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

LSLS

Well-Known Member
Yeah FF has always been an odd duck in the comic community and the movies.

The title “First Family of Marvel!” Might have worked great in the early 1960s but how much cachet now?

No idea.

As far as Superman I must be the only one who liked Henry Cavill as SM. Snyder I’m indifferent to but I did like the treatment. I’m with you though he’s not my favorite but don’t hate him either as a character. Neural I guess.

And yeah you would have to think dinosaurs in the summer should be a hit but who knows these days.
I'd actually agree with you Cavill is the best I've seen as Superman, I think the recast was a big mistake. Just the character as a whole kind of bores me. I also remember it driving me crazy when I was little that nobody recognized him.
 

Willmark

Well-Known Member
I'd actually agree with you Cavill is the best I've seen as Superman, I think the recast was a big mistake. Just the character as a whole kind of bores me. I also remember it driving me crazy when I was little that nobody recognized him.
As Marvel discovered with Captain Marvel ridiculously overpowered heroes are boring. When they are that powerful they are either wish fulfillment for the writers or the writers having to concoct ever more elaborate schemes to defeat them.

Sometimes is both.

Take Superman. Most often his foes have no super powers and has to rely on “tricks” magic, science or whatever. Now that is cool in some cases, I’m not bashing it but the same time it’s simply masking the fact that with a nigh invulnerable character the “normal” threats really don’t matter. Or you have to rely on even more OP villains like Doomsday. Problem with that becomes there can be so many of those type of villains before it has its own set of problems as a plot contrivance.

I guess in a round about way, more believable heroes like Spider-Man are “better “ because they aren’t so over the top. Or are humorous when fighting low level goons who are no match for them.

Where Marvel used to excel was not creating characters for the sake of it, but giving the reader a reason to care about the character themselves, not what they represent. Spider-Man isn’t great story because he’s Spider-Man. He’s a great character because of the all too relatable failings of Peter Parker.

His failings are what make him great.
He failed to save Gwen Stacy and the repercussions of that haunted him for years.

That is fantastic writing. Superman? Yawn…

As always for folks YMMV.
 
Last edited:

DCLcruiser

Well-Known Member
Why would an autistic child deter people from seeing the movie?
It’s a sensitive subject. They may not want to explain it to their kids. It may make them feel uncomfortable. It may reflect their own family and be triggering. I don’t know. Why didn’t people go see it?
 

Agent H

Well-Known Member
It’s a sensitive subject. They may not want to explain it to their kids. It may make them feel uncomfortable. It may reflect their own family and be triggering. I don’t know. Why didn’t people go see it?
Because it was under marketed and people don’t go see as many original movies at the theater. I bet that when it comes out on Disney+ it will the most watched movie for that month.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
I still don’t get why they name movies with the character’s name. I get it worked for Snow White and Moana, but let’s try to be descriptive or at least captivating.
100+ years of Hollywood history? I mean how many movies in the entire history of cinema have had the main characters name in the title? Hundreds? Thousands? If audiences now need a more descriptive title for a movie before they'll see it I weep for society.
 

DCLcruiser

Well-Known Member
100+ years of Hollywood history? I mean how many movies in the entire history of cinema have had the main characters name in the title? Hundreds? Thousands? If audiences now need a more descriptive title for a movie before they'll see it I weep for society.
We complain that they don’t advertise movies enough to entice audiences, but it’s ok to name it John Carter, Luca or Elio. They tell the passerby nothing, they don’t hook you in (Luca pun?), or encourage further research.

If Star Wars was called Luke, would it grab as many eyeballs?
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
We complain that they don’t advertise movies enough to entice audiences, but it’s ok to name it John Carter, Luca or Elio. They tell the passerby nothing, they don’t hook you in (Luca pun?), or encourage further research.

If Star Wars was called Luke, would it grab as many eyeballs?
And what did Ben Hur tell audiences? What would have been a better title? Prince turned slave who drives a chariot?
How about Sparticus?
Or Mary Poppins?
How about Anne Hall?
Forest Gump?
Kill Bill?

There are like I said hundreds or even thousands of movies with simple names of the main characters for the title, and many were fairly successful. I think we have to stop blaming the title of a movie.
 
