criterionforum.org

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2020 11:01 pm**

Ferocious Detritus wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 7:22 pm Even adjusted for inflation, with that $225 million, you could make No Country for Old Men, There Will be Blood, Tree of Life, One False Move, Lone Star and who knows how many other similarly-themed period films. This is another example of a millionaire artist spending untold dollars making a "statement" work of art, when the truly righteous thing to do, if they really cared about anything but their ego, would be to simply give that money to the Osage Nation.

Speaking as someone who thinks a 200 million dollar budget for this would be crazy, this is a ridiculous application of the relative privation fallacy - how can one justify making any film or work of art more expensive than amateur-level under this philosophy? All those other films you mentioned still cost anywhere from a million dollars to a couple dozen million dollars. Any one of their budgets is still a huge sum; why is that level of spending not morally objectionable?

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2020 11:46 pm**

Never Cursed wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 11:01 pm
Ferocious Detritus wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 7:22 pm Even adjusted for inflation, with that $225 million, you could make No Country for Old Men, There Will be Blood, Tree of Life, One False Move, Lone Star and who knows how many other similarly-themed period films[...]
[...]Any one of their budgets is still a huge sum; why is that level of spending not morally objectionable?

Because I... didn't say it was? I didn't say those films were exorbitantly or wastefully expensive. I basically said they were examples of better-spent budgets, whatever the size.

Never Cursed wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 11:01 pmSpeaking as someone who thinks a 200 million dollar budget for this would be crazy, this is a ridiculous application of the relative privation fallacy - how can one justify making any film or work of art more expensive than amateur-level under this philosophy?

Yeah, I wouldn't mind if more unknown filmmakers were given a bit of these monies, even if it meant one less Scorsese film. I think, say, Cassavetes would be absolutely embarrassed by, if not furious about, this sort of thing, this whinging by spoiled millionaires who want their toys. At least he put his money where his mouth is; hell, Coppola did, too. Can Scorsese tell this story with this outrageous budget any better than someone like Jeremy Saulnier could for a tenth of that?

When middle America disdains Hollywood, it's not just the phony morals clumsily conveyed by so many films; it's also this money business. It literally is obscene, the waste. There used to be a time when the rich were hated for all the right reasons; now, it seems they're admired for all the wrong ones. I don't understand it.

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2020 11:57 pm**

Ferocious Detritus wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 11:46 pmCan Scorsese tell this story with this outrageous budget any better than someone like Jeremy Saulnier could for a tenth of that?

Yes

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 12:24 am**

domino harvey wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 11:57 pm
Ferocious Detritus wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 11:46 pmCan Scorsese tell this story with this outrageous budget any better than someone like Jeremy Saulnier could for a tenth of that?
Yes

Oh, good. Problem solved.

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 12:27 am**

Glad we were able to put this one to bed

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 12:30 am**

swo17 wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2020 12:27 am Glad we were able to put this one to bed

The most expensive bed I've ever slept in.

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 12:55 am**

Reverend Drewcifer wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 5:52 pm Budgets for the last 10 Scorsese narrative films (sourced from Wikipedia, so burp):
The Irishman: $159–200 million

Silence: $40–50 million

The Wolf of Wall Street: $100 million

Hugo: $150–170 million

Shutter Island: $80 million

The Depaaaaahted: $90 million

The Aviator: $110 million

Gangs of New York: $100 million

Bringing Out the Dead: $32 million

Kundun: $28 million
Pretty clear upward trend on three fronts:
Passion projects where Scorsese's budget is "all-in," talent forgoes their usual (gigantic) salaries, and no one stands to make a killing at the box office

Leo-fronted blockbusters that are all but guaranteed to at least recoup the investment or have a healthy RoI

Whatever the hell line items contributed to an out-of-whack basis of estimate that was all but abandoned as the years dragged on to make The Irishman
However, this budget doubles that of the last Leo movie, and Killers of the Flower Moon doesn't sound like an easy sell, subject matter-wise. So is this a passion project? Is it going to be crazy ambitious epic? Is everyone too famous to reduce their salaries this time out? Did Netflex make a bundle on The Irishman, and if they didn't, were they at least happy with the aura of prestige surrounding that film? How did they do with a similar investment on an "easy-sell" like Six Underground? Will I ever enjoy The Irishman? Questions abound.

Hugo has the most credible budget out of these. In the sense, the money was clearly visible on the screen. I really like it, probably my favorite Scorsese this millennium but a really outrageous budget for the kind of film it is. It is like a quaint art film but has the budget of a Marvel movie. They were obviously going to lose money on that.

Same with Irishman. I think it would have lost money in a theatrical model. The budget I think might have been due the delays and VFX.

The most perverted budget I think I have ever seen in Hollywood has to be How Do You Know (2010). It's budget is $120 million dollars. I cannot even imagine where the money went.

American cinema is like American healthcare - costs waaaaaay more than anywhere else in the world, and delivers worse outcomes.

