because we were never going public. This kind of planning and remaining private is unheard of in the industry but the results were extremely apparent. Until US investors start rewarding long-term planning instead of short, destructive bursts of money, this is going to keep eroding industries. Then you'll end up with little monopolies where the standing business were able to actually prioritize long-term planning for whatever reason.
But…but that’s fucking stupid.
Just like democracy, America does capitalism literally the worst in the world while still just about being able to call it self a free market democracy.
It’s either money laundering or lack of money consciousness.
I keep hearing stories of how RoP had therapists on set or how Matt Damon was paid an INSANE amount of money for that ‘Air’ movie, about $40 million. So I’m leaning more towards people don’t know how to have conscious spending.
Sometimes it's just frivolous spending. Maybe when you don't actually care about the show/film you're making, it's awesome to get to splurge some studio money and play billionaire for a while.
Sometimes it's The Producers.
It is basic industry "embezzlement". Big cash pools attract the most vultures.
asd
ch1na
The majority of the money in a lot of movies actually goes into advertizements, with some of these though it seems like they're not even really doing that
I’ve been telling for years, there’s gotta be some money laundering scheme going on.
These movies and series have gargantuan budgets, but the product itself seems to be way, way cheaper.
how much is an average employee in the industry make a year? 100k? how many employees work on these projects? how long do they take to make? do the math. millions $$$.
Yeah it really is things just aren't all what they seem or used to be.
@@Xxd_unit_007xX You didn't even do your own math you just guessed as much as he did lol
Then it’s written off on taxes for them
I have never heard about you, so why would i know if you have been "telling for years".
My brother and I were talking about this. He said that we’re getting the real life story of The Producers. Where a producer can make more money from a flop than a failure. If a play flops, nobody cares about seeing the budget. But if it succeeds, they review everything including the budget. Basically if a producer makes a flop, they can pocket the rest of the money for themselves and nobody cares because he produced a flop. If he tries to the same scam to a successful play. He will be investigated for embezzlement. TL;DR producers are producing flops of popular I.P to embezzle the budget
Holy shit, this makes a lot of sense!
Except now we have so many flops that people are starting to look at their budgets and how much money is being wasted lmao.
Too many cooks always spoil the broth.
4:00 Disasterpiece!
(Sic) reference bro
@BTtheDumfuq come on man don't beat around the bush, just spit it out
Slipknot?!?!?!?!
@suomenkeisari5371 looks like this guys getting left behind
I'm gonna push my fingers into my eyes
Bro just discovered money laundering and didn’t even notice it
1:30 what is this? money laundering charlie, just like regular art its mostly money laundering
That was “Daddy chill 💅” reference
And paying people to say it is good.
Money laundering what? Drugs, no my friend these people scoff at drug money, they profit off the entire population.
VFX artists should get paid more than the A-List celebrities. Anyone who’s done animating, rigging, and 3D design knows how much work it is to get even 30 seconds of footage.
But I can't see their RIPPLING muscles 😅
So much work to sit an a chair and look at pretty pictures
Considering most of their work is garbage, nah... they're making enough money.
@@majorpwner241 Just because you watch bad movies doesn’t mean every movie out there has bad VFX. Please try your hand at making something even close with a time crunch and you will understand.
Most shots are 7-10 seconds long and takes lots of days to do and render
My biggest issue with modern TV is the stupidly low episode counts of each season!
Now we get shorter & shorter seasons, some with multiple month "breaks" splitting a season in half, just to artificially extend them!
And that's to say nothing about how long it takes between seasons! It used to be your get a new season at the same time each year. Now, you may be waiting 2+ years!
We don't need to go back to 22+ episode seasons, but these 8 episode or less ones need to stop.
Anything to keep you subscribed into that next month waiting for your favourite series to drop.
@@SmolPotatowo I wait until a series is over and closed, sometimes even multiple shows, then just subscribe for 1 month and binge them all at once.
I have no problem with 8 or less episodes, but then it's absurd to expect that I have to wait for another season for at least 2-3 years. Do you remember Squid Game? People will still watch, but they have already fumbled the bag.
