A Spirited 15 Rounds ...

Rodan75

Rodan75

Well-Known Member
the.dreamfinder said:
To each their own.

It speaks to Nagenda’s character that he’d bet all his goodwill with the company on that project, and to a lesser degree on Katwe, versus “Tron: Legacy”’s Sean Bailey.
Click to expand...

Both movies felt like great fits for the Streaming Service. So maybe Netflix is a good place for him. But any loss from The Studios feels like a mistake at the moment.
 
Kman101

Kman101

Well-Known Member
Rodan75 said:
Both movies felt like great fits for the Streaming Service. So maybe Netflix is a good place for him. But any loss from The Studios feels like a mistake at the moment.
Click to expand...

This. It's easy to tell which Disney movies will and won't do well in theaters. Streaming service for some of these movies makes a lot of sense. They still draw audiences and make money, but they're not and were never going to be, blockbusters. Also doesn't mean some of them don't have issues, lol. I almost feel like they "try too hard" sometimes with things like Tomorrowland and A Wrinkle in Time and they don't end up resonating.

Having skipped to the last page here, was there any discussion on guests robbing balloons from a vendor in Shanghai Disney Resort?
 
MisterPenguin

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Since I'm on a tear about Disney (Live Action) Studio, let me share some data from the big movie spreadsheet I'm making and will post soon-ish...

Since 2000, Disney Studios has made 79 movies, not counting the Nature, Documentaries, Foreign, or Concert movies.

Among critics, they have an average "recommend seeing" score of 53% and an average absolute score of 55%.

They have cost, on average $87M to make and grossed, on average, $247M. Now, if theaters get 50% of the B.O. and marketing cost is, as a rule of thumb, half of the production cost, then the average net profit of a Disney Studio films is actually a loss of $6M.

Of those 79 movies, only 8 were made without some other studio as a co-producer. And those 8 have some of the lowest critical scores and biggest box office losses in the bunch.

Compare that to...
​
Pixar: 88%/79%, average profit of $99M​
​
Spider-Man movies: 77%/69%, average profit $103M​
​
Marvel movies: 84%/70%, average profit $148M​
​
Blue Sky/Fox Animation: 63%/60%, average profit $66M​
​
Disney Animation: 80%/70%, average profit $30M (would be much higher adjusted for inflation)​
​
And again, Disney Studios since 2000: 53%/55%, average loss of $6M.​
 
the.dreamfinder

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
MisterPenguin said:
Since I'm on a tear about Disney (Live Action) Studio, let me share some data from the big movie spreadsheet I'm making and will post soon-ish...

Since 2000, Disney Studios has made 79 movies, not counting the Nature, Documentaries, Foreign, or Concert movies.

Among critics, they have an average "recommend seeing" score of 53% and an average absolute score of 55%.

They have cost, on average $87M to make and grossed, on average, $247M. Now, if theaters get 50% of the B.O. and marketing cost is, as a rule of thumb, half of the production cost, then the average net profit of a Disney Studio films is actually a loss of $6M.

Of those 79 movies, only 8 were made without some other studio as a co-producer. And those 8 have some of the lowest critical scores and biggest box office losses in the bunch.

Compare that to...
​
Pixar: 88%/79%, average profit of $99M​
​
Spider-Man movies: 77%/69%, average profit $103M​
​
Marvel movies: 84%/70%, average profit $148M​
​
Blue Sky/Fox Animation: 63%/60%, average profit $66M​
​
Disney Animation: 80%/70%, average profit $30M (would be much higher adjusted for inflation)​
​
And again, Disney Studios since 2000: 53%/55%, average loss of $6M.​
Click to expand...
But pay windows.
 
HauntedMansionFLA

HauntedMansionFLA

Well-Known Member
ChrisFL said:
My thoughts on the James Gunn situation- there's no 100% right or wrong option, however Disney KNEW James Gunn said those things, they KNEW he apologized in 2012 and he's done no similar actions or tweets since. The Disney knee-jerk reaction of immediately firing him was the worst part of that.

Will Disney get rid of any Seth MacFarlane shows when they take over Fox, because he's made some pretty awful comments ON his actual TV shows that could be construed badly. It's called shock humor and there used to be a time where we could accept it for what it is and not read too far into it. Yes, what James Gunn said was horrific, but that was the point! That was the kind of industry he was in with Troma at the time.

Using the same situation, I don't think Roseanne should have been fired, but given some "cool off" time to make up for it. I'm in no way a fan of hers, but she's been making shock humor for years also.

I mean, I watched Top Gear and now The Grand Tour with Jeremy Clarkson who has said some horrible things as well, but I'm still a fan of his and don't think he'd ever really harm someone.

For Disney/Marvel this is a really bad situation because the MCU has been such a cash cow and Guardians has been a huge part of that. I think they should have given James Gunn a different role, maybe just as a producer/consultant, but use the same script and not allow him to direct the film. Something of a compromise, but that ship has sailed I fear.
Click to expand...
Jimmy Kimmel does a late night talk show on Disney’s owned ABC. Before that show, he did The Man Show which didn’t show females in the best light.
 
S

shernernum

Well-Known Member
MisterPenguin said:
Since I'm on a tear about Disney (Live Action) Studio, let me share some data from the big movie spreadsheet I'm making and will post soon-ish...

Since 2000, Disney Studios has made 79 movies, not counting the Nature, Documentaries, Foreign, or Concert movies.

Among critics, they have an average "recommend seeing" score of 53% and an average absolute score of 55%.

They have cost, on average $87M to make and grossed, on average, $247M. Now, if theaters get 50% of the B.O. and marketing cost is, as a rule of thumb, half of the production cost, then the average net profit of a Disney Studio films is actually a loss of $6M.

Of those 79 movies, only 8 were made without some other studio as a co-producer. And those 8 have some of the lowest critical scores and biggest box office losses in the bunch.

Compare that to...
​
Pixar: 88%/79%, average profit of $99M​
​
Spider-Man movies: 77%/69%, average profit $103M​
​
Marvel movies: 84%/70%, average profit $148M​
​
Blue Sky/Fox Animation: 63%/60%, average profit $66M​
​
Disney Animation: 80%/70%, average profit $30M (would be much higher adjusted for inflation)​
​
And again, Disney Studios since 2000: 53%/55%, average loss of $6M.​
Click to expand...
True, although movies, in particular of the type that Disney deals in (Superhero, Star Wars, Animated, etc.) generate revenue in other ways too, such as merchandise. Also, the digital and video sales on their movies I wouldn't doubt tend to be better than many other titles. However, as you note, the movie side is not the consistent cash cow some think it is.

For every Force Awakens, Avengers, Beauty and the Beast, there is a Mars Needs Moms, John Carter, and A Wrinkle in Time
 
the.dreamfinder

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
shernernum said:
True, although movies, in particular of the type that Disney deals in (Superhero, Star Wars, Animated, etc.) generate revenue in other ways too, such as merchandise. Also, the digital and video sales on their movies I wouldn't doubt tend to be better than many other titles. However, as you note, the movie side is not the consistent cash cow some think it is.

For every Force Awakens, Avengers, Beauty and the Beast, there is a Mars Needs Moms, John Carter, and A Wrinkle in Time
Click to expand...
Disney, in the tentpole era (2009-Present), has had at LEAST one movie bomb, resulting in a publicly announced write off, each year.
 
Last edited:

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

Back
Top Bottom