Numbers don’t lie — or do they?

Once advertised, pic budgets now often under-reported

It’s impossible to nail down figures for mega-budgeted pics.

Several execs who are regularly given a peek at the actual “buy-in” budgets for tentpoles say that studio execs and publicists invariably quote a number that’s 20%-30% below the actual cost. Reps are terrified to make clients look profligate.

Sometimes the studios are correct to under-report a pic’s budget, thanks to complicated offshore lease-back and tax schemes which can shave $10 million-$15 million off a picture’s final negative cost.

“King Kong” is said to be budgeted at $175 million. But, thanks to tax breaks and incentives from New Zealand, Universal could end up spending less than $150 million.

And studio voodoo economics make it hard to pinpoint a figure.

The budget of “Superman Returns” could be “lowered” by amortizing the cost of sets over several pics, assuming it spawns sequels.

There was a time when studios not only didn’t mind admitting to their hefty budgets; they used the big spending as part of a film’s marketing campaign.

In 1936, the posters for the Paul Robeson film “Song of Freedom” carried a tagline that boasted “Robeson in his most memorable role! Cast of thousands in $500,000 epic!”

Seventy years later, the song clearly does not remain the same.

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 0

Leave a Reply

No Comments

Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

More Film News from Variety