The Film Industry by Numbers

trent · 4 Mar 2010 at 22:50

The Film Industry by the Numbers

Thought i would post this as i found it interesting and maybe some of you will as well.

Caged · 4 Mar 2010 at 23:14

What idiot paid Ben Stiller $40 million?

Vulcan · 4 Mar 2010 at 23:23

I love these fact and figure images that have been popping up recently.

But anyway...... I'm surprised at the studio breakdown, I didn't realise so much was spent on advertising.

Judge Mental · 4 Mar 2010 at 23:33

Caged said:
What idiot paid Ben Stiller $40 million?

...and who paid that cgi whore Emmerich 70 million? A good chunk of that must be commission from 3ds max.

Sankari · 4 Mar 2010 at 23:53

You know there's something very wrong with the world when Michael Bay earns almost twice as much as Steven Spielberg in a single year.

tibbsey · 5 Mar 2010 at 00:15

**** you Bay.

****.

Andelusion · 5 Mar 2010 at 01:06

Evangelion said:
You know there's something very wrong with the world when Michael Bay earns almost twice as much as Steven Spielberg in a single year.

Still it's pretty decent going considering his some 80 million dollars are just from royalties and 'consulting' :eek:

Also **** you Daniel Radcliffe, I'd like a Ferrari F430 please. Jealousy sucks

Pestilence · 5 Mar 2010 at 05:09

It really does just show you how ridiculous the world is when you realise that a person can be paid more than the GDP of a small country to show up on a set and basically recite lines for 6 weeks.

trent · 5 Mar 2010 at 06:10

Pestilence said:
It really does just show you how ridiculous the world is when you realise that a person can be paid more than the GDP of a small country to show up on a set and basically recite lines for 6 weeks.

yes it that easy... infact i'm going to go and do it now. cya

Pestilence · 5 Mar 2010 at 06:16

trent said:
yes it that easy... infact i'm going to go and do it now. cya

*sigh* Was that an attempt at sarcasm?

I obviously recognise the effort it takes to eventually make your way to the A-list as an actor having spoken to, and been friends with, a few so far. That doesn't negate the fact that paying someone 30 million quid to turn up on set for 6 weeks and read a script is perhaps a little ridiculous.

trent · 5 Mar 2010 at 06:23

Pestilence said:
*sigh* Was that an attempt at sarcasm?

I obviously recognise the effort it takes to eventually make your way to the A-list as an actor having spoken to, and been friends with, a few so far. That doesn't negate the fact that paying someone 30 million quid to turn up on set for 6 weeks and read a script is perhaps a little ridiculous.

But that actors presence in a film will more often then not return a much larger rate of return then the cost of their wage. So i don't see how it is ridiculous.

Sankari · 5 Mar 2010 at 06:24

I live for the day when Michael Bay is finally killed by one of his own explosions.

qqg3 · 5 Mar 2010 at 11:28

Radcliffe has too much money, jealous much!

Surprised 20th Century Fox have that kind of market share, thought it would be higher.

zootfloot · 5 Mar 2010 at 12:09

Im baffled...and possibly stupid too.

Where is the profit that the film studio's make from the movies shown?

As far as i can see they make no profit whatsoever and pump all their money back into advertising, paying actors etc?

PermaBanned · 5 Mar 2010 at 12:21

Why did i think of Al Stewart's Paint By Numbers when i saw this thread?

Calabi · 5 Mar 2010 at 12:35

zootfloot said:
Im baffled...and possibly stupid too.

Where is the profit that the film studio's make from the movies shown?

As far as i can see they make no profit whatsoever and pump all their money back into advertising, paying actors etc?

Its obviously made by the studios. They do all manner tricks to reduce the perception and reality of how much profits they make to avoid taxes and jealousy.

neoboy · 5 Mar 2010 at 14:05

Not to mention DVD sales.