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

[Hawkeye_2018]

Wow! How big is your family? I saw it the day it came out for $10. There where probably ten people in the theater

4. So would be $160 if we went to just 4 movies at $10 a ticket. But since I don't go to theaters often, when I do, I want to go to a nice one (Imax, Dolby, XD..etc) so tickets are more likely closer to $15 each. Do that 4 times and you spent at least $240 for a family of 4.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

The smaller the theatrical window the less money the theater makes from a movie. The splits for studios and theaters favors the majority of the first couple weeks going to studios. So a smaller window means theaters get almost no money from a movie for its entire run, effectively destroying theaters. Which is why AMC has come out publicly saying that 45 days is the sweet spot for theaters, studios make their money the first couple weeks and theaters get theirs for the rest.

True, but we've seen that movies continue to play in theaters even after the digital release.

Movies typically follow a predictable pattern and drop in the 30% range each week. We've seen movies continue to follow that pattern, even when they're available to stream.

Granted, that typically refers to renting or buying the movie, usually at a premium cost. It can still be comparable price wise at that point to go to the theater. If movies are available for "free" on Netflix after 17 days that could have more of an impact.

We also saw people go out in droves to watch Stranger Things in the theater, day and date with the Netflix release. This shows that if people value seeing a certain movie in the theater, they will.

For me, the difference between 17 and 30 days is meaningless. Long gone are the days of having to wait six months to watch a movie at home. If the shorter window is keeping me from going to the theater, and it admittedly does, the 17 versus 30 day wait isn't going to make a difference.

It will likely continue to impact the type of movies that succeed theatrically. Focus will continue to be on the big event movies. Disney could have put Avatar 3 on D+ in December and it still likely would have been a huge hit because everyone wants to see that movie in 3D in the theater.

Netflix is a business model that doesn't seem to need theaters. Other studios feel differently. We've talked about how it's not only extra revenue but adds perceived value to a movie which translates to post-theatrical revenue.

If Netflix/WB bows out, I suspect others will jump in to fill the void. Competition already means studios need to consider their theatrical output. Just look at the Summer movie season where each weekend is staked out months or years in advance. If some of those spots open up, others may fill the void.

 

[MisterPenguin]

As clearly Deadline has reported that their sources have said that Netflix is still a proponent of the 17 day window (as shown in the articles posted)

That's not what the article says.

The article uses the past tense. As you quoted...

"Sources have told Deadline that Netflix have been proponents of a 17-day window which would steamroll the theatrical business, while circuits such as AMC believe the line needs to be held around 45 days."​

Note that it doesn't say "are still proponents...".

However, the article also says Sarandos says...

“There’s been a lot of talk about theatrical distribution, so we want to set the record straight: we are 100% committed to releasing Warner Bros. films in theaters with industry-standard windows.”​

It's clear that Netflix once eschewed theatrical releases. But they kept dipping their toe in it. And in order to assuage anti-merger proponents, they are saying (whether one believes them or not) that they will adhere to the industry standard, which is significantly more than 17 days.

 

[Disney Irish]

True, but we've seen that movies continue to play in theaters even after the digital release.

Not Netflix movies. When Netflix releases a movie to theaters it for a specific number of days and then leaves, there is no sticking around for x number of days after moving to digital/streaming. So that is the fear by the industry that the same will happen if/when they take over WB.

Movies typically follow a predictable pattern and drop in the 30% range each week. We've seen movies continue to follow that pattern, even when they're available to stream.

That pattern may continue or it may get worse in a smaller theatrical window world. Again that is the fear by the industry, and specifically theater owners.

Granted, that typically refers to renting or buying the movie, usually at a premium cost. It can still be comparable price wise at that point to go to the theater. If movies are available for "free" on Netflix after 17 days that could have more of an impact.

I think it'll have more of an impact. How many times have we talked about the D+ effect where more people are waiting until it hits D+ for free. And that is Disney who has the longest theatrical window at almost 90 days. So just imagine that would be worse here, where most would just wait until the movie reaches Netflix in 17 days. And as we've seen once people get into the habit of just waiting, they do it for almost everything, its a cascading effect.

We also saw people go out in droves to watch Stranger Things in the theater, day and date with the Netflix release. This shows that if people value seeing a certain movie in the theater, they will.

And how much would Netflix have made if they did that as a theatrical exclusive? $50M? $100M? That is the point.

