Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs

[Disney Analyst]

I figured we could create a thread to discuss all things Disney, and their box office performance, instead of littering the various threads.


Disney has had success in the last couple of years (No Way Home, Dr. Strange, Avatar, etc.), and pretty big box office blunders (Lightyear, Strange World, and now Elemental. Of course, The Little Mermaid is doing great domestically and failing internationally, etc.)

So the question is, what happens now? What should Disney be doing to turn the tide, and start taking the box office by storm again? Is this just a blip, that happens every few years, or is this a worrying trend? Is it just Disney, or is the box office itself not what it once was?

Does Pixar have a future? Or should Disney start merging animation all under the Walt Disney Animation department?

Discuss, but please keep it civil, and let's try and avoid the typical culture war / political talking points.

 

[doctornick]

Well, start with a 6-9 month window between theatrical release and appearing on streaming. There's no reason to make the content available so soon "for free" on a service with a large subscription base consisting of mostly the same people who were previously buying all the tickets for the movie theaters for Disney and Pixar.

And control costs for films. Animated movies and live action remakes should be targeted for around $100M production costs, maybe at absolute most $150M.

 

[TalkingHead]

Disney has had success in the last couple of years (No Way Home, Dr. Strange, Avatar, etc.)

No Way Home was Sony, not Disney, right?

 

[jpinkc]

No Way Home was Sony, not Disney, right?

Yes

 

[Disney Analyst]

No Way Home was Sony, not Disney, right?

No Way Home is technically a coproduction with Columbia Pictures, Marvel, and Pascal Productions, distributed by Sony. It's a weird mix, but it's part of the MCU, and I would still tie it to Disney, even if it's not technically correct.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Well, start with a 6-9 month window between theatrical release and appearing on streaming. There's no reason to make the content available so soon "for free" on a service with a large subscription base consisting of mostly the same people who were previously buying all the tickets for the movie theaters for Disney and Pixar.

And control costs for films. Animated movies and live action remakes should be targeted for around $100M production costs, maybe at absolute most $150M.

I agree, costs need to be reigned in. They need to maintain quality in animation, with lower costs.

 

[jpinkc]

Fire all current creative execs, Rehire John Lassiter, Fire Kathleen Kennedy, put Favreau and Filoni in charge, beg George Lucas to become involved. Look at what sold not what "YOU" want to sell cause folks aint buying it. Use what you have in Marvel, what 60+ years of stories from the comics, people would kill to see in live action. Give em what they want (Ironman, Cap, Hulk, Xmen, Deadpool, Fantastic 4, Avengers, not a West Coast Avengers knock off trying to be the Avengers) not what "YOU" think they want. Slow the roll on how many a year you throw out. 1-2 (good) Marvel, 1-2 (good) Star Wars movie, Pixar/Disney Animation can do 2 or 3.

 

[Ghost93]

1. Keep movies off Disney Plus for at least 6-12 months. Need to get people to stop expecting to get movies for free.

2. Rein in the budgets. Until the Disney/Pixar brand improves, Disney shouldn't be spending $200 million on animated films.



4. With Star Wars, have the story mapped out in advance BEFORE creating the next trilogy. The sequel trilogy suffered from a lack of direction. I'd also set the story far into the future or the past, and not have any of the Skywalkers present.

5. Marvel needs to hire better scriptwriters. Would save a lot of money that they currently spend on reshoots due to poor test screenings.

 

[TP2000]

Is it just Disney, or is the box office itself not what it once was?

It's just Disney. Or more accurately, it's just Disney and Pixar. Marvel is doing just fine.

The 2022 Box Office both domestically and globally had some historically huge hits for family and teen/young adult audiences. Just not at Disney (except Marvel, of course.)

Americans still turn out in theaters in droves if the movie is really good. The trick is, and this part may sound revolutionary to some, you have to make movies that Americans actually want to see and will actually buy a ticket for.

