• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Ridley Scott's GLADIATOR 2 budget is now at 310 million dollars

Represent.

Represent(ative) of bad opinions
With accidents on the set, complaints about animal abuse and now reports that the production went wildly over budget, sources tell Rambling Reporter that Ridley Scott's long-anticipated Gladiator sequel is leaving Paramount execs feeling a bit like Joaquin Phoenix's Emperor Commodus — "terribly vexed." Initially budgeted at $165 million, sources say that figure has ballooned to something closer to $310 million. (Paramount insiders insist the net cost of the 49-day shoot was under $250 million.) "It's a runaway," says one source. "It's not being managed." The strikes account for some of that money; the shutdowns starting in July reportedly cost $600,000 a week, or a total of about $10 million, until Scott resumed shooting in December (though there were reports he kept cameras rolling during the work stoppages, shooting extras at crowd scenes in Malta, where he built a Coliseum set). But even before the walkouts, Fortuna clearly frowned on this sequel, which stars Paul Mescal as a grown-up Lucius, the young royal in the original who worshiped Russell Crowe's Maximus. A stunt gone wrong in June sent four crewmembers to the hospital with non-life-threatening burn injuries. Then in July, PETA sent an open letter to Scott filled with "whistleblower" reports about horses and monkeys being abused on the set — reports that sources close to the production deny, noting that the Humane Society was on-site during filming.


Its fucking crazy that entertainment costs so much to make. No film needs to be this much. Especially one that wont be CGI heavy. Boils down to poor management. And the audience, us, are the ones that will pay the price. That price being more sequels, reboots, and far less original films being green lit.

Side note. Spider-Man 2 cost roughly the same amount in the game industry.

What the fuck are these people doing
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
If the $310M excludes marketing, you can probably just round it off to $400M. To break even at the box office the movie will have to sell about $850M as weighted take is less than 50% when global markets are factored in as studios get a lower cut.

Good luck trying to aim for $1 billion ticket sales. Not saying it's impossible as some supe movies do it and the first Gladiator movie was a giant success that made almost half a billion over 20 year ago. But TV and movie productions sure know how to break a budget rolling the dice on big sales coming in.

If there's any industry that seems to have a blank cheque way of budgeting, leave it to the entertainment industry.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member


Its fucking crazy that entertainment costs so much to make. No film needs to be this much. Especially one that wont be CGI heavy. Boils down to poor management. And the audience, us, are the ones that will pay the price. That price being more sequels, reboots, and far less original films being green lit.

Side note. Spider-Man 2 cost roughly the same amount in the game industry.

What the fuck are these people doing
Someone posted earlier this year saying some She Hulk TV episodes cost $25M to make. Sounds impossible. I googled it and articles say it's true. Ive never watched a She Hulk show, but to get some to cost $25M it must have the craziest CGI and highly paid actors ever into some TV episodes.

Budgets Gone Wild.

It's like media have no finance or project managers to coordinate things on time and budget. Basically just wing it.
 
Last edited:
I guess Ridley Scott is at the point of his career where he don’t care.

No studio is giving him another big budget epic once this bombs
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
I guess Ridley Scott is at the point of his career where he don’t care.

No studio is giving him another big budget epic once this bombs
If you skim his filmograhy the past 20 years, most of the movies either dont make a lot of money (especially to cover budget as bx office take is 50% tops) or get meh reviews. Some of them are outright terrible.

The only real standout that was both a huge box office success with excellent reviews is The Martian.

Tip to all: Avoid watching the Robin Hood movie with Russell Crowe. Among the worst movies I've seen the past decade. You wouldnt imagine how anyone can take the Robin Hood story and make it into a boring soap opera. But if you have trouble sleeping at night, watch it. You'll fall into a coma in the first 15 minutes.
 
Last edited:
If you skim his filmograhy the past 20 years, most of the movies either dont make a lot of money (especially to cover budget as bx office take is 50% tops) or get meh reviews. Some of them are outright terrible.

The only real standout that was both a huge box office success with excellent reviews is The Martian.

