Disney's Live Action The Little Mermaid

[Chi84]

Too old and can't sing

Hermoine or SirWalter?

 

[The Mom]

But if all that were true, then NOBODY would see movies in the summer, all movies would have failed at the box office past, present, and future, and the summer would never have been a hot spot for movie releases.

When I was young (back in the stone age) movie theaters would use the fact that they had air conditioning as a selling point, so people who couldn't make it to the beach, etc would go to the movies to get out of the heat. And, not all summer days a re bright and sunny..

Summer movies may also still be popular because children and teenagers are out of school and can go on a "school night." Or during the day.

 

[Figgy1]

Hermoine or SirWalter?

 

[Figgy1]

When I was young (back in the stone age) movie theaters would use the fact that they had air conditioning as a selling point, so people who couldn't make it to the beach, etc would go to the movies to get out of the heat. And, not all summer days a re bright and sunny..

Summer movies may also still be popular because children and teenagers are out of school and can go on a "school night." Or during the day.

 

[DKampy]

They’re not covering budgets on tentpoles…might want to look into that…maybe?

my point is stop looking for “reasons” why this movie may…possibly…get to $500 total. That’s not a success. Standards are what they are today.

For whatever collection of reasons - it failed. None of the theories presented here cover that. Maybe pieced together it explains SOME of the shortcoming. But at the end of the day the crowds didn’t need/want it…so Disney didn’t deliver for the balance sheet. It is what it is…and that’s what it is.

Last week the blame was hand sanitizer…before that China…before that 5 trolls in moms basement…

We’ll all be better off when the search for Spock’s excuses end

I don’t understand the debate…. The issue is it failed intentionally but succeeded domestically…unfortunately it needed both to make it’s money back in the theatrical window

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

If only they had done Emma Watson some justice in the musical arrangements at least. But BatB songs overwhelmed her voice, sadly. Aside from that, the movie was enjoyable. But when casting a musical, the lead needs to be able to carry their part.

She’s not a singer…
…but half the planet had seen her in 9 movies…

So she and Olaf pocketed a cool billion plus for Disney…
That’s a smart way to go about these…if they must?

You know who would have made major bank as Ariel?
Taylor swift. I’m only half kidding

 

[Tha Realest]

They’re not covering budgets on tentpoles…might want to look into that…maybe?

my point is stop looking for “reasons” why this movie may…possibly…get to $500 total. That’s not a success. Standards are what they are today.

For whatever collection of reasons - it failed. None of the theories presented here cover that. Maybe pieced together it explains SOME of the shortcoming. But at the end of the day the crowds didn’t need/want it…so Disney didn’t deliver for the balance sheet. It is what it is…and that’s what it is.

Last week the blame was hand sanitizer…before that China…before that 5 trolls in moms basement…

We’ll all be better off when the search for Spock’s excuses end

We’re at the midway point of 2023, and one - one - film appears to have turned a profit thus far. Virtually everything else released so far has either lost money or is set to lose money. The remaining films are no longer sure bets to reach profitability.

This is dated (Next Goal Wins comes out later this year, and Blade has been bumped to 2025). I think Haunted Mansion has the best prospect of turning a profit given its comparatively modest budget. Other than that, we could see just a few films in the green, with the rest breaking even (at best) or losing massive amounts of money.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I don’t understand the debate…. The issue is it failed intentionally but succeeded domestically…unfortunately it needed both to make it’s money back in the theatrical window

It didn’t “succeed” domestically…

Not supposed to be top 10 for the year domestically…which it may even not be.

This isn’t alot of money for Tentpoles. This isn’t Indie art house stuff here.

you can’t claim 50% victory…but that’s been done for weeks too

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

We’re at the midway point of 2023, and one - one - film appears to have turned a profit thus far. Virtually everything else released so far has either lost money or is set to lose money. The remaining films are no longer sure bets to reach profitability. View attachment 726339
This is dated (Next Goal Wins comes out later this year, and Blade has been bumped to 2025). I think Haunted Mansion has the best prospect of turning a profit given its comparatively modest budget. Other than that, we could see just a few films in the green, with the rest breaking even (at best) or losing massive amounts of money.

I see at most 4 profitable movies there…

But a huge stock obsessed media conglomerate like Disney cares not for these peasant concerns

 

[Angel Ariel]

She’s not a singer…
…but half the planet had seen her in 9 movies…

So she and Olaf pocketed a cool billion plus for Disney…
That’s a smart way to go about these…if they must?

