dxwwf3
Well-Known Member
Let me think ...
"I see you ... baby."
Yes, it would be!!!
:lol:
I love Favs and Vaughn together (Especially in The Break Up), but Swingers' dialogue really got on my nerves. Different strokes.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Princess and the frog a failure?
- Thread starter ILLmaticS0ldier
- Start date
:lol:
I love Favs and Vaughn together (Especially in The Break Up), but Swingers' dialogue really got on my nerves. Different strokes.
tomman710
Well-Known Member
Dude you were reading my mind! I knew there was a movie that I couldn't remember that didn't go crazy at the BO in one specific week but hung around forever. My Big Fat felt like it was in theaters for a full year almost.
I don't think PatF will do that but just saying, the next few weeks are dry and who knows how long it could hang around.
Let's wait and see ...
tomman710
Well-Known Member
Granted ... but at least, at the time, it was fresh.
I have to say I had a fun time watching Avatar, especially in 3D, but you have to admit it offers nothing fresh or original in terms of story, characters, and most certainly dialogue.
dxwwf3
Well-Known Member
I felt the story obviously took elements from other films, but just did it better. Star Wars didn't have an "original" story either and that didn't seem to bother anyone. I felt the characters were original enough and the dialogue didn't bother me.
Sometimes more original isn't always better. For instance, the dialogue in Juno was praised for being so original, but for me it made me want to punch every single character in the face and let them know they aren't nearly as "cool" as they think they are. There is a fine line between originality and smugness. There is definitely enough originality in Avatar, but it takes a simple, classic story and just does it better than it has ever done before. The landscapes and environments have as much originality as most of the action films that come out today.
With all of the sequels and retreads coming out today in theaters (some of which I have no complaints about), I don't know why people are coming down so hard on something that is extremely original and unique by comparison? :shrug: I guess I can see not caring for the dialogue, but the creativity and originality arguments are not valid at all to me.
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
HEY MODS!!!
Can we get this thread moved to wherever animated film discussions are held here (not animated discusisons about film, although that would apply here too, but discussions about animated films be they hand drawn/traditional or newfangled/CGI)?
Oh, wait, did Disney announce when the Hulk meet and greet is coming to EPCOT?
Can we get this thread moved to wherever animated film discussions are held here (not animated discusisons about film, although that would apply here too, but discussions about animated films be they hand drawn/traditional or newfangled/CGI)?
Oh, wait, did Disney announce when the Hulk meet and greet is coming to EPCOT?
dxwwf3
Well-Known Member
Yeah it's in the wrong forum, but talking about movies in a thread about movies is hardly misplaced :lol:
It's a lot easier for a film (especially a family film) to have legs in the summer than in the winter, but word of mouth when the kids get back at school can help somewhat.
_Scar
Active Member
:brick:
This film is by no means a "failure". Just because a film doesn't make the money in the box office, doesn't mean it won't stick around. Read my posts above, please.
xdan0920
Think for yourselfer
Since I am not i the Walt Disney company, I don't know if this film is considered a commercial failure. Maybe they weren't going for a Pixar level hit.
What I can say is that its Box Office take is definitely a disappointment. To only make 25 million in it opening weekend, and to actually lose audience like this over the Christmas weekend is just plain unacceptable.
As for myself, I love everything Disney. I see all pixar movies on opening weekends, I go to WDW about once a year. I watch a Traditionally animated disney movie 2-4 times a month. When house of mouse was on Cartoon Disney I would tivo it, and watch all the time.
And I have not, and will not see PatF until it comes out on Netflix. It has generated zero excitement for me. I don't even know anyone who has seen it. My family is all Disney nuts, and we don't even discuss this movie.
So I guess in my opinion this is a major FAIL.
What I can say is that its Box Office take is definitely a disappointment. To only make 25 million in it opening weekend, and to actually lose audience like this over the Christmas weekend is just plain unacceptable.
As for myself, I love everything Disney. I see all pixar movies on opening weekends, I go to WDW about once a year. I watch a Traditionally animated disney movie 2-4 times a month. When house of mouse was on Cartoon Disney I would tivo it, and watch all the time.