Tip to all: Avoid watching the Robin Hood movie with Russell Crowe. Among the worst movies I've seen the past decade. You wouldnt imagine how anyone can take the Robin Hood story and make it into a boring soap opera. But if you have trouble sleeping at night, watch it. You'll fall into a coma in the first 15 minutes.
I thought after Exodus his films were budgeted around $100M. Wasn’t until Napoleon he got his $200M+ budgets again. I could be wrong
 
Last edited:

Spyxos

Gold Member


Its fucking crazy that entertainment costs so much to make. No film needs to be this much. Especially one that wont be CGI heavy. Boils down to poor management. And the audience, us, are the ones that will pay the price. That price being more sequels, reboots, and far less original films being green lit.

Side note. Spider-Man 2 cost roughly the same amount in the game industry.

What the fuck are these people doing
Ok, now I have to watch it twice in the movie theater.
 

Puscifer

Member
Said it before and I'll say it again. Not interested in mega gojira movies that clearly have lost the plot on what makes movies interesting anymore. This has to be a fucking joke, it's easily the most expensive movie ever made at this point
 
Well he always finished earlier than scheduled and under budget. Multiple cameras, French hours (no breaks because food is always on set), few takes. IIRC The Martian wrapped 2 million under budget and 3 days earlier than expected.
49 days for Gladiator 2 is three weeks shorter than The Martian. I bet they regret those Malta sets lmao

Won't be as based as the Nick Cave script though:

MAXIMUS rises out of the body of a dying CHRISTIAN. The CHRISTIAN is arched backwards, mouth open in a terrible scream, a sword thrust downward, deep in his chest. All about him CHRISTIANS are being massacred by a mob of civilians and guards. Some kneel, some attempt to flee, as they are clubbed and hacked to death by a frenzied mob. Bodies twist and shudder and spurt blood on the ground of the town square. The air is full of screams of pain and prayer. MAXIMUS looks about him in horror. He sees, at the centre of the mayhem, an old man, POLYTHNUS, kneeling in the dirt, petitioning the heavens in prayer. He holds a wooden crass. CHRISTIANS try to protect POLYTHNUS and are slain in the process. MAXIMUS is attacked by the mob. MAXIMUS draws the sword out of the chest of the CHRISTIAN and begins to hack a swathe through them. With great art he chops and swings at the blood-hungry mob.
 

Chiggs

Member
Said it before and I'll say it again. Not interested in mega gojira movies that clearly have lost the plot on what makes movies interesting anymore. This has to be a fucking joke, it's easily the most expensive movie ever made at this point

Avatar 2 was more expensive, but also had parts of Part 3 included in its cost.
 

Chiggs

Member
If you skim his filmograhy the past 20 years, most of the movies either dont make a lot of money (especially to cover budget as bx office take is 50% tops) or get meh reviews. Some of them are outright terrible.

The only real standout that was both a huge box office success with excellent reviews is The Martian.

Tip to all: Avoid watching the Robin Hood movie with Russell Crowe. Among the worst movies I've seen the past decade. You wouldnt imagine how anyone can take the Robin Hood story and make it into a boring soap opera. But if you have trouble sleeping at night, watch it. You'll fall into a coma in the first 15 minutes.

Ridley Scott is all atmosphere. He does it as good as anyone, but he's basically just an expensive arthouse director masquerading as box office draw, which, to your point, doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
 

Rival

Gold Member
So preoccupied with whether or not they could. No one stopped to think about whether or not they should.
 

Represent.

Represent(ative) of bad opinions
Said it before and I'll say it again. Not interested in mega gojira movies that clearly have lost the plot on what makes movies interesting anymore. This has to be a fucking joke, it's easily the most expensive movie ever made at this point
Not even close actually Star Wars Force Awakens was like 530 million.

This cracks the top 10 at #10, replacing ... Justice League which was 300 million

 
Last edited:

AJUMP23

Gold Member


Its fucking crazy that entertainment costs so much to make. No film needs to be this much. Especially one that wont be CGI heavy. Boils down to poor management. And the audience, us, are the ones that will pay the price. That price being more sequels, reboots, and far less original films being green lit.

Side note. Spider-Man 2 cost roughly the same amount in the game industry.

What the fuck are these people doing
They hire lots of people. They have a ton of special effects. For gladiator they burned a Forrest. It is also his production company so he double and triple dipping in fees.
 
