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

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Dude, listen.... Do I want every MCU movie to do $1B+ like the several that were the run up to Endgame, YES 100% Absolutely. But do I expect that to be the case, especially post-pandemic? No of course not. I've reset my expectations as I know its hard to get to those levels even during the best times and even harder in the current market space. And I can even acknowledge the drop off in quality that many saw with Phases 4/5, even if I didn't agree with them.

So you can call it an excuse, I call it resetting my expectations based on the reality of where the marketplace is right now. As a whole, outside of maybe Stitch, I see very few other movies for 2025 hitting $1B+. Its hard to hit that threshold now, the audiences just aren't there in most cases. And if personal finances become even more constrained as many are expecting the rest of the year and into next, I don't see that changing.

I just missed the part where Disney made an official announcement that MCU pics aren’t expected to clear budgets anymore?

Is it on youtube?

 

[Disney Irish]

I just missed the part where Disney made an official announcement that MCU pics aren’t expected to clear budgets anymore?

Is it on youtube?

And where is the announcement that they officially expected any particular box office return on any movie MCU or otherwise? Guess I missed that presser.

 

[TsWade2]

BRING BACK HAND-DRAWN ANIMATION!

Seriously, it’s so much more charming than computer animation (which I know wasn’t the point of your post, but I hope you’ll forgive me).

I wish to support you, but forget it! Disney is too ashamed of their hand drawn legacy. And Bob Iger hates hand drawn animation like Michael Eisner did.

 

[Disney Irish]

I wish to support you, but forget it! Disney is too ashamed of their hand drawn legacy. And Bob Iger hates hand drawn animation like Michael Eisner did.

Disney isn't ashamed of hand drawn animation or its legacy within the company, that is just ridiculous. Its a business, and from the business standpoint they just don't feel its worth the investment to rebuild an entire division around that type of animation as they don't think they can get a good enough return on that investment.

Trust me if Disney knew they could milk Billions out of a new hand drawn animated feature they would do it immediately.

 

[MrPromey]

I think the New Avengers is a clever reveal in the movie itself, but I feel renaming the movie in the marketing after one week will just confuse people more than anything else. In fact, it might turn people against the movie as they will see a bunch of D-list characters and say "NOT MY AVENGERS!!"


Now to be fair, I think the movie does a terrific job of developing the characters and making you really like them. I was a bit indifferent the Black Widow movie and didn't care for The Falcon and the Winter Soldier (the two MCU properties Thunderbolts most directly follows up on with the inclusion of Yelena, Red Guardian, Valentina and John Walker). And Ghost left no impression on me in Ant-man and the Wasp. So I wasn't at all hyped to see these characters when this movie was announced, and I'm sure most people felt similarly.

Yet, by the time Thunderbolts ended, I had grown to love the characters as the movie did a fantastic job fleshing them out. So by the time the movie revealed these characters are the "New Avengers" (as the marketing is now spoiling), I was on board, and I am now looking forward to see what happens next with them. But the casual moviegoer who hasn't seen the movie yet will likely scoff at the idea of these guys becoming the next Avengers team, as they only know the characters from how they were depicted their less well received movies/TV shows.

It was such a clever reveal at the end and the closing credits where it shows news headlines including "NOT MY AVENGERS!" as happening in-world was such a funny and smart acknowledgement of why the movie was named the way it was to begin with as it pertains to fans. It really hit in the end. I know the "secret" was always going to get out quickly but I don't think the title (as-is with asterisk) should ever have been changed.

 

[MrPromey]

Is everyone on vacation?

Thundervengers could hit $100m domestic tonight, possibly $200m worldwide.

I’m not seeing anything about the “big reveal” other than here. I thought if they played that up, it might boost interest. Maybe they’re holding their fire for the moment.

We just got back from WDW and are heading to Atlanta on Sunday, so we’re missing our usual movie days (Monday Tuesday) two weeks in a row. Not sure when we can catch it.

So you still haven't seen it?

It's a shame they spoiled the reveal for you ahead of time, then. :/

 

[Tony the Tigger]

I wish to support you, but forget it! Disney is too ashamed of their hand drawn legacy. And Bob Iger hates hand drawn animation like Michael Eisner did.

What in the world are you talking about?

It’s best to couch wild speculation with, “In my opinion…” or “I wonder if…”

So you still haven't seen it?

It's a shame they spoiled the reveal for you ahead of time, then. :/

Ah, well.

I still want to see if their marketing changes.

 

[TP2000]

I wish to support you, but forget it! Disney is too ashamed of their hand drawn legacy.

