By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Teeqoz on 29 April 2016
Edit Thread
mountaindewslave said:
Teeqoz said:

But what I'm saying is that you have to consider some of that budget was shared between the movie and the video game. Those cutscenes would've been made for the game, even if the movie wasn't made (but maybe not quite at this quality). The story etc. would also have been written for the game either way, so some costs would've been incurred either way, thus this movie will have a lower budget than what is normal. They also borrowed models and assets from Insomniac, further reducing costs.

 

Also no way it had a 80 million budget. The last full theatrical release Rainmaker Entertainment (the company behind this) made (Escape from Planet Earth) seems like it had a similar budget to this, and that had a budget of 40 million $. No way this is far above that, if at all.

you have no idea how much CGI animated films cost. Even the most terrible ones (that look awful) often can cost 10s of milions. if this were a drawn cartoon film or claymation MAYBE it would be much lower, but anyone downplaying the investment in this is not being realistic.

We're talking about an hour and a half film. the video game will use nowhere near that many cutscenes, nor is it likely that the scenes are exact duplicates. Sony will lose money on Ratchet & Clank if it performs at all based on its reviews

Ratchet & Clank (PS4) has about two hours worth of cutscenes, those that are shared between the movie and the game are identical, and like I said, Ratchet & Clank did NOT have a higher budget than Escape from Planet Earth. Certainly not more than Lego: The Movie or Minions.

 

As for how Sony will lose money on it, well they literally can't. They didn't fund it, didn't distribute it, didn't make it. They licensed the IP to Rainmaker.