Budget balloons like this because there are lack of internal checks and balances. With a director like Scott, who's well past his prime but has insanely inflated ego, you can't have him on a loose leash. There's a 2 hour long interview on yt with the historical consultant who worked on Napoleon. His recommendations were pretty much ignored by Scott. And if you read between the lines, he was essentially a yes man because he didn't want to risk losing that paycheck and future opportunities.

Same thing with how Disney spent 25m per episode on she-hulk despite each episode running less than 30min. Awful management and disney writing blank checks.
 

Represent.

Represent(ative) of bad opinions
They hire lots of people. They have a ton of special effects. For gladiator they burned a Forrest. It is also his production company so he double and triple dipping in fees.
Ya but they originally budgeted this movie at 165 million. Its now at 310 million.. poor management. I would fire the FUCK out of whoever was in charge of budgeting if this was my company.
 

AJUMP23

Gold Member
Ya but they originally budgeted this movie at 165 million. Its now at 310 million.. poor management. I would fire the FUCK out of whoever was in charge of budgeting if this was my company.
But what if you and the studio are getting money under the table to fund it.
 

Puscifer

Member
Avatar 2 was more expensive, but also had parts of Part 3 included in its cost.
At least that makes sense, you're shooting 2 different movies


Not even close actually Star Wars Force Awakens was like 530 million.

This cracks the top 10 at #10, replacing ... Justice League which was 300 million

How the actual was force awakens 530 million lmao
 

FunkMiller

Gold Member
Excellent!

Another hopeful massive, over priced flop to add to the pile. The more we get of these, the faster the system falls, and all the useless executives grifting huge slices of cash off the top of these overblown budgets will get fucked.

Burn It To The Ground GIF by Parker McCollum
 

jason10mm

Gold Member


Its fucking crazy that entertainment costs so much to make. No film needs to be this much. Especially one that wont be CGI heavy. Boils down to poor management. And the audience, us, are the ones that will pay the price. That price being more sequels, reboots, and far less original films being green lit.

Side note. Spider-Man 2 cost roughly the same amount in the game industry.

What the fuck are these people doing
Why do you say this? I bet there will be LOADS of CG in this, hopefully backgrounds and distant crowds, but no way this is gonna be all in camera.
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
Isn't a real set with real environments far more expensive then cgi?
Depends. The real "advantage" of CG is that you can just green screen everything while filming the asctors so you can get them done quickly. Real sets need real lighting, background stuff to reset, extras to do their job, and actors to be there. The in camera effect is, to me, far superior, but its harder on the actors I think as they have to wait around, travel to the location, wait for sunset, etc. Working on green screen sets or in The Volume is more of a 9-5 job I think.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Why do you say this? I bet there will be LOADS of CG in this, hopefully backgrounds and distant crowds, but no way this is gonna be all in camera.
As long as the cgi is for stuff not in focus or boring drab buildings that makes sense. If it's for up close stuff like the tiger in the first movie, yikes. That cgi was terrible.
 

sankt-Antonio

:^)--?-<
Ridley Scott fee
Actor A fee
Actor B fee

Blame paying people millions of dollars for a few weeks’ work.
Imo Hollywood accountants found a way to embezzle money from movies that are over budget or don’t make bank in the box office or are getting relegated to tax write offs without ever being released.

It make no sense otherwise. A 20mill Star Wars flick could have a ROI of 1000% but they somehow choose to spend 600mill (with advertising) to get a billion back? Yeah no.

The movie costs a fraction of that money, the rest gets into someone’s pocket. It has to.
 

RJMacready73

Simps for Amouranth
Colour me unsurprised, for some reason Hollywood movies cost an absolute arm and a leg, then you go take a Google map flyover of the Hollywood hills and surrounding areas and it's nothing but multi million dolla mansions absolutely everywhere, tens of thousands of them.. they pay themselves a fucking fuckton of money to churn out mediocrity, go watch Godzilla Minus1 made for just over half the budget of a fucking She Hulk SINGLE EPISODE and not only was it visually epic it was a bloody amazingly fantastic movie made for $15mil!!??? Yeah somit ain't right
 

diffusionx

Gold Member
Why are people surprised by these numbers? Titanic cost $200 million to make in the mid-1990s. It is not at all surprising that an action movie 30 years later would cost 50% more in unadjusted dollars.
 

sankt-Antonio

:^)--?-<
Why are people surprised by these numbers? Titanic cost $200 million to make in the mid-1990s. It is not at all surprising that an action movie 30 years later would cost 50% more in unadjusted dollars.
LoTR Part I cost 95mill to make, on location, while founding weta FX, with expensive miniatures and, back in the day, expensive CGI (was cheaper to do miniatures for a lot of stuff than CGI). Part II + III 95mill.