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 1:02 am**

Part of the costs for How Do You Know were from Brooks insisting on shooting the entire movie sequentially

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 1:08 am**

Also, the Warren Beatty comedy disaster Town & Country somehow cost $90 million

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 2:47 am**

Never Cursed wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2020 1:08 am Also, the Warren Beatty comedy disaster Town & Country somehow cost $90 million

The article pretty much explains it - a ton of rewrites, a ton of reshoots, and furthermore a dragged out process that stretched the schedule beyond anything reasonable. (Especially if actors had to leave and return due to prior commitments.) They probably did enough work to make at least two features.

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 3:14 am**

The cast is what made How Do You Know completely crazy - I believe James L Brooks, Owen Wilson, Reese Witherspoon, and Jack Nicholson all got over $10 million each for the movie. Which leaves enough budget for the rest to be a lavish production still on the pricy side but at least it’s somewhat comprehendable.

For this movie I’d assume Leo, Scorsese, and De Niro all getting at least $20m if not more (Leo brings the cost up and I expect they probably have a deal that they receive the same amount). Which I think still leaves quite a gap considering a great deal of the purported expensive vfx cost of the Irishman was for things that for the most part won’t really apply to this at all.

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 3:22 am**

It's Scorsese getting addicted to his "de-aging" tech...without that, and you could shave a good $40 or $50 million off the price.

Funny that a filmmaker who has decried the MCU as being "not cinema" doesn't seem above it to the degree he won't plunder the MCU's technical toybox to allow him to keep using Robert De Niro and pretend that he's still young enough to pull off roles that should be given to actors decades younger.

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 3:36 am**

Well whatever the fuck this means:

swo17 wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 5:25 pm Very interesting...
With the current technology it's a simple matter to attach Mr. De Niro's face to Mr. DiCaprio's body and vice versa, an effect so seamlessly achieved that the viewer only gradually realizes it as the deeper thematic implications emerge organically within the story

there’s clearly something wild and surreal up his creative sleeve beyond that simplified answer, and I for one want to know what it is

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 3:41 am**

swo made up the quote as a joke, as neither Premiere nor Cahiers use NYT style guide =; Otherwise though, what he wrote is completely accurate

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 4:09 am**

Well that’s just great, now it’s destined to be a letdown

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 5:09 am**

Martin Scorsese wrote:In fact, I liked the joke so much that I went to my producer and made sure to secure an additional $75 million in budget just to bring it to life. He was of course willing to do this because he really liked the joke as well. It was a really a very good joke. Also, the other thing that is a joke to us is money

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 2:34 pm**

Glenn Kenny appears to be subtweeting this thread:

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 11:21 pm**

DarkImbecile wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2020 2:34 pm Glenn Kenny appears to be subtweeting this thread:

That may or may not be the case... but I'll never know, as I stopped scrolling through his just today's several hundred postings trying to find the one quoted above. I have no interest in wading through that much diversionary swill.

Based on the above comments, I'd say Kenny is hallucinating. Has anyone in this thread spoken in favor of CEOs while suggesting a film's budget is too large? No idea what he's getting at, other than insufferably injecting politics into everything so he can argue about it.

Sometimes I like his criticism. I especially like when he goads Jeff Wells. Of course, he could always come here and post... unless of course he aggrees with a recent Wells statement about this forum: "Fuck those guys."

Posted: **Sun Apr 12, 2020 12:13 am**

I wasn’t being serious; the “$200 million on a movie?!?! <clutches pearls>” sentiment has been going around social media today.

Posted: **Sun Apr 12, 2020 6:42 pm**

Posted: **Sun Apr 12, 2020 6:43 pm**

That’s correct, filming was to take place in Oklahoma

Posted: **Sun Apr 12, 2020 7:13 pm**

Greatly benefiting their economy!

Posted: **Wed Apr 15, 2020 8:46 pm**

Donate to Leo and Bob's “All In Challenge” charity and get a walk-on role in Killers of the Flower Moon. It works like a raffle. $10 gets you ten entries, $250 gets you 250, etc. Kind of disappointing. Was hoping De Niro was going around with two rolls of raffle tickets like door-to-door magazine crews. Or maybe a fish fry.

Posted: **Thu Apr 16, 2020 1:38 am**

Reverend Drewcifer wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 8:46 pm Donate to Leo and Bob's “All In Challenge” charity and get a walk-on role in Killers of the Flower Moon. It works like a raffle. $10 gets you ten entries, $250 gets you 250, etc. Kind of disappointing. Was hoping De Niro was going around with two rolls of raffle tickets like door-to-door magazine crews. Or maybe a fish fry.

Come on fellas, pass the hat so I can win this

Posted: **Wed May 27, 2020 11:27 pm**

Apple to co-fund the project with Paramount.

criterionforum.org

1302 Killers of the Flower Moon

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)

Re: Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2021)