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

[brideck]

And that highlights how inconsistent theaters are in accomplishing short windows for some films and not others.

This probably comes down to the kind of distributor/theater deals that the Ankler pieces I linked were talking about. Universal makes them take 17-day movie A as a requirement to being allowed to also screen movies B, C, & D.

Netflix's movies are all the same short window (if they're even put in theaters), so there's little financial motivation for theaters to accommodate them.

 

[Disney Irish]

And that highlights how inconsistent theaters are in accomplishing short windows for some films and not others.

Because its not in their interest from a monetary standpoint to give movies with short windows any of their screens.

What is going to make a theater more money, a handful of showing of the Stranger Things in a weekend or dozens of showings Avatar 3 in that same time period? The obvious answer is Avatar 3.

There are many reasons why movie theaters are declining. Those have been discussed ad nauseam. Whether Netflix buys WB or not, it will not change the inevitable trend for theaters, unless theaters themselves evolve.

You're right it likely won't change the inevitable trend, but it can accelerate it and that is the fear that theater owners have. So rather than 10-20 years of theaters left in existence it could be 5 years. I don't know about you but that scares me, because if theaters go then whats next? What other forms of entertainment will drop in favor of at-home entertainment.

The point is it can happen. The way your original post read was that it wasn't possible. All I had to do was find one example to counter it. That's how it works. If you added exceptions that's fine but it still shows that money can still be made. There are non-netflix examples too, such as rereleases, like Avatar, Back to the Future, Jaws, Star Wars etc. etc.

And I've said multiple times event situations still work, both those examples are events. That is not the majority of films that Netflix releases though, nor is it the majority of films that even WB releases. We have a handful of event films a year, typically less than 5, that isn't enough for theaters to survive. Its the rest of the slate that makes up the bulk of screenings during the year. And I know someone said that studios can just slot in more movies, well again that means studios would have to produce more, which is more expense, and more that has to be recouped, easier said than done.

I'm just saying both or more possibilities are possible.

You're right anything is possible, but I'm advocating for a continued theatrical experience, and the Netflix model whether they publicly say otherwise doesn't promote that. So as I said before in order for Netflix to convince me that they have theatrical experience in mind they have to show me, and so far they haven't.

On a related note, movie theaters can't control all their circumstances, but they can control the theater experience. Here's a recent incident that happened on a Broadway show that's all too common in movie theaters, and that many theater chains have failed to properly mitigate.

Not saying its wrong in principal, but its Mamma Mia, its a rock musical. I remember commercials for the national tour in the early 2000s that literally showed the audience dancing and singing, so it was promoted as a "party". So I give a bit of a pass here to the audience members who were singing along with the show.

As for movie theaters I agree, they do need to do a better job at controlling the audience to make sure that phone use and talking is eliminated as much as possible.

 

[Disney Irish]

Academy Reveals List Of 201 Films Eligible For Best Picture Oscar Race

Oscars: Academy Reveals List Of 201 Films Eligible For Best Picture Race

deadline.com

 

[MisterPenguin]

Ideally, security would be in the form of Patti Lupone coming out on stage and just viscerally reprimanding the sing-alongers.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Finally saw Avatar 3.

Like all of them, it’s “fine.”

I think the thing for me is I never connected to these characters. I barely remember who they are.

Maybe I’m just shallow and would be more into it if one of them looked like 90’s Harrison Ford.

Maybe, outside of some action scenes, they’re just on the “meh” side.

The female villain was more interesting, but also moved like a stripper or something lol.

There were things that stuck out as odd, which we discussed on the way home, but I don’t even remember anymore. I felt it was darker, more(?) cursing, etc.

They’re all pretty, but forgettable. I don’t get why they’re huge.

Bring on Mando.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Finally saw Avatar 3.

Like all of them, it’s “fine.”

I think the thing for me is I never connected to these characters. I barely remember who they are.

Maybe I’m just shallow and would be more into it if one of them looked like 90’s Harrison Ford.

Maybe, outside of some action scenes, they’re just on the “meh” side.

