Disney and Jon Favreau Joining Forces on “The Lion King”

[Tony Perkis]

Dumbo did, but it was followed by two $1 billion hits within 4 months, so nobody cared.

True.

And also, it’s Dumbo, so nobody cared.

 

[jt04]

I would argue the exact opposite. He’s clearly pumping the well dry, in terms of its WDS banner theatrical releases.

Pixar has announced they will be doing original stories for the foreseeable future. I expect Disney Animation Studios will continue to provide new content like they did with Frozen. I expect some original content on Disney+ to get adapted to theatrical releases.

Marvel is bringing in new characters and storylines.

But I also know there will be a lot of demand for sequels to films like TLK, JB, and Aladdin.

It is crazy how many options Disney has now. All of these are billion dollar properties at the box office if done right.

 

[Tony Perkis]

Pixar has announced they will be doing original stories for the foreseeable future. I expect Disney Animation Studios will continue to provide new content like they did with Frozen. I expect some original content on Disney+ to get adapted to theatrical releases.

Marvel is bringing in new characters and storylines.

But I also know there will be a lot of demand for sequels to films like TLK, JB, and Aladdin.

It is crazy how many options Disney has now. All of these are billion dollar properties at the box office if done right.

I specifically called out theatrically released films under the WDS banner, though I should have included live-action in that statement.

Not Pixar.

Not Star Wars.

Not Marvel.

Those all operate somewhat external from the rest of creative.

Short term, very profitable. Long term, the past 3-5 years of Disney live action will be viewed as amongst the company’s most creatively bankrupt.

 

[jt04]

I specifically called out theatrically released films under the WDS banner, though I should have included live-action in that statement.

Not Pixar.

Not Star Wars.

Not Marvel.

Those all operate somewhat external from the rest of creative.

Short term, very profitable. Long term, the past 3-5 years of Disney live action will be viewed as amongst the company’s most creatively bankrupt.

I disagree. They've definitely green lit some projects they shouldn't have. And others did not live up to the capabilities of the studio. But they seem to be learning from past errors. And I think they have the luxury of time and quantity now to delay projects that aren't developing to the Disney standards.

This might be why time slots are announced sometimes years in advance but no title. There might be multiple projects in the pipeline but only the best developing at that studio will get the slot.

 

[brb1006]

Funny observation. I was in Walmart and they have a great big cardboard display (about 8ft) of product for the lion king. But the funny part was only ONE item was from the new movie. And that was a plush lion. Everything else was from the original movie. It cracks me up that they had to remake it, only to use it to push the original.

I visited Walmart after I saw the movie in theaters. The Lion King display contained mostly young Simba stuffed animals and a few products related to the original 1994 film.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I would argue the exact opposite. He’s clearly pumping the well dry, in terms of its WDS banner theatrical releases.

Because it’s a short term strategy. But you have to understand that he could care less what happens after he cashes out to understand.

Again, I haven’t seen anything to validate this, and frankly, it makes no sense. It risks cannibalizing its actual exclusive like The Mancalorian and some of the Marvel stuff.

That is a new line of “thought”...for lack of a better word. They have 8 big releases this year...none next...but if you blame the streaming service, it somehow “makes sense”

The expectations for what a streaming service will actually do for Disney’s books - at least in the short term - are being vastly overstated.

That's a good point actually. Many think the new chief will be Bob Chapek. I have no opinion. But I DO think that the pressure will be there for new, fresh material. I think that Disney fans and the general public are starting to become more and more vocal about the desire for new stories.

They can’t do new because it is risky from a Wall Street perspective. The management philosophy is to guarantee profits BEFORE they happen to drive stock. New stories aren’t very conducive to that.

Chapek is no where near qualified to run the international corporation Disney has become. If that’s the best they got...they got nothing.
Yet another reason for iger to absolutely empty the tank...for himself.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I disagree. They've definitely green lit some projects they shouldn't have. And others did not live up to the capabilities of the studio. But they seem to be learning from past errors. And I think they have the luxury of time and quantity now to delay projects that aren't developing to the Disney standards.

This might be why time slots are announced sometimes years in advance but no title. There might be multiple projects in the pipeline but only the best developing at that studio will get the slot.

Ok...I’ll play...

What new ideas/movies have they even attempted to make for the last 5 years or so?

I’m not being sarcastic...I can’t really think of any other than a wrinkle in time...

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Pixar has announced they will be doing original stories for the foreseeable future. I expect Disney Animation Studios will continue to provide new content like they did with Frozen. I expect some original content on Disney+ to get adapted to theatrical releases.

Marvel is bringing in new characters and storylines.

But I also know there will be a lot of demand for sequels to films like TLK, JB, and Aladdin.

It is crazy how many options Disney has now. All of these are billion dollar properties at the box office if done right.

Pixar remains to be seen..
But if you are not expecting Incredibles 3, Toy Story 4, and Inside Out 2...you need to watch more closely.

Like they did with frozen? That opened in 2012? That they have appeared to have struggled making a sequel for for 7 years?
Or wreck it Ralph 2?
Tangled 2 coming?

Point is that Disney is on a clean 5 + year drought on a new animated property of quality (forgive if I have forgotten one - it’s possible)

Marvel is old material from marvel...but it does provide them a lot of content.

The last one is the head scratcher: what sequels are you expecting from 100% straight remakes of cartoons that did not have sequels? At least not theatrical ones.

That one is stressing the Brain ligaments...HUH?!?!?

 

[Tony Perkis]

Because it’s a short term strategy. But you have to understand that he could care less what happens after he cashes out to understand.

From Iger’s perspective, I 100% get it.

I just don’t care about things from his perspective, because I care more about the long term prospects and creativity of Disney films, and not just their corporate viability.

That is a new line of “thought”...for lack of a better word. They have 8 big releases this year...none next...but if you blame the streaming service, it somehow “makes sense”

The expectations for what a streaming service will actually do for Disney’s books - at least in the short term - are being vastly overstated.

I think a Disney + Fox streaming service is an absolute slam dunk, due to the content available.

I just don’t buy into this idea that they need 5 2019 remake theatrical releases to anchor it. That’s making an excuse without providing proof of it solving a problem.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

From Iger’s perspective, I 100% get it.

I just don’t care about things from his perspective, because I care more about the long term prospects and creativity of Disney films, and not just their corporate viability.



I think a Disney + Fox streaming service is an absolute slam dunk, due to the content available.

I just don’t buy into this idea that they need 5 2019 remake theatrical releases to anchor it. That’s making an excuse without providing proof of it solving a problem.

Agreed on the longterm...and many defenders of iger just don’t want to hear it. No matter if he’s done a good job - and he has by most metrics - he has shown no great desire to provide stable growth longterm.

He’ll steer the treasure ship...but I have little doubts he’d be willing to light it on fire just before he jumps. As long as his legacy and fortune is secure, that’s where it ends.

Let me clarify on the streaming service: I think it will be successful (I think Bob was a coward and waited too long and hid behind cable...but that’s a minor Criticism)...

But it’s a long process to build up subscribers and garner lots of profit. Disney is warning both the street and the Disney fans: when on earth do they charge anyone $6.99 for anything?

It’s hard...Netflix has 145,000,000 subscribers...but it’s taken a long time for that.

 

[LSLS]

There is definitely a reason they loaded up this year. I dont think iger would be so transparent as to walk out next year after setting it all up like this. Honestly I think hes hedged on the 50th bringing in record crowds anyways (and it seems to me the parks will bring in way more profit than movies).

So I could actually buy the streaming service being a reason. But, if they were that all in for the service, I would think they would have at least one of their marvel series ready at launch.

So I'll throw another idea out there. You have tons of construction at the parks, and (they thought) tons of people holding out on vacations for the opening of the two star wars lands. Is it possible they loaded movies up this year to counter some sort of a potential short-term park revenue drop? Honestly I dont have a clue how the accounting works, so it's probably not that simple. But thought it might be an idea.

 

[Jedijax719]

When I read the $6.99 for D+ subscriptions, the first thing that comes to mind is how temporary that must be. $6.99 for the first year then up to $10-$12 for the next year? Or $6.99 for basic, DVD quality and (like Netflix) more expensive for HD and super expensive for 4K (or not available in 4K until the second year when it goes up to $15).

Problem is, can Disney really take that gamble? Netflix has been around for a long time and people are just used to having it. With D+, if they jack around with the price too much, people will just leave it immediately and they cannot really afford to have people leave in droves when it's launching.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

There is definitely a reason they loaded up this year. I dont think iger would be so transparent as to walk out next year after setting it all up like this. Honestly I think hes hedged on the 50th bringing in record crowds anyways (and it seems to me the parks will bring in way more profit than movies).

So I could actually buy the streaming service being a reason. But, if they were that all in for the service, I would think they would have at least one of their marvel series ready at launch.

So I'll throw another idea out there. You have tons of construction at the parks, and (they thought) tons of people holding out on vacations for the opening of the two star wars lands. Is it possible they loaded movies up this year to counter some sort of a potential short-term park revenue drop? Honestly I dont have a clue how the accounting works, so it's probably not that simple. But thought it might be an idea.

I see June 2020-2021 being a good window for departure for him.

This “for the 50th” thing is way overblown. Crowds will likely be larger...but how much can be reasonably expected?
First: where do you lodge them? I-drive?
Second: price are already starting to discourage new mass audiences and will likely get worse.

And I think iger is positioning himself to leave at any time. It makes no sense for him to stay past one minute of a recession. And only the fools now subscribe to the theory that it’s been “figured out” and now somehow the bankruptcy queen and his team of unqualified will lead a post recession world. The bubbles are worse than ever.

Bob won’t stay through rough seas. I can’t blame him at all for that.

 

[Jedijax719]

They have to do that to drive subscriptions. They don’t “want” to.

That indicates their internal data is not painting a good picture for mass subscribers at first.

I think that too many Netflix shows have gained a lot of "addicts" (not a bad thing for TV shows I guess) that will be tough to let go. Lots of Disney fans own the movies they want to watch and have no real reason to subscribe to something to watch what they already own. As for the shows, they will have to rely on good WOM which will take a while. Disney will have to offer a price point that will make it palatable to subscribe to it while keeping Netflix (or streaming service du jour). Likewise ( I wish), Netflix could reduce THEIR own prices to keep subscribers if they are worried. But I have a feeling that is why they increased the price of their subscriptions in the past year. That way, if they reduced back to what it was, it looks like they are giving a price break. We'll see.

I also really want to be positive and optimistic that Disney is trying to get as much $$$ from their theatrical releases this year to have money for theatrical risks with new materials. Unfortunately (sort of) I think the new stories will be relegated to streaming only. We may really be stuck when it comes to the big screen.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I think that too many Netflix shows have gained a lot of "addicts" (not a bad thing for TV shows I guess) that will be tough to let go. Lots of Disney fans own the movies they want to watch and have no real reason to subscribe to something to watch what they already own. As for the shows, they will have to rely on good WOM which will take a while. Disney will have to offer a price point that will make it palatable to subscribe to it while keeping Netflix (or streaming service du jour). Likewise ( I wish), Netflix could reduce THEIR own prices to keep subscribers if they are worried. But I have a feeling that is why they increased the price of their subscriptions in the past year. That way, if they reduced back to what it was, it looks like they are giving a price break. We'll see.

I also really want to be positive and optimistic that Disney is trying to get as much $$$ from their theatrical releases this year to have money for theatrical risks with new materials. Unfortunately (sort of) I think the new stories will be relegated to streaming only. We may really be stuck when it comes to the big screen.

I don’t think that’s necessarily “the strategy”...but their box office slate is very week after 19. That didn’t “sneak up” on them...they knew what was coming after since development takes years and they jockey the schedules more than a year out.

They have no big Pixar tent poles coming, Star Wars is shutdown (sorry...”in development”...which it has been for over a year with nothing moving at all)...MCU is in what will likely be an “equalizer” period.

And feature animation doesn’t have much on the horizon. So why go back to back with wreck it Ralph and frozen?

It sure seems deliberate to “unload the magazine”..I can’t get why they did Incredibles and a toy story in consecutive years? And why they did 2 spiders, 2 avengers and 3 or 4 other MCU films in 3 years?

Seems like push/overkill. Especially if you are soft after. Does not seem to be a longterm strategy.

Not to mention the onslaught of love action remakes...and poppins...

Think about it: in one year it will be poppins, dumbo, Aladdin, lion king and malificent.

10 months...to be exact.

 

[Darkprime]

Yes part of me thinks the reason for Disney's slate this year being so stacked with theatrical releases is Disney+ but then the other part of me thinks it might just be a coincidence and everything just lined up that way. Typically Disney and its subsidiaries release no more than 10 films a year. Which is actually less than any of its competitors (WB,Universal) etc. This year Disney just happened to acquire Fox and their slate increased. So it could just be a coincidence that the slate was so huge.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Yes part of me thinks the reason for Disney's slate this year being so stacked with theatrical releases is Disney+ but then the other part of me thinks it might just be a coincidence and everything just lined up that way. Typically Disney and its subsidiaries release no more than 10 films a year. Which is actually less than any of its competitors (WB,Universal) etc. This year Disney just happened to acquire Fox and their slate increased. So it could just be a coincidence that the slate was so huge.

But none of Disney’s releases this year were affected by fox at all.

This is deliberate...but we don’t know why?

The bigger indictment is it seems they forced a couple of movies in they didn’t need too...that makes me wonder.

They did not need marvel-avengers - Spider-Man in 5 months and then flatline the rest of the year.

They don’t need malificent...frozen and Star Wars too close my adversely affect some of the casual market. And lion king and Aladdin 2 months apart didn’t make a ton of sense either.

The big one is toy story for me...didn’t need it at all this year. Really needed it next.

The other issue that shows is they are making no new material...or they could offset some of these big name movie with others. None are being made.

 

[Jedijax719]

Ironically, by Disney owning Fox, it will give the illusion next year that Disney is producing more original content. It will just be that they own another studio's original content.

I think this will actually be the first time Disney has owned an entire studio rather than an intellectual property (SW and Marvel).

 

[MisterPenguin]

Ironically, by Disney owning Fox, it will give the illusion next year that Disney is producing more original content. It will just be that they own another studio's original content.

I think this will actually be the first time Disney has owned an entire studio rather than an intellectual property (SW and Marvel).

Wha? Pixar, LucasFilm, and Marvel were all actual studios.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Wha? Pixar, LucasFilm, and Marvel were all actual studios.

Marvel and Pixar never released a standalone movie...

But LFL - on the other hand - retained and financed nearly all their movies and simply used paramount, Fox, etc for distribution...that was just not wanting to sweat the “small” stuff.

It will be interesting to see how they consolidate - for sure - down the road.