this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
214 points (98.6% liked)

Star Wars

4889 readers
20 users here now

Discussion for all things Star Wars. Movies, books, games, TV shows and more are welcome.

1. Keep it civil.

2. Keep it Star Wars related.

3. No memeposts. Memes are great and everybody loves them, but there is already !starwarsmemes@lemmy.world for those.

Community icon art from DeviantArt user DavidDeb.

Banner art by Ralph McQuarrie.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I dunno. Leave it be hopefully. The show just looked really cheap. Their clothes looked like costumes instead of actual clothes. Not to mention how poor the makeup was for everyone.

Maybe I just prefer quality over quantity.

[–] golli@lemm.ee 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And yet it carried a $180m budget, more than something like dune part 1 (and slightly less than part 2).

[–] pixel_prophet@lemm.ee 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

There is probably a lot of creative accounting happening with a lot of those types of numbers. Any Disney + ad that has something to do with the Acolyte probably gets counted in that total. Countless examples of movies and shows with way smaller budgets that end up looking a lot better than most of the recent Disney slop.

[–] golli@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago

I guess marketing getting rolled into that number, as opposed to movie budgets where it is usually separate could make up for it. Or it includes lots of long-term investments similar to the huge stage surrounded by screens ("the volume") that they used for the mandalorian. Although I am not aware that acolyte did something like that.

Countless examples of movies and shows with way smaller budgets that end up looking a lot better than most of the recent Disney slop.

Yeah, but that just goes to prove that money doesn't solve every problem. It didn't fix the writing either. The spending part is easy enough.