The female villain was more interesting, but also moved like a stripper or something lol.

There were things that stuck out as odd, which we discussed on the way home, but I don’t even remember anymore. I felt it was darker, more(?) cursing, etc.

They’re all pretty, but forgettable. I don’t get why they’re huge.

Bring on Mando.

They're huge in large part because they're the rare, if not only, movie you absolutely need to see in the theater to get the intended experience.

They're filmed and designed to be seen in 3D. It's not added after the fact like most movies.

Some movies benefit from 3D to a degree. The first Dr. Strange for example has that early multiverse scene that truly shines in 3D. However, you don't really need the entire movie in 3D.

Avatar on the other hand feels immersive the entire time like no other movie does.

Yeah, the story and characters aren't great, but it's more like a theme park attraction. I loved watching them swim amongst the whales in Avatar 2 for example. If one goes in ready to appreciate the artistry, they'll enjoy it more than someone who really wants a great story.

Avatar 3 got repetitive unfortunately. There does need to be more time between these movies to build anticipation and for the experience to feel fresh again. Releasing what was essentially a two-part movie in relatively short succession was a mistake.

 

[BrianLo]

Yeah, the story and characters aren't great, but it's more like a theme park attraction.

I agree. Even more than that, they appeal very well to non-domestic audiences in a consistent across the board way. So when people say they don’t get where this movie lands compared to other movies they have top of mind, I’d also counter with you probably aren’t living in France.

 

[Disney Analyst]

I agree. Even more than that, they appeal very well to non-domestic audiences in a consistent across the board way. So when people say they don’t get where this movie lands compared to other movies they have top of mind, I’d also counter with you probably aren’t living in France.

I think - and maybe I’m off here… but that the story across Avatar being familiar, simple, broad… does better across language barriers. It translates easily and well, and the broad themes are universal and something non-Americans can easily get on board with.

Unlike something like Wicked that is steeped in Americana culture / nostalgia from the source material

 

[Disney Irish]

Avatar 3 up to $1.23B, for anyone thinking its not going to get to $1.5B or beyond is fooling themselves, it still continues to hold well.

‘Avatar: Fire And Ash’ Leads Global Weekend With $87M As WW Cume Blazes To $1.23B

Avatar: Fire and Ash is still the rage around the world with a global weekend of $86.9M, $65.6M of that minted in its fourth weekend abroad in 52 material territories taking the 20th Century Studios pic’s foreign haul to $888M and global $1.23 billion. The trilogy’s running cume is $6.5B. That...

deadline.com

So the prediction by some of $1.7B or so is probably right about where this will end up.

 

[TP2000]

Happy Sunday Brunch, for those who celebrate!

First pass estimate of weekend box office is out. No big news, but Burbank has two in the top 5 still!

The Numbers - Weekend Box Office Chart for January 9, 2026

Weekend Domestic Box Office Chart for the weekend of January 9, 2026

www.the-numbers.com

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Avatar 3 up to $1.23B, for anyone thinking its not going to get to $1.5B or beyond is fooling themselves, it still continues to hold well.

So the prediction by some of $1.7B or so is probably right about where this will end up.

Avatar is a strange case in that there is debate about whether or not it's a disappointment when compared to the $2.9 and $2.3 billion grosses of the first two.

Only in the realm of James Cameron and/or Avatar is that a discussion.

It does however show that audience interest has declined, and that is likely due to the shorter release time between 2 and 3 as well as a sense of repetitiveness in part 3.

The question isn't will they greenlight a part 4 so much as how will that look?

One final movie with a longer gap would likely perform better than part 3.

However, does it make still make sense to do two movies that might only gross a "mere" $1.5 billion each?

Parts 2 and 3 were filmed together in part because it made sense financially. These movies are expensive. Is part 4 cheaper to make because the tech has been developed, or does James Cameron have some crazy expensive new ideas in mind?

 

[BrianLo]

So the prediction by some of $1.7B or so is probably right about where this will end up.

Please attend my awards acceptance speech and send flowers to my room on Oscars Night.

