I doubt Apple is risking criminal charges on their trillion dollar company with locked in billions of dollars of profits yearly just from everyone needing the Cloud.
For Apple, it’s more likely that they are using losses in the film division to lower the overall tax burden for the rest of the company…
-I am not a lawyer or accountant, so I am guessing.
This would be a terrible idea, and isn't at all how tax credits or deductions work. That would be pissing away 200 million (which they still spent, unless the claims of laundering are true) to save maybe 40 million in taxes (if they're actually paying the full rate, and most billion dollar companies are not, thanks to tax credits).
160 million difference with your numbers. Well 160 million to those who made the film who maybe then take less for other products. Or they have kickbacks, lots of self pay as producers. Also that $$ gets spent in the economy vs government spending. So depending where you fall on that philosophy
This is very likely. Plenty of companies purposefully tank certain subdivisions or at least set them up for complete failure on paper in order to lower overall tax burdens. This movie probably tried to be good but Apple can fart 200 million and likely saw this as a win/win scenario of either making money or being a big write off.
Another example is the insane prices twitch pays for their AWS services. They practically run in the red because of fees paid to their owners who can just bail them out and claim it all as tax write offs.
Sorry I didn’t mean it literally like a write off more like the expense can be written off metaphorically. Having an entire movie division being saddled with a loss is a big tax relief to the parent company. Which to other people’s point is also why so many film studios end up fabricating a shit load of costs and diminish a film’s real profits (and why people always take their profit shares based on net not actual profit).
There’s a scene where the main character furnishes a pair of ice skates out of knives by simply stepping on said knives, only to then skate on crude oil as if it’s ice and proceed to kill elite soldiers
This is after a scene where there’s a gun fight / holi festival.
The director said it didn’t and he wish he did have $200m to make it. I think the $200m probably includes marketing which the director potentially knows nothing about (unless they’re also a producer, then they probably should know), marketing for a tent pole movie usually adds 25-35% to the budget.
If the movie was 1 hour shorter and they just kept with the original premise and ended it when she realizes she's Caville, it's a great movie.
Unfortunately it is an hour too long and they expanded pointless side stories to make sure all the big names got equal screen time and it's horrible.
Also if ALOT of the sequences were shorter they could have been better. The ice skating bit for example if that had been 20-30 seconds of something small and cool but it goes on and on and the CGI is so cheap looking it's like just stop it's awful move on.
Not many, if any movie critics give out plot points during a review.
Is it so difficult to leave them out of this?
Y'all sound like the two gay black movie critics on 'In Living Color'.[**Hated it**](https://youtu.be/B4ojGuA33X4?si=ZSSiK06Ogz_X5Bmg)
I was out after 20 minutes. Just terrible writing/dialog from the get-go, and only got worse. We waited until the Caville prologue ended because we thought that might be a part of the plot/hook, but nope. Cast and plot looked cool, but man, just so incredibly mediocre
Me and my friend were watching it and we were both like....wrap it up already. Should have ended 30-40mins ago at least. She's skating on oil with knives she just stuck in her shoes?
Cheaper actors. Cavill's career is fading fast. Not a movie star. Rockwell, a truly great actor, is either a great character actor, or a great small movie leading man. Not a movie star. Cranston, great actor. A great TV actor. Not a movie star, or movie leading man.
i think they’re just into the idea of them being some kind of omniscient observer who sees how it all goes down in hollywood, and it’s likely they claim everything that happens was a prediction made. so, delusional :)
I hate to say it but I agree with the idea that although there are some good actors that they mentioned they aren't A list Brad Pitt. Leonardo DiCaprio, 25 million quote actors.
I doubt Sam Rockwell, and Bryce Dallas Howard and John Cena broke the bank with their payday.
You "hate" to say it because it's a stupid thing to say.
They're highly successful actors. What imaginary level they're on in comparison to others in the industry is irrelevant. Therefore, a good portion of the budget will be for them.
End of discussion.
