Marketing a movie like that also costs tens of millions of dollars. They take out ads in dozens of countries and run press junkets for weeks.
Oddly, marketing costs are generally not included in a movie budget; it’s accounted for separately.
Ahh, a 10-82.
No, and with any luck I’ll never know what it looks like.
Don’t studios have inventories of period clothing and whatnot for this purpose?
I understand they built an entire western town (front) and over 2 mi of railroad track to use in the filming…
That can’t have been cheap…
For that kind of dough, they’d better have had silver trailers and silver craft services.
Plus, they probably had to pay for the rights to reuse every other character Johnny Depp has played since 21 Jump street.
Hey, cocaine-fueled orgies at the director’s house don’t come cheap! And it’s Adam Sandler, so it has to be kosher cocaine 
I’m sure studios have some period clothes, but that doesn’t mean they’ll have enough or that they’ll be quite right. They can’t possibly have enough period clothes to cover all the potential period pieces- clothes would be different from the 17th, 18th, 19th century periods, and different from the different places that films are set. Even if the studio had a film that was set at the same time, but set in Britain or Europe or in an urban area in the US, the clothes would be different that what is needed in a Western. Some incorrect clothes could be used and would only be noticed by the history and fashion buffs, but probably not all of it.
Also, this movie was made by fairly powerful people, for a big budget movie. If it was a lower budget movie made by a newer director and less powerful producer, then the studio could pressure them to use props and costumes that are somewhat anachronistic, or otherwise not perfect. But Verbinski, Depp, and Bruckheimer can have costumes or props made from scratch if they don’t like what’s available in the inventory.
[QUOTE=Ranger Jeff]
There were all those dead hookers they had to disappear from Depp’s trailer/dressing room. That can get expensive…
[/QUOTE]
Affleck was in The Lone Ranger too?
I simply cannot buy the idea that period pieces can result in humongous budgets. Let’s say you need 200 extras, and they need period clothes and props. If you spend $2,000 per extra for costuming (which is very high) you’ve spent $400,000. Double that to fill in the reasonable extra props and you’ve got $800,000 - a drop in the bucket compared to $225 million.
As an example, if you look at the Western flop ‘Heaven’s Gate’ the props were meticulously selected by an obsessive director, and every prop in that movie probably didn’t add up to a fraction of the alleged $40 million budget. ON that movie is was the time it took, small scenes that should have been wrapped up by the B unit in an hour took up the whole day. time is the enemy of movie budgets, or at least it was.
If period pieces were so expensive because of props & costumes then HBO series like Deadwood and Rome would be prohibitively expensive to produce. Sets might cost more, mind you, as the series was ended because the sets were destroyed.
But costuming? I expect most studios pay more for catering than they do on costumes.
Today I suspect there is also some excessively creative accounting going on. Movie studios seem to get quite a bloat out of renting things to themselves, for example.
Try looking at the incredible number of people in the credits. Now imagine paying 500 people for the better part of a year (or more).
Rome pretty much was canceled because it was too expensive to produce. The show was set to be canceled in mid 2006, over a year before the forum set caught on fire.
Seriously, however, Adam Sandler has got to be one of the most overpaid actors ever. I haven’t seen Jack and Jill, but if it’s anything like every other Adam Sandler comedy ever made, it probably did cost about $10 million to make, or it would have if anybody other than Sandler was the star.
I always assumed a 10-82 was the code for a dead hooker in the star’s trailer, which in this case was Depp. Is it Affleck specific?
It’s pretty hard to work out how movie budgets are assigned when you see stuff like this from the Hollywood Reporter - Disney’s ‘Lone Ranger’ Could Lead to $150 Million Loss. It contains this:
*In August 2011, former Walt Disney Studios chairman Rich Ross suspended production of Lone Ranger because of concerns over the $250 million budget in the wake of box office bomb Cowboys & Aliens, also a Western.
But after Bruckheimer and Verbinski promised to scale back the budget to $215 million, Disney gave the go-ahead. *
So they had a budget that included $35,000,000 that they didn’t really need? Was it for the production drug buy perhaps?
I got the impression it was Affleck specific. Otherwise, when the call went out how would they know which trailer to send the clean up crew to? Maybe for Depp it’s a 10-82B?
All those hookers, blow, private jets, and limos can add up.
Great answers here. Two miles of track? Good LORD!