The 5 Most Pointless Ways Big Budget Movies Blew Millions
Movie budgets have gotten so large that it's almost impossible to imagine just what it is they're spending these hundreds of millions on. Well, as with most Hollywood stories, the reality seems more unrealistic than even the worst special effect.

You can't really examine some of the more interesting expenditures in Hollywood history without bringing up Kevin Costner's $175 million albatross. Cracked's covered some of the VFX work on this shitshow previously (they CGI'd his goddamn hairline?) but the tale of the single most expensive visual in the film is too full of schadenfreude to pass up:

Universal paid $22 million for a quarter-mile long set called "The Atoll," representing the floating junkpile that our piss-drinking, gilled Costner-Mutant finds himself on. Kevin convinced Universal that for the utmost verisimilitude, they had to film on the ocean. But instead of then just filming on the ocean, they built a massive tank...in the ocean, just off the coast of Hawaii.
And then they built a giant set that depleted all the available steel in Hawaii. It weighed 1000-tons, cost $22 million and contained approximately no bathrooms. The crew didn't like the idea of swimming and filming in their own filth, so costs rose as crewmembers had to be ferried back and forth to the island just to use the collection of port-a-potties outside their living quarters, which were old, uninsulated condominiums. By contrast, Costner slept in a villa, complete with a butler, a chef and private swimming pool while collecting a $14 million salary.

Diiiiiiick.
When it came time to shoot, they put the set they built in the tank they built. One thing they didn't take into account: Floating cities with no means of propulsion are hard to move. When a hurricane warning was issued in the middle of shooting, they had no choice but sit back while the fucking thing sank. Costner's career followed shortly.

Alan Moore's magnum opus was largely considered to be unfilmable, and the snotty, pretentious negative nancies who went on record with that opinion were proved wrong in 2009: You COULD film Watchmen, if you had 130 million bucks on hand, and the balls of adamantium necessary to absorb the swift kicks from fanboys accepting nothing less than a sweet, slow porkbath from Alan Moore himself.

We can't be sure he wouldn't enjoy doing that.
Of that insane budget, $17 million went towards the realization of Dr. Manhattan. The motion-capture footage of Billy Crudup wearing space jammies was processed and finessed by squads of animators. Brilliant minds set to massaging light scatter algorithms and miniaturizing millions of tiny atomic reactions just under his translucent blue skin. And yes, it's true: There were people whose job it was to ensure Dr. Manhattans dick had proper jiggle physics. When one of your stars is a Giant Blue Superhero who is both figuratively and literally the world's biggest swinging dick, you'd better make sure that shit swings correctly. Especially when all 40-feet of it will be wagging in the breeze up on IMAX screens.

So much money could have been saved.
Maybe it was due to all that focus on tiny dermatological nuclear explosions, or finely calculated dick dangle algorithms, but it seems strange that they spent $17 million alone on Dr. Manhattan and they couldn't get his fucking mouth to work right. Jon Osterman isn't a very emotional character, but Jar Jar Binks's lips flapped more realistically than the Doc's did during most of Watchmen. And since actors tend to do their emoting through their face, rather than their groin, filmgoers probably would have been fine with allocating some of the cock budget towards an increased effort to make Manhattan a little less like an irradiated, well-hung muppet.

Bruce the animatronic shark is one of the most well-known and well beloved special effects in film history. There's even an independent documentary, The Shark is Still Working, that details the impact of that one special effect, and how it transformed Steven Spielberg from snot-nosed film brat to one of the princes of New Hollywood. One of the main focuses of that documentary? Spielberg and almost everyone on set thought Bruce was a fucking piece of shit. And to be fair, he pretty much was.

Bruce never knew.
Jaws wasn't scheduled to be a very expensive movie by modern standards, only $4 million. Spielberg (after being convinced he couldn't use real, trained sharks, a lesson further expanded upon in the unintentionally hilarious Deep Blue Sea) paid for three animatronic sharks, at a cost of $150,000 each, or roughly about quarter of the budget. The delays and repairs he had to make on the sharks, which had never been tested in the water, often sank like great white turds to the bottom of the ocean. In one instance, one of the sharks shorted out and exploded, inciting panic attacks so severe Spielberg would wake up on set completely paralyzed. Bruce ended up doubling the film's budget when it was all was said and done, and only appears in the film when they couldn't get decent free stock footage to replace him.