The Creator had a 80mill budget and was all shot on location globally, with a thousand effect shots.

Gladiator 2 costing this much is a scam.
 

YuLY

Member
Tip to all: Avoid watching the Robin Hood movie with Russell Crowe. Among the worst movies I've seen the past decade.
Did you watch like 3 movies in the past decade? otherwise I cant explain what you just said. First of all, the movie is decent. Second, even with the same theme there is a worst movie: Robin Hood 2018.
 

efyu_lemonardo

May I have a cookie?
Why are people surprised by these numbers? Titanic cost $200 million to make in the mid-1990s. It is not at all surprising that an action movie 30 years later would cost 50% more in unadjusted dollars.
The Mars Pathfinder mission from the mid 1990s cost $265 million to develop, launch, fly to mars, land and operate a rover for 3 months. In the process, NASA invented many new engineering solutions that had never been tried before and laid the foundation for future mars rover missions. Hollywood is a scam.

 
Last edited:

Represent.

Represent(ative) of bad opinions
Why are people surprised by these numbers? Titanic cost $200 million to make in the mid-1990s. It is not at all surprising that an action movie 30 years later would cost 50% more in unadjusted dollars.
Tom Cruise is filming a movie in SPACE and its going to cost less than the new Gladiator movie. Over 100 million dollars cheaper.

Its bad management.

Tom shows the rest of Hollywood how its done, amazing products at less money. Good management.
 
Last edited:

Gp1

Member
Let's just say that a movie studio is going to write off some heavy taxes with this one.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Did you watch like 3 movies in the past decade? otherwise I cant explain what you just said. First of all, the movie is decent. Second, even with the same theme there is a worst movie: Robin Hood 2018.
It was so bad I'd put the every superhero and Star Wars movie I've seen ahead if it. Black Adam is an academy award winning movie compared to Robin Hood 2010 (I never saw RH 2018).
 

Audiophile

Gold Member
I saw Hans Zimmer play the Gladiator soundtrack live, so I'll end the Gladiator "series" on a high note with that and probably skip this sequel unless Ridley pulls a rabbit out of a hat and it gets rave reviews.

Prometheus was 50% solid and 50% awful; and Covenant was complete toilet water. The Martian is a good time but it barely feels like any of that was Ridley. The Counsellor had some really good parts (including one of the best "sex" scenes opening it) but it kinda fumbled and ended like a wet fart. I haven't seen any of his other newer stuff since these. I love his early stuff through to the 2000s, particularly Blade Runner, American Gangster, Matchstick Men, Black Hawk Down, Thelma & Louise and of course Alien. Hannibal is criminally underrated too.

I'm still yet to watch: The Last Duel, Kingdom Of Heaven, All The Money In The World, The Duellists, Black Rain, A Good Year, White Squall & Someone To Watch Over Me. Plus need to rewatch Body Of Lies.

When he hasn't got top tier material to work with and doesn't get a chance to focus on world building with it then I get the feeling that he's just phoning it in now. He said himself in an interview "I just finish the movie and move on"; I don't get a sense that he particularly cares anymore. Fair enough though, he's in his late 80s and has more than given his fair share of classics..!

He said recently that he wished he directed BR2049; and I'm so glad he didn't. At the same time, while I can't even begin to grasp why Gladiator II even exists, gotta respect the balls to even try it; to do it without Russell Crowe, and to blow a load of money on it.
 
Last edited:

Sub_Level

wants to fuck an Asian grill.
I watch trailer it's not feeling like first movie.No wow effect
Good morning sir, I am a Nigerian Prince. My family is in grave danger and being hunted by pirates. I have access to a gold vault but I need your help to transfer the funds into your account!

All I need is for you to dm me your 16 digit credit card number, the expiration date, the name on the card, and the security code on the back. Thank you!
 
Top Bottom