Just yesterday, I was discussing the issue of ballooning budgets with you, thanks to the swelling price tag of the Film of Steel. It seems that this issue is becoming a popular one, and today Len Wiseman, director of Underworld: Evolution chimed in with his personal thoughts. He makes the observation that films such as his own- with far more modest budgets- are still competing for the same box-office dollars as the much-hyped 200 million dollars films. "it's a strange thing for me, because I'm trying to make a movie that I know is promoted and presented as [being as] big as some of those other movies." Wiseman continues by saying he'd love the chance to have a brief shoot of himself precluding his newest Underworld picture explaining to the audience that his entire film was made for the same price as the twelve minute chase scene in the Matrix 2.
I want a quick survey response to these comments; we'll call it the Cinematical Insta-Jury. The first twelve people to respond will comprise our decision making body. The issue- is Wiseman raising a fair point about the unequal box-office footing between normal films and the big budget hype-machines, or is he just a whiner who is trying to make early excuses in case his film doesn't succed? Provide any supporting arguements you like, and give me a winner or whiner verdict.
[via sci-fi wire]