Last edited:

DCLcruiser

Well-Known Member
And what did Ben Hur tell audiences? What would have been a better title? Prince turned slave who drives a chariot?
How about Sparticus?
Or Mary Poppins?
How about Anne Hall?
Forest Gump?
Kill Bill?

There are like I said hundreds or even thousands of movies with simple names of the main characters for the title, and all were fairly successful. I think we have to stop blaming the title of a movie.
I already admitted that Snow White and Moana worked. I am not saying it is impossible.

But, when people complain about audiences not being interested in a movie, perhaps it’s because they weren’t enticed. The name matters, it’s the first impression.

Other than that, I can’t figure out how Disney fails miserably on Sci-Fi themed movies.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
I already admitted that Snow White and Moana worked. I am not saying it is impossible.

But, when people complain about audiences not being interested in a movie, perhaps it’s because they weren’t enticed. The name matters, it’s the first impression.

Other than that, I can’t figure out how Disney fails miserably on Sci-Fi themed movies.
How many successful non-Disney sci-fi animated movies are there? I really can't think of any, at least not ones hugely popular, I honestly can't. Can you name any?

So maybe this is more a genre issue rather than a Disney issue, that animation just isn't the right medium for the genre. As there have been many fairly well done movies, just didn't find major success with audiences.
 

DCLcruiser

Well-Known Member
How many successful non-Disney sci-fi animated movies are there? I really can't think of any, at least not ones hugely popular, I honestly can't. Can you name any?

So maybe this is more a genre issue rather than a Disney issue, that animation just isn't the right medium for the genre. As there have been many fairly well done movies, just didn't find major success with audiences.
When you put it that way, I think you’re right. You would think that kids and Sci-Fi would work, but maybe not.

Maybe you need a sense of danger, that requires a more adult film. There are so many great Sci-Fi films in general.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
When you put it that way, I think you’re right. You would think that kids and Sci-Fi would work, but maybe not.

Maybe you need a sense of danger, that requires a more adult film. There are so many great Sci-Fi films in general.
And again by all evidence Elio is great too. So the issue is not the movie itself or even its title, as audiences that are seeing it are giving it great reviews.

So we have to look beyond the movie itself. And look at the other factors, many of which have been discussed in this thread many times over now. But just to summarize my thoughts, is that unless its an event film that audiences just aren't going to the movies much anymore. This is an industry wide issue and not isolated to just Disney. Sure we can throw a bunch of Disney specific issues into the mix to add to that, and even the sci-fi genre issue, but that is not the primary reasons in my opinion.
 

DCLcruiser

Well-Known Member
And again by all evidence Elio is great too. So the issue is not the movie itself or even its title, as audiences that are seeing it are giving it great reviews.

So we have to look beyond the movie itself. And look at the other factors, many of which have been discussed in this thread many times over now. But just to summarize my thoughts, is that unless its an event film that audiences just aren't going to the movies much anymore. This is an industry wide issue and not isolated to just Disney. Sure we can throw a bunch of Disney specific issues into the mix to add to that, and even the sci-fi genre issue, but that is not the primary reasons in my opinion.
Agreed. Plus, the old eventual release on D+ issue.

I haven’t been to the movies in 2 years, thanks to my young kids. So, I’m not helping the cause, and I appreciate the D+ releases.
 

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
Is this movie title descriptive enough?

Night of the Day of the Dawn of the Son of the Bride of the Return of the Revenge of the Terror of the Attack of the Evil Mutant Hellbound Flesh Eating Crawling Alien Zombified Subhumanoid Living Dead, Part 5​



 

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
How many successful non-Disney sci-fi animated movies are there? I really can't think of any, at least not ones hugely popular, I honestly can't. Can you name any?

So maybe this is more a genre issue rather than a Disney issue, that animation just isn't the right medium for the genre. As there have been many fairly well done movies, just didn't find major success with audiences.
You're not thinking anime or Studio Ghibli.

Castle in the Sky
Steamboy
Ghost in the Shell
Cowboy BeBop
Akira


What about the Iron Giant? Heavy Metal? Monsters vs. Aliens? MegaMind?

 
Last edited:

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

Back
Top Bottom