6 ms·

As long as we're talking money and priorities: The budget for the film Gravity was $100 million dollars. Sending this Indian probe to Mars cost $69 million dol

As long as we're talking money and priorities: The budget for the film Gravity was $100 million dollars. Sending this Indian probe to Mars cost $69 million dollars.

jonmrodriguez 13y ago
Wow
LionRoar 13y ago
I like these kinds of perspectives :)
slig 13y ago
Not a fair comparison. They spent $100MM on a movie knowing that they will net $X00MM in profits.
- wonderzombie 13y ago
  Could you explain how or why this is unfair? I don't think the OP was suggesting that Gravity's expenditure was therefore not worthwhile. If anything, your comment adds further weight to the comparison by illustrating the scale of a major motion picture in terms of expenditure and profit.
  - rikacomet 13y ago
    Science cannot be bought in the store, you don't have a market of people willing to pay you back. Its not constantly craved by humans unlike entertainment. And it is not limited to general rules of business, specially when we are going beyond our abilities, and stretching them even further. For example, ISRO have never had a engine before that could re-ignite after a 300 days period of cryogenic conditions of space. That technology developed in extreme conditions can be reverse engineered to make our cars perform better in winters. Or some other applications. Does that sort of returns even get reported ever?
- mtgx 13y ago
  Don't be silly. Hollywood's movies are never profitable - if you check their accounting books at least. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
- kamakazizuru 13y ago
  yes - and so will ISRO - with its private company Antrix - its already making money launching spaceships for telecoms companies and other non-spacefaring nations. the mars mission if you will - is just a slightly more expensive Marketing move - showing clients what they can do. So its a very fair comparison!
melling 13y ago
Yes, but Gravity has earned over $218 million dollars so far so if they had made Gravity, they'd now have their money back plus another $200-$300 million dollars. Bollywood should make a few American films every year or so. Where's the Pixar of India? A better argument might be that a country needs to develop other industries and gain certain expertises. There's no point in having all the IIT's, if people have to leave the country to use their abilities. Space, rocketry, satellites, etc are upmarket skills.
- dman 13y ago
  Science has trickle down effects in terms of know how filtering into industry to solve real world problems.
- kamakazizuru 13y ago
  1) a large number of big budget animation and non-animation movies that use large amounts of SFX actually get their animation work done in India nowadays. 2) the logic of your argument fails anyways - they proved to the world - that they can send a spaceship to mars - they already launch satellites for other countries - and make a shit ton of money on it - their people are learning to make spaceships that can go into deep space - an industry that if anything is also growing in the private sector - they did the whole thin for the cost of a few hundred javelin missiles that the US army has been using to kill arguably mostly civilians in Afghanistan (and dont tell me the US has money - you know the debt ceiling fight recently? That was the US agreeing to borrow more money). there is almost 0 wrong with this mission.
- DanBC 13y ago
  > Bollywood should make a few American films every year or so. Where's the Pixar of India? What? Indian cinema gross box office for 2011 was $1.1billion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_cinema https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_cinema > India is the world's largest producer of films.[23][24] In 2009, India produced a total of 2961 films on celluloid, that include 1288 feature films.[25] The provision of 100% foreign direct investment has made the Indian film market attractive for foreign enterprises such as 20th Century Fox, Sony Pictures, Walt Disney Pictures[26][27] and Warner Bros..[28]
aaron695 13y ago
The price of a cup of coffee(for everyone in the US) would be around 600 million :) So it's less than the price of a cup of coffee really.
Intermernet 13y ago
I agree with your premise, but a possibly better example would be the 2011 movie "Mars Needs Mums". [1] "The film was a commercial failure, and is the biggest box office bomb in history, grossing only about $39 million on a budget of $150 million." It's also, coincidentally a Mars reference :-) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Needs_Moms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Needs_Moms

As long as we're talking money and priorities: The budget for the film Gravity was $100 million dollars. Sending this Indian probe to Mars cost $69 million dollars.

jonmrodriguez 13y ago

Wow

LionRoar 13y ago

I like these kinds of perspectives :)

slig 13y ago

Not a fair comparison. They spent $100MM on a movie knowing that they will net $X00MM in profits.

wonderzombie 13y ago
Could you explain how or why this is unfair? I don't think the OP was suggesting that Gravity's expenditure was therefore not worthwhile. If anything, your comment adds further weight to the comparison by illustrating the scale of a major motion picture in terms of expenditure and profit.
- rikacomet 13y ago
  Science cannot be bought in the store, you don't have a market of people willing to pay you back. Its not constantly craved by humans unlike entertainment. And it is not limited to general rules of business, specially when we are going beyond our abilities, and stretching them even further. For example, ISRO have never had a engine before that could re-ignite after a 300 days period of cryogenic conditions of space. That technology developed in extreme conditions can be reverse engineered to make our cars perform better in winters. Or some other applications. Does that sort of returns even get reported ever?
mtgx 13y ago
Don't be silly. Hollywood's movies are never profitable - if you check their accounting books at least. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
kamakazizuru 13y ago
yes - and so will ISRO - with its private company Antrix - its already making money launching spaceships for telecoms companies and other non-spacefaring nations. the mars mission if you will - is just a slightly more expensive Marketing move - showing clients what they can do. So its a very fair comparison!

melling 13y ago

Yes, but Gravity has earned over $218 million dollars so far so if they had made Gravity, they'd now have their money back plus another $200-$300 million dollars. Bollywood should make a few American films every year or so. Where's the Pixar of India? A better argument might be that a country needs to develop other industries and gain certain expertises. There's no point in having all the IIT's, if people have to leave the country to use their abilities. Space, rocketry, satellites, etc are upmarket skills.

dman 13y ago
Science has trickle down effects in terms of know how filtering into industry to solve real world problems.
kamakazizuru 13y ago
1) a large number of big budget animation and non-animation movies that use large amounts of SFX actually get their animation work done in India nowadays. 2) the logic of your argument fails anyways - they proved to the world - that they can send a spaceship to mars - they already launch satellites for other countries - and make a shit ton of money on it - their people are learning to make spaceships that can go into deep space - an industry that if anything is also growing in the private sector - they did the whole thin for the cost of a few hundred javelin missiles that the US army has been using to kill arguably mostly civilians in Afghanistan (and dont tell me the US has money - you know the debt ceiling fight recently? That was the US agreeing to borrow more money). there is almost 0 wrong with this mission.
DanBC 13y ago
> Bollywood should make a few American films every year or so. Where's the Pixar of India? What? Indian cinema gross box office for 2011 was $1.1billion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_cinema https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_cinema > India is the world's largest producer of films.[23][24] In 2009, India produced a total of 2961 films on celluloid, that include 1288 feature films.[25] The provision of 100% foreign direct investment has made the Indian film market attractive for foreign enterprises such as 20th Century Fox, Sony Pictures, Walt Disney Pictures[26][27] and Warner Bros..[28]

aaron695 13y ago

The price of a cup of coffee(for everyone in the US) would be around 600 million :) So it's less than the price of a cup of coffee really.

Intermernet 13y ago

I agree with your premise, but a possibly better example would be the 2011 movie "Mars Needs Mums". [1] "The film was a commercial failure, and is the biggest box office bomb in history, grossing only about $39 million on a budget of $150 million." It's also, coincidentally a Mars reference :-) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Needs_Moms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Needs_Moms