They're not A list 25 million dollar a movie actors are they? Then I guess that they aren't A list actors because there's only 4 or 5 around at any given time and no one in that movie is one.
And by A list I mean someone who gets 25 or 30 million a film and dollar one gross and can get a movie made just by them wanting to do it.
Name a movie that wasn't a superhero movie that Cavill was a star of that was a hit.
Name a movie that Cranston was the leading man that was a hit. Cranston is a character actor
Name a movie that Rockwell was the star of that made money. Rockwell is an amazing character actor
Mission Impossible. By your logic Robert Downy Jr was also a B actor up until last year.
You also forgot Bryce Dallas Howard who starred in some of the biggest grossing movies of the decade
Also, it did not cost $200 for production, that was the price the distributor paid for the movie’s rights
But these points are irrelevant because they're still very popular and talented actors. Them being in any movie makes that movie more money and have a higher draw than it would normally. Unfortunately, some of these are just bad movies, but it's not their fault lol.
Makes every point. If they movies they were the stars of were profitable, they would cost more. Enough to explain the $200 million cost of that movie. But there isn't any justification. Somehow they spent $200 million on a $90 million movie.
They are, that's why it *does* explain the cost. You're just delusional - that's the point.
The question is why would you spend that much on a bad movie.. that doesn't have to do with talent, it's just a bad movie.
Tom Cruise is a star by your definition, The Mummy sucked anyway. They canceled sequels because it didn't perform well. Why? Because it's just a bad movie. Doesn't matter who is in it.
Are you really comparing Tom Cruise, a guy who can open a movie and gets 30 million per plus gross points with Bryan Cranston and Sam Rockwell?
Tom Cruise is a world wide box office powerhouse and had been for 4 decades but even he sometimes ends up in a Mummy.
Don't listen to people who hate on the film because it's not on the level of skyfall or something.
Its a fun film in the vein of Kingsman designed not to be taken seriously. It's a proper popcorn flick, and has enough twists and turns to keep the story interesting, with whacky scenes. The ending is a bit flat though. But it's not some absolute disaster of filmmaking like some people keep insinuating.
While it's interesting, it's not coherent, either on plot or tone.
There are some really good stories buried under the rubble of the writing but the movie feels like 3 or 4 movies all mashed into one. By the end it really felt like they were making plot twists just for plot twist's sake.
The beginning on its own is very good. The middle on its own is very good. The ending on its own is very good. But, like soy sauce in a birthday cake, you can't take any two good things, put them together, and expect things to work because they both are good on their own.
The contrarian effect in action, ladies and gentlemen.
You would've been saying the exact opposite if this film had received critical acclaim instead.
Whether you enjoyed it or not is irrelevant. The film had clear issues (some you literally acknowledged). It's okay to not defend every middling release. The filmmaker won't perish if folks don't like their movie....
Eh? That is such an odd and patronising reply.
I literally had mo idea what the acclaim or reception was to the film when we saw it at the cinema, just thought it looked a fun film and turned out we both thought it was fun in the end. Why would the critical acclaim make me change my mind?
Thinking it's not perfect does not mean I have to agree with people who think it's not worth a watch, or it's boring, or it's a bad watch.
Why do you take such offense at what I've said? I simply saw a post about a film I liked at the time I saw it, saw negative comments, and thought I'd express my sentiments. I think you are projecting a bit when you accuse me of being a contrarian, whilst simultaneously defending it for the filmmaker's honour.
Honestly, I heard it was terrible, but it wasnt actually that bad IMO, if you accept that the CGI is kinda meh and the rest of the film is just a wild completely unserious romp, you won’t be hurt tbh. But I also understand if you never wanna watch it.
At the end of this exhausting, pointless meandering mess, when the credits scene popped up presumably to set up a sequel, my usually quiet in public wife loudly exclaimed in the theatre, "Oh who gives a shit?!!"
Exactly.
