MORGANABLE LIFE & CULTURE / FILM
Veteran Nollywood actor and filmmaker Jide Kosoko has revealed that he is in debt after his film, Eleko: Oba Esugbayi, failed to recover its production cost of more than ₦300 million from cinema screenings.
Akure —
Veteran Nollywood actor and filmmaker Jide Kosoko has revealed that he is in debt after his film, Eleko: Oba Esugbayi, failed to recover its production cost of more than ₦300 million from cinema screenings.
Kosoko made the disclosure in an interview with African A-List. A clip from the interview attracted wider attention this week, and Nigerian media reported his remarks on October 22 and 23, 2026.
He explained that investors provided the money for the historical film and expected the project to return their investment.
“My film ‘Eleko: Oba Esugbayi’ that recently came out and we took to the cinemas, cost us over N300 million,” Kosoko said.
He stressed that the money was not a gift. People had invested in the production, expecting its cinema run to generate enough revenue to recover their funds.
However, the film did not earn enough to cover its production cost. Kosoko said the limited money it generated was shared among those involved, leaving the project unable to recoup the investment. He described himself as someone carrying debt.
The actor did not disclose the exact amount he owes or provide a financial breakdown.
Therefore, the reported production budget should not be confused with a confirmed final loss.
The available information shows that the film failed to recover its reported cost, but it does not establish the total amount still outstanding.
A COSTLY FILM WITH UNCERTAIN RETURNS
Eleko: Oba Esugbayi is a historical film about Oba Esugbayi Eleko, the Lagos monarch who resisted British colonial rule.
The production brought a chapter of Lagos history to the screen and featured established Nollywood performers, including Femi Branch, Femi Adebayo, Saidi Balogun, Dele Odule and Yinka Quadri, according to published reports.
The film premiered in March 2026 and screened in cinemas. Its historical subject and familiar cast could attract interest, but they could not guarantee strong ticket sales.
Like other cinema releases, its performance depended on audience turnout and the share of ticket revenue returned to the production.
Pulse Nigeria reported that the film earned about ₦18.3 million during its opening weekend.
That figure reflects the reported first weekend, not the film’s total cinema earnings.
It nevertheless shows the gap between the production budget and the money generated at the start of its theatrical run.
Box-office revenue does not necessarily go entirely to a producer. Cinema operators and distributors may receive portions of ticket sales under their agreements.
Producers must also consider publicity, promotion and distribution expenses. As a result, ticket sales do not always translate into enough money to recover production costs.
Kosoko’s disclosure highlights the uncertainty involved when a producer relies on outside investors.
Kosoko said the funds came from investors rather than people who simply gave him money.
That distinction matters because the arrangement carried an expectation of returns.
However, public reports have not detailed the investment agreements, each person’s contribution or the terms for handling a shortfall.
FINANCIAL PRESSURE ACROSS NOLLYWOOD
Kosoko’s experience reflects a challenge for filmmakers: production costs can rise while cinema earnings remain uncertain.
A large budget may cover cast fees, crew wages, costumes, locations, equipment and editing. Yet spending more does not automatically attract more viewers or guarantee a profit.
Producers must compete for audiences’ time and money. Release dates, publicity, cinema availability, competing films and public interest can affect ticket sales.
A film based on local history may carry cultural value, but it still needs enough paying viewers to support its business model.
The risks can extend beyond the cinema run. When a project fails to recover its costs, a producer may find it harder to finance another film or attract investors for a future release.
Investors may also become more cautious when they cannot judge likely returns or understand how a production will manage a shortfall.
Kosoko’s remarks do not prove that cinema releases across Nollywood are unprofitable. Each film has a different budget, audience, release plan and distribution agreement.
His case instead shows how a production can fall short financially despite substantial investment and the involvement of experienced performers.
Producers can reduce some risks by setting realistic budgets, planning publicity early and agreeing on clear terms with investors and distributors.
Written agreements can explain how revenue will be shared, which costs will be deducted and how the parties will handle a loss.
Filmmakers may also consider other ways to earn revenue, depending on the rights they hold and the agreements they sign.
These options can include streaming licences, television deals and later distribution opportunities.
However, there is no confirmed information that a new deal has been secured to recover the shortfall from Eleko: Oba Esugbayi.
Kosoko has not publicly provided a complete account of the film’s finances, and available reports do not establish its final total loss.
The reported budget exceeded ₦300 million, while the actor said the project failed to earn back the money invested.
Those facts should remain separate from any estimate of the debt still owed.
His disclosure offers a cautionary lesson for Nigeria’s film industry. Creative ambition and a major production budget cannot guarantee box-office returns.
For filmmakers and investors, careful planning, clear financial agreements and realistic expectations remain important when taking a film to cinemas.
Whether the film earns additional revenue through future distribution remains unknown, but Kosoko’s account shows how a disappointing cinema run can create financial pressure long after a movie reaches the screen.
