200mln f... dollars!!! WTF!?

Yeah, this had a high budget. I think they expected to start a Prince Of Persia franchise like Pirates Of The Carribean. But, since this movie didn't do well domestically in the box office, I doubt we'll see a sequel.

I have to say, when I think of movie production costs it reminds me why a familiar scene we remember from our childhood is seeing those FBI Warnings when we put a disk in, no matter what the movie is. Just how movie's cost a lot to make, and the studio needs money. But, I feel like a lot of movies could do things to lower their budgets, as some really good movies with nice effects have low budgets.

Prince of Persia was 150 million, but here's the thing, when you push your release date forward a full year and currency exchange rates don't agree with you, then that 150 million slowly becomes 200 million.

Basically Prince of Persia went into production with a 150 million budget in 2008. The movie was supposed to come out summer 2009, but was pushed back a year so as to not rush post-production and go over-budget too much, like they did a year prior on Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, which escalated from 200 million all the way to 300 million.

So in their attempt to delay the movie a year to keep the budget in check, they actually threw another 50 million on top because if you remember, that's when the dollar was really losing ground to the British pound, and PoP was mostly filmed in the UK, at Pinewood.

A string of bad luck (financial crisis), production problems, bad management, stupidly expensive sets (some barely used in the movie because of massive rewrites very late in development) and something like 6 months at Pinewood, where historically budgets go to die ended up pushing this to $200 million.

Prince of Persia is now a cautionary tale for Disney and other studios of how to NOT manage your budget on a big production. Suffice to say they've gotten much better at this in the last 5 years.

http://filmonic.com/ Molesting your film shaft