A Spirited Valentine ...

[Princess Leia]

Alive in wonderland the first only was a hit because of the source material. Alice through the looking glass semi-flopped because once the reviews came out that it sucked there was not an incentive to go. Pirates is different due to epic characters, only pirate series today among other things, but it has to get mostly positive reviews to succeed over a billion

Alice also probably flopped for these 2 reasons-
1. Competition at the box office (X-Men Apocalypse)
2. Johnny Depp had been accused of domestic abuse like one week before opening.

 

[Daveeeeed]

I watched Alice in the theater (a friend was obsessed and wanted to go; I'd never pay to see it in a theater, LOL), and then I just tried watching the second one on TV a few weeks ago and I literally struggled to get through it. I almost didn't even finish it.

Exactly. It flopped because people didn't really like the first, so when reviews came out that the 2nd was worse then people felt like it would be a waste to see it in the theater. Pirates doesn't suffer from that. I mean heck Jason Bourne made 59M opening weekend and went on to make over 400M worldwide, so I would expect Pirates to open between 120-140 (if it is good) and end up making over 300M domestically with abroad doing at least on par with Stranger Tides. Who knows though... predictions are easier closer to the film's release -- we're a bit to far out, but so far the film has a pretty good hype.

 

[Princess Leia]

I watched Alice in the theater (a friend was obsessed and wanted to go; I'd never pay to see it in a theater, LOL), and then I just tried watching the second one on TV a few weeks ago and I literally struggled to get through it. I almost didn't even finish it.

I saw the first one in theaters... And still have no idea why it made so much at the box office. It was an overblown mess, IMO.

 

[Daveeeeed]

Alice also probably flopped for these 2 reasons-
1. Competition at the box office (X-Men Apocalypse)
2. Johnny Depp had been accused of domestic abuse like one week before opening.

I seriously doubt it had anything to do with Depp's personal life -- that kind of thing barely does anything. Look at the Dark Knight arises for instance... people were murdered in a theater and it still does well. Aloha had controversy recently as well. If anything It was mainly because the first one was bad, so the second one didn't have trust from a fanbase so when reviews were worse who wants to go? X-Man has a semi-different viewer base, but it did still take out people similar to a despicable Me 2 to The Lone Ranger. But X-Men was not highly received either, but had a more trusted fanbase

 

[stretchsje]

I have been thinking about the various comments said online about how WDI just can't build high capacity rides anymore and how they spend so much money on rides. Here is my long reflection on WDI and Universal Creative:

The reason why you rarely see high capacity rides as in say over 1500 guests an hour is two folds: ride safety regulation has gotten quite more severe and the guests slow down operation a lot.

On the ride regulation subject, look no further than Seven Dwarves Mine Train. Originally supposed to have comfortable T shaped lap bars, we ended up with the current tight U bars installed in a space not designed for them. Look at how many adults struggle to get the bar closed and then think of many lost dispatches you get over an hour. Splash Mountain received those lap bars and it made things difficult for cast members as unlike Tokyo, the Florida station was not designed for lap bars. Again, you slow things down and capacity suffer. Adding air gates to all the rides also slow things down.

On the subject of slow guests, think back say 25 years ago: how many guests did you see that required more time to load? Going back to Seven Dwarves Mine Train, even with the ADA seat, it is still a struggle for many guests and you end up with cases where with 5 trains on the ride.... two will be waiting behind the station and the fifth will probably stop at the top of B lift. By the time you get all the trains moving again on the correct interval, you've lost one or two dispatch (so 20 or 40 guests less that hour).

To give you an idea of how things used to be, I give you the example of Space Mountain at Disneyland Paris, prior to the 2005 refurb. For 10 years, that ride ran with 5 trains at once and with no air gates in the station, end result was a capacity on paper rated at 2400 guests an hour. To give you an idea, 2400 guests is pretty much a walk in the waiting line to the station with how fast you're loading guests on. Two cast members assigned seats in the double station and the robust Vekoma ride system even capable of adding and removing trains while the ride was running. With no air gates, guests stayed behind a red line and it was the load cast member and dispatch cast members duties to look at the guests to make sure no guests got too close. Disabled guests had two severe rules: you needed to be able to walk the length of the station to sit in the back car and you had to be able to go up and down stairs on your own. Temple Du Peril, Peter Pan's Flight and later Crush Coaster also had the same rules, but they were relaxed a few years ago.

