Wow factor busting the budget of Hollywood movies at DVinfo.net

Christopher Lefchik · October 30th, 2005, 07:34 PM

It's a jungle out there
-Wow factor busting the budget of f/x pics like 'Kong'

By GABRIEL SNYDER, PAMELA MCCLINTOCK, Variety.com

Hollywood studio execs have long blamed stars like Tom Cruise and Julia Roberts for ballooning film budgets.

But those salaries seem like a bargain compared to the cost of special f/x.

Last week Universal acknowledged that "King Kong" costs shot up to $207 million when the studio agreed to add a half hour -- at a cost of $32 million -- to Peter Jackson's great-ape epic.

Read More

Michael Wisniewski · October 30th, 2005, 09:53 PM

Amazing how the stuff of dreams is so expensive. I'd be skeptical at the results, if PJ hadn't pulled off the battle scenes in Return of the King.

At US$207 million I'm guessing PJ really wanted some amazing angles of King Kong on the Empire State Building.

Dennis Khaye · October 30th, 2005, 10:36 PM

LOL at Michael, I read the write up on PJ in Wired mag. Remember when Superman came out and the marketing guys came up with "You'll believe a man can fly" well PJ wants you to believe an ape can grow to that size and not be crushed by his own weight. Things like these keep me up at night, that and why do space ships have to be areodynamic.

Bill Porter · October 31st, 2005, 01:50 PM

Easy - spaceships have to be aerodynamic because when they're flying along at Warp whatever, they need to have minimal wind resistance.

Perhaps you have wondered how the rumble of the engines or the zap of the lasers, travels so well in outer space. It's because in an airless vacuum, there are no air molecules to get in the way of the sound waves.

Keith Loh · October 31st, 2005, 02:23 PM

Thanks, that made me throw up all over my office mate's keyboard.

Michael Wisniewski · October 31st, 2005, 03:09 PM

Maybe they're going to make King Kong aerodynamic.

Anhar Miah · November 1st, 2005, 09:06 AM

The thing with FX is that it gets cheaper with time, however the same can not be said about actors!

Anhar

Bill Porter · November 3rd, 2005, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith Loh

Thanks, that made me throw up all over my office mate's keyboard.

Hahahaha!!

Stephen Finton · November 18th, 2005, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Wisniewski

Maybe they're going to make King Kong aerodynamic.

I guess they'd have to shave him.

Anhar Miah · November 18th, 2005, 08:55 AM

Erm Bill, why would a shapeship need to have minimal wind resistance, aerodynamics applies when you have a rigid body moving through gaseous or liquid environment, however this should not apply in space (I far as know) as there is no atmosphere, hence aerodymanics should not apply.

At warp speed time dilation would be more of something to worry about.

Anyway I digress :)

Anhar

Stephen Finton · November 19th, 2005, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anhar Miah

Erm Bill, why would a shapeship need to have minimal wind resistance, aerodynamics applies when you have a rigid body moving through gaseous or liquid environment, however this should not apply in space (I far as know) as there is no atmosphere, hence aerodymanics should not apply.

At warp speed time dilation would be more of something to worry about.

Anyway I digress :)

Anhar

The faster you go, the more particles you come into contact with. Space is not a perfect vacuum. Aerodynamics could help at higher speeds. By higher, I mean ludicrous.

Emre Safak · November 19th, 2005, 01:10 PM

Colonel Sanders: Prepare ship for light speed.
Dark Helmet: No, no, no. Light speed is too slow!
Colonel Sanders: Light speed too slow?
Dark Helmet: Yes. We're going to have to go right to...Ludicrous speed.
Colonel Sanders: Ludicrous speed? Sir, we've never gone that fast before...I don't know if the ship can take it.
Dark Helmet: What's the matter, Colonel Sanders? Chicken?

Bill Porter · November 20th, 2005, 02:21 PM

Ha ha ha ha ha

October 30th, 2005, 07:34 PM	#1
Christopher Lefchik Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: US Posts: 1,152	Wow factor busting the budget of Hollywood movies It's a jungle out there -Wow factor busting the budget of f/x pics like 'Kong' By GABRIEL SNYDER, PAMELA MCCLINTOCK, Variety.com Hollywood studio execs have long blamed stars like Tom Cruise and Julia Roberts for ballooning film budgets. But those salaries seem like a bargain compared to the cost of special f/x. Last week Universal acknowledged that "King Kong" costs shot up to $207 million when the studio agreed to add a half hour -- at a cost of $32 million -- to Peter Jackson's great-ape epic. Read More

October 30th, 2005, 09:53 PM	#2
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	Amazing how the stuff of dreams is so expensive. I'd be skeptical at the results, if PJ hadn't pulled off the battle scenes in Return of the King. At US$207 million I'm guessing PJ really wanted some amazing angles of King Kong on the Empire State Building. __________________ "Ultimately, the most extraordinary thing, in a frame, is a human being." - Martin Scorsese

October 31st, 2005, 02:23 PM	#5
Keith Loh Air China Pilot Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Posts: 2,389	Thanks, that made me throw up all over my office mate's keyboard. __________________ -- Visit http://www.KeithLoh.com \| stuff about living in Vancouver \| My Flickr photo gallery

October 31st, 2005, 03:09 PM	#6
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	Maybe they're going to make King Kong aerodynamic. __________________ "Ultimately, the most extraordinary thing, in a frame, is a human being." - Martin Scorsese

November 1st, 2005, 09:06 AM	#7
Anhar Miah Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: United Kindom, England Posts: 290	The thing with FX is that it gets cheaper with time, however the same can not be said about actors! Anhar __________________ The IT Ninja Learn, Teach, Grow..

October 30th, 2005, 10:36 PM	#3
Dennis Khaye Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Grand Rapids, MI Posts: 255	LOL at Michael, I read the write up on PJ in Wired mag. Remember when Superman came out and the marketing guys came up with "You'll believe a man can fly" well PJ wants you to believe an ape can grow to that size and not be crushed by his own weight. Things like these keep me up at night, that and why do space ships have to be areodynamic.

October 31st, 2005, 01:50 PM	#4
Bill Porter Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Ventura, California, USA Posts: 751	Easy - spaceships have to be aerodynamic because when they're flying along at Warp whatever, they need to have minimal wind resistance. Perhaps you have wondered how the rumble of the engines or the zap of the lasers, travels so well in outer space. It's because in an airless vacuum, there are no air molecules to get in the way of the sound waves.

November 18th, 2005, 08:55 AM	#10
Anhar Miah Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: United Kindom, England Posts: 290	Erm Bill, why would a shapeship need to have minimal wind resistance, aerodynamics applies when you have a rigid body moving through gaseous or liquid environment, however this should not apply in space (I far as know) as there is no atmosphere, hence aerodymanics should not apply. At warp speed time dilation would be more of something to worry about. Anyway I digress :) Anhar __________________ The IT Ninja Learn, Teach, Grow..

November 19th, 2005, 01:10 PM	#12
Emre Safak Trustee Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Brookline, MA Posts: 1,447	Colonel Sanders: Prepare ship for light speed. Dark Helmet: No, no, no. Light speed is too slow! Colonel Sanders: Light speed too slow? Dark Helmet: Yes. We're going to have to go right to...Ludicrous speed. Colonel Sanders: Ludicrous speed? Sir, we've never gone that fast before...I don't know if the ship can take it. Dark Helmet: What's the matter, Colonel Sanders? Chicken?

November 20th, 2005, 02:21 PM	#13
Bill Porter Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Ventura, California, USA Posts: 751	Ha ha ha ha ha