Warner Bros. tried to push "Beetlejuice Beetlejuice" to streaming on Max, but Tim Burton refused and agreed to make the film for cheaper.
  • reddig33@lemmy.worldEnglish
    56·
    2 months ago

    Takeaway message — if you want your work shown in theaters, don’t sell your production to Warner-Discovery.

    • TheImpressiveX@lemmy.mlOPEnglish
      50·
      2 months ago

      I’ll do you one better - if you want your work to see the light of day at all, don’t sell your production to Warner-Discovery, as it might get cancelled for a tax writeoff.

  • BruceTwarzen@lemm.eeEnglish
    262·
    2 months ago

    The fact that 100million dollars is a low budget movie now somehow is mind blowing to me.

      • cabbage@piefed.social
        2·
        2 months ago

        I guess it might be relatively low for the sequel to a cult classic made by a famous director and with a star spangled cast. A lot of directors probably wouldn’t limit themselves when they know they don’t have to.

  • 4grams@awful.systemsEnglish
    11·
    2 months ago

    good, I’m glad. I saw it in the theater and the biggest thing I took away from it was an appreciation for not having overdone it. just a fun, nostolgic take on an old halloween classic with ultimately low stakes. hit just the right note as far as I’m concerned.

    still 100 million is a lowered budget. sheesh.

    • cabbage@piefed.social
      4·
      2 months ago

      Exactly. Nothing about the original screams blockbuster, and nothing about the new one (except maybe some of the casting) does either. It’s just a really fun and, in my opinion, overall great movie. There’s nothing $50 million could have done to improve upon it. And it is absolutely worth seeing in a cinema.

  • whotookkarl@lemmy.worldEnglish
    71·
    2 months ago

    It seems like the money laundering that has infested classical art has inevitably spread to movie and TV seasons, over 100 million budgets what the fuck

      • whotookkarl@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        2 months ago

        I guess so and inflation threw off my intuition since the rate keeps accelerating. Cleopatra in '63 for 31 million would be over 301 million today in inflation adjusted dollars, and avengers in 2012 at 220 million would be over 318 million today. It’s staggering how much less a dollar is worth today than just 12 years ago.