Follow TV Tropes

Ask The Tropers

Go To

Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help. It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread for ongoing cleanup projects.

Ask the Tropers:

Trope Related Question:

Make Private (For security bugs or stuff only for moderators)

StarSword Since: Sep, 2011
30th Aug, 2023 08:01:52 AM

This page claims a budget of $15 million, so if that's even close to accurate, the film bombed hard even by arthouse standards. Not that Radcliffe likely cares, he's set for life after playing Harry Potter.

Larkmarn Since: Nov, 2010
30th Aug, 2023 08:05:49 AM

No reasonable movie could possibly have a budget of under $1. Even if Radcliffe, the biggest name was doing this for free because he thought it would be fun, even the most basic salaries would exceed that gross.

Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
Jalpo99 Since: May, 2017
30th Aug, 2023 08:10:55 AM

Guess I will take that wording for it as the closest estimate. I'll cite this thread and the source when I readd it. Thanks for the help.

Life is just a dream.
Dirtyblue929 Since: Dec, 2012
30th Aug, 2023 02:19:19 PM

^^ Just for the sake of clarity, I'm pretty sure that OP and the editor they mentioned meant "no budget was listed in the example/the budget is not known", not "the movie had no budget".

Edited by Dirtyblue929
Top