GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

The Lord Of The Rings TV's $465 Million Budget Is "Fake News," Says Former Amazon Boss

The former Amazon boss says it's "fake news."

By on

14 Comments

Sharon Tal Yguado, a former executive at Amazon Studios, has responded to the recent news about The Lord of the Rings TV show's astronomical season 1 budget. Posting on Twitter, Yguado laughed at the $465 million number for season 1, saying, "Imagine if you actually had the correct numbers and didn't report fake news."

She was seemingly reacting to the price tag and former Hollywood Reporter editor Matthew Belloni's own take on the story. He criticized the reported massive budget, saying, "Imagine if Amazon put this kind of money toward creating a world we *haven’t* already seen in six movies."

New Zealand's minister for economic development and tourism, Stuart Nash, said in an interview with Morning Report that Amazon is spending $650 million NZ ($465 million USD) for season 1 alone. The Hollywood Reporter said it was able to confirm this number.

Yguado was the Head of Genre Drama at Amazon Studios until her exit from the company in May 2019. In her role, Yguado worked on the Lord of the Rings series and was its "lead executive" since the inception, according to Deadline.

Whatever the case, Amazon is getting a special deal from the New Zealand government to help finance the Lord of the Rings TV show. The government just added another 5% rebate onto the existing 20% rebate to give Amazon more than $100 million in subsidies.

In other Lord of the Rings news, Amazon recently canceled its Lord of the Rings MMO due in part to a reported contract dispute.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 14 comments about this story
14 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for zerojuice
zerojuice

615

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By zerojuice

Since it was widely reported (even on this site) that Amazon budgeted roughly $1 billion USD for this show ($250 million USD to purchase the license rights, and $750 million USD to make six seasons); I think the numbers for season 1 ($450 million USD) are a little inflated.

The only thing I can think of is they included set building and architectural design that is to be used in every season and to then be left behind for tourism (much like the Shire from the movies).

2 • 
Avatar image for bloodbornelore
BloodborneLore

1356

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

BloodborneLore

As a traditional old-school lefty, on my world I have often complained about fake news. Here though, the narrative is the opposite and it’s the left who are the mainstream folk willing to follow each other over a cliff and it’s everyone else calling out their fake news. This universe is backwards... and why does everything look so washed with grey?

2 • 
Avatar image for zmanbarzel
ZmanBarzel

3164

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By ZmanBarzel

Gee, who to believe: New Zealand‘s minister for economic development and tourism and a well-respected journalistic outlet that confirmed the figure, or someone who hasn’t been involved with the production — hell, even with the company at all — the past two years?

6 • 
Avatar image for idakooz
idakooz

356

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By idakooz

THR hasn't provided "evidence" of this so yeah whatever. Take it with a grain of salt. But I wouldn't doubt this is costing a buttload of money either way. The license right holders of LOTR have precedent of requesting a lot of money to use their IP for media entertainment.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for naomha1
naomha1

1095

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

naomha1

Imagine a person that was actually still employed by Amazon and actually KNEW the numbers instead of telling people it's "fake news". For someone that hasn't worked for Amazon in over 2 years I'd imagine she's the first to now what the actual numbers are. Ugh. For New Zealand and the Hollywood Reporter to confirm those numbers and her to call them "fake" is annoying beyond belief. Either say they're incorrect or wrong. This whole "fake news" bs started by Trump is beyond annoying. Not everything is "fake".

3 • 
Avatar image for bloodbornelore
BloodborneLore

1356

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

BloodborneLore

@naomha1: “Fake news” as a phrase began with George W Bush and his 9/11 demolitions. Trump was merely the first politician to use the phrase. Other politicians were too afraid to speak up about anything that was fake, whilst the public pointed fingers and knew exactly what was up.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Renunciation
Renunciation

1216

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

Renunciation

@bloodbornelore: Nah. You're both wrong.

According to the BBC (and many other verifiable sources):

On 8 December 2016, Hillary Clinton made a speech in which she mentioned "the epidemic of malicious fake news and false propaganda that flooded social media over the past year."

"It's now clear that so-called fake news can have real-world consequences," she said.

...

President-elect Trump took up the phrase the following month, in January 2017, a little over a week before taking office. In response to a question, he said "you're fake news" to CNN reporter Jim Acosta. Around the same time he started repeating the phrase on Twitter.

Merriam-Webster cites examples of the phrase "fake news" being used by publications in the late 1800s.

BuzzFeed News media editor Craig Silverman is widely given credit for popularizing the term in 2014.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Pyrosa
Pyrosa

10650

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

Pyrosa

@naomha1: Interesting! If I'm reading this correctly, we have a whole group of people so vulnerable to a former butthole politician that they get triggered just by reading words he said?

Gonna start working "covfefe" into my conversations just to see what it does to people...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Pyrosa
Pyrosa

10650

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

Pyrosa

They're paying everyone in $DOGE.

...which will make the battle scenes much more impactful!

(Hooooooollllllddd!!!!)

2 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-64a3ced8b46b8
deactivated-64a3ced8b46b8

5977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

deactivated-64a3ced8b46b8

I sure wish that phrase would go away. It has such an icky connotation for me.

4 • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

19928

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

mogan  Moderator

@thecupidstunts: "Imagine if ..." or, "Fake news"? I could do without either, really.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for illegal_peanut
illegal_peanut

4194

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By illegal_peanut

@mogan: "Imagine if" should stay due to its verbal versatility. It can work in a positive way and a negative way on the fly. Like, "Imagine if blizzard entertainments never teamed up with Activision." that's an interesting thought, or "Imagine if the lord of the rings animated series from 1978, was longer and was a three-parter.". It usually causes the reader to strengthen and use their mental muscle more. And it causes people to practice pondering. Which is a good thing whoever you ask. If you don't like pondering then literally don't like anything man-made (Which everything manmade was made with pondering).

Fake news just reminds us of an angry old man, who didn't make good on any of his promises.

2 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-64a3ced8b46b8
deactivated-64a3ced8b46b8

5977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

deactivated-64a3ced8b46b8

@mogan: The latter. I know it's just semantics in the end, but that phrase just implies a level of aggression when I hear it now.

Someone could say something was reported innacurately, or incorrectly or even that it's just false, and it wouldn't really bug me at all. I guess I need to get over it. 🤷‍♀️

2 •