Top Stories

Robert Pattinson On Set of 'Cosmopolis'!

Robert Pattinson On Set of 'Cosmopolis'!

Robert Pattinson suits up as he walks to the set of his new film, Cosmopolis, on Sunday (May 29) in Toronto, Canada.

The 24-year-old Twilight star filmed scenes with his co-stars Sarah Gadon and Kevin Durand at a local diner.

Robert is playing Eric Packer, a “financial wunderkind,” in the film based on Don DeLillo‘s novel of the same name.

The David Cronenberg-directed drama will hit theaters sometime next year!

10+ pictures inside of Robert Pattinson on the set of Cosmopolis

Just Jared on Facebook
robert pattinson on set of cosmopolis 01
robert pattinson on set of cosmopolis 02
robert pattinson on set of cosmopolis 03
robert pattinson on set of cosmopolis 04
robert pattinson on set of cosmopolis 05
robert pattinson on set of cosmopolis 06
robert pattinson on set of cosmopolis 07
robert pattinson on set of cosmopolis 08
robert pattinson on set of cosmopolis 09
robert pattinson on set of cosmopolis 10

Credit: O\\\\\\\'Neill/White; Photos: INFdaily
Posted to: Robert Pattinson

JJ Links Around The Web

  • Khloe Kardashian is officially back in LA - TMZ
  • Lucy Hale is opening up about her sexual assault - Just Jared Jr
  • Bachelor in Paradise's Ashley Iaconetti and Jared Haibon are engaged - TooFab
  • Tiffany Haddish recycles her Alexander McQueen gown at the MTV Awards - The Hollywood Reporter
  • Lili Reinhart saved Madelaine Petsch from a wardrobe malfunction - Just Jared Jr
  • jane

    awwwwwwwww hot!!

  • @92

    I dont care how the money gets distributed out the fact remains it made 70 million dollars so far. That my friend is a success. You claim that industry people know wfe is a failure…I’m still waiting for even one person in the industry to make such a claim. You seem to be very alone on that one!! Just face it…it did very well. Good for them!

  • Jenna

    Looking forward to seeing what Cronenberg, Robert and the rest of the cast do with Cosmopolis! Excited!

  • @102

    One more time….
    It DID NOT make 70 million for the studio. That’s what counts as being successful or not. The more you repeat that, the more ridiculous you sound.
    And the industry has said that it was not a success.
    The numbers come from the industry. They don’t lie, no matter how badly you want them to.
    And to the other posters…
    Mr. Miranda Kerr?
    I doubt that an actor who has worked with some of the greatest directors around, and one who is still popular after not being on the big screen for four years is considered to be anyone but Mr. Orlando Bloom. Well, except for a few haters out there who will never forgive him for getting married.
    BTW, Rio is also considered a disappoinment. That was a really bad example.

  • Tess

    Is he still around? Wasn’t he so 2010?

  • silvie

    I applaud Rob for working hard at evolvoing as an actor. He is already great and will only get better with each role he takes. I loved WFE, Remember Me and though I found The Haunted Airman to be a bit disturbing his acting was great. His performance in Little Ashes was also believable. And of course I loved him in Twilight. I wish him huge success.

  • @104

    You keep saying the industry says it wasnt a success yet you can not show me one person in the industry who has said so. They must only exist in your head. You may think you are some box office analyst and industry expert but you’re not! I will take their information over yours any day and they agree with me and most other people in the World that WFE was a success! You may not like it but there is no need to lie about it. If you break down every film income like you have done then not many movies are a success then are they? That just goes to show that you do not know what you are talking about and are not the expert you think you are! It makes no sense whatsoever!

  • @107

    Numbers don’t lie.
    It’s not a little indie that studios use as tax write-offs. It had a fairly substantial budget for the type of movie it was. The studio expected to make money. It expected to capitalize on the popularity of its cast. Rob’s fans went, and a few people who loved the book, but no one else did.
    It has not made money for the studio, therefore it is NOT a success.
    You guys are failing math, aren’t you.

  • @108

    Seriously…do you break down every movie like this in your special way to make them all failures or just the ones that you dont want to be a success?? Never mind…I already know the answer to that!!! Look…we get it…you’ve convinced yourself that you know better than actual professionals on the matter and thats great for you…arrogance can be a good thing…but we get it. You know this better than everyone else and you know that better than everyone else…your numbers dont lie.. blah blah blah!! Now can you change the record because its pretty boring now!!

  • @109

    You fans brought this upon yourselves.
    Claiming success where there is none, and comparing him to Leo.
    A bit of realism is good for you.
    Admit that his movie did not make a profit for the studio, therefore cannot be considered a success, and we will stop bombarding you with the TRUTH.
    You sopund like a bunch is six year olds with their fingers stuck in their ears.
    It’s ridiculous!

  • http://AOL libby

    @Ana: Robert Pattinson is so hot, he could melt the ice in Alaska….

    I see that Taylor L is getting a little attention since Robert
    is out of town…..

