Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
But it wasn’t on Broadway
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Bob Iger is back! Chapek is out!!
- Thread starter Disney4family
- Start date
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I think it’s more a way to fill the void of tbe decline of cable and broadcast ad revenue…which was their biggest generator for decades and now fell behind parks and are still declining…
_caleb
Well-Known Member
I’m not sure the cinemas, studios (or their investors), share your confidence.
_caleb
Well-Known Member
I agree that that’s how it started. But one panicked raid of the storehouse, and well, you’ve just merged your quick serve chain with your high-end steakhouse.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
You seem to have resorted to the equivalent of "Ok, boomer" even when presented with rather detailed responses and questions.
Even this seems deliberately and obnoxiously obtuse.
Last edited:
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
The lesson of the moment is that the studios and investors have absolutely no idea what is going on because the models they went all in on have been shattered by contact with reality. That is why every major studio is engulfed in chaos, most notably Disney, WB, and Netflix. A consensus will emerge, but not for a while, and not without lots of unforeseen upheaval.
By the way, the least chaos-ridden studios, Paramount and (to a lesser extent) Universal are the ones that had limited streaming investment and have rededicated themselves to theatrical releases. So some folks share my confidence (for instance the entire trade press), and the number is increasing.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
Movies shifted from theaters to Disney+ because of the pandemic, that's it. *Shows* shifted from *TV* to Disney+ to avoid what the recording industry went through.
The movie business isn't dying, it just got pandemicked. The TV business is dying (except for Sports and News).
They're not. They did, briefly, because they had to.
I bet you dollars-to-donuts that Avatar does $2 billion.
TwilightZone
Well-Known Member
Iger am I right?
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
We're crowdsourcing his job for him. Between all of us, we can solve the future of the entertainment industry.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
It would have to be really, really good…tall order
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
Chi-nah.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
Would it?
I don't think it will do $2 billion, but it's not like the first Avatar was an especially good movie and it still set records.
Last edited:
BuddyThomas
Well-Known Member
Not sure how many people have an attention span or the time to sit in a movie theatre for three bloated hours and ten minutes for a sequel whose origins many don’t even remember, but we shall see.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
The runtime might be a challenge, that's true. But spectacle still counts for something. Sometimes people just want to see fast cars and pretty women and space $#!? blowing up. I expect this movie to be a competently-told story that also happens to be *gorgeous* to look at.
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
Avatar 2 doesn't necessarily have to be a "good" movie to do well. The Transformers movies are an example of that. The first Avatar wasn't good either IMO, but it did coast by on the technology and visual spectacle.
On the one hand, I really don't know if I think the sequel will do as well as expected/hoped by Cameron and the executives. But on the other hand, it's dangerous to bet against James Cameron. It's a wishy washy statement to make I know, but I really wouldn't be surprised with either the movie underperforming or outperforming expectations.
It should also be noted that even the theatrical re-releases of the first Avatar have commanded some really impressive numbers. This past round made $30 million globally.
On the one hand, I really don't know if I think the sequel will do as well as expected/hoped by Cameron and the executives. But on the other hand, it's dangerous to bet against James Cameron. It's a wishy washy statement to make I know, but I really wouldn't be surprised with either the movie underperforming or outperforming expectations.
It should also be noted that even the theatrical re-releases of the first Avatar have commanded some really impressive numbers. This past round made $30 million globally.
BuddyThomas
Well-Known Member
Very possible. I will wait for the reviews. Something no hater (not you, As far as I can tell) waited to do for Strange World.
I would never bet against James Cameron, in the past people have said:
“Terminator was lightning in a bottle, that hack is going to destroy Ridley’s Alien”
“Ok, Terminator 2 is in no way going to be better then the original”
“An action director is doing a historical love story disaster movie where everyone knows the ending! That’s going to flop!”
“ is this blue cat people movie, this is never going to make money.”
“Terminator was lightning in a bottle, that hack is going to destroy Ridley’s Alien”
“Ok, Terminator 2 is in no way going to be better then the original”
“An action director is doing a historical love story disaster movie where everyone knows the ending! That’s going to flop!”
“ is this blue cat people movie, this is never going to make money.”
Last edited:
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Avatar…was at the intersection of a few weird events.
The visual effects where probably the most impressive to a casual audience of any movie since the matrix…
So it became an event movie
And there was Zero Competition. The schedule was clear. That happened with another Jimmy Cameron movie in 1997.
Avatar was a decent flick. But it wasn’t a great story or anything…it outperformed it’s potential.
And that happens. It happens a lot. It probably happened this year.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
His best movie was an action comedy…I’ll remind
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
And the reason I don’t think it’s a $2 bil is that Hollywood decided 5 years ago it can count on $500-$750 million from the Far East markets…they are not in a position to deliver that in the next 45 days.