A Quote by Joe Carnahan

When you're spending $200 million on a movie, you need to make $400 million to break even. It's a spectacle. — © Joe Carnahan
When you're spending $200 million on a movie, you need to make $400 million to break even. It's a spectacle.
You don't have to spend $200 million or $100 million to make a great movie.
We have so many films that we can fit into the slate a year, and we spend $100 million on those films in order to make $400 million dollars. We don't spend $20 million in hopes of eking out $40 million.
They say I'm worth either €200 million, €100 million, €50 million or €10 million, but that's something between God, the HMRC and myself.
The movie business is not about the money. Of course, you need money to make the movie. If you have a small budget, adapt yourself. Having $200 million dollars doesn't ensure that you're definitely going to make a good movie. There's so many examples that prove that.
I think 'Cyrus' has a lot of fat in it. It was a $7 million movie. If you're going to make a movie with famous people, you don't necessarily need to spend 7 million dollars. Make it for less than that, and you'll be able to sell it and make a ton more than that, and everybody shares the profits.
I bought a company in the mid-'90s called Dexter Shoe and paid $400 million for it. And it went to zero. And I gave about $400 million worth of Berkshire stock, which is probably now worth $400 billion. But I've made lots of dumb decisions. That's part of the game.
I bought a company in the mid-90s called Dexter Shoe and paid $400 million for it. And it went to zero. And I gave about $400 million worth of Berkshire stock, which is probably now worth $400 billion. But I've made lots of dumb decisions. That's part of the game.
You have these big $200 and $300 million movies with special effects, and I've always thought, 'Gee, why don't we make 30 movies instead of one $300 million movie?' Let's shake it up a bit; wouldn't that be a better bet? Evidently not.
We're trying to improve everyone. It doesn't matter if he cost £10 million, £15 million, £200 million. There is always space to do something better.
I'm projecting somewhere between 100 million and 200 million computers on the Net by the end of December 2000, and about 300 million users by that same time.
100 million dollars used to be the limit of what a movie might cost; now they routinely cost 300 million. Sooner or later, spectacle is just going to have to find a new way to exist.
What's interesting as a director, and even studio executives don't understand this, is that if you're directing a $200 million movie with six million people, it's the same as directing a $25,000 movie with three people. The director's job is, "You stand there and do that," or "This is the shot I want." The logistics change, but the job remains the same. And I enjoy the job.
The million, million, million ... to one chance happens once in a million, million, million ... times no matter how surprised we may be that it results in us.
People call me a movie star. If you're in the business, a movie star is someone who can make a film bankable. My name and $6 million will make a $6 million movie. I'm a working actor. Because I started late, I had a very short run as a leading man, and my films didn't make money in America.
Here's a guy that inherited $200 million. If he hadn't inherited $200 million, you know where Donald Trump would be right now?
Nowadays, you have to sell, like, half a million or a million records just to break even.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!