You know who would have made major bank as Ariel?
Taylor swift. I’m only half kidding

If they’re going to go that route then they should do what they did with the live action Cinderella remake and remake it as not a musical. Let the actor focus on acting. Refer to the familiar melodies in the orchestral score, but if the lead isn’t a singer, don’t have them sing. IMO, the Cinderella remake is one of the better remakes as it is.

For ex, Frozen. A live action frozen remake - if remade shot for shot and a musical - - requires someone who can hit Elsa’s notes. If they want to cast someone who can’t hit them, then for the love of everything don’t have them try.

 

[Tha Realest]

I see at most 4 profitable movies there…

But a huge stock obsessed media conglomerate like Disney cares not for these peasant concerns

I think Haunted Mansion (given its budget) should turn a profit. I’ll even be generous and say the same for Wish and The Marvels. But not enough to offset the losses.

And what I think a lot of people are missing in this is that the diminishing quality of the Marvel films are really taking an appreciable toll on the brand. Yeah, maybe Ant-Man came close to breaking even, but you’ve just made it more of an uphill climb for the next mid-tier solo film to do well.

 

[Jedijax719]

They’re not covering budgets on tentpoles…might want to look into that…maybe?

my point is stop looking for “reasons” why this movie may…possibly…get to $500 total. That’s not a success. Standards are what they are today.

For whatever collection of reasons - it failed. None of the theories presented here cover that. Maybe pieced together it explains SOME of the shortcoming. But at the end of the day the crowds didn’t need/want it…so Disney didn’t deliver for the balance sheet. It is what it is…and that’s what it is.

Last week the blame was hand sanitizer…before that China…before that 5 trolls in moms basement…

We’ll all be better off when the search for Spock’s excuses end

Nah, you posted an article that talked about BP:WF, TLM, and (for some reason), Thor4 (none of the thor movies ever even made $900 million WW). Budgets may be high, but not much higher than predecessors.

Black Panther Budget: $200 million
Wakanda Forever Budget: $250 million
World Wide Box Office Difference: $491 million
Budget Difference: $50 million

Thor Ragnorak Budget: $180 million
Thor Love and Thunder Budget: $250 million
WW Box office difference: $95 million
Budget Difference: $70 million

Aladdin Budget: $183 million
Little Mermaid Budget: $250 million
WW Box office difference: around $700 million
Budget Difference: $67 million

In all cases, the world wide loss was higher (in most cases MUCH higher) than the budget difference. The issue was not the budget. There were other issues. We can dissect those issues endlessly but can we STOP blaming the budget. And can we STOP saying that possible reasons are "excuses" without stating counter reasons for the box office reduction?

Constantly bringing up budget sounds like perseverating. Then low-key, back-handed insults against Halle Bailey make it worse.

 

[DKampy]

It didn’t “succeed” domestically…

Not supposed to be top 10 for the year domestically…which it may even not be.

This isn’t alot of money for Tentpoles. This isn’t Indie art house stuff here.

you can’t claim 50% victory…but that’s been done for weeks too

Over 300+ is tentpole money domestically which TLM will get to…it’s that they also need international budgets to soar…at that rate they should only have one or two tentpole a year even pre-covid

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

This movie is the 322 highest grossing movie domestically adjusted…

But it did pass basic instinct and has Wayne’s world in its sights

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Nah, you posted an article that talked about BP:WF, TLM, and (for some reason), Thor4 (none of the thor movies ever even made $900 million WW). Budgets may be high, but not much higher than predecessors.

Black Panther Budget: $200 million
Wakanda Forever Budget: $250 million
World Wide Box Office Difference: $491 million
Budget Difference: $50 million

Thor Ragnorak Budget: $180 million
Thor Love and Thunder Budget: $250 million
WW Box office difference: $95 million
Budget Difference: $70 million

Aladdin Budget: $183 million
Little Mermaid Budget: $250 million
WW Box office difference: around $700 million
Budget Difference: $67 million

In all cases, the world wide loss was higher (in most cases MUCH higher) than the budget difference. The issue was not the budget. There were other issues. We can dissect those issues endlessly but can we STOP blaming the budget. And can we STOP saying that possible reasons are "excuses" without stating counter reasons for the box office reduction?