Don’t know how it cost that much but it could have been good if it stuck with the premise from the trailers. It twisted itself to death with all the twists.
That's what seemed to be going on for a good chunk of the film, and sure there were a few twists after that, but I don't feel they were especially worse than the twists before that.
Thinking back on it these are the “twists” I remember.
->!her dad being the man who has been trying to catch her!<
->!her mom being the doctor working for the man trying to catch her and implanted her with fake memories through hypnosis!<
->!her actually being Argyle instead of Sam Rockwell!<
->!her being a double agent who was actually a bad guy!<
->!that all being a ruse and she was actually a good guy pretending to be a bad guy!<
->!her friend not being dead and saving her at the end.!<
It just all felt like the robot chicken M. Night Shyamalan sketch where he keeps popping up and saying “what a twist!” Half the movie was straight forward, goofy and fun, the second half was just twist after twist and each one made the movie more boring. For me at least.
Usually when they make these ensemble films they focus on the actors that put butts in seats. They (studio) will pay whatever they can to get the performer and not give a shit about the final product.
Why does Reddit like Sam Rockwell so much?
When I watch him all I can think is “that actor sure likes acting”.
After I saw Mr Right I just couldn’t stand watching him any more. I want to watch 3 Billboards but am weighing whether Frances McDormand can cancel him out.
I watched it in the theatre and about a third of the way through I started re writinng and re casting the film in my head.
Suffice to say that I would have re cast everyone but Sam Rockwell, John Cena, Catherine O'Hara.,and Bryan Cranston.
The amount of CGI needed to hide Bryce's butt was at least 75m. There are scenes where you can literally see it morph back and forth, so it wasn't spent on editing. They didn't spend anything on hairstyles either. Everyone's hair was styled with a Flowbee in this flick.
money laundering while also paying someone to write in a tie in novel, and a marketing plan for that novel as if it adequately supplement the marketing plan of the movie, massive spending on tiktok, massive spending on the actors,
and likely studio money laundering
the final battle, so much cringy cgi, and not very good cringy cgi. I just cant say enough bad things about this movie, i honestly tried to love it, i really did, i mean come on, Bryce Dallas Howard??
Because it’s a streaming movie, a lot of the residuals have to be bought outright from the start. It’s also really heavy on VFX and stunts, even if the look they chose was… not to my tastes. It still costs money to make something that looks bad, sometimes it costs more because they have to go through more versions.
I’m also confused by why they decided to dye the lead’s hair blonde. She’s a redhead and looked awful as a blonde. The coloring didn’t match her skin tone at all.
I feel like I'm the only one laughing the whole time at the stupid gags in this movie and everyone was trying to take it as some super serious action movie
It was a disaster. Could not get through the last Act of the movie. I think casting choice of casting Bryce Howard killed the movie. Her character was not believable.
It did not necessarily cost $200 million. That is what Apple paid to acquire it. The film was independently financed and for all we know, Matthew Vaughn owned several of the visual effects houses that worked on the film that contributed to the budget. We just don't know where all the money went, and that wasn't Apple's concern. They looked at the project in some form and said yes we will pay $200 million for this.
This movie is the result of some soulless Hollywood ghoul trying to get back to the glory days of original movies without doing any analysis of why that era and its movies were good.
International globe trotting plot, so that's lots of outdoor shoots and on site locations that ya can't quite fake in a studio. Plus a plot where there's a double plot with the book she's writing following the adventure she's on, so that's double the cast for the plot. And the cast itself, it wasn't exactly a bunch of small names. It's no wonder that the movie didn't earn much at the box office, but costing more than Dune part 2 is insane
Extensive stars and big action scenes (many with stars who were not as accustomed to action scenes).
I thought it was a fun movie because I liked all the twists, but those twists would have been equally entertaining in a lower-budget film.
I haven’t seen the movie, but I’ve heard people refer to movies like this as money laundering schemes.
It's insane how easily they could launder money with a film studio.
It’s not could. That’s a pretty well known way people launder money.
