A question asked at the Homepaddock blog and we are offered this picture claiming it was,
Let us assume the numbers themselves are totally correct (a big assumption). The question we should ask ourselves is, If these are the benefits what are the costs? We need to trade-off benefits against costs to make a judgement about the usefulness of The Hobbit. After all we are often told of the great benefits of many things that governments back, like sports stadiums, and such claims turnout to be false, so why should we think otherwise about a movie?
Thus, what are the costs of the subsidies to the movie? And most importantly what are the opportunity costs of these subsidies. The money that went to the movie could have been used for something else which also would have produced benefits that we could make a graphic of.
So we need a full cost-benefit analysis before we can say the movie was worthwhile.