 

[Jedijax719]

Pixar and WDAS need to be consolidated into one branch at this point. I don't think there's really any way around that. Disney STILL does well with musicals even post-pandemic.

Budgets, taken in isolation, are not really a problem. What is a problem is that budgets of yesteryear cannot match the post-pandemic box office results. Scaling them back too much may mean less quality and even lower box office results. It's a vicious cycle.

Disney might benefit from putting more content on D+ that would otherwise have been slated for theaters. Take risks with new properties (such as Keepers of the Lost Cities, 1001 Arabian Nights) and other properties such as Pirates of Caribbean on D+ and put effort into writing and casting while being able to lower budgets with said series. Build up a reputation with their streaming content and create a demand for something theatrical.

 

[Disney Analyst]

I still need data to better tell me whether this is a Disney thing, or an industry thing.

As it seems to me a handful of films, including some from Disney, have had big money made, and the rest are… flailing.

 

[spacemt354]

This side of the forum wasn't as active back in the 2000s, early 2010s, but I'd be curious if we would be having the same 'sky is falling' type reaction to box office numbers as Disney rolled out the likes of Treasure Planet, John Carter, The BFG, Tomorrowland, etc.

All historic box office bombs with sizeable budgets but Disney kept on trucking.

So the thread title brings up an interesting point...do they care?

Obviously these numbers must have some effect on what gets approved into the future, but at the same time I don't see them lowering the budgets of these films when the likes of Pixar cost 150-180 million back in the 2000s (roughly $200-250 million with inflation)

I also don't see them extending the release to Disney+. The first 2-4 weekends bring in the most profit upon release. If a film is good and you want to see it, you'll more than likely make a trip to go see it within that time frame. If you don't think it's worth it, then having the film come out 2 months after, or 6 months after, I doubt is going to convince people to go see the film instead if they're on the fence.

The only thing it might do, is limit the amount of folks who love the film so much, they'll go back and see it again in a month. Maybe they stay at home and wait for it to drop on Disney+. Yet, that helps Disney+ viewership, since not much else is attractive on the service other than new movie drops.

 

[erasure fan1]

There are more than a few things Disney needs to fix. First they need to get back on track creatively. I know it's easier said than done. But you need the best storytellers to want to work for Disney. And once you have them, the focus needs to be put squarely back on quality story.

We've talked about budgets to death, but I still think it's the best way Disney has to shift the narrative. Think about something like mermaid. If the budget was something around 150, the movie is in the green already. Same thing with antman. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. If the movies are constantly being talked about as underperforming and losing money. More people might decide to wait for streaming, or just skip it all together.

As for Lucasfilm, yea, Kennedy just needs to be given the "we wish Kathy all the best in her new endeavors, and appreciate all she has contributed to the company." Speach. I just don't see a non divided fan base while she's there. Too many bridges have been burned so any movie that comes out with her name on it. Is going to struggle.

The easy answer to all this is to look at Muppets Mayhem. That's the kind of reverence for an IP that you need. Go listen to the podcast I linked in the Muppets mayhem thread with Jeff Yorkes. It's a fantastic look into how they went about the show. That's the kind passion you want from your creative teams. People who want to stay true to the IP and what made it special to begin with. Sure I'm a Muppets Homer, I'll freely admit. But nothing Disney has done with them has really come as close to the Henson Muppets as this. If all the creators put the IP and it's legacy first, instead of what they want out of it. Things would be much better in the house of mouse.

 

[Jedijax719]

Right now, movies need to be made for the quick financial return and studios cannot count on long runs. Sure, NWH, Mav, and Mario had/have had long big runs. But they aren't the norm. This isn't even 2019.

I've said this before and I will say it again. Studios need to make streaming and theatrical films mutually beneficial. Test something on streaming. If it is a hit (like Walking Dead, GOT or Stranger Things), then have finales show exclusively in theaters for a while. The finale of Stranger Things would greatly benefit from being a 2-21/2 hour theatrical event. Like Endgame, people will want to see what happens and will not want to wait for streaming. Likewise, they can also put the premier in the theater. People LOVE connected series which is one of the main reasons those I mentioned were so popular and is also why franchises like SW, HP, and LOTR are among the most loved and why the infinity movies are the best of the MCU. Did I say people LOVE connected sequential series? They want to see what happens next.

