The Avengers has a "$260m budget" - The Avengers

Uh....wow...that's a step up from the $38-40 million Serenity was given. Like one-stepping to the moon kinda upward movement!

Then again, the salaries of actors like Sam Jackson and RDJ have to make up a nice chunk of it. But still...gotta wonder what the Big Purple One thought when he saw the numbers for the budget if this is anywhere near correct!

BlueEyedBrigadier | July 31, 12:42 CET

Yeah. He's kind of used to working for pocket change - or even nothing at all. That budget could feed a small country for years!

Nebula1400 | July 31, 12:43 CET

Well, I'm sure Joss is counting the pennies each and every way, good talent is very expensive these days.

Plus, there's the cost of the llamas.

Madhatter | July 31, 13:22 CET

So basically this movie either needs a $100+ million opening weekend or "Inception"/"Avatar"/"Titanic"/"Dark Knight" like rewatch appeal to turn a profit off its domestic box office.

No pressure, though!

KingofCretins | July 31, 13:27 CET

(Pss) No mention of "Titanic" please, that's a gloomer for sure!

Madhatter | July 31, 13:38 CET

I was reading through the comments on a different site (where the budget number was a rumor at the time), and some nit-wit was concerned about how "cheap" the film would look with "only" a $250+ million budget. I was going to post a comment like BlueEyedBrigadier (about Serenity's SFX budget), but it was clear the poster was an anti-Whedon troll.

Madhatter: Why the gloom? Are you concerned how that film went over-budget? Or that you'd be depressed if "Avengers" only had Titanic-level box office and Oscars? :)

[ edited by OneTeV on 2011-07-31 22:55 ]

OneTeV | July 31, 13:53 CET

The Skrulls it is then.

Jaymii | July 31, 14:18 CET

That, my friends, is a lot of money. Holy cripes.

No pressure indeed, heh. Although it is pretty great that we get to see what Joss can do with that kind of cash.

It makes me both excited and slightly fearful-by-proxy. Because, yikes, the responsibilty. I'm glad the magazine I work for only turns over a couple of million a year and I'm but one of a few people to produce the content, and also - most importantly - not in charge. I'd possibly have a nervous breakdown if the stakes were this high ;) - either that, or be inspired to do my best work yet. Which I'm sure will be the case for Joss (or, if not his best, then certainly his most expensive ;))

GVH | July 31, 14:26 CET

Not that far off Avatar started with.

Anyhoo, not worried. joss has to make the best film he can; Marvel and Disney have to package it well. I imagine it being massive. And giving joss more doors to choose from with his work.

gossi | July 31, 14:35 CET

KingsofCretins: It's not really as big of a deal now if it doesn't make a profit domestically. The international box office makes up for the majority of any movie's profits. Anyway, I would be surprised if it made less than $260 million domestically with the profits of most big tent pole movies nowadays.

NFA110 | July 31, 14:42 CET

Madhatter: Why the gloom? Are you concerned how that film went over-budget? Or that you'd be depressed if "Avengers" only had Titanic-level box office and Oscars? :)

Neither actually, just an aversion to anything James Cameron and I think I'll hush right there.

Back to topic, thinking Joss will blast this one outa' the ballpark for certain, can I have a witness?

Madhatter | July 31, 14:54 CET

I have difficulty believing that number. Seems a bit of an exaggeration. Iron Man, Thor and Captain America were in the 140-160 range and Iron Man 2 was around 200. Going to 260 seems needlessly risky on the part of a studio that seems to already know what they're doing. I'll be taking this with a huge grain of salt. I suggest you all do the same.

Also, the cinematographer never says it has a $260M budget. It is a comment inserted by the author of the article with no source mentioned for the number. I certainly have no info (other than common sense) to say that it doesn't have that budget, but in no way is this a "legitimate" source.

[ edited by IrrationaliTV on 2011-08-01 00:06 ]

IrrationaliTV | July 31, 14:59 CET

Disney spent $260m on Tangled, IrrationaliTV.

gossi | July 31, 15:12 CET

Maybe, but that doesn't mean they will spend that on this one. And maybe they will. My issue is with saying this number is "legitimate" simply because some dude from fuji film magazine typed it. That doesn't make it true. Unless of course this is the internet and everything on it that some dude types is true.

IrrationaliTV | July 31, 15:32 CET

Yeah. Also, Iron Man 2 was 160 with just RDJ and some Iron Man FX. Incredible Hulk was 150 with just the Hulk FX and Norton. Avengers is Downey, Jackson, Hemsworth, Johansson, Renner, and Evans's salaries, the FX for Hulk, Iron Man, Mjolnir, Cap's Shield, and Hawkeye's arrows plus whoever is the villain (probably the shapeshifting Skrulls or something equally CG heavy).

I think if you're Marvel Studios, the past 5 years has been all leading up to Avengers, and you save all your money to pour into this one project. By all rights, this should be the biggest budget they've ever attempted and their biggest returns. In the small teaser they've released, even the hair and makeup departments seem to have a larger budget. I think this is gonna do for Joss what Star Trek did for JJ Abrams.

PuppetDoug | July 31, 15:32 CET

Kevin Feign has recently said The Avengers will cost more than anything they've done before, and Iron Man 2 came in at around $200m. I don't see $260m as being outside the ballpark. I imagine it will be cheaper due to tax breaks.

gossi | July 31, 15:36 CET

As someone mentioned, we should take this news with a grain of salt. No disrespect, dannyrobertson, but that figure does raise some eyebrows including me with my jiggling half glass (full!) of water.

I'm still standing by my care of the llamas. :)

Madhatter | July 31, 16:06 CET

Cost of producing the Avengers? $260 million.

Cost of a matinee ticket? $8.

Seeing the final product all assembled AND written AND directed by Joss? Fucking priceless.

