MovieChat Forums > Signs (2002) Discussion > $72 million budget??

$72 million budget??


This film takes a very minimal approach to the alien invasion concept, with most of it taking place inside one house with hardly any on-screen alien action to witness. Yet, it cost nearly as much as Independence Day, which showed entire cities being immolated and hundreds upon hundreds of sets and special effects. Where did all the money go? Nowadays, Signs could've easily been made by Blumhouse for $5-$8 million. I get some money probably went to Gibson, but I still don't get it. I was thinking this cost $30 million, max.

reply

That's a great point! Never really considered how overwhelming the budget is for this. Especially, as you pointed out a heavy effects driven film can be done around 100-150M today.

Well, according to the web Mel was paid 25M plus several more million in perks including daily perDiem. Mid Night was reportedly paid 12M+ for directing and writing. And Phoenix a flat 1M. So, after that and adding an extra 2M for other actors and miscellaneous perks for Mel, Night and Phoenix that leaves 32M.

Yes, 32M is a lot for a production of this size. But keep in mind this was tent-pole movie that was expected to perform very well from a large studio Touchstone(Disney). I'm sure the studio was thrilled to keep the cost under 100M and didn't squeeze the film makers for the fine details of daily film expense and post production. On top of that, heavy hitting producers such as Frank Marshall, K. Kennedy and Sam Mercer were attached and most likely drawing large checks for their services.

Could Blumhouse do this for under 10M? Easily, but they are a studio that specializes on delivering movies on a small budget and probably cut corners that the major studio's can't. And they certainly couldn't have cast Mel Gibson and M.Night in their prime for this price.

So in fairness Blumhouse 10M budget + Mel&M.Night = 47-50M and that's not adjust for inflation.

Link------
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/750x970/documents/melsigns1.gif

reply

Sounds like we found the same Reddit thread LOL.

$72 million does seem high for a film like this for sure, but it's not overwhelmingly high considering the talent involved.

In any case, with a $400+ million gross I'm sure the studio considered it money well spent. And it's a great movie. It's either my #1 or #2 M. Night movie. I never can decide between Signs and what is probably his most underrated movie, The Village.

reply

Oh man the Village. That movie gave me the worst case of goosebumps. When she finds the creature in the woods... shutter. Def underrated but I understand why some hate it.

reply

I loved the whole premise of the story. Personally, I was very sympathetic to the villagers and their wanting to reclaim a simpler life in a simpler time, though it may not have worked out exactly as they wanted it to.

I wouldn't mind trying a social experiment like that myself.

reply

On top of the very well-directed understated performances (Shyamalan's hallmark), the score for both Signs and The Village by James Newton Howard is some of the most haunting and emotionally engaging I've ever heard (even besting his own Batman Begins score, which is quite good also). He's probably my favorite composer, even edging out greats like John Williams, Howard Shore, James Horner, Jerry Goldsmith, Alan Silvestri, Phillip Glass, Michael Kamen, Hans Zimmer... okay I guess I'll stop there.

reply

I don't specifically recall the score from Signs, but I do remember thinking that compositions for The Village were quite good.

reply

Yes there are moments in The Village that are absolutely superb. Signs has some great moments in the score, but Howard knocked it out of the part with The Village (I also like his work on Unbreakable). Of the three Unbreakable is actually my favorite, movie, and I like the main them music, but as soundtracks Signs and The Village are quite good.

reply

Add advertising and marketing, which would have eaten up the difference between the $32 million remaining, less the cost for actual filmmaking.

reply

I agree with pretty much everything you said...

If I had to guess, I'd say this film was probably made for around 30 or 40 Million like you said

but Your forgetting M Night shyamalan's Salary...I tried looking up his pay but couldnt find anything, But you have to consider he was coming off The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable....I got to believe He got a Salary in the 15 to 20 Million range upfront Plus Back end

So I would guess BOTH Gibson and Shyamalan accounted for at least 30 to 40 Million of The 72 Million Budget....

If That is correct, Then The overall film itself cost around the 30 Million you were thinking(which also makes sense to me)

So It conclusion...The answer to where did all that money go, IMO Is Literally HALF went to Gibson and Shyamalan....Probably 10 to 15 Million went for Special Effects and the rest went for The Movie itself.

In 2000 to 2001 when the movie was being greenlit and made....Gibson and Shyamalan were A Listers and I've just got to believe they both got at LEAST 15 Million upfront

reply

I would never have bothered watching this movie if Mel wasn't in it. Nuff said.

reply

Hollywood accounting at work.

reply