The kids call it "Problematic" now. Which made me laugh when I had my nephews and their wives explain that word to me a few summers ago at the beach one day, because it's really quite a damning concept with a flaccid, flimsy name.

But for whatever reason, our betters in the faculty lounge gave that new concept the tepid name of "Problematic".

I would have called it something like "Horrifically Damned", or maybe "Toxic Hatred For Stupids".

 

[Agent H]

The kids call it "Problematic" now. Which made me laugh when I had my nephews and their wives explain that word to me a few summers ago at the beach one day, because it's really quite a damning concept with a flaccid, flimsy name.

But for whatever reason, our betters in the faculty lounge gave that new concept the tepid name of "Problematic".

I would have called it something like "Horrifically Damned", or maybe "Toxic Hatred For Stupids".

The kids call 2d animation “problematic” now? What? I don’t even feel strongly either way on the 2d vs. 3d debate but that makes no sense.

 

[Phroobar]

The kids call 2d animation “problematic” now? What? I don’t even feel strongly either way on the 2d vs. 3d debate but that makes no sense.

I always thought 1d animation was problematic. Who wants to watch a bunch of horizontal lines?

 

[Disney Irish]

I always thought 1d animation was problematic. Who wants to watch a bunch of horizontal lines?

Have you not seen the wildly popular Henry Stickmin Indy game that has been going around for years now? Not a joke btw.

 

[MrPromey]

I always thought 1d animation was problematic. Who wants to watch a bunch of horizontal lines?

As someone who's first experience at home gaming was an Atari 2600, I have a warm place in my heart for horizontal lines. Also vertical lines but often not in the same games.

Having said that, being able to move some of those lines myself may be what made the difference...

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Point is that you're still trying to compare post-pandemic movies to pre-pandemic movies. Something as has been discussed many times isn't wise to do. (BTW, I meant pre-2020 when I said pre-2019)

But when have I ever claimed that the MCU hasn't underperformed post-pandemic, never have. I have agreed lots of times that the MCU is not up to pre-pandemic levels. And honestly outside of a few exceptions I don't expect it to be. The heights of Endgame is a lighting in a bottle moment, it'll likely never get back to that heights again anytime soon, until maybe we get a X-MenVsAvengers level movie.

I think there’s a big gap between how much people’s expectations have changed though, personally I don’t expect MCU films to do $1 billion plus anymore but I do still expect them to do $700 million, that’s a 30% decrease in expectation, and still provides a couple hundred million in profit to Disney, many people seem to have decreased their MCU expectation to $400-500 million now, a 50-60% decrease, I don’t think that’s realistic, it’s certainly not an expectation that should result in more MCU movies being made anyway. If the expectation isn’t at least $100 million in profit there’s no incentive for Disney to continue spending hundreds of millions on the MCU, they should spend that money elsewhere with a bigger expectation to actually make a profit.

 

[TP2000]

The kids call 2d animation “problematic” now? What? I don’t even feel strongly either way on the 2d vs. 3d debate but that makes no sense.

The actual process of hand drawing animation is not "Problematic", but the subject matter and plotlines of many of those hand drawn films are "Problematic". Which is why Disney is often seen as ashamed of its own legacy film library.

Disney is too ashamed of their hand drawn legacy.

 

[TP2000]

Here's a fun Saturday lunchtime box office update for this weekend. Special thanks to both @brideck for alerting us to this change in advance, and to Kurt in the Command Center for re-calibrating the blinky lights at his console so as not to create any confusion in how this is framed: Rachel Zegler's Snow White added 1,020 theaters this weekend.

The box office results for that were... interesting.

Thunderbolts shows a decline of 72% from last week for Friday, but that is deceiving because last week's Friday numbers include last Thursday's preview showings.

Snow White notably added 1,020 theaters for this weekend. But judging by the fact that increased theater count only produced a per theater box office haul of $52 per theater, the results weren't great. 1,330 theaters nationwide netted Burbank an extra $70,000 (there isn't a zero missing from that, Kurt double checked) for yesterday. That's an Oof!

That "Oof!" was clear-eyed framing from me, not Kurt.

The Numbers - Daily Box Office Chart for Monday May 26, 2025

Daily Domestic Box Office Chart for Monday May 26, 2025

thenumbers.com

 

[Casper Gutman]

I think there’s a big gap between how much people’s expectations have changed though, personally I don’t expect MCU films to do $1 billion plus anymore but I do still expect them to do $700 million, that’s a 30% decrease in expectation, and still provides a couple hundred million in profit to Disney, many people seem to have decreased their MCU expectation to $400-500 million now, a 50-60% decrease, I don’t think that’s realistic, it’s certainly not an expectation that should result in more MCU movies being made anyway. If the expectation isn’t at least $100 million in profit there’s no incentive for Disney to continue spending hundreds of millions on the MCU, they should spend that money elsewhere with a bigger expectation to actually make a profit.