So with all that in mind, how many guests was Space Mountain able to move in real life? 2350-2375 an hour. We simply could not run out of Fast Pass on busy days and guests would have maybe a return time 45-50 minutes later in the worst cases. Sadly, the 2005 refurb brought modernity to Space Mountain and it can now run only 4 trains on two stations or 2 trains on a single station, shrinking capacity to 1700-1800 guests for 4 or 700-800 for two. Air gates were also added and it made loading slower as well. So poor Space Mountain went from the highest capacity single track coaster in the world to one that struggles with lines all the time. I can't count the times where I waited close to 25-30 minutes with a fast pass now.

Walt Disney Imagineering has all those things to deal with when designing rides now. They sometimes hit homeruns like the separate ADA loading station and the ride system for Pirates in Shanghai. Other times, they miss completely and deliver to Operations rides with no capacity.

One time Universal Creative messed with a high capacity ride is at Universal Studios Japan. Picture this: they finally built a high capacity roller coaster that could do more guests per hour than DLP Space Mountain. Its a Bolliger & Mabillard Hyper Coaster (like Mako at SeaWorld Florida) with a double station like Big Thunder Mountain. They could run 5 36 passenger trains on Hollywood Dream at once and get numbers that would make any other parks red with jealousy. So what did our good friends at Universal Creative do? Let's add Backward trains and call it "Backdrop"! Only one slight problem: they kept forward trains as well...

End result is this operational disaster: one Universal Express line, a single riders line for Backdrop, a regular line for Backdrop and a regular line for plain forward facing Hollywood Dream. You end up with standard line that barely moves since they also split Universal Express tickets where you get specific Forward or Backdrop slots. They also had to modify all the trains since to keep the same capacity, they had to install a second mechanical release system in both stations for the Backdrop trains and this lead as well to losing the restraint sensors. They now work with low tech pieces of tape placed on the lap bar and someone able to fit on Mako would require the bar to be shoved a good inch further in. On average, each train has 1-2 guests who can't fit and this again slows down the lines a lot.

Good insight.

Every few years I take a trip to Knoebel's Grove in Elysburg, PA to remind myself of how things used to be. No air gates. Lap bars fit extremely loosely. Parking is free. Rides are individually priced and ticketed. It's so refreshing.

 

[Kman101]

Exactly. It flopped because people didn't really like the first, so when reviews came out that the 2nd was worse then people felt like it would be a waste to see it in the theater. Pirates doesn't suffer from that. I mean heck Jason Bourne made 59M opening weekend and went on to make over 400M worldwide, so I would expect Pirates to open between 120-140 (if it is good) and end up making over 300M domestically with abroad doing at least on par with Stranger Tides. Who knows though... predictions are easier closer to the film's release -- we're a bit to far out, but so far the film has a pretty good hype.

Glad to know there's buzz around the movie. I really didn't see much for it until the Super Bowl ad but you seem more in that world than I am. I've never said they won't make bank. But there's always a tipping point. I mean, this is movie #5 and the last few weren't exactly loved. I enjoyed the first few. Sort of lost interest. Depp, Disney and Pirates = $$$$ but for how much longer? I guess I really didn't think there's all this demand for the franchise anymore. We'll see how it does though. I'm not convinced it's going to be a massive money maker (even when it does rake in millions and probably opens at #1), just a gut feeling. We'll see though.

As for Alice, I fully expected the sequel to bomb and it did. Same as I did for Tomorrowland, The Lone Ranger and The BFG. "Bombs" of course that made BANK, but still, they're bombs in the grand scheme of Disney movies. I'm sure most companies would love bombs like these though. They still rake in the cash.

 

[RobbinsDad]

It is still about nature. And while the ''all the animals that ever or never lived" mantra exists, no one ever said it had to be on this planet, especially when talking about mythical beasts. This area is going to be good. With Cameron's pushing this way overbudget and Rohde's oversight, it will be a great addition to WDW. This is not something to be angry about, but to enjoy. Now, it shouldn't have taken six years ... but that's just Disney.

I was skeptical about this at first because I thought it would be super cheesy and fake-looking. I'm extremely surprised and impressed by what I've seen so far. If this is Cameron's doing, then ask him to be CEO of TWDC.