For me, the difference between 17 and 30 days is meaningless. Long gone are the days of having to wait six months to watch a movie at home. If the shorter window is keeping me from going to the theater, and it admittedly does, the 17 versus 30 day wait isn't going to make a difference.

Not sure why you keep focusing on 30 days, when the industry has been pushing for 45 days. Also the difference here is this isn't just 17 days and then it goes to digital, its 17 days and then it goes to Netflix for no extra cost. As said once a major studio reduces the theatrical window to a shorter time frame that trains the audience that they don't have to go and just wait until it hits the service they already pay for in a couple weeks not a couple months as is the case now. No leaving the house, no extra expense, just wait 2 weeks and it'll be there. That is a significant change.

It will likely continue to impact the type of movies that succeed theatrically. Focus will continue to be on the big event movies. Disney could have put Avatar 3 on D+ in December and it still likely would have been a huge hit because everyone wants to see that movie in 3D in the theater.

Netflix is a business model that doesn't seem to need theaters. Other studios feel differently. We've talked about how it's not only extra revenue but adds perceived value to a movie which translates to post-theatrical revenue.

If Netflix/WB bows out, I suspect others will jump in to fill the void. Competition already means studios need to consider their theatrical output. Just look at the Summer movie season where each weekend is staked out months or years in advance. If some of those spots open up, others may fill the void.

That is a risk that many theater owners aren't willing to take though.

Would Avatar perform the same if it went to D+ for no extra cost by Christmas? Probably not. It certainly would be less likely to get over $1B.

Also in order for other studios to fill the void that would mean more output would have to happen, are other studios willing to foot the bill? We already hear complaints about Hollywood spending too much on movies as it is. Why would you think they would just increase their expenses more to fill the void, especially in an even more uncertain market where audiences are getting trained to stay home even more and wait for the movies to hit their services. Also were not talking about a small studio here, we're talking about one of the 4 major studios. Not to mention that many other studios would need to start adjusting their release strategies in order to compete with Netflix/WB, ie a cascading effect. That would be a huge void that would have to be filled if all studios need to adjust their windows in order to compete, there likely isn't enough content to fill that void.

 

[Disney Irish]

That's not what the article says.

The article uses the past tense. As you quoted...

"Sources have told Deadline that Netflix have been proponents of a 17-day window which would steamroll the theatrical business, while circuits such as AMC believe the line needs to be held around 45 days."​

Note that it doesn't say "are still proponents...".

However, the article also says Sarandos says...

“There’s been a lot of talk about theatrical distribution, so we want to set the record straight: we are 100% committed to releasing Warner Bros. films in theaters with industry-standard windows.”​

It's clear that Netflix once eschewed theatrical releases. But they kept dipping their toe in it. And in order to assuage anti-merger proponents, they are saying (whether one believes them or not) that they will adhere to the industry standard, which is significantly more than 17 days.

And what is that standard? Is it 30 days? 45 days? 90 days? Its different for every studio, for example for Disney its an average of 70 days while for Uni it ranges from 17 to 45 days depending on the type of movie. So there isn't one standard. And so what would it be for WB/Netflix after the merger, that is the point, and Teddy never says what he will commit to, just an "industry standard". But he would be the one making the standard for WB/Netflix, and that can be whatever he makes it, including the 17 days.

So its boilerplate Hollywood PR speak where you say something that sounds like a commitment but no real commitment at all.

 

[MisterPenguin]

And what is that standard? Is it 30 days? 45 days? 90 days? Its different for every studio, for example for Disney its an average of 70 days while for Uni it ranges from 17 to 45 days depending on the type of movie. What is it for WB/Netflix after the merger, that is the point, and Teddy never says what he will commit to. So its boilerplate Hollywood PR speak where you say something that sounds like a commitment but no real commitment at all.

So, I'll put you down for "I don't believe them."

As for how many days?... That's a new front you want to argue about. I'm not following you there. My point is that the hysteria over a 17 day window has no substance. The article is reporting that Netflix *had been* pushing 17 days while saying that *for now* they'll follow an industry standard.

The industry standard right now is all over the place. Certainly not like it was before they pandemic.

Companies, like Disney, that wanted to goose their streaming service kneecapped the theatrical window. Then they learned "Oh, we can make money for each 'window' including theatrical" and started to go back to longer theatrical windows, but nowhere near what they used to be.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Not Netflix movies. When Netflix releases a movie to theaters it for a specific number of days and then leaves, there is no sticking around for x number of days after moving to digital/streaming. So that is the fear by the industry that the same will happen if/when they take over WB.

