NearTheEars
Well-Known Member
Tron grossed $400 million during its run. Certainly not Frozen numbers, but not chump change.
I think we'll see another installment in a few years.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
A Spirited Perfect Ten
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
Tron grossed $400 million during its run. Certainly not Frozen numbers, but not chump change.
I think we'll see another installment in a few years.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
An Alice sequel is coming actually.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_in_Wonderland:_Through_the_Looking_Glass
lebeau
Well-Known Member
It's more than just a hit. Otherwise every hit movie would be a tentpole. If we're not talking sequels, there needs to be some kind of successful tie in. I don’t think most of the movies you mentioned qualify.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
If Disney was happy with its performance, we would have had a sequel by now. Disney considered Tron a disappointment. Not a disaster. But not worth rolling the dice again.
shannon12
Active Member
I could look t this picture ALL DAYHe already dons the style perfectly in Jurassic Park.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
That seems like a bad idea. No one actually liked that movie. It wax a hit because it came out at exactly the right time. 3D was hot post Avatar and Depp was still box office gold.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Alice in Wonderland: Through the Looking Glass is set for a May 2016 release.
Iger has made repeated comments about how he is in the franchise business and that films are intended to be the start of franchises.
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
I can't agree with this.
A tentpole, per Hollywood's definition, is a major released designed to support the period's financial performance and compensate for potential flops. In short, it's supposed to be THE big release for a studio that period. That does not mean it has to spawn into a franchise.
Inception and Interstellar were tentpoles for WB. They have and won't spawn sequels.
Signs was a tentpole for Touchstone. It has zero sequels.
Many Pixar films are considered tentpole films, yet most of them don't have sequels.
It is not a requirement to produce a franchise with a tentpole. That sort of reasoning is part of why Hollywood is in such a creative mess these days.
NearTheEars
Well-Known Member
Yes, I think they thought the nostalgic Tron geeks would turn out in droves. Turns out, there's not as many as they thought.
But it was still profitable, and will be worth another look.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
A tentpole per Iger's definition is supposed to start or continue a franchise.
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
Possibly so. But the definition of a tentpole does not require reference to a sequel.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
Right. Even by a more general definition, there is an expectation that a tentpole goes beyond the movie's individual grosses. Some kind of tie in revenue. Not every hit movie qualifies as a tentpole. If they did, we wouldn't differentiate between hits and tentpoles.
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
A studio's expectation of a tentpole is determined well before the film is released. Its grosses are irrelevant in regard to its positioning as a tentpole release.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
They will come back to Tron someday. Every familiar idea will be recycled so long as someone thinks there may be some money left in it.
Next time, they need to execute better.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
Fair enough. In that case I should have been more specific. I was referring to successful tentpoles.
By Iger's own definition, his track record isn't great.
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
See this is total brand advocation. I think you honestly believe that most people go to Disney parks because of their love of the Disney brand. Not simply because they are amazing theme parks in an amazing family vacation environment. You believe that MOST people are bothered by the fact the Indy isn't Disney and shouldn't be in the parks. I think you're dillusional. Most families don't know, and don't care. That is one major reason that Universal has been able to make not only make "in roads" into Disney's market, but a freakin' interstate highway.
My apologies to @WDW1974, here in Otown, it has become the IP WARS. But, and that's a big but, that doesn't mean TWDC has to look outside of their vast library of IPs to find suitable IPs to exploit. You can blame to boys up the street for causing the IP WARS. And bare in mind, they still have an ace or two in their hand yet to drop.
Last edited:
Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
I hope.. really hope.. this post falls into obscurity and no single WDC executive can read it.
Last edited:
Spirited Big Picture Musing:
Well, I guess Juno (when did we start naming winter storms?) derailed this into At The Movies With Some MAGIC.
It is always something. Tomorrow, it will be fanbois talking about DL's 60th media event (BTW, any bloggers, lifestylers, podcasters or just members of this community going to be there?) and trying to extrapolate things that aren't there based on what they so desire.
Me?
I'm very interested in who replaces Bob Iger in 2018 (yes, that does seem so long compared to 2016). I think that's more important than any other topic here, but I realize that I'm not everyone.