 

[Princess Leia]

I seriously doubt it had anything to do with Depp's personal life -- that kind of thing barely does anything. Look at the Dark Knight arises for instance... people were murdered in a theater and it still does well. Aloha had controversy recently as well. If anything It was mainly because the first one was bad, so the second one didn't have trust from a fanbase so when reviews were worse who wants to go? X-Man has a semi-different viewer base, but it did still take out people similar to a despicable Me 2 to The Lone Ranger. But X-Men was not highly received either, but had a more trusted fanbase

Alice's numbers could be an interesting parallel to Avatar's.

• Avatar, released 12/2009. Alice, released 3/2010
• 3D (though Avatar was filmed with 3D cameras, and Alice was converted post-filming)
• Both were filled with visual CGI effects
• Incredibly high box office performances (Avatar currently reigning with over $2,787,000,000, Alice had peaked at #5 with $1,025,467,110)
• The first sequel released several years after the initial movie (Alice 2 came out over 6 years after the first, and Avatar's sequel is planned to be released a whopping 9 years after the first)

But this is where they differ- while Avatar has a Rotten Tomatoes critical score of 83% (Certified Fresh), Alice 1 has a score of 52% (Rotten).
This is why I'm a little worried about Avatar (Pandora will be fine regardless of the success rate of future films): with it's December release date, Avatar 2 will be in competition with the Han Solo film and Mary Poppins Returns, as well as anything that comes out in November 2018 (Mulan, How the Grinch Stole Christmas, Fantastic Beasts 2, Disney's Gigantic, etc.), and whatever comes out in Jan. 2019. These movies are all going to be in competition with each other, and it won't be pretty.

 

[Daveeeeed]

Glad to know there's buzz around the movie. I really didn't see much for it until the Super Bowl ad but you seem more in that world than I am. I've never said they won't make bank. But there's always a tipping point. I mean, this is movie #5 and the last few weren't exactly loved. I enjoyed the first few. Sort of lost interest. Depp, Disney and Pirates = $$$$ but for how much longer? I guess I really didn't think there's all this demand for the franchise anymore. We'll see how it does though. I'm not convinced it's going to be a massive money maker (even when it does rake in millions and probably opens at #1), just a gut feeling. We'll see though.

As for Alice, I fully expected the sequel to bomb and it did. Same as I did for Tomorrowland, The Lone Ranger and The BFG. "Bombs" of course that made BANK, but still, they're bombs in the grand scheme of Disney movies. I'm sure most companies would love bombs like these though. They still rake in the cash.

And video sales will prevent Alice 2, Lone Ranger etc. from losing that much more or zero at all in the long run. Don't worry I agree with you. Pirates if it is not better than every film in the series (besides 1) it probably will probably do 700M, but if it gets like an 80% on Rotten Tomatoes I'll bet money that it will cross a Billion worldwide. This is a critical step in the franchise and I think they havea good shot at doing good, but we truly don't know what will happen.

I knew Tomorrowland, BFG, John Carter, Lone Ranger, Jupiter Ascending (not Disney) etc. were going to flop as you rarely can introduce a new concept without it being good... that goes back to why Alice 1 was a hit because everyone knows Alice in Wonderland. Transformers' audience are mainly teens to 20's who don't really have a taste in movies, or they just want to see action (personally I think it's crazy). It's still insane how a studio can happily write a 200 million check for a sure flop crappy film, yet epic films like Whiplash etc. have such a hard time getting funded by major studios. Again rare is the day that you'll have Transformers or Great Gatsby, but things like the brand, actual actor appeal (looking at you Clooney) like Emma Watson, DiCaprio, or Robert Downy Jr., and a millenial's appeal to the visual effects can make a crappy film get hundreds of millions. As for lower bad films like the ones that are commedies and horror, people just might want to check it out, or they just don't want a serious movie (My Big Fat Greek Wedding 2, which I enjoyed) as you don't always want to go to the theater wanting to be in a wonderfully crafted complex Inception like plot. I mean Pirates almost didn't even happen.

The moral of the story is, I suppose, just wait and see how it does, and Movie Studios are stupid.

 

[Daveeeeed]

Alice's numbers could be an interesting parallel to Avatar's.