    Personally I dont care for Taylor, reminded me of a little puppy
    following K around in all of the movies, and did he reallly
    think he was going to get the girl…..give me a break..

    If it wasnt for his muscles there’s not much left, he is a very
    short guy and I dont believe leading man material…..

    Remember to vote for Rob for the MTV AWARDS….

  • @110

    Thanks for the dose of “your” realism but no thanks!!!!!! We can claim success because there is success according to the actual professionals…your analysis of the industry does not hold much weight on the matter except maybe to yourself! Anyway…bombard away if you feel the need but my God I dont know why you bother…nobody here cares what you have to say about it because we can all make up our owns minds and look at professional analysis of the situation. You are just an annoying broken record at this stage but thats probably a compliment to you! I doubt you have anything new to say so it will just be more of the same from you…great! I look forward to it! Blah blah blah!

  • *eyeroll*

    Never mind.
    I forgot that I was dealing with children.
    Children ignore facts. And they certainly don’t seem to understand basic math.
    Facts are facts. And they don’t go away, even if you try to ignore them.

  • @113

    Exactly…facts are facts. You’re version of the “facts” however are not!

  • honest question

    How can you ignore box office numbers?
    I think that is what people are talking about.
    Having a movie do ‘better than expected’ is not saying that it was successful.
    Bottom line = the movie did not make any money for the studio.
    All the talk about percentages is basically correct, except that on average, the studio gets 55% of the domestic take, not 50%. But they still make hardly anything from ‘overseas’ markets.
    If you want industry confirmation, just go to Box Office Mojo.
    At the very bottom of the page that lists the box-office results, there is a note stating this fact.

  • @115

    So by your analysis nearly every movie brought out every year is a failure and makes no money for the studio. I’m sorry but thats just ridiculous! The whole industry would have collapsed a long time ago if that was the case! A hell of a lot of movies dont make anywhere near the 70 million profit wfe has so far. Are they all failures then. No. Of course they make money from international box office. A substantial amount. People in the industry and FOX have been very happy with the box office revenue so far from wfe… making it a success!

  • Svetlana

    Go Rob. I wish you continued success and much love and happiness.

  • @116

    Please look up the word “profit”.
    While you are at it, look up ‘net’ and ‘gross’.
    I know you are young, but this will help you later in life.

  • Shaking head

    Can you bring in a quote from a box office analyst or the studio head from Fox who made WFE and quote him that the movie bomb? Just one, not even a dozen. i just need one. Fine the numbers say it all for you, but couldn’t you find even one person who agree with your analysis? Or is it so apparent that people don’t even need to comment it? According to your delusional logic. For the record, box office analysts said the movie performed well above expectations, meaning $ucce$$. YOU are not a box office analyst. YOU obviously know that just looking at the net profit isn’t how it works. Yet you have this weird formula that you took from no where and applied it to the film, and only you claim it is unsuccessful based on this formula you assume is right (give me a source of where you got this formula from?) You don’t know $hit about how the money is distributed between studios, theater owners and overseas distributors. Those are insider information and is confidential. A written contract is pulled out ahead of time outlining the distribution of box office earnings each week, usually the studios get a larger percentage the early weeks, and the later weeks the theater owners. Every movie, the contract and negotiation is different, there is no set numbers and you don’t know when it crosses over. You are ASSUMING that it is 50/50 studio and theater owners, with NO international box office profit (dumb). Rio debut at number one, it is successful. Please tell me your profession. Are you an unemployed uni student majoring in something completely unrelated to film? And your source of information is justjared comments or other gossip site comments? I bet you are digesting what I’m saying now and taking it as fact, just like how you expect us to do the same for your dumb anaylsis, when clearly the numbers show WFE made 70 million profit. The world needs to know who is taking on the expert opinion and going around screaming the movie is not a success based on box office gross and net earnings… it made 70 million profit from $38 million budget for a total of 107 million. So the numbers show that it did NOT lose money. Box office watchers said it performed better than expected, and considering Pattinson the lead from Twilight and two Oscar winners starred in the movie, that is HUGE.

  • Haha

    umm 70 million net profit, 107 million gross profit. DUMBA$$. (Harry Potter fans suck).

  • @120

    Oh my. I really worry for our school system.
    Using your numbers (which are not accurate BTW)
    Gross domestic = 54.4 million
    Gross worldwide = 107 million
    Net = gross MINUS expenses
    Net profit domestically = 29.92 (after theaters take their cut)
    Plus the 5-10% taken from overseas of appx 53million = 5.3 million profit .
    29.92+5.3 = 35.22 PROFIT
    But it wouldn’t even be that much with the millions spent on advertising. But we will be generous and say that they only spent two million on advertising. Then another million on premiere expenses, etc.
    That leaves just over 32 million
    If the movie cost 38 million to make, how can you claim that it made a profit?

    In order for a movie to be successful it has to make at least double its production cost DOMESTICALLY. Studios don’t make much at all from ‘overseas’ sales.
    WFE cost 38 million to make. Not counting the advertising budget. That means that they would have to make 76 million (domestic) to earn the studio back its money.
    As of today, it has earned 54.4 million domestic, and 99.8 worldwide.