That pattern may continue or it may get worse in a smaller theatrical window world. Again that is the fear by the industry, and specifically theater owners.

I think it'll have more of an impact. How many times have we talked about the D+ effect where more people are waiting until it hits D+ for free. And that is Disney who has the longest theatrical window at almost 90 days. So just imagine that would be worse here, where most would just wait until the movie reaches Netflix in 17 days. And as we've seen once people get into the habit of just waiting, they do it for almost everything, its a cascading effect.

And how much would Netflix have made if they did that as a theatrical exclusive? $50M? $100M? That is the point.

Not sure why you keep focusing on 30 days, when the industry has been pushing for 45 days. Also the difference here is this isn't just 17 days and then it goes to digital, its 17 days and then it goes to Netflix for no extra cost. As said once a major studio reduces the theatrical window to a shorter time frame that trains the audience that they don't have to go and just wait until it hits the service they already pay for in a couple weeks not a couple months as is the case now. No leaving the house, no extra expense, just wait 2 weeks and it'll be there. That is a significant change.

That is a risk that many theater owners aren't willing to take though.

Would Avatar perform the same if it went to D+ for no extra cost by Christmas? Probably not. It certainly would be less likely to get over $1B.

Also in order for other studios to fill the void that would mean more output would have to happen, are other studios willing to foot the bill? We already hear complaints about Hollywood spending too much on movies as it is. Why would you think they would just increase their expenses more to fill the void, especially in an even more uncertain market where audiences are getting trained to stay home even more and wait for the movies to hit their services. Also were not talking about a small studio here, we're talking about one of the 4 major studios. Not to mention that many other studios would need to start adjusting their release strategies in order to compete with Netflix/WB, ie a cascading effect. That would be a huge void that would have to be filled if all studios need to adjust their windows in order to compete, there likely isn't enough content to fill that void.

If Netflix does a limited theatrical release with a fixed end date, wouldn't theaters just turn it down? Or negotiate a different fee schedule?

I focused on 30 days because that's what Superman and Jurassic World did this year, and performed well.

You're still assuming WB folds into Netflix completely and WB movies follow a new pattern. Superman had a theatrical release followed by a paid digital release followed by streaming on HBO. I still have a hard time believing they would put a tentpole movie like that on Netflix after 17 days.

Netflix for now is still generally quantity over quality and they rarely spend the type of money needed to make a Superhero movie. Superman as a straight to Netflix film doesn't add up for me.

 

[Disney Irish]

So, I'll put you down for "I don't believe them."

And you believe him when even just earlier in 2025 he called the theatrical model as outdated?

Sorry, as the saying goes if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck its certainly not a zebra. But maybe Teddy has seen the error of his ways, something that many in his ranks have been telling him since he ascended to the ranks of CEO 6 years ago. But to me a leopard doesn't change his spots, so doubt it. So yeah I'm all in on the "don't believe him" column.

As for how many days?... That's a new front you want to argue about. I'm not following you there. My point is that the hysteria over a 17 day window has no substance. The article is reporting that Netflix *had been* pushing 17 days while saying that *for now* they'll follow an industry standard.

The industry standard right now is all over the place. Certainly not like it was before they pandemic.

That isn't really a new front for me. I've already said numerous times that if Netflix really has any intent to keep a longer theatrical window they would be specific with the number of days they will commit to not just say "follow an industry standard", which as you even admit is all over the place. Paramount publicly committed to 30-45 days, they didn't use this BS "follow an industry standard" PR doublespeak non-committal stance that Teddy has.

Companies, like Disney, that wanted to goose their streaming service kneecapped the theatrical window. Then they learned "Oh, we can make money for each 'window' including theatrical" and started to go back to longer theatrical windows, but nowhere near what they used to be.

When Disney changed their theatrical window it was in the early days of the post-pandemic recovery when everyone was trying anything to figure out the new normal, but then settled in and hasn't really changed since. Disney still has the longest theatrical window of any studio. Heck we even have posters here asking why they aren't pulling underperforming movies from theaters earlier.

 

[MisterPenguin]

And you believe him when even just earlier in 2025 he called the theatrical model as outdated?

Sorry, as the saying goes if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck its certainly not a zebra. But maybe Teddy has seen the error of his ways, something that many in his ranks have been telling him since he ascended to the ranks of CEO 6 years ago. But to me a leopard doesn't change his spots, so doubt it. So yeah I'm all in on the "don't believe him" column.