• Avatar, released 12/2009. Alice, released 3/2010
• 3D (though Avatar was filmed with 3D cameras, and Alice was converted post-filming)
• Both were filled with visual CGI effects
• Incredibly high box office performances (Avatar currently reigning with over $2,787,000,000, Alice had peaked at #5 with $1,025,467,110)
• The first sequel released several years after the initial movie (Alice 2 came out over 6 years after the first, and Avatar's sequel is planned to be released a whopping 9 years after the first)

But this is where they differ- while Avatar has a Rotten Tomatoes critical score of 83% (Certified Fresh), Alice 1 has a score of 52% (Rotten).
This is why I'm a little worried about Avatar (Pandora will be fine regardless of the success rate of future films): with it's December release date, Avatar 2 will be in competition with the Han Solo film and Mary Poppins Returns, as well as anything that comes out in November 2018 (Mulan, How the Grinch Stole Christmas, Fantastic Beasts 2, Disney's Gigantic, etc.), and whatever comes out in Jan. 2019. These movies are all going to be in competition with each other, and it won't be pretty.

Exactly. THat's why Alice 2 flopped because the first one (from those who saw it in a theater... not talking about the DVD people that couldn't enjoy Avatar's 3D) sucked, so the second one was not trusted. And also like you mentioned 3D was truly getting good then, but there are so many factors for competition to familiarity all the the way to how good it is or previous movies in a series. I'd expect there to at least be a week in between Avatar and Disney's films, but Avatar originally had epic legs that I doubt the future sequels will be able to have even at a lower multiplier. Again we shall see -- we're even further out from Avatar than Pirates, so until you get close or until it is released it will be interesting.

Also January is a godawful month to release movies... it truly has to be released Christmas Break (or Wide-Release Late November/December), and then people will either go again throughout the month or see one of the movies then that they did not see in January.

Consider January the "Legs" month. La La Land is proving it yet again... it's fully release was 'technically' in January, but it was in a way marketed to the less crowded January. Legs proved they work even for smaller movies. IMO the best film of 2016/2017.

 

[Princess Leia]

Exactly. THat's why Alice 2 flopped because the first one (from those who saw it in a theater... not talking about the DVD people that couldn't enjoy Avatar's 3D) sucked, so the second one was not trusted. And also like you mentioned 3D was truly getting good then, but there are so many factors for competition to familiarity all the the way to how good it is or previous movies in a series. I'd expect there to at least be a week in between Avatar and Disney's films, but Avatar originally had epic legs that I doubt the future sequels will be able to have even at a lower multiplier. Again we shall see -- we're even further out from Avatar than Pirates, so until you get close or until it is released it will be interesting.

Also January is a godawful month to release movies... it truly has to be released Christmas Break (or Wide-Release Late November/December), and then people will either go again throughout the month or see one of the movies then that they did not see in January.

Consider January the "Legs" month. La La Land is proving it yet again... it's fully release was 'technically' in January, but it was in a way marketed to the less crowded January. Legs proved they work even for smaller movies. IMO the best film of 2016/2017.

Alice and Avatar both had very little competition for their first films, which is almost incredible if you look at the next two years of movie releases. They had an easy opportunity to rake in over a billion dollars each.

That's going to be very difficult this year, and I think we'll start to see a lot of films do adequately well, but not great. This past weekend alone had 3 blockbuster types come out on the same day (50 Shades, John Wick 2, Lego Batman). I think they'll all be okay for the rest of February, but will fizzle out in March. Why? In March, there's going to be a 'Big Movie' being released every weekend: Logan, Kong, Beauty and the Beast, Power Rangers, Ghost in the Shell. They'll fight each other throughout April (no big releases outside of F8), and will probably see their numbers halt in May (GotG2, King Arthur, Alien: Covenant, Pirates 5).

Pirates is going to have an insane amount of competition at the box office this year. Wonder Woman literally comes out one week later, so while I hope Pirates does a decent job at the box office, it's going to be an uphill battle. It would have been better for Disney if they had just pushed the release date to August (GotG1 also had an August release date, which is probably one of the reasons it had a great box office performance).

 

[CJR]

I'd expect there to at least be a week in between Avatar and Disney's films, but Avatar originally had epic legs that I doubt the future sequels will be able to have even at a lower multiplier.

I actually think everyone involved realizes this. I think they're still hoping they'll be monsters at the box office, but the idea that every sequel will match the heights of a record breaking prequel is unrealistic. Fox hopefully took good notes from Independence Day.