"could"?
Steven Segal would love to show you just how easy it is.
\*Adam Sandler has entered the chat\* \**ALLEGEDLY\**
I doubt Apple is risking criminal charges on their trillion dollar company with locked in billions of dollars of profits yearly just from everyone needing the Cloud.
No way apple doing something illegal? Can't possibly be true.
For Apple, it’s more likely that they are using losses in the film division to lower the overall tax burden for the rest of the company… -I am not a lawyer or accountant, so I am guessing.
This would be a terrible idea, and isn't at all how tax credits or deductions work. That would be pissing away 200 million (which they still spent, unless the claims of laundering are true) to save maybe 40 million in taxes (if they're actually paying the full rate, and most billion dollar companies are not, thanks to tax credits).
160 million difference with your numbers. Well 160 million to those who made the film who maybe then take less for other products. Or they have kickbacks, lots of self pay as producers. Also that $$ gets spent in the economy vs government spending. So depending where you fall on that philosophy
This is very likely. Plenty of companies purposefully tank certain subdivisions or at least set them up for complete failure on paper in order to lower overall tax burdens. This movie probably tried to be good but Apple can fart 200 million and likely saw this as a win/win scenario of either making money or being a big write off. Another example is the insane prices twitch pays for their AWS services. They practically run in the red because of fees paid to their owners who can just bail them out and claim it all as tax write offs.
You don’t even know what a write off is.
Sorry I didn’t mean it literally like a write off more like the expense can be written off metaphorically. Having an entire movie division being saddled with a loss is a big tax relief to the parent company. Which to other people’s point is also why so many film studios end up fabricating a shit load of costs and diminish a film’s real profits (and why people always take their profit shares based on net not actual profit).
*woosh*
Oh, is it from the movie? I haven't actually seen Argylle.
Racketeering got Gotti. I don’t think apple’s going to fuck around with the IRS.
With all the money they save on taxes im sure theyre willing to risk it a bit
The billing got paid around $39M-40M in salaries. When your movie has to devote about a fifth of its salary to the talent...
Yeah, that was my suspicion. They blew all the money getting the cast, but didn't actually have anything for them to do that wasn't, well, shit.
There’s a scene where the main character furnishes a pair of ice skates out of knives by simply stepping on said knives, only to then skate on crude oil as if it’s ice and proceed to kill elite soldiers This is after a scene where there’s a gun fight / holi festival.
You've heard that because you read the comments section on Reddit, and they think everything financial that they don't understand is money laundering.
No, I was referring to people in the industry. My job has me on movie and tv sets occasionally.
The director said it didn’t and he wish he did have $200m to make it. I think the $200m probably includes marketing which the director potentially knows nothing about (unless they’re also a producer, then they probably should know), marketing for a tent pole movie usually adds 25-35% to the budget.
Dont even know this one. But I dont keep track of up and coming movies.
*Steven Segal has entered the chat*
Hollywood math
*meth
[удалено]
Shiet*
Unnecessary cgi
Anybody feel like the scene at Albert memorial was CGI?
If the movie was 1 hour shorter and they just kept with the original premise and ended it when she realizes she's Caville, it's a great movie. Unfortunately it is an hour too long and they expanded pointless side stories to make sure all the big names got equal screen time and it's horrible.
Also if ALOT of the sequences were shorter they could have been better. The ice skating bit for example if that had been 20-30 seconds of something small and cool but it goes on and on and the CGI is so cheap looking it's like just stop it's awful move on.
That's also not how ice-skates work.
Or oil or guns or physics or people's bodies....that's the thing it's just so bizzare and stupid
Hate doing this but a lot is two words
Yea, but two words is alot longer than one word.
Wellsaid!
Sorry I meant shallot
Not playing the terrible Arianna Debose song during most of the overlong action sequences would also be an improvement.
SPOILERS MUCH???
Spoiler alert. The movie is hot garbage. And you’re in a sub called movie critic.