That isn't really a new front for me. I've already said numerous times that if Netflix really has any intent to keep a longer theatrical window they would be specific with the number of days they will commit to not just say "follow an industry standard", which as you even admit is all over the place. Paramount publicly committed to 30-45 days, they didn't use this BS "follow an industry standard" PR doublespeak non-committal stance that Teddy has.


When Disney changed their theatrical window it was in the early days of the post-pandemic recovery when everyone was trying anything to figure out the new normal, but then settled in and hasn't really changed since. Disney still has the longest theatrical window of any studio. Heck we even have posters here asking why they aren't pulling underperforming movies from theaters earlier.

I'm not doing the multi-paragraph back and forth with you. We each had our say. Our listeners will judge accordingly.

Good day.

 

[Disney Irish]

If Netflix does a limited theatrical release with a fixed end date, wouldn't theaters just turn it down? Or negotiate a different fee schedule?

Would they turn it down, or even have an option to? That would be a lot of movies to turn down, WB released 13 movies in 2025, I don't see how they could turn down that many movies.

Also theaters aren't in a position of power to negotiate a better fee schedule, that is usually in the studios favor.

I focused on 30 days because that's what Superman and Jurassic World did this year, and performed well.

That is different though, as they didn't go direct to a streaming service, they were made available on digital purchase, followed by rental, and took 3 months before they went to streaming. You're assuming it still follows the same patterns as before with a full theatrical release, then digital, then streaming 3-4 months later.

You're still assuming WB folds into Netflix completely and WB movies follow a new pattern.

Netflix is certainly not going to run WB as a completely independent entity, so of course its gets folded into Netflix corporate. And while I have my doubts on short term plans, in the long term they will certainly reshape WB to follow the Netflix way. It would be very rare for any acquire-er to be shaped by the one being acquired.

It wouldn't be in the interest of Netflix shareholders for it to be run any other way.

Superman had a theatrical release followed by a paid digital release followed by streaming on HBO. I still have a hard time believing they would put a tentpole movie like that on Netflix after 17 days.

Netflix for now is still generally quantity over quality and they rarely spend the type of money needed to make a Superhero movie. Superman as a straight to Netflix film doesn't add up for me.

We're talking about the same company that has notoriously spent hundreds of Millions on movies that never go to theaters, for example the Russo's $320M tent pole film Electric State that never went to theaters and was a Netflix exclusive, and that was just in 2025. Or the Knives Out franchise that they bought for $450M, and has spent a total of 8 days in theaters for the two sequels, not 8 days each but 8 days total.

 

[Disney Irish]

I'm not doing the multi-paragraph back and forth with you. We each had our say. Our listeners will judge accordingly.

Good day.

We obviously are going to see what happens, as we have no control over anything here. So we will be able to judge things accordingly soon enough.

 

[networkpro]

All this hoo ha and no mention of KK's replacement announcement coming soon ? These film projects take years to complete and lots of management.. and as we've seen if the wrong management inputs are made, they can kill movies and franchises.

 

[Disney Irish]

All this hoo ha and no mention of KK's replacement announcement coming soon ? These film projects take years to complete and lots of management.. and as we've seen if the wrong management inputs are made, they can kill movies and franchises.

Probably because its just rumor for now. And also this has been in the works for awhile now, so basically old news. And finally I don't think as many people care about Kennedy as some around here believe.

 

[networkpro]

Probably because its just rumor for now. And also this has been in the works for awhile now, so basically old news. And finally I don't think as many people care about Kennedy as some around here believe.

Other than being in the same hand picked successor scale of poisoning what they touch as Chapek...

 

[brideck]

Would they turn it down, or even have an option to? That would be a lot of movies to turn down, WB released 13 movies in 2025, I don't see how they could turn down that many movies.

Also theaters aren't in a position of power to negotiate a better fee schedule, that is usually in the studios favor.

Theaters do currently turn down Netflix's 17-day movies. That's why they don't play at most of the large chains. You are right in that it would be a whole different proposition if the entire WB slate also became 17-day movies overnight.

Studios have theaters over a barrel in a lot of different ways. I was reminded of this (long, but worth it) piece in a Letterboxd newsletter that I read a couple months ago that interviewed a bunch of theater operators and moviegoers across the country.

https://theankler.com/p/ghosts-in-the-balcony-crowd-pleaser-letterboxd-issue-1

And there's this later one, that talks about the crappy contracts that distributors force theaters into, using Tron: Ares as a prime example.

https://theankler.com/p/small-town-theaters-crowd-pleaser-letterboxd-issue-3

It doesn't sound like a very fun business to try to be in.