"Find stock footage of this, assholes!"
It's not as if Spielberg couldn't have seen this coming. The damn thing almost accidentally decapitated George Lucas during an after-hours set visit: While showing off his shark, Lucas stuck his pompadour'd head in between the jaws of Jaws, laughing as Spielberg worked a remote control that operated Bruce's gaping maw. Spielberg, channeling his inner Johnny Knoxville, clamped the jaw shut on Lucas. But the hydraulics broke, trapping Lucas neck-first. Spielberg and John Milius basically beat on the thing until the jaws popped back open, at which point Spielberg ran away from his own set like a little girl. It's a good thing it happened to young Lucas; if this occurred now, Bruce would have punctured George's goiter, loosing a tsunami of failgravy that would have drowned most of Southern California.








The budget for Dr.Manhattan's mouth was instead used on the inkblots for Rorschach's mask.
ReplyMoney well spent.
"Bruce would have punctured George's goiter, loosing a tsunami of failgravy that would have drowned most of Southern California."
ReplyThat was fuckin' funny.
"Superbastard, the dead-eyed piano slinging asthmatic." Absolutely hilarious. I smell a comic book series on the horizon
ReplyIf only Steve had killed Lucas with the shark before he made the prequels... and messed with THX and Star Wars...
ReplyYeah, since when is 1/4 of 4 million $150,000??
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesI mean 450,000. Still.
I was going to post about this...
I'm guessing, judging by the fact that it says he ended up doubling the budget, that the original budget was 2 million instead of 4. $450,000 is damn near 1/4 of that.
watchmen film was alright but i think it would have been better portrayed as an animated short series rather than being cramed into a 2 hour-or-so movie. plus dr. manhattens voice and charicterization seemed all wrong, he was a puss in the movie and thats hard to say about someone who can literally do anything. also laure seemed dumb and ditzy, in the comic she almost sets the owl-nest on fire cause shes looking for a cigarette lighter, in the flick shes just pushes a button with a flame symbol like a retard, guess ya cant portray women smokeing, in the 80s, when statistically more people smoked. only problem with rorsach was that he looked to short, looked needlessly cartoony. but thats nitpicking, at least the actor who played him read the book and was a fan of the comic. also blameing dr.manhattan wont really solve anything, dr.manhattan is technically an american, a major city in every country was destroyed yet in the whole contenental u.s. only newyork was destroyed, as usual america comes out on top, so sence manhattan is american and the u.s's losses are comparitively less than the rest of the international communities america would still receve hostility from the u.s.s.r. due to manhattans nationality, unlike the comic where literally no country could receve blame, sept the ozyman.
ReplyI'm sorry but the space squid of the comics was way more implausible then a giant being with the powers of god who everyone could see was loosing his grip on reality going crazy and blowing s**t up.
Someone might have already mentioned this, but Brandon Routh's Superman-Shield was encrusted with a buttload of tiny diamonds. I'm sure it wasn't worth $10 million, but still, it's excessive. It also doesn't make sense from a narrative POV. BTW, I'm bored.
ReplyIt's funny that the writer says nothing happens in Superman Returns. When it actually has just as much action as the original Donner Superman film. So I guess nothing happened in that movie either?
ReplyAnd the plus side of Superman Returns is it didn't lead to "The Richard Pryor Show: Guest Starring Superman."
Watchmen was totally worth it, even the CGI schlong-ness. Costner, on the other hand, should be repeatedly kicked in the meat and two veg for just about everything he's done
ReplyCould have mentioned Titanic, which sunk an immense amount of money sinking a CGI titanic, then had to spend another immense amount because a coding mistake meant that everything was back to front...
ReplyWait. If real explosions instead of CGI explosions is cost-effective, and the movie was a hit that easily made huge profits, then how was #1 pointless?
ReplyPrecisely. All the previous examples were expensive scenes that were CUT from the movies (and therefore a waste of money). It appears that ID4 made good use of its effects budget and made a fortune.
I think the point is that they literally blew millions
Can anyone link me to the ID4 trailer with the speed bus crashing though the stargate sign? For years people thought I was MAD!! Now I can prove them wrong!!
ReplyIsn't expensive CGI sort of missing the main point of CGI, which is to be cheaper and easier than using models?