And I have not, and will not see PatF until it comes out on Netflix. It has generated zero excitement for me. I don't even know anyone who has seen it. My family is all Disney nuts, and we don't even discuss this movie.
So I guess in my opinion this is a major FAIL.
toetheline29
New Member
I'm a college student, and I found myself unable to convince any of my friends to go with me. So, (fearing a situation similar to yours), I recruited my young cousin to go with me. :lol:
I should start by saying that yes, I liked the movie. Good, not great, but I can't quite put my finger on where it fell short. I thought the dialogue was good, you got to know the characters better than in many Disney movies, I liked most of the songs, and I thought the animation was, in general, great (the Bayou portion of the movie, which was considerable in length, did not appear to be anything special visually with the exception of Ray's song to me).
As others have mentioned, I think the "Princess" in the title eliminated (or at least severely limited) boys as an audience. I'm sure titles are carefully examined to be sure they are just right, so I find it hard to believe that it was accidental. It just doesn't seem like the kind of thing that would get by them. Disney probably thought they could make more money off the princess market, in ticket sales but also in merchandising, which is fine; it just limited their audience.
I think that perhaps another part of the issue was that this movie may have seemed to be made for young children. The "Princess" in the title and the constant touting of this as another Disney princess movie could have easily achieved this effect. This would have limited the market further by eliminating children over the age of, say, seven or eight.
I am really disappointed it hasn't done better. I thought it was really well done, and I adored Tiana and loved her work ethic (as contrasted with Prince Naveen's and Charlotte's sense of entitlement... UGH).
My opinion might be colored by the fact that I had my little girl with me, and it was her first time seeing a 2D on the big screen. But whether I was looking through her eyes or my own, I loved every second. Can't wait to see it again.
My opinion might be colored by the fact that I had my little girl with me, and it was her first time seeing a 2D on the big screen. But whether I was looking through her eyes or my own, I loved every second. Can't wait to see it again.
t3techcom18
Well-Known Member
Like I was saying, I realize why it's there, I'm just saying, my main reaction was of me doing a double-take when I saw that; and yes, it's true, most princess films and Disney in general are filled with magic, but (for the most part) it's magic that's never based in reality and is only fictional. Even the 3 Sisters in Hercules made sense in a mythological way.
It's funny how you mention about putting a princess movie in New Orleans though. I don't mind it being in a real life place, but I was just discussing this with my Dad last night. PATF could've had the potential to be as powerful and stirring as The Lion King.
Many of the elements it has at the current moment are an oxymoron for its time period: Putting an African-American princess in the capital of the Deep South after the Civil War era, having life simple and easy in that regard, and marrying someone who was white in the end? Definitely not that realistic in that regard for that time period. I thought they really were going to go and add historical value, make Tiana's story even more appealing by putting in what obstacles other than money she would have to face if she wanted to open a restaurant.
Sure, depending the route you take with it, it could be considered too intense or not appropriate for a children's film, but,
A) It's history;
B) It was the reality of the situation at the time; and most notably,
C) If The Iron Giant, The Lion King, and WALL-E put extremely adult situations or themes into their story, why not PATF?
CaptainMichael
Well-Known Member
For me, this was the highlight of the movie and something that I feel eventually went by the wayside, sadly.
tirian
Well-Known Member
Cinderella was a huge hit when it was released, and saved the animation studio. You're forgetting the average price of a movie ticket in 1950 was between 25 and 75 cents.
Sleeping Beauty was indeed a disappointment, but only because the film cost more than it could possibly make. The animated feature was actually the second-biggest movie of the year, behind Ben-Hur.
The movie had a budget of $105 million, and has brought in just under $80 million to date, in less than three weeks. So, the US run is far from over, and the full international run hasn't even began. It's received good ratings from the critics, and is up against some blockbuster films in Avatar and Sherlock Holmes. In the end, PaTF will make a solid profit for Disney, but probably will not be in the same sphere of a WALL-E or Ratatouille.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Since it's release it has become so, but it certainly was not for the year of 1959. Disney's The gy Dog alone made $3.7 million more that same year.