  • @121

    Wow…you’ve really got something to prove dont you!!! I applaud the effort you put in to your sums but it does not make them accurate! You have no idea how much percent they get from overseas or even domestically and even with your ridiculously harsh analysis the movie will most definitely make up the few million it needs to a success in your little formula with dvd sales. It all adds up to the same thing that we have been saying all along…a success! We just got there quicker than you in a more realistic manner by paying attention to the experts!

  • Naughty

    We need to go back to school don’t we? Let me see and hope that you reply this time more understandably unless your reading comprehension needs to be reexamined as well: where did you get the information that FOX made 55% from domestic gross for WFE? And they made 5-10% from international gross for WFE? Are you the accountant for Fox studios? Because if you are not, which you most obviously are not because they wouldn’t waste their time badmouthing their own films to gossip readers, you ARE making a lot of serious assumptions and claiming it is FACT. The profit structure with the theaters are much more complicated than that.
    Again, where is your source, or did school not teach you to cite your sources when claiming fact not opinion? It’s much more complicated than just taking 55% and 5-10% from the gross profits, unfortunately for you.

  • @123
    see bottom of page….as mentioned before.
    * Production Budget in millions. On average, studios earn approximately 55 percent of the final gross.

  • @124

    Good Lord. You do see the words..”on average” and…”approximately” right?!! Where are you getting your international box office percentage for wfe?? You are not the studio so you do not know the deals they put in place. If the studio is happy then it must have been a success for them and they are happy!

  • hi

    Let’s take your precious Harry Potter DH 1 for instance. I assume it takes 200 million to make. It earned domestically 295 million. It also earned 659 500 000 million overseas. So ten percent of that is 65 950 000 million and half of 295 million is 147 million. Factoring in some math we get WB only making 13 million in profit even though Potter almost broke the billion dollar threshold and is well known as being one of the most lucrative cash cow for WB. This all does not include DVD sales or the marketing budget. Phew.

    And your precious Lainey Gossip also said that WFE is a success:

  • @126

    Finally someone is using their brain.
    The studio made a PROFIT of 13 million, IN THE THEATERS, not counting the DVD sales.
    Not a movie still in theaters that has not earned the studio any money yet.
    I’m glad someone FINALLY got smart.
    Sure took you gals long enough!

  • yea

    Except your little formula is skewed since Harry Potter is a cash cow for WB in the box office since it is a SUMMER TENTPOLE. And using your math again, HP 6 lost money in the box office since it took 250 million to make and made less than DH 1 in the box office. AWWW poor Harry Potter. Lucky for Rob, Twilight makes most of its money in domestic sales and has a low production cost. Potter is a losing franchise with weak box office turnout. It’s cast won’t survive the box office game (Perks of Being a Wallflower and Women in Black).

    Another film critic,Lainey Gossip, said it was a success, why haven’t you responded to that? http://laineygossip.comMovies_for_adults_earn_well_in_first_half_of_2011_led_by_strong_opening_for_The_Hangover_Part_2_31ma.aspx?CatID=0&CelID=0

  • @128

    The website won’t pull up for me, but Lainey is a gossip hound (and not a very good one) not a film critic.
    Are you going to quote Perez Hilton next?
    And I love how you call factual evidence a “little formula” since you don’t agree with it.
    Saying something does better than expected, does NOT mean that it was successful.
    But I guess that ‘simple math’ is too much for your ‘simple minds’ to grasp.

  • yea

    Don’t forget Potter has a marketing budget of approximately 100 million dollars. The studio incidentally won’t make any money until they get to DVD sales, so Potter won’t even make any money while it is still in theaters!
    And according to WB, while Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire earned a worldwide total of $938.2, Warner Bros has got it down as still losing $167 million (! Funny that Potter is box office poison, more so than WFE.

  • @127

    Don’t forget Potter has a marketing budget of approximately 100 million dollars. The studio incidentally won’t make any money until they get to DVD sales, so Potter won’t even make any money while it is still in theaters!
    And according to WB, while Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire earned a worldwide total of $938.2, Warner Bros has got it down as still losing $167 million (! Funny that Potter is box office poison, more so than WFE.

  • @129

    No, I wouldn’t bring up Perez Hilton. We are on a gossip site so I thought you would like some more gossip to help you understand. Your low reading comprehension skills hopefully may pick it up as actual film analysts seem to fly over your head. Either way, the potter franchise and it stars are box office poison now and in the future thanks to your formula.

    Let me link it for you again since you are so stubborn:

  • sheesh

    So you are interpreting Lainey’s “performed decently”, as her saying that it was a success???
    Performed decently, and ‘did better than expected’ are NOT the same thing as saying that it was successful.
    But go ahead, believe what you want. You continue to ignore facts because they keep proving you wrong.

  • @133

    Nobody is ignoring facts….just your unusual interpretation of them! Your formula that is oh so accurate in determining success is obviously a whole load of crap unless you want to admit that it makes nearly every movie a failure including harry potter!