Squishy | July 31, 17:00 CET

If it wasn't Marvel/Disney, I'd expect it to be more in this day and age. 260m sounds about right.

bobw1o | July 31, 17:29 CET

Sounds plausible. And kind of scary.

Effulgent | July 31, 23:31 CET

I'm not too worried. Unless it gets horrible reviews maybe. People I know who are entirely not up on the geekfest that is this film have already heard of it (not due to any action on my part) and we're what... 9 months away from release? By the time it hits, I'm sure it will have been hyped enough.

Mitholas | July 31, 23:32 CET

Whether it is $150M or $300M there is no reason to be worried. That is ridiculous. Marvel totally knows what they are doing whether it is Disney or Paramount, Joss, Favreau or Branagh. Worry is not an issue. The movie will perform well. There is a winning formula at work here.

IrrationaliTV | August 01, 00:35 CET

If Iron Man 2 got 200mil I am not surprised this one may get 250+. like it was mentioned earlier they have been building up to this for like 5 years now, Marvel wants it to be huge. and even after the star budget, i cant wait to see how much awesome Joss will buy with that

Canis_Latrans | August 01, 04:28 CET

The official number, unprecedented in Hollywood blockbusting, is eleventy-billion.

Pointy | August 01, 04:57 CET

Really? I read it was eleventy-billion and free cupcakes at all times on set, to sweeten the deal.

Sunfire | August 01, 06:33 CET

Joss usually talks about the hundreds of tens of people that are fans of his work, so this movie is spending about a hundred million per movie goer (using Pointy's official number).

OneTeV | August 01, 06:36 CET

OneTeV - Yep. Why do you think ticket prices have gotten so expensive?

BillK | August 01, 06:55 CET

I think Pointy stuck the landing. I have no doubt that this movie's production costs + marketing could equal that kind of figure, but I also have no doubt it'll do just fine once the international take and DVD/Blu-Ray numbers all come in. Now more than ever, these films are made for the world, not just the U.S., and this will do boffo worldwide box office.

MrArg | August 01, 08:26 CET

Maybe that figure includes marketing costs.

According to imdb the budget is $150 million, but that might not be accurate either.

So far the single most expensive film ever made (not counting inflation) is At Worlds's End at a cost of $300 million. Make of that what you will.

[ edited by Dave B on 2011-08-01 17:43 ]

Dave B | August 01, 08:40 CET

Does anyone want to hazard a guess as to how much money the Avengers will make?

Simon | August 01, 09:25 CET

If you do a google search for budget and Avengers, there's been quite a few numbers that have popped up over time. Previously $170 million was one of the more popular numbers, which seemed a bit on the small side, and $260 seems a bit on the larger side of things. Perhaps it's right, but I would still take it with a grain of salt.

Matt_Fabb | August 01, 09:29 CET

Does anyone want to hazard a guess as to how much money the Avengers will make?

Spider-Man 3 is the biggest Marvel movie to date making $890 million world wide. For Marvel Studios, it's been Iron Man 2 with $622 million. So perhaps Avengers might be able to surpass that in the area of $700 million? That said, studios share profits with theatres and typically don't retail as much of the profits in domestic (US & Canada) versus other places in the world because of the distributors get a bigger cut elsewhere. So a $700 million movie might only be breaking even if it costs $260 million to make.

Matt_Fabb | August 01, 09:54 CET

Let's not underestimate the movie's potential to open big with the grossly underserved Skrull audience. And with tight and shiny fetishists, though admittedly there's some overlap.

Pointy | August 01, 09:55 CET

Matt_Fabb, theater receipts is only the first revenue stream for a film. After it comes VOD, DVD and BD, the pay cable rights, basic cable rights, network broadcast rights, international broadcast rights (in every separate country) consumer products, netflix streaming... (I'm sure there are streams I am missing). If this made anywhere in the $600 is range for WW Box office, I'm sure everyone involved will be thrilled.

IrrationaliTV | August 01, 11:49 CET

Matt_Fabb: You mentioned that SM3 was the biggest earner? That matches up with a pet theory that these franchises are heavily influenced by the previous movie in the series. SM2 was a great superhero film, so it lured audiences to see the lesser third film (which salted the earth for the next SpiderMan film). X-Men3 built on the goodwill of X2, but X3 was an albatross for the movie that came out this summer.

I think Avengers will make good money, largely due to the solid reputation that Marvel films has going, and the good/decent movies from this summer (Thor, Cap). If things work out for Joss (movies have their own life) and it blows away reviewers next summer, then all bets are off.

OneTeV | August 01, 14:05 CET

How's this for a shocking, but probably true, prediction. The Avengers will cost more and make more than all of Joss's other works combined (comics, movies, TV, web series) have cost and made. (Not counting stuff like Toy Story and Speed, where he's not credited as being the main creative force.)

I'm just guessing of course, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Squishy | August 01, 19:39 CET

Squishy: I'm not sure it even beats Buffy. Seven seasons, 144 episodes. IMDB listed the budget as "$2.3M (per episode: 2001 season) (estimated)". Even if that number is 2.0 instead of 2.3, that's a lot of episodes. Even if they are comparable, then add on 5 seasons of Angel (110 episodes at "$2M (per episode) (estimated)").

OneTeV | August 02, 04:17 CET

Wow, I had no idea it cost nearly that much per episode. I stand corrected.

Squishy | August 02, 07:00 CET

@OneTeV: Presumably, however, the early seasons of Buffy were a lot less expensive than the 2001 (season 6?) episodes. Fewer (and crappier) special effects, fewer stunts, lower salaries...

I'm stunned Angel wouldn't be more expensive, even though there were fewer main characters. The show just LOOKED richer.

SpendTheNightAlone | August 02, 14:22 CET

July 31 2011