It added a nice 150M WW on this last full non-holiday week. Definitely has firmly and fully retreated from Way of Water back to its opening weekend. A normal movie would be expected to leg out to 1.53 now. This might have slightly better than normal legs. My July prediction might have been a tad high, but I’ll certainly accept the ballpark win.

 

[BrianLo]

Avatar is a strange case in that there is debate about whether or not it's a disappointment when compared to the $2.9 and $2.3 billion grosses of the first two.

Only in the realm of James Cameron and/or Avatar is that a discussion.

It does however show that audience interest has declined, and that is likely due to the shorter release time between 2 and 3 as well as a sense of repetitiveness in part 3.

The question isn't will they greenlight a part 4 so much as how will that look?

One final movie with a longer gap would likely perform better than part 3.

However, does it make still make sense to do two movies that might only gross a "mere" $1.5 billion each?

Parts 2 and 3 were filmed together in part because it made sense financially. These movies are expensive. Is part 4 cheaper to make because the tech has been developed, or does James Cameron have some crazy expensive new ideas in mind?

My vague understanding is that what are now four and five were each originally written as separate treatments and 2 eventually split into 2 / 3. So knowing nothing else I’d expect a bit more originality there, mixed with a large time jump will automatically not make it feel so much like an episodic continuation.

I kind of think they just give him the money and accept it and tell him to make both simultaneously again to save some costs. The real money is in VFX so 5 can be canceled and written down if four flops.

5, if marked as a conclusion, probably will do better than 4. That’s been pretty consistent on series that are longer than just a simple trilogy.

The last bit is it seems like he’s already filmed 45 min or 1H of film 4, so I think he’d be incapable or refuse trying to shrink the entire treatment of 5 into the other 2 hours of run time.

This is just one of those things where the film industry constantly makes ostensibly bad bets (Tron:ares) that I’m not sure you immediately reject something that isn’t overtly, to me at least, a totally bad bet. Especially on THE guy who thinks this is his magnum opus and the land you opened also was a huge success.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Im still going with 1.8

 

[Nevermore525]

Paramount’s latest venture is filing suit against Warner Brothers for information regarding valuation of the Netflix deal:

Paramount Skydance sues Warner Bros. Discovery in hostile takeover attempt

The lawsuit comes shortly after the WBD board once again told shareholders to reject Paramount's offer.

www.cnbc.com

"WBD has failed to include any disclosure about how it valued the Global Networks stub equity, how it valued the overall Netflix transaction, how the purchase price reduction for debt works in the Netflix transaction, or even what the basis is for its 'risk adjustment' of our $30 per share all-cash offer," Ellison said in the letter on Monday.

"We filed suit this morning in Delaware Chancery Court to ask the court to simply direct WBD to provide this information so that WBD shareholders have what they need to be able to make an informed decision as to whether to tender their shares into our offer," Ellison said.

Ellison also informed WBD shareholders on Monday that Paramount intends to nominate directors for election to WBD's board at the company's 2026 annual meeting, in a move that would add a proxy fight to the equation.

 

[Disney Irish]

Paramount’s latest venture is filing suit against Warner Brothers for information regarding valuation of the Netflix deal:

Paramount Skydance sues Warner Bros. Discovery in hostile takeover attempt

The lawsuit comes shortly after the WBD board once again told shareholders to reject Paramount's offer.

www.cnbc.com

"WBD has failed to include any disclosure about how it valued the Global Networks stub equity, how it valued the overall Netflix transaction, how the purchase price reduction for debt works in the Netflix transaction, or even what the basis is for its 'risk adjustment' of our $30 per share all-cash offer," Ellison said in the letter on Monday.

"We filed suit this morning in Delaware Chancery Court to ask the court to simply direct WBD to provide this information so that WBD shareholders have what they need to be able to make an informed decision as to whether to tender their shares into our offer," Ellison said.

Ellison also informed WBD shareholders on Monday that Paramount intends to nominate directors for election to WBD's board at the company's 2026 annual meeting, in a move that would add a proxy fight to the equation.