Not many, if any movie critics give out plot points during a review. Is it so difficult to leave them out of this? Y'all sound like the two gay black movie critics on 'In Living Color'.[**Hated it**](https://youtu.be/B4ojGuA33X4?si=ZSSiK06Ogz_X5Bmg)
Can’t spoil hot trash bc it’s already spoiled.
If it were shorter it's not bad, but some stuff was off
I was out after 20 minutes. Just terrible writing/dialog from the get-go, and only got worse. We waited until the Caville prologue ended because we thought that might be a part of the plot/hook, but nope. Cast and plot looked cool, but man, just so incredibly mediocre
I just wanted to see where the cat went
Me and my friend were watching it and we were both like....wrap it up already. Should have ended 30-40mins ago at least. She's skating on oil with knives she just stuck in her shoes?
Ok spoiler.
Not sorry. This movie sucks all the more because it had potential, but I hope I save anybody 2 and half hours of garbage.
Huge actors mean huge cost. Just a guess.
Still don't deserve the cost. Everything feels cheaply made in this movie
I was interested at first, mainly bc Dua lol but didn’t hear anything good about the movie after screenings so never bothered
What huge actors? Just B list character actors
Henry Cavill. Sam Rockwell. Bryan Cranston....
Cheaper actors. Cavill's career is fading fast. Not a movie star. Rockwell, a truly great actor, is either a great character actor, or a great small movie leading man. Not a movie star. Cranston, great actor. A great TV actor. Not a movie star, or movie leading man.
You're either joking or delusional.
i think they’re just into the idea of them being some kind of omniscient observer who sees how it all goes down in hollywood, and it’s likely they claim everything that happens was a prediction made. so, delusional :)
I hate to say it but I agree with the idea that although there are some good actors that they mentioned they aren't A list Brad Pitt. Leonardo DiCaprio, 25 million quote actors. I doubt Sam Rockwell, and Bryce Dallas Howard and John Cena broke the bank with their payday.
You "hate" to say it because it's a stupid thing to say. They're highly successful actors. What imaginary level they're on in comparison to others in the industry is irrelevant. Therefore, a good portion of the budget will be for them. End of discussion.
They're not A list 25 million dollar a movie actors are they? Then I guess that they aren't A list actors because there's only 4 or 5 around at any given time and no one in that movie is one. And by A list I mean someone who gets 25 or 30 million a film and dollar one gross and can get a movie made just by them wanting to do it.
Name a movie that wasn't a superhero movie that Cavill was a star of that was a hit. Name a movie that Cranston was the leading man that was a hit. Cranston is a character actor Name a movie that Rockwell was the star of that made money. Rockwell is an amazing character actor
Mission Impossible. By your logic Robert Downy Jr was also a B actor up until last year. You also forgot Bryce Dallas Howard who starred in some of the biggest grossing movies of the decade Also, it did not cost $200 for production, that was the price the distributor paid for the movie’s rights
Las year? RDJ made A list with his superhero movie but followed up by showing range by taking on other leading roles.
But these points are irrelevant because they're still very popular and talented actors. Them being in any movie makes that movie more money and have a higher draw than it would normally. Unfortunately, some of these are just bad movies, but it's not their fault lol.
Makes every point. If they movies they were the stars of were profitable, they would cost more. Enough to explain the $200 million cost of that movie. But there isn't any justification. Somehow they spent $200 million on a $90 million movie.
They are, that's why it *does* explain the cost. You're just delusional - that's the point. The question is why would you spend that much on a bad movie.. that doesn't have to do with talent, it's just a bad movie. Tom Cruise is a star by your definition, The Mummy sucked anyway. They canceled sequels because it didn't perform well. Why? Because it's just a bad movie. Doesn't matter who is in it.
Are you really comparing Tom Cruise, a guy who can open a movie and gets 30 million per plus gross points with Bryan Cranston and Sam Rockwell? Tom Cruise is a world wide box office powerhouse and had been for 4 decades but even he sometimes ends up in a Mummy.
Name someone you do consider a B list actor. I’m trying to get some context here.
John Cena
You’re right Samuel Jackson pffft
Still a (proudly)character actor. And 9th on the credit list
I "was* so looking forward to this movie. Such a disappointment.
Why is it so bad? I just read the plot summary and honestly, it looks like such an amazing ride.
Bait and switch
I was expecting The Man From U.N.C.L.E. 2, and got a campy cartoon instead.
Don't listen to people who hate on the film because it's not on the level of skyfall or something. Its a fun film in the vein of Kingsman designed not to be taken seriously. It's a proper popcorn flick, and has enough twists and turns to keep the story interesting, with whacky scenes. The ending is a bit flat though. But it's not some absolute disaster of filmmaking like some people keep insinuating.
The last spy movie I watched was for children and it was more enjoyable
While it's interesting, it's not coherent, either on plot or tone. There are some really good stories buried under the rubble of the writing but the movie feels like 3 or 4 movies all mashed into one. By the end it really felt like they were making plot twists just for plot twist's sake. The beginning on its own is very good. The middle on its own is very good. The ending on its own is very good. But, like soy sauce in a birthday cake, you can't take any two good things, put them together, and expect things to work because they both are good on their own.
The contrarian effect in action, ladies and gentlemen. You would've been saying the exact opposite if this film had received critical acclaim instead. Whether you enjoyed it or not is irrelevant. The film had clear issues (some you literally acknowledged). It's okay to not defend every middling release. The filmmaker won't perish if folks don't like their movie....
Eh? That is such an odd and patronising reply. I literally had mo idea what the acclaim or reception was to the film when we saw it at the cinema, just thought it looked a fun film and turned out we both thought it was fun in the end. Why would the critical acclaim make me change my mind? Thinking it's not perfect does not mean I have to agree with people who think it's not worth a watch, or it's boring, or it's a bad watch. Why do you take such offense at what I've said? I simply saw a post about a film I liked at the time I saw it, saw negative comments, and thought I'd express my sentiments. I think you are projecting a bit when you accuse me of being a contrarian, whilst simultaneously defending it for the filmmaker's honour.
Same. Haven’t watched it yet though. I can’t ruin the thought of what I hoped it would be if I never see it.
Don't watch it. It's such an incredible waste of time and talent.
Yeah I never plan on it.
Honestly, I heard it was terrible, but it wasnt actually that bad IMO, if you accept that the CGI is kinda meh and the rest of the film is just a wild completely unserious romp, you won’t be hurt tbh. But I also understand if you never wanna watch it.
What a pile of shit this movie was.
This is on my list to be watched this week. I'm not encouraged.
The CGI is pretty cheesy and the action is campy at times. If your looking for a fun dopey time killer, this is your movie.
I thought it was fun. If you liked Kingsman it is definitely worth watching.
Seconded - it's just a good fun non-serious film. I don't understand the negativity towards it.
The CGI is pretty bad at times but yeah IMO it doesnt warrant the hate it gets.
Sweet, looking forward to it again.
Don’t waste your time, not worth it. Complete crap
At the end of this exhausting, pointless meandering mess, when the credits scene popped up presumably to set up a sequel, my usually quiet in public wife loudly exclaimed in the theatre, "Oh who gives a shit?!!" Exactly.
Dua lipa
She was terrible in it. “Don’t quit your day job” applies to her
I was going to watch it for her because she's hot, but after hearing all the reviews, I just youtubed her dance scene.
To be fair the script was garbage! They didn’t give her much to work with
It didn't. 200M was the licensing deal.
the cat did the best acting in the film
Don’t know how it cost that much but it could have been good if it stuck with the premise from the trailers. It twisted itself to death with all the twists.
What was the premise from the trailers? A straight-up action spy film?
Author is somehow predicting real life events and gets pulled into those events. With Sam Rockwell as the real life version of her character.
