Which du think is costlier to make - an animated film or a motion piture?
By kteja_86
@kteja_86 (293)
India
May 20, 2007 10:31pm CST
I've always had this doubt in mind - Which is costlier to produce?!!? Because each one has its own advantages..motion picture requires star casting while animated requires heavy labour of the artists and technicians..
By the way,i appreciate these animated films a lot,and the hard work put into it....How about u?!
1 response
@inallduetime (741)
• United States
21 May 07
I don't see how an animated movie can be more expensive than a movie. You have location costs, travel costs, people costs, union concerns, other budget concerns, promotion costs, etc. when doing major motion pictures.
On the animated end, the set is graphically designed, so they employ graphic artists. They hire a celeb or two and use their voice and work within a budget that is considerably less (I would assume); so there is no way, that can equal the cost of doing a major motion picture.
At least that is my opinion. I know if it were me, I sure wouldn't spend as much to create "The Lion King" as opposed to creating "Mission Impossible 3"....