First… film… in… a… new… series.

People seem to have convinced themselves that the Avengers films, the culmination of a decade of less profitable buildup, was the standard. Which is very silly.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

First… film… in… a… new… series.

People seem to have convinced themselves that the Avengers films, the culmination of a decade of less profitable buildup, was the standard. Which is very silly.

Here's a list of post phase 1 MCU intro movies and their global grosses (all unadjusted):

Eternals: $402 million
Shang-Chi: $432 million
Ant Man: $512 million
Doctor Strange: $677 million
Guardians of the Galaxy: $773 million
Captain Marvel: $1.1 billion
Black Panther: $1.3 billion

Average gross: $742 million

Deadpool 1 also made $782 million.

$700 million is not an unrealistic expectation for an MCU movie, even a 1st character intro (which Thunderbolts technically isn't, as some characters were introduced prior).

Again, few here have said that Thunderbolts is a flop, or won't turn a profit, but $500 million globally is not blockbuster status for an MCU movie in 2025, nor likely Disney's expectation for success. Even accounting for outliers like The Marvels and changing movie habits, we know how much No Way Home, GotG 3, Deadpool 3, Black Panther 2 and Doctor Strange 2 did.

 

[Disney Irish]

Here's a list of post phase 1 MCU intro movies and their global grosses (all unadjusted):

Eternals: $402 million
Shang-Chi: $432 million
Ant Man: $512 million
Doctor Strange: $677 million
Guardians of the Galaxy: $773 million
Captain Marvel: $1.1 billion
Black Panther: $1.3 billion

Average gross: $742 million

Deadpool 1 also made $782 million.

$700 million is not an unrealistic expectation for an MCU movie, even a 1st character intro (which Thunderbolts technically isn't, as some characters were introduced prior).

Again, few here have said that Thunderbolts is a flop, or won't turn a profit, but you've become obsessed with this idea that $500 million globally is blockbuster status for an MCU movie in 2025 and it just isn't. Even accounting for outliers like The Marvels and changing movie habits, we know how much No Way Home, GotG 3, Deadpool 3, Black Panther 2 and Doctor Strange 2 did.

Take out the two $1B+ movies (as they actually skew the average and I think you know that because they are the outliers not the norm which is why you acknowledge it but don't give the actual average without them) and the average actually drops to $559M, which I think is a much more realistic expectation. Now yes several haven't gotten to that point, and I can acknowledge that most of that is because of the quality that many feel have dropped with the MCU. But the hope is the moving forward we should see that change, and I hope it starts with Thunderbolts as you can feel the difference between it and the others post-Endgame. We'll see what the final number is when it comes in.

The bottom line is people started expecting that the MCU would just continue to do $1B+ because that was what they saw as the norm in the run up to Endgame. But the reality is that out of 36 total movies, only 11 got over $1B. That is something like only 30%. That is high for almost all franchises, but its not the reality or sustainable. It was never going to be that every movie, especially post-Endgame, was going to continue getting $1B+. And when that didn't happen they wrote off the MCU as failing, when in reality it was just coming back to a more normal level.

 

[Disney Irish]

I think there’s a big gap between how much people’s expectations have changed though, personally I don’t expect MCU films to do $1 billion plus anymore but I do still expect them to do $700 million, that’s a 30% decrease in expectation, and still provides a couple hundred million in profit to Disney, many people seem to have decreased their MCU expectation to $400-500 million now, a 50-60% decrease, I don’t think that’s realistic, it’s certainly not an expectation that should result in more MCU movies being made anyway. If the expectation isn’t at least $100 million in profit there’s no incentive for Disney to continue spending hundreds of millions on the MCU, they should spend that money elsewhere with a bigger expectation to actually make a profit.

I think its fair to have a more realistic expectation, whether that is $500M or $700M can be debated. But I don't think its fair however to decry the failure of the MCU if some movies don't hit whatever that expectation might be. As there are more factors than just what is on-screen that affects the box office. Many of which has been discussed ad nauseam here about the state of the box office.

Also has noted above if you take out the outliers of the $1B+ intro movies post-phase 1 and the average is actually $559M. So that is really what the expectation should be for most MCU films like Thunderbolts. Now will it get to that, I don't know. We'll have to wait and see.

 

[Tha Realest]

“The math doesn’t look as bad if you take off the top two earning films.”

I just tried that argument unsuccessfully with my property tax assessment. It works as well here as it did there.