« Sugar Ray Leonard biographical film | Filmstalker | Butler and Hall in Game »


Thor budget and casting

Thor.jpgMatthew Vaughn has written a short piece for The Guardian talking about his working week, and in it we get an interesting insight into the budget issues for the upcoming Thor film that he's planning to direct.

At the same time a rumour we had about the casting of Thor and his nemesis in the first film have been confirmed by the actor Kevin McKidd.

In the article on The Guardian through Rope of Silicon, Matthew Vaughn talked about a phone call he received from the studio telling him how the budget for the Thor film calculated out and what he had to get it down to, here are the figures:

"Marvel loves the script. The only problem is that it has been costed at $300m and they ask how I am going to reduce it by $150m."

Oh lord, that's a hell of a drop. However I have to wonder how it is being costed so high, are they looking at huge stars in there? I have hopes that Vaughn can bring that down though, and he should bring an interesting vision to the film. I just wish his first superhero film had been something other than Thor, something more mainstream.

I still can't believe that budget and think that the accountants have really messed up somewhere.

On the casting front we had heard the rumour that Kevin McKidd might be Thor, and then he revealed that he may not get it as the studio wants Thor to be younger.

However he has just revealed that he talked with his agent, who hadn't told him he was up for Thor, and found out that he's in the running for the baddie of the film, from CHUD.

"I phoned my agent and said 'Look, this thing's come up about how I'm going to play Thor and that it's between me and some WWF boxer (Triple H)', and he said 'Oh yeah, we've been talking to them about it.' I said 'Why didn't you tell me?' He said it's because they were really keen on me, but then they decided the vision for Thor is somebody much younger, a 20 year old actor. But there's another role in it, the other main guy, that they're thinking about me for now"

The baddie of the film is perhaps Loki, the brother of Thor and the bad guy in the script.

Well here's a way they could get the cost down, with McKidd as the baddie and a twenty year old possible newcomer as Thor, there'll be no need for huge names.

Casting aside, I still can't get over the cost that they're talking about, US $300 million? As Rope of Silicon point out, that's around the total cost of all three Spiderman films! Insane.



Why would anyone need 300 mil for a movie anyway? 150 mil makes you "superman returns" ( seriously. the other 100 mil in it's 250 mil budget were for projects that never saw the light of day. )

if you want to know how big of a budget they really need, look at any of the star wars prequels. completely greenscreen 99% cgi with big name stars. boom.

113 mil is what it took to make ROTS. marvel knows what they're doing, me thinks, in slashing this completely preposterous 300$ budget.


Add a comment


Site Navigation

Latest Stories



Vidahost image

Latest Reviews


Filmstalker Poll


Subscribe with...

AddThis Feed Button

Windows Live Alerts

Site Feeds

Subscribe to Filmstalker:

Filmstalker's FeedAll articles

Filmstalker's Reviews FeedReviews only

Filmstalker's Reviews FeedAudiocasts only

Subscribe to the Filmstalker Audiocast on iTunesAudiocasts on iTunes

Feed by email:


My Skype status


Help Out


Site Information

Creative Commons License
© www.filmstalker.co.uk

Give credit to your sources. Quote and credit, don't steal

Movable Type 3.34