I would strongly disagree with you if the content was really good. Shows like The Honeymooners and Fawlty Towers have been timeless largely BECAUSE of the low episode count (they focused on quality over quantity). Good thing I don't actually have to care (I always wait for shows to be canceled, then buy them on physical media and binge watch them).
That's why I give up on modern tv shows. I loved season 1 of Invincible and by season 2 finally dropped I quit caring and moved on. This has been a problem for a long time now it's also why I gave up on Dexter after season 2.
“A smell that smells smelly.” Pure poetry.
It's a SpongeBob quote
- Halo, STD, and NuTrek, bankrupted Paramount, putting them almost 16 billion dollars in debt before Skydance took over. Halo has already been cancelled with other shows on the chopping block.
- The issue with films is that the directors/producers/staff that are hired. They get surprised that the audience somehow doesn't like what's being made and are forced to do reshoot after reshoot pushing the expenses even higher. Indy 5 failed due to the expensive constant reshoots, with Captain America 4 and Snow White expected to auto-fail or break even because they didn't properly plan the movie/shows to begin with and pushed their budgets through the roof.
- The entertainment is being made for 1% of the audience with little to no consumer base to support it.
- Sheer audacity and ego. These producers/directors are hired to ignore what the audience wants until it's too late and the show fails, such as The Marvels.
You don’t think money laundering is happening?
Paramount was financially struggling long before they made those shows so I doubt those were the ones that caused them to sell to Skydance. Paramount had been courting acquisition for years
Little bit of A, little bit of B. Having producers/directors/writers that only care about leaving their mark really is hurting modern entertainment. It's also money laundering tho. A lot of people are making a lot of quick money off of these failures.
Didn’t the marvels’ budget skyrocket because Disney interference as well?
Also another problem is that (this mostly applies to Marvel) they hire directors who only done low budget indie movies and then give them the gig to do a $200m superhero blockbuster despite have little experience in working with genre filmmaking or CGI.
The minecraft movie trailer had me going through the 7 stages of grief in a minute 💀😭
Bro copied a comment from the MC teaser comment section😭
@@comrade_boi9941it ain't wrong 😢
@@comrade_boi9941who caressss
You could fix up to 4 countries every year with all the money being wasted on bad film's/films that aren’t worth the cost.
The budget for rings of power could have housed every man woman and child in America twice over
"how much did that TV show cost?" - "Eh, about 2 Venezuelas and one Greece" xD
lmao you could give the people in the USA healthcare for that money.
exactly its so sad to see so much money that can help so many people immensely being tossed around and wasted so much
Movie studios give completely unreasonable timelines and working conditions and pretend that if they throw 200 million dollars at the problem then it’ll look great. You can pay a painter all the money you want but they still won’t paint the Sistine Chapel in two weeks.
Charlie is not suicidal. Remember.
I get what you mean, but hopefully theres a ongoing investigation if they were to make a complot for charlie.
Christopher Nolan produced Oppenheimer on a budget of $100 million-a film directed by one of the greatest filmmakers of our time, featuring a superstar cast to tell the story of one of the most important humans in the history of our species. Not to mention, audiences got their money's worth with just over three hours of some of the finest cinema in recent memory.
These studios deserve nothing more than to be taken out back and put down in the cold, wet rain if all they are going to produce on these bloated budgets is uninspired, second-rate, run-of-the-mill, spiritless nonsense that no one cares about and no one asked for.........AND YOU CAN QUOTE ME!
PING!!! This comment hit the nail on the head.
And all the actors took pay cuts just to work with Nolan
Oppenheimer was a snooze fest with a ridiculous amount of unnecessary nudity
BUT THE DATAAAA !!!!
A good movie is not determined completely by how much money spent on production, it’s about mainly determined on good writing, something films seem to lack recently.