 

[Disney Irish]

Other than being in the same hand picked successor scale of poisoning what they touch as Chapek...

But again you ask the average person on the street and most don't know who Kennedy is, nor do they even care who is the next President of LFL.

But its being discussed here if you want to partake into that discussion -

Thread 'General Star Wars News'

Aug 14, 2023

Building the ‘Star Wars’ Universe on TV: Inside the Making of ‘Obi-Wan Kenobi,’ ‘Andor’ and ‘The Mandalorian’

Ever since 1977, Star Wars has been a franchise with recognizable aesthetics: The distinctive hum of a lightsaber. Rusty armor and billowing capes on the costumes. The iconic Millennium Falcon. Geo…

variety.com

• MisterPenguin
• Replies: 1,412
• Forum: Disney Movies, Animation, TV and Disney+

• 

 

[Disney Irish]

Theaters do currently turn down Netflix's 17-day movies. That's why they don't play at most of the large chains. You are right in that it would be a whole different proposition if the entire WB slate also became 17-day movies overnight.

Studios have theaters over a barrel in a lot of different ways. I was reminded of this (long, but worth it) piece in a Letterboxd newsletter that I read a couple months ago that interviewed a bunch of theater operators and moviegoers across the country.

https://theankler.com/p/ghosts-in-the-balcony-crowd-pleaser-letterboxd-issue-1

And there's this later one, that talks about the crappy contracts that distributors force theaters into, using Tron: Ares as a prime example.

https://theankler.com/p/small-town-theaters-crowd-pleaser-letterboxd-issue-3

It doesn't sound like a very fun business to try to be in.

Disney has long been known to be aggressive in their terms with theaters, its why they got more favorable splits, as they held many a movie hostage in order to do it.

And I can't imagine Netflix being any different and possibly even worse if they became a major studio with WB.....

"Welcome to the Netflix/WB distribution agreement signing AMC, Cinemark, and Regal, for those that don't know me I'm Ted Sarandos. You'll notice some changes with this years agreement compared to previous years under the previous management. And it may not seem fair, but you will accept the new 90/10 split and 17 day window and like it or we'll forgo theatrical completely, its not like we haven't survived without theatrical before. Remember you guys are dinosaurs, an outdated model, we're the future.".

Teddy -

 

[DKampy]

I don’t trust Netflix and as a company has shown their disdain for theaters several times over the years and very well could knock the window down to 17 days…. However I think the main point is a comment was made in 1 article of a possibility…. Then certain individuals start spouting it off as hard facts to fit their Hollywood needs to burn narrative… it is all about fact checking

 

[Disney Irish]

I don’t trust Netflix and as a company has shown their disdain for theaters several times over the years and very well could knock the window down to 17 days…. However I think the main point is a comment was made in 1 article of a possibility…. Then certain individuals start spouting it off as hard facts to fit their Hollywood needs to burn narrative… it is all about fact checking

I have no issue saying that the Deadline quote is being taken out of context. But its not for no reason, and its because of Netflix's long history of having disdain for theatrical made verbal by their CEO.

So for me its a "show me you've changed not just tell me" scenario. If you really are serious about theatrical now, how about start releasing some of your upcoming Netflix movies into theaters for a longer than a weekend or two. For example their upcoming Peaky Blinders movie coming out on March 6th, how about giving it a full theatrical release with a 45 day window and wait to put it on Netflix in late April instead of March 20th. Or even the upcoming January 16th Ben Affleck and Matt Damon movie called The Rip which is a Netflix exclusive, why not release that to theaters, its not like there is anything major coming out for January anyways.

 

[coffeefan]

I have no issue saying that the Deadline quote is being taken out of context. But its not for no reason, and its because of Netflix's long history of having disdain for theatrical made verbal by their CEO.

So for me its a "show me you've changed not just tell me" scenario. If you really are serious about theatrical now, how about start releasing some of your upcoming Netflix movies into theaters for a longer than a weekend or two. For example their upcoming Peaky Blinders movie coming out on March 6th, how about giving it a full theatrical release with a 45 day window and wait to put it on Netflix in late April instead of March 20th. Or even the upcoming January 16th Ben Affleck and Matt Damon movie called The Rip which is a Netflix exclusive, why not release that to theaters, its not like there is anything major coming out for January anyways.

WB now doesn't even average 45-day windows. It would be silly to expect that.