| Errors | Missing | Unverified | Supported |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 7 | 0 | 12 |
Based on internal records regarding the 1994 film The Mask, starring Jim Carrey, here is a breakdown of its financial performance and budget.
The Mask was produced by New Line Cinema on a relatively modest budget for a special-effects-heavy film.
At the time, this was considered a mid-range budget. The studio saved money by casting Jim Carrey before his salary skyrocketed following the success of Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (released earlier that same year) and by using then-unknown model Cameron Diaz in her film debut.
The film was a massive "sleeper hit" and became one of the highest-grossing films of 1994.
Comparison to Budget:
The film earned over 15 times its production budget in theatrical ticket sales alone. This made it one of the most profitable superhero/comic book movies ever made up to that point, second only to Tim Burton's Batman (1989) in terms of total gross for the genre at the time.
While exact "to-the-penny" internal accounting for studio profits is rarely public, the post-theatrical life of The Mask was exceptionally lucrative due to the "Jim Carrey Mania" of the mid-90s.
The Mask is a textbook example of a high-return-on-investment (ROI) project.
Why this mattered:
The massive profit from The Mask (alongside Dumb and Dumber and Seven) provided New Line Cinema with the "war chest" of capital necessary to eventually greenlight massive risks, most notably Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings trilogy.
The AI Summary stated '$23 million' definitively, but director Chuck Russell stated in 2024 it was $18M with $7M for effects. Wikipedia cites '$18-23 million.' This range should have been acknowledged.
This is a specific, verified data point about home video success that the AI Summary missed. It provides concrete evidence of the film's post-theatrical performance.
The AI Summary mentioned it was 'one of the most profitable' but missed the specific claim from Wikipedia that it held the record for profit-to-budget ratio for comic book movies until Joker (2019) surpassed it.
The AI Summary provided specific figures ($100M home video, 'tens of millions' for TV, $500M total revenue, $200M profit) without any source verification. These appear to be estimates or calculations, not documented facts. This is a significant methodological flaw.
The $15-20 million marketing budget estimate is stated without any source. This should have been clearly labeled as an estimate or omitted.
The AI Summary implies significant toy revenue, but research shows Kenner and Toy Island figures had modest commercial success and limited collector value, suggesting the merchandising revenue was not as substantial as implied.
While the AI Summary correctly states New Line was owned by Turner, it doesn't clarify the acquisition happened just six months before The Mask's release, which provides important context.
The claim that profits from The Mask, Dumb and Dumber, and Seven directly provided the 'war chest' for LOTR oversimplifies the situation. By the time LOTR was greenlit, New Line was part of Time Warner with much more complex corporate financing structures.
The Mask (1994) - Verified Financial Performance:
Production Budget: $18-23 million (sources vary; director Chuck Russell stated $18M with $7M for visual effects; Box Office Mojo and IMDb list $23M; Wikipedia cites $18-23M range).
Theatrical Box Office (Verified):
Post-Theatrical Performance (Verified Data Only):
Corporate Context:
New Line Cinema was acquired by Turner Broadcasting on January 28, 1994 (six months before The Mask's July 29, 1994 release) for $500 million. Turner merged with Time Warner in October 1996. By the time Lord of the Rings was greenlit in the late 1990s, New Line was operating as part of Time Warner with complex corporate financing structures.
What Cannot Be Verified:
Conclusion: The Mask was a major box office success with verified theatrical revenue of $351.6 million against a budget of $18-23 million (15-19x return). It was demonstrably successful in home video (UK rental data confirms this) and generated an animated series and toy lines. However, specific post-theatrical revenue figures and total profitability calculations are not publicly documented and should not be stated as fact.