PSA: I thought 'The Room' was the peak of bad cinema until I saw its budget

I was watching a documentary on YouTube called 'The Disaster Artist' and they mentioned the movie cost six million dollars to make. I always assumed it was some guy's cheap home movie project, but that's real studio money. It made all the terrible green screen and weird acting choices even funnier knowing someone paid for that. Anyone else have a bad movie that's surprisingly expensive?

3 comments

3 Comments

johnh822mo ago

Nah, you're missing the point completely. That budget is what makes it a real movie and not just some joke. They spent real money on sets and film stock and a crew. That commitment to making a terrible movie seriously is the whole art of it. If it was cheap, it would just be bad. The fact that they burned six million to make it is the legendary part.

blairwhite2mo ago

Right? It hits different when you find out they actually spent real money. Makes the whole thing way more wild.

danielh816d ago

Hear me out though, I see it more like Blair does. The fact that it cost that much makes it even funnier to me, not more legitimate. Like, they had a real budget with professional lighting and sets (and a whole crew), but they still ended up with those weird plastic spoons and that ridiculous rooftop CGI. It's like watching someone try really hard to bake a fancy cake and it comes out looking like a lumpy potato. The money just adds this layer of tragic comedy to the whole thing. I don't think spending money automatically makes it art, especially when the result is that unintentionally hilarious.