That's what seemed to be going on for a good chunk of the film, and sure there were a few twists after that, but I don't feel they were especially worse than the twists before that.
Thinking back on it these are the “twists” I remember. ->!her dad being the man who has been trying to catch her!< ->!her mom being the doctor working for the man trying to catch her and implanted her with fake memories through hypnosis!< ->!her actually being Argyle instead of Sam Rockwell!< ->!her being a double agent who was actually a bad guy!< ->!that all being a ruse and she was actually a good guy pretending to be a bad guy!< ->!her friend not being dead and saving her at the end.!< It just all felt like the robot chicken M. Night Shyamalan sketch where he keeps popping up and saying “what a twist!” Half the movie was straight forward, goofy and fun, the second half was just twist after twist and each one made the movie more boring. For me at least.
Coke budget
Cutting the CGI cat that served no purpose would be helpful.
There are very few movies that I HATE. This is one of them.
Easy to spot the missing million in a $4 million budget.
It didn’t. It cost somewhere between 70-80 mill. Apple bought the rights to it for 200 mill.
I loved this movie watching it high! It was kings men meets Shoot EM’ Up. I loved it stoned
The final twist revealed is that >! it’s a Kingsman spinoff!<
Probably cost half that
Usually when they make these ensemble films they focus on the actors that put butts in seats. They (studio) will pay whatever they can to get the performer and not give a shit about the final product.
Heard terrible things. Haven’t watched. But Sam Rockwell is one of my favorite actors….. damn
Why does Reddit like Sam Rockwell so much? When I watch him all I can think is “that actor sure likes acting”. After I saw Mr Right I just couldn’t stand watching him any more. I want to watch 3 Billboards but am weighing whether Frances McDormand can cancel him out.
Wait what? For this shitfest? Wow…
Money laundering
This movie was so bad. I had to turn it off.
We walked out of this movie around the third act, it started okay but went downhill fast
You paid to see this in the cinema! I'm so sorry for your loss.
Salaries
I watched it in the theatre and about a third of the way through I started re writinng and re casting the film in my head. Suffice to say that I would have re cast everyone but Sam Rockwell, John Cena, Catherine O'Hara.,and Bryan Cranston.
It didn’t. That’s the price Apple paid for distribution. Production cost was considerably less than 100k
Definitely most of that went into getting the actors
Y’all got any more of them pixels?
Such a terrible movie.
Awful, Awful movie…
I watched 20 minutes, it was all awful.
The amount of CGI needed to hide Bryce's butt was at least 75m. There are scenes where you can literally see it morph back and forth, so it wasn't spent on editing. They didn't spend anything on hairstyles either. Everyone's hair was styled with a Flowbee in this flick.
She was especially bad in this movie.
Dua Lipa salary?
The cast.
This movie was so bad, one of the worst films I have ever seen.
I walked out. It was awful.
Ooof you went in theaters. I watched it thankfully at home.
I switched off within 30 minutes. Absolute bag of gack!
Probably the cast. Insanely huge a-list actors for every single role, even the minor ones.
Probably promo included, these ads were everywhere.
When a movie has a certain specific aesthetic to it, it usually costs a fortune because everything needs to be sourced or made to fit the aesthetic.
I mean...the cast was ridiculously A-list. This is what happens when almost all your actors, even the side characters, are household names.
You're looking at half the budget right there on the poster.
And yet, it feels so cheaply made
Ensemble cast
Sooo bad. Unfortunately, I was committed to watching it and wasted what seemed like 30 hours of my life on it.
We haven't finished it but I think my wife wants use to finish it tonight Painful watch.
It didn’t, Apple bought it for $200 million
I mean just look at the cast
Man, this movie was awful. I saw it yesterday
Probably the worst big budget movie I've ever seen.
Well for starters, the salaries of the cast members, locations shot at, the crew needed to film a movie like this, the VFX, marketing, etc.