@Disney Analyst I think the reason this feels like a Disney thing is the volume of movies Disney puts out compared to others. At least, the volume of really big budget tentpoles Disney puts out. They don't put out small scale, lesser known, indie-type, Oscar bait movies in the theaters.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Right now, movies need to be made for the quick financial return and studios cannot count on long runs. Sure, NWH, Mav, and Mario had/have had long big runs. But they aren't the norm. This isn't even 2019.

I've said this before and I will say it again. Studios need to make streaming and theatrical films mutually beneficial. Test something on streaming. If it is a hit (like Walking Dead, GOT or Stranger Things), then have finales show exclusively in theaters for a while. The finale of Stranger Things would greatly benefit from being a 2-21/2 hour theatrical event. Like Endgame, people will want to see what happens and will not want to wait for streaming. Likewise, they can also put the premier in the theater. People LOVE connected series which is one of the main reasons those I mentioned were so popular and is also why franchises like SW, HP, and LOTR are among the most loved and why the infinity movies are the best of the MCU. Did I say people LOVE connected sequential series? They want to see what happens next.

@Disney Analyst I think the reason this feels like a Disney thing is the volume of movies Disney puts out compared to others. At least, the volume of really big budget tentpoles Disney puts out. They don't put out small scale, lesser known, indie-type, Oscar bait movies in the theaters.

That’s a great point (your last paragraph).

 

[Magenta Panther]

Yeah, Disney could try not to spend so much money on their movies, but if they fail to make movies that look appealing, the budget won't matter much. Kind of like it spends so much money on new attractions, only for them to take forever to build and be somewhat underwhelming.

I just wonder if at this point, the damage that Chapek and Iger have done to the Disney legacy can be repaired. It's not just the lousy movies and the self-destructive politicking. The Walt Disney classics have been damaged due to an overweening desire to "fix" them for "modern sensibilities", which implies that those movies were problematic and, by extension, that Walt himself was problematic. What an incredibly stupid thing to do - besmirch your company's founder. Idiots.

As for the streaming issue, I don't think that's a good enough excuse for a Disney's film's failure. Look at Mario, at Minions, at The Bad Guys, at Puss In Boots - The Last Wish; they did very well at the box office despite the fact that they would soon leave theaters and be available on streaming. Those movies did well because people still like to go to the movies as a form of recreation, as a way to get out of the house and meet with friends and have fun - but the films have to be worth the extra expense. Disney, of late, has failed to convince audiences that its films ARE worth the extra expense. As for the future? At the moment, I haven't seen anything on Disney's list of upcoming film projects that gets me excited. But of course, I can't predict future box-office successes. We'll see what happens. But...I'm not optimistic.

 

[jrice]

Disney will have a hard time and has to some tough decisions to make quickly. First, the story talent is sub par and the good talent was let go. Disney need to start trusting then again…that is gone. Also, stop making excuses that is the fans fault. Um, no! If you build it, they will come (see 2019 and before).

Get people to excited to see your movies! Make an adventure type movie or something to get families back in theater. Can we get some good news about Disney? Every week there is major new article and it is not positive. Keep your movies off D+ for at least three months…that way it forces people back in theater (but you have to make a good movie).

Overall, Disney needs to get back to making family movies that families want see (including the fans). They have the biggest pockets and have repeatability. That is how you make a billion.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Right now, movies need to be made for the quick financial return and studios cannot count on long runs. Sure, NWH, Mav, and Mario had/have had long big runs. But they aren't the norm. This isn't even 2019.