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the move, mods!
The film is a failure by Disney's own expectations, by how much it cost, by how much they spent on marketing and by what it has done.
I am not speaking artistically as I haven't seen it yet. FWIW, the clips I have seen long very nice ... and I actually like the Newman music a lot ... that was the best part of the MK Showboat show.
But this isn't a film that's going to do boffo BO ... it's going to make back its money by DVDs and princess merchandise. It isn't going to do it on its own merits ... you know like UP did ... or any of the Pixar films ... or any of the Disney films of the 1989-mid 90s period.
Those are just facts ... ... unless someone wants to boldly proclaim this film's going to crosss the $200 million level domestically ... oh wait, it might struggle to top $100 million.
Good thing they can sell merchandise.
The film is a failure by Disney's own expectations, by how much it cost, by how much they spent on marketing and by what it has done.
I am not speaking artistically as I haven't seen it yet. FWIW, the clips I have seen long very nice ... and I actually like the Newman music a lot ... that was the best part of the MK Showboat show.
But this isn't a film that's going to do boffo BO ... it's going to make back its money by DVDs and princess merchandise. It isn't going to do it on its own merits ... you know like UP did ... or any of the Pixar films ... or any of the Disney films of the 1989-mid 90s period.
Those are just facts ... ... unless someone wants to boldly proclaim this film's going to crosss the $200 million level domestically ... oh wait, it might struggle to top $100 million.
Good thing they can sell merchandise.
High box-office numbers usually translate into strong DVD sales. So all of these posts saying PATF will have "legs" which will translate into strong DVD sales, is currently unlikely.
I have a feeling PATF will end up with a domestic total of around $80 million. Atlantis back in 2001 made $84 million domestically. Considering ticket inflation, one can argue Atlantis was a more successful film than PATF. Yet, Atlantis does not factor into the Disney legacy much, if at all.
Sure PATF can turn into legacy film a decade from now. Anything is possible. As of right now, PATF is a huge disappointment for the Disney Company. Signaling to Disney execs to stick with CGI.
I have a feeling PATF will end up with a domestic total of around $80 million. Atlantis back in 2001 made $84 million domestically. Considering ticket inflation, one can argue Atlantis was a more successful film than PATF. Yet, Atlantis does not factor into the Disney legacy much, if at all.
Sure PATF can turn into legacy film a decade from now. Anything is possible. As of right now, PATF is a huge disappointment for the Disney Company. Signaling to Disney execs to stick with CGI.
muteki
Well-Known Member
We finally got around to seeing this today, and if I were just judging by our theater, I would say that it is far from a failure. This was a 2 pm matinee showing, and there was not a seat to be found, and kids were sitting on the floor up front. Bad from a fire code standpoint, but pretty good for a movie 2+ weeks out. If this continues through the next week or so while kids are out of school, I don't think D & Co have anything to worry about.
That, and the movie budget has likely been made back several times over just on merch sales.
That, and the movie budget has likely been made back several times over just on merch sales.
happymom52003
Active Member
I also saw it this afternoon, in a packed theater....just about every seat was taken. I loved the movie. I took my daughter because my son had no interest in seeing it since it was a "princess movie", but I really think he would have liked it. The audience seemed to like the movie...I heard lots of laughter, and a couple of times people even applauded. I will admit there were a few places that the movie felt slow to me, but the feel good ending made me forget all about that. I can't wait to see it again, and I might not even wait for the dvd to come out for my son to see it...we may go back to the theater as a family later this week.
Disneyfanman
Well-Known Member
It's "hard facts" time folks.
Through this past weekend it made about 64 million dollars. It has one more weekend in the holiday season to post significant numbers. We are realistically looking at a domestic take of 80 to 90 million. And 90 million is optimistic at this point.
There is no way that Disney is happy in any way with the box office. No way.