Merger Math: Paramount Suit Wants WBD To Show Its Work

Paramount is seeking hard numbers and calculations that Warner Bros. Discovery used to rebuff its $30 a share cash offer in favor of a Netflix deal.

deadline.com

"The company’s lawsuit wants WBD to lay out the following:

• The value or value range ascribed to the Global Networks business, including valuation materials and underlying projections by WBD management or financial advisors.

• Specific terms of the net debt adjustment in the Netflix merger agreement pursuant to which net debt on the streaming and studios business in excess of an undisclosed target will reduce the consideration payable to WBD stockholders, including such net debt target, and the level of such net debt assumed in the financial analyses provided to the board by WBD management or financial advisors. The net debt of Global Networks at the time of the separation is a key unknown.

• All analyses, estimates, or projections provided to the board in respect of anticipated financing or bank costs should WBD not complete its proposed spin-off of the Global Networks business to form the basis for the conclusion that WBD will face sunk costs by abandoning its planned separation and distribution.

• Any analyses, estimates or projections provided to the board in respect of anticipated financing or bank costs upon the completion of the Global Networks spin-off, or upon the failure of completion of the Netflix transaction. “While pointing to the opportunity cost from abandoning its planned separation of Global Networks, the Board failed to disclose the financial impacts and opportunity costs from a failed Netflix transaction, prohibiting a fair comparison between the two deals,” claims Par.

• A fair summary of the substantive work performed by any financial advisor in connection with any opinion rendered to the board related to the value of the Paramount offer, the Netflix merger, and/or Global Networks

• Qualitative or quantitative “risk adjustment” factors that the board considered or applied in concluding that the “risk adjusted value of the Paramount offer is not superior to the Netflix merger, “including the relative probability and magnitude of such risk factors, all quantitative adjustments to any valuation analyses on the basis of such factors, and how such factors were derived or calculated, and including whether and how any such “risk adjustment” factors were applied in valuing the Netflix merger.”"

 

[Phroobar]

Avatar is a strange case in that there is debate about whether or not it's a disappointment when compared to the $2.9 and $2.3 billion grosses of the first two.

Only in the realm of James Cameron and/or Avatar is that a discussion.

It does however show that audience interest has declined, and that is likely due to the shorter release time between 2 and 3 as well as a sense of repetitiveness in part 3.

The question isn't will they greenlight a part 4 so much as how will that look?

One final movie with a longer gap would likely perform better than part 3.

However, does it make still make sense to do two movies that might only gross a "mere" $1.5 billion each?

Parts 2 and 3 were filmed together in part because it made sense financially. These movies are expensive. Is part 4 cheaper to make because the tech has been developed, or does James Cameron have some crazy expensive new ideas in mind?

I think they are looking at making 4 & 5 together just like 2&3 did. 4&5 are suppose another two parter.

Maybe they will go to the artic to save some funky looking intelligent polar bear from the humans wanting it's toenail clippings.

 

[Disney Irish]

You only amend a "superior" offer if you're afraid that its indeed weaker, ie the mix of cash/stock is actually seen as weak given the state of the stocks involved recently.

Netflix Considers Shifting Deal For Warner Bros. To All Cash – Report

Netflix has discussed revising its cash-and-stock deal for the Warner Bros. studios and streaming assets to all cash, according to a Bloomberg report.

deadline.com

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Avatar is a strange case in that there is debate about whether or not it's a disappointment when compared to the $2.9 and $2.3 billion grosses of the first two.

Using this quote to respond to the conversation generally:

If $2.9 billion to $2.3 billion wasn’t considered a “flop,” then neither is $2.3b to $1.7-ish billion.

Side note: domestically, Avatar is at about $344 million, Wicked at about $342 million.

 

[DKampy]

Using this quote to respond to the conversation generally:

If $2.9 billion to $2.3 billion wasn’t considered a “flop,” then neither is $2.3b to $1.7-ish billion.

Side note: domestically, Avatar is at about $344 million, Wicked at about $342 million.

Imagine actually calling a billion dollar movie a flop…. For all the complaining about Disney films…. They will have 3 movies in the top 5… a rare feat for any studio