• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs

BuddyThomas

Well-Known Member
BF0F69FA-1DCA-45FC-9162-2EAFD195F7DD.jpeg
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
Gore because the premise is a modified Frankenstein's monster one, so there are cadavers and surgery, mostly with a whimsical visual tone.

Disturbing material because anything that involves suicide as a plot element earns that flag and the general (albeit ridiculous) premise of the movie (which I won't spoil here) would be pretty disturbing if it asked you to take it seriously at all.

Graphic nudity as opposed to partial nudity because it's not just women from the waist up. It is both nearly 100% used for laughs throughout the movie and to point out the ridiculousness of human nature/behavior.

Yeah, as I said earlier, all of that is just not my scene. For movies, or for anything really. But I'm glad it's available for adults who seek out or enjoy that sort of entertainment.

“All” the actresses are not “very thin”. Please stop spreading fake news all over the place.

I hadn't even known about it until a popular LA radio station mentioned on Monday evening that the actresses on the Emmy's red carpet seemed suddenly very thin. Apparently a prescription for Ozempic is now mandatory if you live west of the Hollywood Freeway.

I'm looking forward to seeing the looks at the Oscars. That's another two months of prescription refills later, after all.
 

DKampy

Well-Known Member
Sorry it isn't my kind of movie.
I'll refer you to the parents guide and see if Walt would have been proud to release this in his studio.


Also the fact it made only $17m in six weeks. Even Wish made $63m in 8 weeks. No one is going to see it.
Are you kidding me???…completely two different type of films and different strategy rollouts
 

brideck

Well-Known Member
Still no one saw Poor Things. Night Swim and FNAF did far better for horror movies. It isn't even talked about in the horror movie forums I visit. But if you need that kind of movie images in your mind....

This is probably because... and just hear me out here... it's not a horror movie. I'm not sure what would have given you that impression. I don't always fall back on Wikipedia, but it's described there as a "sci-fi black comedy," which is probably about as accurate as you can get for this. I'm not sure what you mean by "that kind of movie images" exactly, but I'd much rather have the largely joyful images from Poor Things in my mind over anything from schlockfests like Five Nights at Freddy's.

You also didn't really answer how it's a "bad" story. Saying something is not for you (without really knowing anything about it) and then falling back on the wisdom of the masses as an arbiter of goodness is not really doing it. Besides, if we're going to use tickets sold/eyeballs as some sort of measure of goodness that would mean that there are only something like 30 "good" movies in a given year, and for 2023 that would mean that at least 6 of the Disney releases that folks like to dunk on here would fall into that category.

Yeah, as I said earlier, all of that is just not my scene. For movies, or for anything really. But I'm glad it's available for adults who seek out or enjoy that sort of entertainment.

That's a shame. If the real you is even a little bit like your online persona, I think you'd find it quite funny.
 

Advisable Joseph

Well-Known Member
Here's a reminder that movies make money on much more than just box office



So losses aren't as cataclysmic as they may seem. The 3x rule is right out!

Also, Deadline's figures seem to only include the initial revenue for streaming video, etc. when comparing their results to researchers who looked at the actual finances of films, who saw much a higher total revenue to box office ratio, as discovered in:





I have to imagine lifetime stream revenue from Encanto must be truly massive, considering how much movies can make from streaming up front, apparently.
 

tcool123

Well-Known Member
Do we have any other information on the financials of the Disney 100 series that released throughout 2023? That would likely be a better benchmark for Soul than current releases not available on streaming.

Otherwise, we could look at the Fathom Events gross and see that their Classics series grossed 4.6 million over a year, or 383,000 a movie.

Otherwise other rerelease successes from 2023 would be Jurrasic Park (2.9 million), Hocus Pocus (3.2 millionish), Nightmare Before Christmas (7 millionish), Coraline (7 million), Return of the Jedi (7.2 million), Titantic (15 million).

Based on the limited knowledge we have it seems like rereleases definitely have a cap and most often don’t make more than a million unless you’re one of those select fee that broke though.
 

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
Here's a reminder that movies make money on much more than just box office



So losses aren't as cataclysmic as they may seem. The 3x rule is right out!

Also, Deadline's figures seem to only include the initial revenue for streaming video, etc. when comparing their results to researchers who looked at the actual finances of films, who saw much a higher total revenue to box office ratio, as discovered in:





I have to imagine lifetime stream revenue from Encanto must be truly massive, considering how much movies can make from streaming up front, apparently.

I agree. Given enough time, most Disney movies will bring in more money than they cost to make in market, when streaming, Blu ray, merch. income is included.

The industry must stop using the box office as the only measuring stick. Until the industry stops using this measuring stick, Disney will continue to "look" like losers.

Until the industry stops using this measuring stick , if Disney does not want to look like a loser, Disney must create movies that make money at the box office. It is possible, see Godzilla minus one.

In my opinion, Disney's problem is more about out of control budgets of their movies and not the content of their movies.
 
Last edited:

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Still no one saw Poor Things. Night Swim and FNAF did far better for horror movies. It isn't even talked about in the horror movie forums I visit. But if you need that kind of movie images in your mind....
It isn’t a horror movie. It’s an art-house Oscar contender from a critically acclaimed director, which has always been handled differently than wide-release cheap horror slop like FNaF and Night Swim.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
I agree. Given enough time, most Disney movies will bring in more money than they cost to make in market when streaming, Blu ray, merch. income is included.

The industry must stop using the box office as the only measuring stick. Until the industry stops using this measuring stick, Disney will continue to "look" like losers.

Until the industry stops using this measuring stick , if Disney does not want to look like a loser, Disney must create movies that make money at the box office. It is possible, see Godzilla minus one.

In my opinion, Disney's problem is more about out of control budgets of their movies and not the content of their movies.
The industry does not use box office as the only measuring stick. Posters on the internet with no understanding of how Hollywood works use box office as the only measuring stick.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
That's a shame. If the real you is even a little bit like your online persona, I think you'd find it quite funny.

I appreciate you explaining the reasons why Poor Things was labeled with MPAA warnings like "Gore" and "Disturbing Material" and "Graphic Nudity", but none of that is my scene for entertainment regardless of its context or humor attached.

My "online persona" is a funny line. I'm just me, checking in on the gang here and typing after a light lunch. My real life spoken language has a few saltier words sprinkled in, but I've learned to omit them when typing here because they just get auto deleted or censored by a moderator anyway. 🤣
 

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
On the topic of Baftas, Disney got the most nominations of any studio, 22 - one more than Uni. The fact doesn’t mean a whole lot for box office, but it certainly shows that the claims “Disney only produces garbage,” or “Disney is unique in not producing a varied slate of films,” are hysterical garbage.
Disney does not produce garbage.

They produce movies that costs more to make and market than they bring in at the box office.
 

brideck

Well-Known Member
My "online persona" is a funny line. I'm just me, checking in on the gang here and typing after a light lunch. My real life spoken language has a few saltier words sprinkled in, but I've learned to omit them when typing here because they just get auto deleted or censored by a moderator anyway. 🤣

Eh, I wouldn't use that term exclusively for you. We're all modified versions of who we are in real-life when we show up at a place like this, for better or worse.

Not worthy of its own post because its not Disney, but... I really hate how casually the term "bomb" is thrown around online in general, but if it's going to apply to anything that's in theaters right now that would be The Book of Clarence. It was supposed to open in the UK this weekend, but was just unceremoniously yanked completely off the release schedule there as of today, and it won't be long for our theaters either. Glad I'm going to check it out tonight.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom