Disney’s Mufasa - the lion king

[Disney Irish]

I wonder if it becomes easier and cheaper to keep doing this, possible re use of some CGI?

Although the budgets keep going up so I guess the answer is no.

These live-action CGI movies seem to top out at ~$200M, its not like a regular movie where there can be a lot of expensive reshoots that cause the budgets to skyrocket. And while you can "re-use CGI", I'm not sure why you would, there is no cost-savings benefit to it like in traditional hand drawn animation where you can reuse a scene.

 

[Disstevefan1]

These live-action CGI movies seem to top out at ~$200M, its not like a regular movie where there can be a lot of expensive reshoots that cause the budgets to skyrocket. And while you can "re-use CGI", I'm not sure why you would, there is no cost-savings benefit to it like in traditional hand drawn animation where you can reuse a scene.

Wicked cost 145 Million..... Amazing.

 

[Disney Irish]

Wicked cost 145 Million..... Amazing.

Wicked part one had very little CGI in it, as everything was done practically. So it kept that costs down because of that. Also helps they used fairly unknown inexpensive inexperienced actors who don't get the big paychecks, which can increase budgets by a lot if using big names.

Part one and two were also filmed back-to-back, which helps keep costs down, its reported both movies combined costs $350M. Which means if true part two will have cost ~$205M, around the same as Mufasa (if not a bit more expensive). So they kept all the expensive stuff for part two. This is also the most Uni has spent on a single project.

 

[DKampy]

Really should table that “does well on Disney+” thing until they begin turning significant profit on D+…

Which they have not as of yet

Well it is a good thing as of August 2024 it was reported Disney + was turning a profit

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Well it is a good thing as of August 2024 it was reported Disney + was turning a profit

Significant profit

They’re relying on that to bring in cash for the business similar to what cable did 20 years ago…

We’re not anywhere close yet

 

[Disney Irish]

Really should table that “does well on Disney+” thing until they begin turning significant profit on D+…

Which they have not as of yet

Not sure why the goal-post moving, as long as D+ is profitable it doesn't matter how "significant" it is for the purposes of these discussions.

The engagement is all that matters in that case as that means eyeballs are on the movie on D+ and not elsewhere, and based on latest figures a majority would be watching with ads, so is earning revenue for Disney.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Not sure why the goal-post moving, as long as D+ is profitable it doesn't matter how "significant" it is for the purposes of these discussions.

The engagement is all that matters in that case as that means eyeballs are on the movie on D+ and not elsewhere, and based on latest figures a majority would be watching with ads, so is earning revenue for Disney.

Go back and read your annual reports from years past and you’ll see why it does matter…

For me…discussing break even movies (may be a rough year for that…but we shall see) isn’t my wheelhouse…

A conglomerate relying too heavily on their vacation compounds…specifically the workhouse in Florida…is.

This all puts stress on those stitches. Losing money on movies or a stagnant streaming service does affect that.

 

[Disney Irish]

Go back and read your annual reports from years past and you’ll see why it does matter…

For me…discussing break even movies (may be a rough year for that…but we shall see) isn’t my wheelhouse…

A conglomerate relying too heavily on their vacation compounds…specifically the workhouse in Florida…is.

This all puts stress on those stitches. Losing money on movies or a stagnant streaming service does affect that.

Again not relevant for our discussion purposes here in terms of engagements on D+ and how that affects the future of TLK franchise.

Also as D+ is now profitable it puts less strain on other parts of the business and ultimately helps the bottom line, so again not sure the reason why this is relevant here.

 

[Disstevefan1]

If it can even carve out a little bit of profit in theaters and then do well on the Disney + service Disney will see that as a win…. Currently that is very possible… it would not have these great holds if word of mouth was not positive…. Disney seem to have turn the ship there…. You don’t hear any of the same negative buzz that was said throughout the 2019 remake theatrical run

I wonder what doing well on Disney+ means to Disney.

Getting a lot of views from their existing subscribers (so they can say they got a lot of views)
or
Gaining subscribers as in, "I am not subscribed but I am subscribing to see Mufasa"
or most likely
For their Ad tier service, more views is better for their advertisers.

