HSX Forum

Movies

Reply Topic List All Forums

Don't get me wrong, Mark Millar is a great writer and he's one of my favorites but he's also quite deluded when it comes to movies.

Posted by: secretstalker (a.k.a TheWeekendWarrior) on Oct 06, 03:57 in response to GalacticPothealer's post *puts on a football helmet*

The amount of bull he's spread around to anyone who'll listen (which is normally MTV interviewers) is quite legendary at this point. If Nemesis was ever going to have a $150 million budget that was due to Tony Scott's involvement and not Mark Millar and he may want to let Scott do what he wants (similar to what Universal/Timur did with Wanted, which veered far off the comic book) because the last person to be faithful to the comic (and have Millar involved) was Matthew Vaughn's Kick-Ass which barely made back its money for Lionsgate (probably has made it back with the DVD release). The funny thing is that Wanted is better for veering away from the comics cause they made something that worked as a movie... Kick-Ass was weaker for when it veered away from the comic because it wasn't nearly as funny or as in tune with why the comic worked so well... though I don't think that hurt it at the box office either.

MTV: [NEMES] "...movie To Get $150M Budget" (week old news, but... GalacticPothealer Oct 06, 00:38

If I click on that link and that quote is from Mark Millar (a chronic liar), I'm gonna slap you upside the head! :) {nm} secretstalker Oct 06, 03:51

*puts on a football helmet* {nm} GalacticPothealer Oct 06, 03:53

Don't get me wrong, Mark Millar is a great writer and he's one of my favorites but he's also quite deluded when it comes to movies. secretstalker Oct 06, 03:57

Lionsgate only paid $15 million to acquire "Kick-Ass", so the film should be reasonably profitable for Lionsgate {nm} Peterlee Oct 06, 04:07

Where on earth did you hear that? The movie cost $45 million of Vaughn's own money to make... why would he take only $15 million? secretstalker Oct 06, 05:22

Well, I see that number on a few articles reporting box office but they seem to all have come from the same source. I don't believe it. {nm} secretstalker Oct 06, 05:23

I believe Lionsgate was the source (since many trades reported the same number). I think the number seems reasonable because.... Peterlee Oct 06, 06:04

You dont pay for the budget with an MG. $15mil was likely the best he could get. $15 mil is A LOT to pay for a movie {nm} Moviesnob Oct 06, 06:12

if its profitable, its BARELY profitable {nm} Moviesnob Oct 06, 06:14

Based on the math of "The Expendables", I guess "Kick-Ass" should be at least modestly profitable for Lionsgate Peterlee Oct 06, 06:29

Even if they paid $15 million for it, they must have spent at least $20 million on marketing and prints... secretstalker Oct 06, 06:42

that dvd estimate is a gross estimate. They dont get all of that, just like theatrical gross. {nm} Moviesnob Oct 06, 07:14

the $18.8 million sales numbers doesn't include Blu-ray revenue. And Lionsgate reports the film sold 1.4 million Blu-ray/DVDs in first week) Peterlee (from past) Oct 06, 07:22

I posted the wrong link of Lionsgate's press release .... here is the correct one Peterlee Oct 06, 07:26

2.7 units doesn't net to $45mil. More like $25 mil {nm} Moviesnob Oct 06, 07:34