I did get one very unexpected, and insightful, bonus of the storm that walloped (love that weather terminology ... bet Bob still recalls when he was using words like that) parts of the NE today. It allowed me to spend some quality time talking Disney with someone who is paid highly to follow the company and was snowed in at home all day.
He/she read both of the stories we were talking about here. But said that colleagues likely read the Huff Po column because it was a strict business op-ed piece by someone in the industry.
Said the impact on it wouldn't make any difference to Bob, but that it just added ''more gravitas'' to the reason Bob got two more years: namely, the Street doesn't have any faith in Rasulo and Staggs to be a No. 1. Said that ''your (my) issues with Bob wanting to open the beachhead in Shanghai and watch Star Wars explode as a Disney property or wanting to watch the box office tally on a few more billion dollar Marvel films are all true, no doubt, but they're ancillary. Bob is remaining because Disney hasn't come up with a legit candidate they can sell to the Street to replace him.''
The long and short of it is that if Wall Street had any faith in these guys, both with numbers/strategic planning pedigrees, Bob likely would be gone in June of next year regardless of anything else.
I keep saying ... telling people ... that the next head of Disney won't be one of these men and Disney's publicity machine kicks in (at least I don't believe the vast majority of fans have any degree of warmth in either individual) with all the PR and planted stories designed to create a false reality.
I've talked a lot about change here. I think people often don't understand that it comes slowly ... sometimes slower than climate change. But big change absolutely can happen. For Disney, that would be an outsider running the company. Not as farfetched a reality as it would have been a few years ago.
Oh, and I'll weigh in on the Indy rumor that Deadline put up by first saying it's old. People were mentioning the very talented Chris Pratt (who was great as usual in Parks and Rec tonight) as a possible Indy before GotG became a huge hit. I think he'd make a great one, actually. But I'll also say that Disney is in no hurry whatsoever to reboot the franchise. It could happen ... but it is many moons away.
Well, I guess Juno (when did we start naming winter storms?) derailed this into At The Movies With Some MAGIC.
It is always something. Tomorrow, it will be fanbois talking about DL's 60th media event (BTW, any bloggers, lifestylers, podcasters or just members of this community going to be there?) and trying to extrapolate things that aren't there based on what they so desire.
Me?
I'm very interested in who replaces Bob Iger in 2018 (yes, that does seem so long compared to 2016). I think that's more important than any other topic here, but I realize that I'm not everyone.
I did get one very unexpected, and insightful, bonus of the storm that walloped (love that weather terminology ... bet Bob still recalls when he was using words like that) parts of the NE today. It allowed me to spend some quality time talking Disney with someone who is paid highly to follow the company and was snowed in at home all day.
He/she read both of the stories we were talking about here. But said that colleagues likely read the Huff Po column because it was a strict business op-ed piece by someone in the industry.
Said the impact on it wouldn't make any difference to Bob, but that it just added ''more gravitas'' to the reason Bob got two more years: namely, the Street doesn't have any faith in Rasulo and Staggs to be a No. 1. Said that ''your (my) issues with Bob wanting to open the beachhead in Shanghai and watch Star Wars explode as a Disney property or wanting to watch the box office tally on a few more billion dollar Marvel films are all true, no doubt, but they're ancillary. Bob is remaining because Disney hasn't come up with a legit candidate they can sell to the Street to replace him.''
The long and short of it is that if Wall Street had any faith in these guys, both with numbers/strategic planning pedigrees, Bob likely would be gone in June of next year regardless of anything else.
I keep saying ... telling people ... that the next head of Disney won't be one of these men and Disney's publicity machine kicks in (at least I don't believe the vast majority of fans have any degree of warmth in either individual) with all the PR and planted stories designed to create a false reality.
I've talked a lot about change here. I think people often don't understand that it comes slowly ... sometimes slower than climate change. But big change absolutely can happen. For Disney, that would be an outsider running the company. Not as farfetched a reality as it would have been a few years ago.
Oh, and I'll weigh in on the Indy rumor that Deadline put up by first saying it's old. People were mentioning the very talented Chris Pratt (who was great as usual in Parks and Rec tonight) as a possible Indy before GotG became a huge hit. I think he'd make a great one, actually. But I'll also say that Disney is in no hurry whatsoever to reboot the franchise. It could happen ... but it is many moons away.