ReplyNah, the point of CGI is so you can film movies like "The Lord of the Rings" without having to hire 8,000 extras from the Spanish army for the battle sequences, like they did at the end of "Spartacus" with Charlton Heston back in 1960. Or so James Cameron can make movies like "Avatar" and not have audiences murmuring, "Huh, the moon of Pandora looks a lot like Maui for some reason."
And, of course, to create things that simply can't be created or recreated in the real world with any kind of tangible special effect. CGI made a lot of things that weren't possible in film possible.
Why would anyone say Watchmen is unfilmable? It seems like a pretty filmable story to me, in the sense that most of the point is what happens, as opposed to what's going on inside people's heads or the language.
ReplyWell, there's a massive quantity of extra scenes and Alan Moore-brand monologues that didn't appear in the movie. You may remember the whole subplot with the kid at the newspaper stand reading the comic book, which got all of five seconds in the film.
I think the movie was about as good an adaptation as you could hope for, though, and it cut out a lot of needless fluff from the comic.
If you read the graphic novel (as big as it is, it's hard to call it a comic) there are "newspaper stories" and "book excerpts" in it that help to move and explain the story while still drawing you in, whereas a voice-over or scrolling text would pull you out and remind you it's a movie. It could be done, but it would suck so much b@!!s it would be pointless.
I'm sure others have pointed it out, but with a $4 million dollar budget for Jaws, $450000 worth of animatronic sharks (3 x $150000 each) is no where near 1/4 of the budget, and is much closer to 1/10th of the budget (11.25%). Basic maths fail.
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesThat's actually closer to 1/8th of the budget (12%) than 1/10th (10%). Basic maths fail yourself, motherfucker!
Because 10% and 12% are so vastly different and he couldn't have possibly been just doing a quick estimate in his head at all. Besides, your math is off too, it's about 11.25% so make sure your math is right before you criticize others
Also, 1/8th of the budget is actually 12.5%. 11.25% is just as close to 10% as it is to 12.5%, so saying it's about 1/10th is no less accurate than saying it's about 1/8th.
This may sound a little dark...but it is too bad they couldn't have decapitated George Lucas after Empire Strikes back and gotten someone with talent to write Jedi and the Prequels.
ReplyI was thinking the same thing, when I read that.
CGI explosions and fire still look like absolute s**t compared to model work and slo-mo. Doctor Who a few years ago featured this glaringly crap CGI nuclear explosion that probably cost thousands. On the other hand Threads from 1985 simulated a nuclear blast outside Sheffield with a cut-out photo of the skyline, a big blue sheet and a puff of white smoke played in slo-mo. It looked so much better and probably cost about 50p.
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesAgreed, I'm getting tired of seeing s****y CGI replacing good models. CGI should be used to enhance an element that already exists not create one. Plus it always ends up costing more anyway.
Doctor Who only gets about 2 million american dollars per episode, which is a pretty small amount for a show that takes place in space or with sci-fi settings for about 45-52 minutes. Comparatively, Starwars Revenge of the Sith ran for 140 minutes and had a budget of 113 million american dollars. If you think about it that way, Doctor Who is pretty amazing with what it does.
The behind the scenes of Doctor Who showed countless examples of good effects on the cheap. For all his flaws, Michael Bay loves real effects and won't hesitate to blow something up for real rather than do CGI for the sake of CGI.
David Tennant burnt his arse in one shot.
Does he really say "Welcome to Earf"?
ReplyIf you watch/listen to the video, what does it sound like he says?
Sounds like he's trying to say Earth, but it comes out Earf.
I always thought it sounded more like "Earf." And I watched that movie until my brain began to short circuit when I was a kid.
"It's a good thing it happened to young Lucas; if this occurred now, Bruce would have punctured George's goiter, loosing a tsunami of failgravy that would have drowned most of Southern California."
ReplyI love you for that.
Oddly enough, I thought both Superman Returns and Watchmen are pretty decent and ligit movies. So sue me but I like them for what they are.
ReplyI agree, at least with watchmen. It is a good film for what it is.
However I don't think it is good for watchmen. Maybe the change of plot was just too big for me to waive
There is about 15 different cuts of watchmen available. At least one of them is pretty close (as close as a movie can get anyway)