With James Cameron so heavily involved in so many areas, I think the sequels stand a much better chance than Alice 2, which Tim Burton declined. I think that alone makes Avatar's chances for success, as a film series, much higher. It also appears that James is pushing for another round of cinema evolution (I can't for sure remember what, but I want to say it was glasses-free 3D), so it's possible that it could have similar impacts the first film did if people buy into it again. We'll find out for sure sooner or later, I just wanted to point out how the creator involved can also make a difference.

Like Alice though, I have a feeling reviews will be a huge deciding factor for many. The movie needs to be good; not as good as the first (which wasn't really that great anyway), but good.

 

[Quinnmac000]

Pirates 5 went over budget according to the media and the rule is it pretty much has to make double to make a profit and at 315 million. It better be good.

 

[brb1006]

Also about USJ I'll add support that it's a great park with a fantastic lineup... but I'm not sure it's something I'd recommend outside of the mega-fandom. Especially for people with easy access to USO.

Very much a best of copy and paste job. While Space fantasty is fantastic and Hollywood dream silky smooth... I'd point out the three 'original' reasons for visiting are coaster. Two B&M's. The question kind of becomes why USJ and not one of many parks with unique B&M's?

I'd largely say the same thing of Tokyo Disneyland. You visit for TDS, TDL is just the bonus until it starts to continue to role out more unique offerings in the future.

Don't forget Magical Starlight USJ's answer to Tokyo Disneyland Electrical Parade Dreamlights.

 

[Mike S]

The unique elements that I am aware of were shot down by Creative's leadership, most notably -- Woodbury. Best of parks are fine. I love TDL, although it has gotten more unique now than it was in 1983 (it opened with two unique attractions, one a film that lasted all of two years I believe). Beijing is going to be a wonderful park. But not likely a must see by American fans because so much of it is literally cut and paste. I'd rather see unique, but I am not who this park is being built for.

Is there a chance the Jurassic World E makes it to UOR's third park?

 

[truecoat]

This is a head scratcher to me because if Iger is concerned about his "legacy" why do this ... it doesn't work with the theme of the park, it creates tons of sight line issues because you could see the tower from practically ever land, and the response was overwhelmingly negative ... how does this help his legacy?

Like this? Courtesy of mintcrocodile.

 

[WildcatDen]

The difference of course is the UNI will building stuff which can be enjoyed NOW instead of slow rolling building projects into the next decade. As for SWL we all know it's never going to finish on time at DHS especially since the DLP deal will suck CAPEX out of WDW the only remaining question is how many years will SWL be delayed...

Wait, what??? Do mine eyes deceive me? Are you actually saying you now believe WDW is building a Star Wars Land? Be still my heart. Of course, I believe you also stated Disney would cease to exist in 2016, or was it 2017? 2018? 2019?

As for finishing "On-Time", I believe Iger gave it a rather large runway. Any date between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019 could be considered on time. I think there were quite a few here who lined up the next few years correctly (2017 - Pandora, 2018 - TSL, 2019 - SWL, 2020 - Epcot Projects (one maybe sooner), and 2021 - MK projects. That does not include the many changes / improvements expected prior to the 50th. I had hoped the new nighttime parade may fall into this schedule sooner rather than later, but I am hearing late 2020 or early 2021 is more likely. Still, one could hope. . .

Also, with your Uni Now comment, King's Island up here in Ohio pretty much builds something new every year (What is in the shed?) but you will never here my compare their schedule to Disney's. It is melons and cherries.

 

[WildcatDen]

Rumblings of a 3rd park would change that. Obviously, a project of that size puts you minimally 5 years down the line. I'm not a huge waterpark goer, but i'm sure Volcano Bay will be a great addition to UO this year.

If (and when) they build a third park, that would likely increase the likelihood of staying an extra day. I personally think the waterparks are more of a locals draw. We have two up here in Cincy and one is included in your daily KI ticket. It is rare to see any plates outside Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky parked at Soak City.

 

[PorterRedkey]

Alice also probably flopped for these 2 reasons-
1. Competition at the box office (X-Men Apocalypse)
2. Johnny Depp had been accused of domestic abuse like one week before opening.

3. It was really bad and didn't make much sense.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

If (and when) they build a third park, that would likely increase the likelihood of staying an extra day. I personally think the waterparks are more of a locals draw. We have two up here in Cincy and one is included in your daily KI ticket. It is rare to see any plates outside Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky parked at Soak City.

You haven't driven by Volcano Bay yet, have you?