Resident Evil: Retribution

Brian_Rice

Carbonite Member
Not sure how many had heard of this yet. Looks like we're going to have to wait one more film before getting that franchise reboot.

Hopefully 5 films will be enough for this franchise. So far the theatrical numbers (unadjusted) have been:

Resident Evil: Budget 33 mil, 102 mil gross

Resident Evil Apoc: Budget 45 mil, 129 mil gross

Resident Evil Extinction: Budget ?, 147 mil gross

Resident Evil Afterlife: Budget 60 mil, 296 mil gross

They've consistently tripled (and with Afterlife quadrupled) budget numbers. I'm assuming that #5 will see a considerable drop off in numbers because of Afterlife's critical fails -- but then again none of the Resident Evil films have ever gotten decent reviews. Still, I'd be suprised if Milla has another one of these films in her after a 5th installment. Should be time for some new blood after this. I think most people want to see the series revamped at this point. The Paul Anderson Res Evil world is pretty much decimated. Time to respawn.

Interestingly they're bringing back Jill Valentine from Apocalypse to be in this one. Maybe we finally get a Leon intro? I'm almost hoping that they don't just so that we have *something* preserved from those earliest games.
 
Sad face!But they sure are banking.

Speaking of banking and "eh" franchises -- Fast Five is at 600 million so far. lol

So many things perplex me.

You know, I always thought the best thing for Hollywood was to make a great original film and shoot for the stars so to speak. Basically, that is how they get big classic mega blockbusters like Jaws, Star Wars, Titanic, Avatar, etc. But last night I was on Wikipedia looking at various film franchises and comparing their profitability. It never really hit me until I looked at all the various franchises as a whole, but now i finally understand why Hollywood is so obsessed with the "F" word.

It seems the strength of a franchise is that it might have a bad film out of the bunch, but it will overall level out in the long run. Besides a rare hit like Avatar (2.7 billion on a 300 million budget) or The Lord of the Rings trilogy (3 billion on about a 300 million budget but with 3 films for 100 million each), it seems most of these franchises spend approx. 300-500 million on making the films, and over the lifespan of the franchise they pretty consistently make nearly 2 billion or more total.
 
Its very weird dont you think guys ? This game had HUUUGE fanbase and they failed ! Why it did so bad is cause it didnt followed the game's plot, idiots kept the title and raped franchise.I didnt knew it did so bad at box office.I know that fans were disappointed tho.No wonder.
BTW i will never believe in avatar budget with 300 million and one location , rest is CGI,where the money went to, into sitting in front of rendering app?
 
Last edited:
I actually liked the last one....yes they ripped of a lot of stuff but Loved it none the less

por ejemplo :
resident_evil_afterlife21.jpg414e49b098.jpg
 
This is huge profits ? After deduction for adverts and screening , maybe budget was 33 for filming but how much went to the movie to get screened and advertised and then how much went to the studios, i thought it made over 200 at least because of huge fanbase but i guess it was badmouthed and fans kept watching it only because it had resident evil title and were still hoping for it to get better.
 
This is huge profits ? After deduction for adverts and screening , maybe budget was 33 for filming but how much went to the movie to get screened and advertised and then how much went to the studios, i thought it made over 200 at least because of huge fanbase but i guess it was badmouthed and fans kept watching it only because it had resident evil title and were still hoping for it to get better.

I dunno...I think maybe you're off on what you consider to be solid profits.

I don't believe any videogame film franchise or stand alone videogame film has done better than the Resident Evils (correct me if I'm wrong).

Most production companies are overjoyed to double their production budget. If they somehow manage to *triple* it that is a windfall, and a quadruple is an absolute home run.

Something like The Dark Knight's worldwide gross was a little better than five times its production budget and that put it in a pretty elite class.

Also, I think you might be overestimating the appeal of Resident Evil as a property. According to Capcom the original game to date has sold 2,750,000 units. That's since 1998. That's great for a game, but 2.75 million people paying 10 bucks to see a film is only 27 million dollars. So the fact that five, six or ten times more people went to go see the film than did people who bought the game off the shelf is pretty good IMO.

Compare that to Tomb Raider whose combined films only doubled their combined production costs. And that had a bonafied *name* attached to it.
 
Last edited:
Good posts Brian

I agree; the series is okay. The last film being one of the best in the bunch.

I thought we didn't need another ALIENS film, until I saw the latest one with Adrian Brody and I loved it; very entertaining and the best Aliens films since Cameron's IMO.

And sides, seeing Milla in anythign is always good.
 
Good posts Brian

I agree; the series is okay. The last film being one of the best in the bunch.

I thought we didn't need another ALIENS film, until I saw the latest one with Adrian Brody and I loved it; very entertaining and the best Aliens films since Cameron's IMO.

And sides, seeing Milla in anythign is always good.

You mean Predators?

I guess the two franchises have kind of intertwined. I agree, though -- it was a great installment in the franchise.
 
I thought we didn't need another ALIENS film, until I saw the latest one with Adrian Brody and I loved it; very entertaining and the best Aliens films since Cameron's IMO.

That was Predators, my man. Predators.

(And they said it was intended to be for Predator what Aliens was for Alien.)
 
Back
Top