A western costing $225M? How on Earth can it cost that much to film a bunch of guys riding around on horses? I knew they were blowing up lots of stuff and wrecking trains, but $225M? And how would like to have been in their production meetings where the ever-growing budget was revealed to the executives at Disney? I'm sure they knew that a western could never recoup the piles of cash being incinerated to make the thing.
Ouch.
5 comments:
I lost any interest in seeing the movie when I saw Johnny Depp was playing Tonto. "What's the matter, they couldn't find a Native American to play the role???" It doesn't help that no one has heard of Armie Hammer. Isn't that what you put into the fridge to cut down on smells?
I just took a peek, Ender's Game, which is a sci-fi action flick cost a little over $100 mil to make.
I think they were trying to make a blockbuster and forgot to make a good movie. I'll just watch Tombstone again, rather than this garbage. Now that's a Western.
That's an insane amount of money!
Let's see, it cost $750,000 for Buster Keaton to smash up a locomotive in 1926. Adjusting for inflation brings that to about $10 million in 2013 dollars. So, on their budget of $225 million, that means the Lone Ranger could have smashed or blown up 22 trains, in a 149 minute movie. That's one train every 6.6 minutes.
From the sound of things, a movie of nothing but trains crashing, blowing up, going over cliffs, or otherwise being destroyed every 6.6 minutes might actually have turned out to be a better movie.
Whoops, I screwed up the link to "The General". It should have been
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_%281926_film%29
Trains being smashed to bits in interesting ways for 149 minutes? I'd see that!
Post a Comment