Constantly bringing up budget sounds like perseverating. Then low-key, back-handed insults against Halle Bailey make it worse.

Did you read the article? It’s talking about what Disney is doing - losing money - on all its recent movies. That’s my point here. Stop praising failure and maybe they might consider not failing so much?

Do you want Disney to fail? Sure seems like it if we praise losers at the bank.

And she’s a nothing…maybe someday that won’t be true…but currently a nothing. Bad casting choice based on the results.
Ok. Go ahead and bite the pearls…just don’t swallow them, please? No injuries.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Over 300+ is tentpole money domestically which TLM will get to…it’s that they also need international budgets to soar…at that rate they should only have one or two tentpole a year even pre-covid

It’s currently behind Alvin and the chipmunks: the squeakuel in terms of butts in seats…

There are 320 other names North of that.

Not a “flop” domestically…but not in the rafters either

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I think Haunted Mansion (given its budget) should turn a profit. I’ll even be generous and say the same for Wish and The Marvels. But not enough to offset the losses.

And what I think a lot of people are missing in this is that the diminishing quality of the Marvel films are really taking an appreciable toll on the brand. Yeah, maybe Ant-Man came close to breaking even, but you’ve just made it more of an uphill climb for the next mid-tier solo film to do well.

They’re taking hits across the board

Marvel is sliding…even though people aren’t mentally prepared to talk about it yet.

Haven’t been able get a Star Wars script even written in an astonishing 5+ years…let alone get a single frame shot

Pixar is gonna be only sequels….That’s assured now.

Not good

 

[Tha Realest]

By all accounts Bailey is the bright spot of the film. And nothing against her, but canvassing the other “live” action films she’s essentially one of the first unknown actors to play a lead in one of these films. Movies live and die on star power, and with the exception of The Jungle Book each one has had a live action star (or multiple stars) in the cast.

I don’t discount the racial component to some of how this film has been received. But they did cast an unknown (from an acting standpoint) with a scant record of film or TV experience. Most successful movies - particularly big budget ones - typically have a known commodity in the lead role(s).

 

[Jedijax719]

Did you read the article? It’s talking about what Disney is doing - losing money - on all its recent movies. That’s my point here. Stop praising failure and maybe they might consider not failing so much?

Do you want Disney to fail? Sure seems like it if we praise losers at the bank.

And she’s a nothing…maybe someday that won’t be true…but currently a nothing. Bad casting choice based on the results.
Ok. Go ahead and bite the pearls…just don’t swallow them, please? No injuries.

Who has praised "failure"? When did anyone anywhere here ever do that?

All studios have lost money with the exception of an occasional hit. And Disney falls into that category of occasional hit. Avatar2 was an absolute roofbuster. Sony had No Way Home. Universal had Mario. Paramount had Mav. Wakanda Forever and Strange 2 didn't do too shabby for Disney either. And considering when it was released, Shang Chi did well for being released at the heart of the pandemic in September. But Disney had its shares of lemons (mostly animated films and Antman3). TLM isn't one of those while not hitting what Aladdin did pre-pandemic.

And forget about the travesty that is Warner Brothers. That's a whole other level. But the truth is that where Disney has completely fallen off the rails is with its animated division. But that is almost purely due to expectation of a quick Disney plus turnaround. TLM may have felt that effect somewhat domestically.

But bad casting choices? I would LOVE to hear the justification for calling Halle Bailey a "bad casting choice". I doubt we will ever get an honest answer to that, but we'd still love to hear why you call her a bad casting choice. Saying that she's "nothing" doesn't cut it. You know and we all know how that comes across.

Some people would say that by casting Halle, Disney was "pandering" to certain groups. But here's the kicker. If Disney went with safe casting with Zendaya or someone who "looks" more like Ariel from 1989 in hopes of earning more money, that could be considered even more pandering.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

But bad casting choices? I would LOVE to hear the justification for calling Halle Bailey a "bad casting choice". I doubt we will ever get an honest answer to that, but we'd still love to hear why you call her a bad casting choice. Saying that she's "nothing" doesn't cut it. You know and we all know how that comes across.

Nobody knows her…so she brought exactly zero audience pull.

That’s what I meant by “nothing”. Nothing in Hollywood terms. No following…no cult of personality. No name or face recognition to market.

I’m not gonna tell you “how things come across”. I’ll just tell you what I’m saying and skip the undertone nonsense.