Is it a financial failure? Honestly it will all depend on the overseas box office. Many films make 2-3 times their domestic take oversease. But will a film as "American" as a tale that takes place in turn of the century New Orleans play well in Japan? I haven't got a clue and neither has Disney at this point. Disney pulled out all the stops in its marketing campaign........and really leveraged every opportunity to sell the film. It didn't work.
From a quality standpoint, it is a well made movie. Classic or not really depends on your point of view. It rated 83% on Rotton Tomatoes fresh meter. It felt rushed to me, and lacked a real emotional punch, but my family liked it. We all liked Avatar and Blind Side much more in the current crop of competitors. Bolt and Up as well earlier in the season. The hook for us was the 2-D revival and the fact that it's the first real Disney musical in awhile.
But it's NOT going to cover it's marketing and production costs without doing about 250 million in world wide box office. And at the end of the day, that is how the studio going to evaluate its success. We can all debate a lot of things, but if this thing stalls at 150M in world wide box office, we are going to see a heck of a lot of spin come out of Disney, and probably a really hard look at future 2-D features. And if the next one falls flat the situation is going to get worse.
If Cars (Not the biggest producing Pixar feature by any means) had stalled at 150M in world wide box office, we would NOT be seeing a sequel in production, no matter how many little race cars it sold. But Cars did almost 500 million world wide, putting it in the black, and all the extra stuff was "gravy on the goose".
The thing that really puts cash in the piggy bank for these movies is repeat business. I saw Little Mermaid 3 times in the theater. I saw Beauty and the Beast 4 times and again when it went to IMAX. I am a total geek for a movie that gets into my heart. I bet P&TF is doing virtually zero repeat business right now. I will probably buy the DVD when it comes out, but that's it. I don't see raving reviews by fans on the internet. It's a solid, well made, above average box office performer that got stomped by the competition.
That's NOT what Disney needed. It needed a Lion King. It got an Oliver and Company.
Through this past weekend it made about 64 million dollars. It has one more weekend in the holiday season to post significant numbers. We are realistically looking at a domestic take of 80 to 90 million. And 90 million is optimistic at this point.
There is no way that Disney is happy in any way with the box office. No way.
Is it a financial failure? Honestly it will all depend on the overseas box office. Many films make 2-3 times their domestic take oversease. But will a film as "American" as a tale that takes place in turn of the century New Orleans play well in Japan? I haven't got a clue and neither has Disney at this point. Disney pulled out all the stops in its marketing campaign........and really leveraged every opportunity to sell the film. It didn't work.
From a quality standpoint, it is a well made movie. Classic or not really depends on your point of view. It rated 83% on Rotton Tomatoes fresh meter. It felt rushed to me, and lacked a real emotional punch, but my family liked it. We all liked Avatar and Blind Side much more in the current crop of competitors. Bolt and Up as well earlier in the season. The hook for us was the 2-D revival and the fact that it's the first real Disney musical in awhile.
But it's NOT going to cover it's marketing and production costs without doing about 250 million in world wide box office. And at the end of the day, that is how the studio going to evaluate its success. We can all debate a lot of things, but if this thing stalls at 150M in world wide box office, we are going to see a heck of a lot of spin come out of Disney, and probably a really hard look at future 2-D features. And if the next one falls flat the situation is going to get worse.
If Cars (Not the biggest producing Pixar feature by any means) had stalled at 150M in world wide box office, we would NOT be seeing a sequel in production, no matter how many little race cars it sold. But Cars did almost 500 million world wide, putting it in the black, and all the extra stuff was "gravy on the goose".
The thing that really puts cash in the piggy bank for these movies is repeat business. I saw Little Mermaid 3 times in the theater. I saw Beauty and the Beast 4 times and again when it went to IMAX. I am a total geek for a movie that gets into my heart. I bet P&TF is doing virtually zero repeat business right now. I will probably buy the DVD when it comes out, but that's it. I don't see raving reviews by fans on the internet. It's a solid, well made, above average box office performer that got stomped by the competition.
That's NOT what Disney needed. It needed a Lion King. It got an Oliver and Company.