 

[Disney Irish]

I wonder what doing well on Disney+ means to Disney.

Getting a lot of views from their existing subscribers (so they can say they got a lot of views)
or
Gaining subscribers as in, "I am not subscribed but I am subscribing to see Mufasa"
or most likely
For their Ad tier service, more views is better for their advertisers.

While more subscribers is nice, they have moved on from the "gain more subscribers" phase of D+. Now its about continual engagements, ie getting existing subs to remain subscribed and continuing to view content. At least 1/3 of all subscribers are on the ad tier, as noted in the recent earnings, so those sweet sweet ad dollars are rolling in every time one of those subs are watching content. So if Mufasa can get those eyeballs watching, that is what Disney considers success.

 

[BrianLo]

For the millionth time, profits at D+ have nothing to do with individual productions still receiving or not receiving their performance based content fees. I’m getting tired of having to chase around false statements due to financial illiteracy and bad assumptions.

DTC profitability is really just a question of was Disney better off going alone or sticking with Netflix licensing. The answer to that is abundantly clear, the company is way, way ahead and has created a service worth many 10’s of billions of dollars in the run up.

Replacing linear is now like 4 steps removed from Mufasa, but yes, it’s replacing linear well and on track to overtake its revenue in 6 quarters or less and overtake its peak profit in about 3 years. It’s a hugely successful transition.

 

[Disney Irish]

For the millionth time, profits at D+ have nothing to do with individual productions still receiving or not receiving their performance based content fees. I’m getting tired of having to chase around false statements due to financial illiteracy and bad assumptions.

DTC profitability is really just a question of was Disney better off going alone or sticking with Netflix licensing. The answer to that is abundantly clear, the company is way, way ahead and has created a service worth many 10’s of billions of dollars in the run up.

Replacing linear is now like 4 steps removed from Mufasa, but yes, it’s replacing linear well and on track to overtake its revenue in 6 quarters or less and overtake its peak profit in about 3 years. It’s a hugely successful transition.

I also think we should now take a lot of this type of discussion out of this thread and into the box office or streaming threads where it belongs. Too much is getting into the financial weeds that is not about this movie.

 

[BrianLo]

Mufasa is up 106M from our flat conversation ten days ago and is rounding on a 6X domestic opening multiple. The power of legs and a fairly empty marketplace. We’ll see if there’s another 110 left in the long tail to bring it over 700.

Mufasa is 2024’s “Elemental” comeback story. Expectations of course being a lot higher for Mufasa as a prequel to one of their biggest franchises, but it will hit 200+ higher off a similar domestic opening.

 

[Moka]

250 domestic seems to be nearly a lock at this point, which that alone would bring it over 630+. Another 70 from OS shouldn't be out of reach to let it squeak by 700. should have enough left in the tank with the fantastic holds it has been having.

 

[Moka]

Crossed $600M yesterday. Time for the final stretch.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Crossed $600M yesterday. Time for the final stretch.

 

[MisterPenguin]

On YouTube Shorts, one out of every 10 shorts was a Mufasa short.

And my algorithm isn't as skewed to Disney as one might think.

 

[Frankenstein79]

You did it Disney, you broke even. ... Unless of course your fudging the numbers with the budget. Which they've done many times.

 

[Disney Irish]

You did it Disney, you broke even. ... Unless of course your fudging the numbers with the budget. Which they've done many times.

Is it only Disney that is “fudging” the numbers or is it all studios? And if it’s all studios doesn’t that mean we have to question every single movie over at least the last couple decades that made claims about their budgets? And if so doesn’t that mean we have to also then question the entire box office and what movies are really actually flops that were counted as successes?

Basically we can go down this rabbit hole if you guys want, but I don’t think you’ll like the outcome. Because then the box office is basically meaningless at that point. Or we just take all movies at their reported budget and let the box office numbers speak for themselves.

 

[Moka]

It isn’t even a debate anymore, $700M is pretty much certain with great both the domestic and OS holds are. Just a question now of how far can it go.