MovieChat Forums > Basic Instinct 2 (2006) Discussion > Wait, so this had a $70,000,000 budget?

Wait, so this had a $70,000,000 budget?

posted 11 years ago by RequiredFields
5 replies | jump to latest

First and foremost, I know Sharon Stone got paid $15,000,000 for the movie.

However, this is an erotic thriller, not a special effects laden sci-fi spectacle or big budget action film with a lot of property damage. How does an erotic thriller cost $70,000,000, especially one with Sharon Stone being the only household name?

I know the original Basic Instinct over $40,000,000 to make, but at least that had Michael Douglas in it, and had an A-list director at the time (Paul Verhoeven) directing it.

I'm at a loss for words how an erotic thriller cost $70,000,000 with Sharon Stone being the one household name. If it cost that much, one would think someone like Brad Pitt could be added to the cast. Although I'm sure a lot of big stars would have ran screaming in the other direction if they had read the script, but perhaps one could have taken the big paycheck, no matter the script.

There are probably other erotic thrillers with $7,000,000 or less budgets that had at least one household name or borderline household name that look as impressive, if not more impressive, than this.

Seriously, this must be the worst example of blowing a great budget I can think of.

_____________________________
I'm a heavy metal maniac.
Metal = best form of music ever

[–] james-mcluckie 10 years ago

Exactly what I thought when I saw it. I know it spent years in 'development hell' but I simply cannot fathom how it soaked up $70m.

[–] tanduylenguyen 10 years ago

Are you both kidding me? What the hell did the whole $70 million go to? Apart from Stone's vanity payment, the rest could not have gone to Morrissey as he was a virtual unknown at the time. It wasn't even a special effects laden movie in the same way that Avatar and Jurassic Park were. There are some mysteries that just seem to boggle the mind...!

[–] icechalkhands 10 years ago

I was confused by this as well. When I saw the budget I was like is this a prank. Plus don't forget to add in how much it actually grossed. Talk about a complete waste.

[–] enriquesinghjr 10 years ago

Filming in the UK is expensive.

This movie was in some sort of development/production (hell) for almost a decade, just like Superman Returns which was also in some sort of development since the late 90s and it's reported production budget came in at 230 million.

This movie had many scripts, some involving Michael Douglas's character...

Sharon Stone got 14 million... plus they are probably also adding the settlement of years before (which to this day hasn't been disclosed but she was seeking the original 14M from her first contract...) so let's say she got half of what she was asking, plus her actual salary... 7+14 = 21M.

Let's say they spent 10 million in development that adds up to 31M... and the rest they spent it on the actual movie that leaves about 39M for the rest of the movie which seems credible for this type of movie.

The original (for which she was only paid 500,000 had a 49 million budget), Sliver had a 40 million budget, Unfaithful had a 50 million budget.

[–] pgFiSheYe 8 years ago

I don't have a problem with the budget.

My issue is with the IDIOTS who invested $70M thinking they would get a nice ROI on this piece of CRAP !

Like seriously, who thought to themselves: "HMMMM... I have $70M ... what should I do with it??? OK !!! Let's do Basic Instinct 2!!! I'll prolly make $140M !!! YO! Steven !! You up to film this movie? No?? Hey, there's no need to mention my mom getting sexual intercourse. Bye. Hey Mr. Nolan! What do you think to a sequel of Basic Instinct??? What ?? I don't understand why would you rather have sex with a bull instead. Bye. Hello?? Directors Hot line?? Get me some young ambitious guy who want to make a SHTLOAD of money!!"