Think about how they full produced Batgirl movie with oscar winning Brendan Frasier and they buried the movie and used it as a tax deductible
The funniest part about this $300 million flop is they’re apparently filming a season 2, now that’s what I call sunk cost fallacy 😅
Makes sense, usually two seasons get green lit before they actually start any work
@@highlordlaughterofcanada8685 if I were them I'd have cancelled the second season, it's just embarrassing
I’ve been convinced for years that the only reason these budgets are so bloated is because these studios are just laundering money
There's just no way THAT amount of money is ALL being spent on just the movie. It's impossible. Absolute monies corrupts absolutely
people getting paid! $500 a coffee for the show runner. Expenses baby! Who we working for?... they can afford it.
Another example is Star Citizen. For a game with a budget $700M USD and well over 10 years of semi-active development, Star Citizen is a buggy, unfinished, near-unplayable waste of time and energy, I struggle to even comprehend where all that cash actually went.
3:07 people describing the Minecraft movie:
That sheep clip was the most horrible thing ever in a trailer
It's not even the sheep that's bad about it @@ricktronimusprime7171
Honestly I kinda like the style of it.
"i... am steve!"
*VOMIT*
@@ricktronimusprime7171 sheep? I thought it was a pig 😂
Alien Romulus only had 80mil and made it look absolutely phenomenal
Yeah. Proof that when passion and good work is done it can be promising even on smaller budgets. And hell it’s not like 80M is small.
Don’t say only as if 80 million isn’t a lot of f-cking money.
Someone definitely cared
@@striker8961 it’s relative in this case and completely justified usage but I visualize large sums of money by seeing how much every single American would have paid for a thing and in this case it’s about 23 cents
@@striker8961 it isn't a lot of money in terms of a movie budget for something as high profile as Aliens... $80m for a house? Sure, that's a lot of money :)
9:45 This guy has exquisite taste in TV shows
It’s because actors nowadays command huge chunks of the budget to deliver their subpar lackluster performances
Same is happening in gaming. My only idea is that they are doing it to appeal to shareholders, like "look, we are making this huge, sooo expensive show, it will blow everyones brain, pls giv mor muuneh" and shareholders wil then give them money but those studios have actually not idea how to utilize these absurd mountains of buckaroos so they waste it.
tbf, i feel like it makes a bit more sense for gaming. the highest end titles usually have massive dev teams (bigger than most movies) and they're (almost) all being paid for the entirety of that game's development cycle, a cycle which is usually much longer than it is for most movies.
tbf, i feel like it makes a bit more sense for gaming. the highest end titles usually have massive dev teams (bigger than most movies) and they're (almost) all being paid for the entirety of that game's development cycle, a cycle which is usually much longer than it is for most movies.
Ngl, when I saw initial Acolyte press shots, the sets and makeup made me believe it was a XXX parody. I had no clue it was an actual Star Wars release.
I actually thought the Acolyte was okay. Not great though, which it should have been for the time & money spent. The fight scenes were well done & I think Amandla looks great. Despite what people are echoing nowadays I think she was good in the role.
5:28 rare bamboozled shocked Charlie moment..
I felt like this for unthinkable. 15mil and 80% of the movie is spent in one room torturing one guy for half of that time. I think it was a good movie, but what all did they spend 15 million on??
Aliens (1986) was made for $18 million dollars, Terminator (1984) cost $6.4 million. I know they are old but even for the time they were very cheaply/efficiently made and look at the results. Also, Godzilla Minus One was insanely cheap and was absolutely amazing. It's sick whatever is going on.
You forgot to account for inflation ... In reality, Aliens cost is $53 million in current value and Terminator expenses reached $19.76 million, that's definitely not the same numbers even though we're far from today's excesses where garbage is made en masse
Well adjusted for inflation Terminator would cost about 80 million and Alien about 240 million if they had been remade today with the same techniques and expenditures.
But still, these movies are classic masterpieces, and nowadays that money is barely enough for a forgettable show
Just pulling numbers out your ass. 6.4mil in 1984 would be 20 mil today
@@anthonykuykendall4207 look it up if you don't believe me
Ever wondered why the cost of subscription services are going up while quality goes down? You just explained it.
“I’m not short i’m fun sized” is insane work 😭
There's a Pron series called Funsized Boys lmao
insane work? a 2013 facebook mom joke is insane work?
