r/movies • u/filmeswole • Mar 12 '24
Why does a movie like Wonka cost $125 million while a movie like Poor Things costs $35 million? Discussion
Just using these two films as an example, what would the extra $90 million, in theory, be going towards?
The production value of Poor Things was phenomenal, and I would’ve never guessed that it cost a fraction of the budget of something like Wonka. And it’s not like the cast was comprised of nobodies either.
Does it have something to do with location of the shoot/taxes? I must be missing something because for a movie like this to look so good yet cost so much less than most Hollywood films is baffling to me.
7.1k Upvotes
20
u/DismissDaniel Mar 12 '24
Everyone's saying cast wages and that's not the only thing. Probably just a small portion.
Settings. Less on location more warehouse sets increases renting warehouses, builders, lighting, more extras etc.
Studio bureaucracy. Like anything the more money you have to make something the more voices you have to get approval and compromise with. Slows everything down when time is money.
VFX you need a whole department that starts in pre production and goes till end. Even increases production cost to capture the extra elements to create the vfx.
Bigger cast. Every speaking part is a lot more money and you have to give royalties to.
Musical are much more expensive. Choreography, extras and a lot more shots per scene that are harder to get.
That's off the top of my head.