Disney poured nearly $600 million into 'Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker,' a film so divisive it left fans wondering: Was it all worth it? The answer, as you'll see, is far more complicated than a simple 'yes' or 'no.'
For years, the estimated budget for the final installment of the 'Star Wars' sequel trilogy hovered around $275 million – a staggering sum in itself. But new reports reveal a much larger figure. According to Forbes, the gross spending on 'The Rise of Skywalker' reached a mind-boggling $593.7 million. But here's where it gets controversial... that's before accounting for some significant tax breaks.
Thanks to tax credits from the U.K. government, Disney received a reimbursement of $103.8 million, bringing the net budget down to $489.9 million. Even with the rebate, this puts 'Rise of Skywalker' in the running for one of the most expensive movies ever made, rivaling J.J. Abrams' own 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens' ($447 million) and 'Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom' ($465 million). It's important to note that all these figures are estimates based on available data.
Why the secrecy around film budgets? Studios prefer to keep these numbers under wraps. In the U.S., film costs are usually bundled into a company's overall quarterly expenses. However, accessing U.K. tax credits requires detailed documentation. Studios often create separate companies for each production to track expenses meticulously. These reports eventually become public, revealing the true cost of these massive projects. And this is the part most people miss... these tax breaks are designed to encourage film production in the UK, providing jobs and boosting the local economy.
Franchise budgets have been spiraling out of control for years, making it tough to turn profit. A $200 million budget barely raises an eyebrow these days, but nearly $600 million? That's an entirely different level of spending!
While ideally, no movie should require half a billion dollars to produce, Disney likely still profited from 'Rise of Skywalker.' The film grossed over $1 billion worldwide. Given that theaters typically retain about half of ticket sales, Disney earned upwards of $500 million from the theatrical release alone. Blu-ray/DVD sales, streaming revenue, and merchandise sales further contributed to the film's profitability.
However, it's important to remember that 'Rise of Skywalker' was profitable despite its exorbitant budget, not because of it. Consider Rian Johnson's 'Star Wars: The Last Jedi,' which earned $1.33 billion worldwide with a reported budget of $260 million. While still a considerable sum, it pales in comparison to 'Rise of Skywalker.' The problem with 'The Last Jedi' was its polarizing reception, which caught Disney and Lucasfilm off guard.
In response, J.J. Abrams returned to direct 'Rise of Skywalker,' aiming to course-correct. However, the film proved to be just as divisive as its predecessor. The fact that Disney spent nearly $600 million trying to appease fans is staggering. Really, it's hard to imagine any studio would spend so recklessly on a single movie.
Ultimately, the investment paid off on paper. But that's it. It is on paper. Maybe not by much, but it paid off nonetheless. The underlying issue is that a movie grossing over $1 billion should generate a substantial profit for the studio. There shouldn't be a situation where such a successful film barely breaks even. One can only hope that upcoming projects like 'The Mandalorian and Grogu' and 'Star Wars: Starfighter' maintain more reasonable budgets.
Does the potential for high profits justify such enormous spending on a single film? Or should studios prioritize responsible budgeting, even if it means sacrificing some visual spectacle? What do you think? Let us know your thoughts in the comments!