@@abethebabelincoln7960 it’s time to let go and move on.
Report the bot selling cheese pizza.
@@Megasaurusify you’re right thank you
No one can convince me the majority of this money, the literally tens-hundreds of billions pouring in to so many things like trash TV shows, is not oil money from out east.
0:53 "bigger than the original trilogy's budget COMBINED" JFC are you serious 😂
Watched
NEPTOTISIM
The way Matt Damon explained was that basically streaming ruined the movie industry. At first actors would get paid basically half to a quarter of there full payment upfront, then make the latter half later off of dvd sales and theater sales. So in order to have star power without those two things not really being a major factor, they have opted to take the full payment up front. So where someone would’ve made 50 mil upfront then another 50 later, now the one actor take the full 100 mil.
It’s a tv show there are no theatres
Mate i think you missed the point here. This means the performers are not worth the salary they are getting. Outside of Tom Cruise and lately the Rock, the movie star has lost its charm.
@@FranciscoFerreira-gc6xu Tom Cruise is mid
@@FranciscoFerreira-gc6xu The Rock has been the same guy in every movie since he was allowed to use The Rock in his branding.
@@futurehofer1564 Man I don't want to stick up for Tom Cruise but his blockbuster resume is absurd. It's like 40 years of big movies. And unlike The Rock, some of them are actually decent. Like Jerry Maguire, or Top Gun. Some of them are actually really good movies, like Collateral or Born on the 4th of july
Reminds me of a quote from the movie "The Producers".
"You make more money with a flop than a hit"
You would think the corporate execs would try to reduce cost to make films and tv shows profitable. If the budget ain’t going to the film to pay for writers, VFX, costume or practical effects, it’s obviously going straight to the exec’s pockets. I hope there’s a big investigation into this so we can see it all come to light.
As someone that used to work in production for many years, a big part of the added cost is the inflated labor unit costs for above the line crew and dept heads for below the line crew.
When I was submitting budgets, I’d have to put in the average cost of labor around 1200/day/person cost while only paying the majority of the crew around 250-300/day.
Money in the bank for people at the top.
For reference, if that was the cost alone without overtime for a large tv show crew, which depending on the scale, could be as high as 150+ crew per day for a 90 day run, that’s around $16M.
That’s realistically not accounting for the above the line rates either
0:40 "There is a smell that smells smelly."
Literal poetry right there.
Yes..
Bro it’s a SpongeBob reference.
@@ChronicUnderachiever420 I know.
Anchovies...
@@Themoonishereagain well now you do. You’re welcome.
Reminds me of this great Siskel/Ebert exchange about Stargate:
Siskel: "Did you hear this movie had a budget of 40 *million* dollars?"
Ebert: "Boy, they must've had some great lunches."
I love that you talked about how overworked vfx artists are. Whenever I see a movie with shoddy vfx, I always say “welp, this is a cash grab.. execs clearly didn’t care about the quality enough to let the vfx team finish their work”
Yeah I didn't think anyone thought it's because the effects artists are bad at their job... first thing I think is they clearly didn't get enough time or money to finish this. But maybe I'm just more in tune with stuff like that
Requirem for a dream costs 4 million dollars to make in 2000. In 2024 with inflation thats 7 million dollars. Let that sink in.
As a person that doesn't watch shows or movies, I always get reminded of the existence of many shows and movies and i somehow have absolutely no clue about a huge portion of the shows and movies released in the last 2-3 years
me too
they're paying the producers, directors, and actors insane salaries. 20 mil for actor #1 for 5 episodes (4 mil per episode), 30 mil to actor #2 (6 mil per episode), 30 mil to director, 20 mil to producer #1, and 20 mil to producer #2. that's 120 mil on some of the most useless people alone, while the crew gets pennies.
Then add in your insurance contracts, fuel and shipping costs for all your sets and props. It’s not that hard to conceive in 2024.
Fuxking eggs are 2x the cost that they were 4 years ago why wouldn’t a movie be 20x if it’s entertainment which is not a necessity
@nuudelz3711 society actually needs forms of entertainment. It will crumble without it