I've said this before and I will say it again. Studios need to make streaming and theatrical films mutually beneficial. Test something on streaming. If it is a hit (like Walking Dead, GOT or Stranger Things), then have finales show exclusively in theaters for a while. The finale of Stranger Things would greatly benefit from being a 2-21/2 hour theatrical event. Like Endgame, people will want to see what happens and will not want to wait for streaming. Likewise, they can also put the premier in the theater. People LOVE connected series which is one of the main reasons those I mentioned were so popular and is also why franchises like SW, HP, and LOTR are among the most loved and why the infinity movies are the best of the MCU. Did I say people LOVE connected sequential series? They want to see what happens next.

@Disney Analyst I think the reason this feels like a Disney thing is the volume of movies Disney puts out compared to others. At least, the volume of really big budget tentpoles Disney puts out. They don't put out small scale, lesser known, indie-type, Oscar bait movies in the theaters.

Theatrical follow-ups to streaming series could backfire if people who have paid money to stream a series feel like they're being forced to pay another fee to get the concluding chapter of a series. Game of Thrones toyed with this idea and decided against it for that reason.

I think a jump to the big screen can work for the Star Wars Mando-verse but it doesn't have to necessarily be a cliffhanger resolution type scenario.

It's hard to see Disney, or most studios, releasing smaller movies theatrically. It's just not as feasible in the age of streaming.

The short time frames and widespread success of Disney+ is a factor. Despite it not being profitable yet, the number of subscribers is remarkable. We all know that Disney fans are loyal so I'd bet there's close to a 1:1 match between lovers of Disney media and Disney+ subscribers.

Every single person who might be interested in The Little Mermaid for example likely has a D+ subscription. Every potential viewer is weighing the expense and hassle of going to the theater against "free" streaming that will likely occur within a few short months. They have to extend the window between theater and streaming.

I suspect the streaming option doesn't harm things like Puss in Boots the same way because Peacock doesn't have the same customer base. With a Disney movie you know roughly when it's coming and you're already subscribed.

Fire all current creative execs, Rehire John Lassiter, Fire Kathleen Kennedy, put Favreau and Filoni in charge, beg George Lucas to become involved. Look at what sold not what "YOU" want to sell cause folks aint buying it. Use what you have in Marvel, what 60+ years of stories from the comics, people would kill to see in live action. Give em what they want (Ironman, Cap, Hulk, Xmen, Deadpool, Fantastic 4, Avengers, not a West Coast Avengers knock off trying to be the Avengers) not what "YOU" think they want. Slow the roll on how many a year you throw out. 1-2 (good) Marvel, 1-2 (good) Star Wars movie, Pixar/Disney Animation can do 2 or 3.

Calls to bring back Lucas are always interesting, because many people loathed the prequels.

The Force Awakens was lazy in terms of rehashing what came before, but man people responded to a movie with that old school Star Wars feel.

I'd support Lucas coming back for sure, but who knows how fans would respond to what he could bring.

 

[TP2000]

Pixar and WDAS need to be consolidated into one branch at this point.

Gosh, there's a thought.

 

[TP2000]

This side of the forum wasn't as active back in the 2000s, early 2010s, but I'd be curious if we would be having the same 'sky is falling' type reaction to box office numbers as Disney rolled out the likes of Treasure Planet, John Carter, The BFG, Tomorrowland, etc.

All historic box office bombs with sizeable budgets but Disney kept on trucking.

The problem with your analogy is that it takes in a timeframe of almost I3 years, from 2002 to 20I5. In amongst those four flops were a bunch of hits from both Disney and Pixar, which I included in this chart for reference.

Yet what we're talking about here is just the last two (2) years. Which have been two years of nothing but flops for WDAS and Pixar, with one historic mega-bomb (Strange World) breaking up the string of mere flops.

But during your I3 year timeframe, there were plenty of other money making movies from both Pixar and WDAS. My favorite little comparison chart maker thing I use can only handle two more movies, after I used your four examples across a I3 year period. But this makes it pretty clear that there were Billion+ mega-hits to outweigh the four flops you chose spread out over I3 years.