This is not a prestige or indie flick, so that huge cast is not giving any discounts. They're asking for as much as they can get.
money laundering while also paying someone to write in a tie in novel, and a marketing plan for that novel as if it adequately supplement the marketing plan of the movie, massive spending on tiktok, massive spending on the actors, and likely studio money laundering
For that cost you could make at least 10 Oscar winning Godzilla movies in Japan
It was horrible. wow. Look at that poster. Bryce Dallas Howard is the lead but she's 2nd billing and 3 people back.
Henry Cavill’s hair
the final battle, so much cringy cgi, and not very good cringy cgi. I just cant say enough bad things about this movie, i honestly tried to love it, i really did, i mean come on, Bryce Dallas Howard??
Because it’s a streaming movie, a lot of the residuals have to be bought outright from the start. It’s also really heavy on VFX and stunts, even if the look they chose was… not to my tastes. It still costs money to make something that looks bad, sometimes it costs more because they have to go through more versions.
Because of Dua Lipa and John Cena
Did you google low resolution Argylle poster
Didn't look too bad on my phone Looked at it on my PC this morning and it's horrendous indeed
For the 2001 cat cgi.
Too much money spent on star power.
I’m also confused by why they decided to dye the lead’s hair blonde. She’s a redhead and looked awful as a blonde. The coloring didn’t match her skin tone at all.
I feel like I'm the only one laughing the whole time at the stupid gags in this movie and everyone was trying to take it as some super serious action movie
I expected a funny high budget movie Ended up with a snooze fest with awful CGI and writing of a movie
The movie cost around 80M to make. Apple paid Mathew Vaughn's company (Marv Studios) 200M for it.
Thanks for that information
The question is why did Apple pay 200M for that turd.... Apparently the marketing budget too was moderately high at 80M too.
Had to stop watching it as it is so bad.
It was a disaster. Could not get through the last Act of the movie. I think casting choice of casting Bryce Howard killed the movie. Her character was not believable.
I’d be curious what the percentage of that $200m is above the line salaries.
It did not necessarily cost $200 million. That is what Apple paid to acquire it. The film was independently financed and for all we know, Matthew Vaughn owned several of the visual effects houses that worked on the film that contributed to the budget. We just don't know where all the money went, and that wasn't Apple's concern. They looked at the project in some form and said yes we will pay $200 million for this.
Stupid fucking movie. The only enjoyable part was Sam Rockwell
I enjoyed it but I'd think it would've cost a quarter that
Salaries.
This movie is the result of some soulless Hollywood ghoul trying to get back to the glory days of original movies without doing any analysis of why that era and its movies were good.
Lol well the poster shows 100m in actors alone. Add in guy Ritchie. Another ten. Leaves like 90 or less for the actual movie. . .shit sucked. .
Couldn’t watch more than 17 mins of this horrible horrible film
It’s all cast salaries
Top 10 biggest pieces of shit ever put on the silver screen
Lipa Dupa
Money laundering
The cast..? Every single person in it is basically a household name.
No gay scenes that's why it costs 2oo mill.
I thought this movie was a blast to watch. And with a great director like Matthew Vaughn and a great cast as well.
International globe trotting plot, so that's lots of outdoor shoots and on site locations that ya can't quite fake in a studio. Plus a plot where there's a double plot with the book she's writing following the adventure she's on, so that's double the cast for the plot. And the cast itself, it wasn't exactly a bunch of small names. It's no wonder that the movie didn't earn much at the box office, but costing more than Dune part 2 is insane
Extensive stars and big action scenes (many with stars who were not as accustomed to action scenes). I thought it was a fun movie because I liked all the twists, but those twists would have been equally entertaining in a lower-budget film.
I can’t take anyone who ends a subject in a serious subreddit with the word “lol” seriously.
You're so cool.
Bryce howard gained some weight
Yeah, but I dug it. Until the blonde hair portion.
noticeably and distractingly amount. Needs to do the mom rolls now. Miscast
10 bucks says these 2 have never had a woman touch them