Leaderboard Extra
10 most expensives movies ever made!

Forums - Discs & Movies - 10 most expensives movies ever made! 

4th May 2007 14:25  #1

Tigerclaw Member Join Date: November 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 493 Send a message via MSN to Tigerclaw
10 most expensives movies ever made!
1. Cleopatra (1963): $290 million

Whoever the financiers were, they must have been at least as soused as star Richard Burton, whose real-life romance with Elizabeth Taylor was as tumultuous as this would-be classic's production.

2. Superman Returns (2006): $268 million

Marginally cheaper than actually flying to Krypton and back.

3. Titanic (1997): $250 million

James Cameron's epic was expected to meet as bleak a fate as its namesake. Little did anyone suspect the director would end up pocketing a profit when his lil' opus sailed past the $1-billion mark.

4. Waterworld (1995): $231 million

Kevin Costner flopped as a web-footed Mad Max. Wow. Didn't see that one coming.

5. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006): $223 million

Another water-bound gamble, but this one paid off handsomely for producer Jerry Bruckheimer. Because he doesn't have enough money already.

6. Terminator 3 (2003): $219 million

Sure, Arnold Schwarzenegger came back -- for a purported $40-million salary.

7. Spider-Man 2 (2004): $213 million

Or $35.5 million for each of Doc Ock's limbs.

8. King Kong (2005): $212 million

If Peter Jackson had just used a guy in a gorilla suit, it would have cost $212.

9. X-Men: The Last Stand (2006): $209 million

If only they had spent $210 million, maybe it wouldn't have sucked.

10. Wild Wild West (1999): $206 million

Eyebrows were raised at the casting of Will Smith

4th May 2007 14:48  #2

Chris Gould Editor Join Date: May 2001 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 7,107 Send a message via ICQ to Chris Gould Send a message via MSN to Chris Gould Send a message via Skype to Chris Gould
That Superman Returns figure is a bit misleading, considering it includes all the abortive attempts at bringing the character back over the years (gay robot sidekicks, giant spiders et al).

4th May 2007 15:46  #3

Matt Contributor Join Date: October 2004 Location: United States Posts: 2,113
It might also help to say where the article came from and that the dollar values are adjusted for inflation and reflect amounts for the year 2006.

4th May 2007 16:13  #4

darth raph Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 142
Surely the Michael Cimino disaster Heaven's Gate that destroyed UA should be in there?

4th May 2007 20:55  #5

Stubby Member Join Date: December 2006 Location: United States Posts: 290
According to IMDB, Heaven's Gate was originally budgetted at $11 million. The movie came in over $40 million (not adjusted for inflation). The original cut was 5 hours long and was trimmed down to a little over 3 hours. All told , the film grossed $5 million.
Also interesting was that this was the movie with so many proven instances of animal cruelty that it became mandatory for all future films to submit to animal rights regulations.

5th May 2007 14:45  #6

darth raph Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 142
Cleopatra very nearly destroyed Fox until Darryl F Zanuck took control and went off to make one of the greatest war films of all time the Longest Day. Fox made their money back with Star Wars anyway! Is it me or do most of these 10 movies suck?

5th May 2007 22:50  #7

Chris Gould Editor Join Date: May 2001 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 7,107 Send a message via ICQ to Chris Gould Send a message via MSN to Chris Gould Send a message via Skype to Chris Gould
Spider-Man 2 and Superman Returns are okay.

6th May 2007 10:44  #8

darth raph Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 142
Yes. Agreed! I am a big fan of Brando and I like what Singer did with Superman Returns. X Men 3 was poor with out Singer!

7th May 2007 10:22  #9

sambadude Member Join Date: June 2006 Location: Australia Posts: 61
Where does Spider-Man 3 fit into this now? I've heard many people say most expensive movie ever made...is that true?

7th May 2007 13:30  #10

Moldovia Member Join Date: April 2006 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 120
On a similar note remember that the original "Mad Max" was the most profitable movie ever made until that pile of dog poo "The Blair Witch Project" got way too much hype.

7th May 2007 18:27  #11

Jonathan Bennett Member Join Date: March 2005 Location: United States Posts: 600 Send a message via AIM to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via MSN to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Yahoo to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Google to Jonathan Bennett
Spider Man 3 cost 500 million to make, so it's the most expensive movie of all-time. 300 mil for the film itself, 200 for marketing.

7th May 2007 22:46  #12

Jersey Jedi Member Join Date: August 2004 Location: United States Posts: 714
Jonathan Bennett wrote: Spider Man 3 cost 500 million to make, so it's the most expensive movie of all-time. 300 mil for the film itself, 200 for marketing.

I've read of a $258 mil budget, but where did you get the $200 mil for advertising? I'm not denying that's how much it was (I saw a commercial every 10 min for about 2 weeks straight), just curious what the source is.

8th May 2007 17:58  #13

Jonathan Bennett Member Join Date: March 2005 Location: United States Posts: 600 Send a message via AIM to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via MSN to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Yahoo to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Google to Jonathan Bennett
Jersey Jedi wrote: Jonathan Bennett wrote: Spider Man 3 cost 500 million to make, so it's the most expensive movie of all-time. 300 mil for the film itself, 200 for marketing.

I've read of a $258 mil budget, but where did you get the $200 mil for advertising? I'm not denying that's how much it was (I saw a commercial every 10 min for about 2 weeks straight), just curious what the source is.

I read an article that mentioned the 500 mil budget. There are 3 answers to it:
258 + 242 = 500
300 + 200 = 500
250 + 250 = 500

8th May 2007 19:49  #14

Jake Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: India Posts: 1
Thats good info . Thanx.

9th May 2007 13:46  #15

seaneth Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 9
IMDB report the cost of making the movie as $258 million, which is still a phenomenal amount of money. But hasn't it taken more than that worldwide already??

9th May 2007 15:55  #16

Kozinski Member Join Date: June 2006 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 235
I believe a general rule (for studio blockbusters anyhoo) is that the trimmings (marketing etc.) cost about just about as much as the film itself.

Frightening, eh?

23rd May 2007 1:07  #17

stanton heck Member Join Date: June 2005 Location: United States Posts: 1,098
SPIDERMAN 3 might have a huge advertising budget but does that include advertisments from product tie-ins (the studio doen't pay for those adds)

1st June 2007 8:36  #18

yankeemike81 Member Join Date: August 2006 Location: United States Posts: 190
i belive the matrix sequels were 237 million combined

1st June 2007 16:38  #19

Tenderheart Bear Member Join Date: March 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 81
Moldovia wrote: On a similar note remember that the original "Mad Max" was the most profitable movie ever made until that pile of dog poo "The Blair Witch Project" got way too much hype.

Wasn't Halloween the owner of that title (still is?) at some point?

Quick Reply 

Message Enter the message here then press submit. The username, password and message are required. Please make the message constructive, you are fully responsible for the legality of anything you contribute. Terms & conditions apply.
Not Registered?
Forgotten Details?