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

[Wendy Pleakley]

Who said it had to be inferior? This is the sentiment that came about because consumers thought only quality products went to theaters and inferior stuff that couldn't make it theaters went direct-to-video. That doesn't have to be the case. Netflix and Disney for that matter, has shown that quality product can be streaming exclusives. So the model is there and viable.

Netflix spends hundred of Millions on their Netflix exclusive movies. So why do you think other studios can't do that same in a similar model? Especially since Disney already has proven they can as well with their streaming exclusives. If theatrical isn't a viable long term distribution model anymore then the same movies will just be pushed to streamers. The economics can be worked out where since a studio is getting more, or in the case of a Netflix, Disney, or Amazon all of it, of the revenue they don't have to worry about having to double to triple the box office in order to just break even. They just have to have enough revenue coming into the streamer to cover content costs, and both Disney and Netflix are profitable in that regard.

There will inevitably be some drop in production values in the absence of theaters.

Movies will be less likely to shoot on location. The amount of time and money spent designing something like a Star Wars movie will be cut back.

The dinosaurs in Jurassic Park won't look as good because the TV screen is more forgiving than a theater screen.

The financial viability of streaming only is something most of us can only speculate on, but blockbuster movies are, in theory, going to typically lose a few hundred million worth of revenue. That has to change how movies are made.

Netflix has some good stuff but their movies generally strike me as being a tier below stuff made for theaters.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

The most under rated reason.

At this point we only see movies in the theater one or two times a year. Additionally, we only go to showings early in the morning because it seems to be the best way to minimize the number of morons attending.

Honestly, why on earth would I want to pay any amount of money to deal with how obnoxious other people are? I know it was an extreme situation, but what happened with Minecraft is exactly the type of thing that makes going to the theaters unappealing.

It’s pretty bad where I live. If there are more than a few other people in the theater with us, it’s about a 90% chance someone will be talking through the movie, or children will be running around the theater, etc.

 

[FrontierSpirit]

There will inevitably be some drop in production values in the absence of theaters.

Movies will be less likely to shoot on location. The amount of time and money spent designing something like a Star Wars movie will be cut back.

The dinosaurs in Jurassic Park won't look as good because the TV screen is more forgiving than a theater screen.

The financial viability of streaming only is something most of us can only speculate on, but blockbuster movies are, in theory, going to typically lose a few hundred million worth of revenue. That has to change how movies are made.

Netflix has some good stuff but their movies generally strike me as being a tier below stuff made for theaters.

I don’t see that. Wednesday is great, strangers things, game of thrones, silo, the studio is incredible, gilded age… I can think of a a lot.

I’m sure AI in ten years will drop FX production costs and still look amazing.

I don’t want cinema to disappear but my kids aren’t very interested in going. They aren’t grabbing a newspaper and looking when Goonies or Back to the future is opening up. That used to be a huge deal.

Stories won’t disappear and will always be told and maybe cinema doesn’t disappear for those 15-25 years olds wanting to get out of the house for date night.

 

[coffeefan]

 

[Disney Irish]

There will inevitably be some drop in production values in the absence of theaters.

Movies will be less likely to shoot on location. The amount of time and money spent designing something like a Star Wars movie will be cut back.

The dinosaurs in Jurassic Park won't look as good because the TV screen is more forgiving than a theater screen.

The financial viability of streaming only is something most of us can only speculate on, but blockbuster movies are, in theory, going to typically lose a few hundred million worth of revenue. That has to change how movies are made.

Netflix has some good stuff but their movies generally strike me as being a tier below stuff made for theaters.

I doubt it, only because we’ve seen Disney and Netflix spend lots of money on their streaming content. Andor for example had the budget and production quality of a movie and it was just a Star Wars streaming show. And there are other examples of this, some of which others have said.

So this idea that somehow it’ll all turn to crap low quality content if there are no more theaters I think is just a bit of alarmist talk rather than being actual reality.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

I don’t see that. Wednesday is great, strangers things, game of thrones, silo, the studio is incredible, gilded age… I can think of a a lot.

I’m sure AI in ten years will drop FX production costs and still look amazing.

I don’t want cinema to disappear but my kids aren’t very interested in going. They aren’t grabbing a newspaper and looking when Goonies or Back to the future is opening up. That used to be a huge deal.

Stories won’t disappear and will always be told and maybe cinema doesn’t disappear for those 15-25 years olds wanting to get out of the house for date night.

I doubt it, only because we’ve seen Disney and Netflix spend lots of money on their streaming content. Andor for example had the budget and production quality of a movie and it was just a Star Wars streaming show. And there are other examples of this, some of which others have said.

So this idea that somehow it’ll all turn to crap low quality content if there are no more theaters I think is just a bit of alarmist talk rather than being actual reality.

Andor was high quality but it was based on a hit movie so there was safety in spending money on it. It still only got two seasons in part due to budgetary issues, from what has been said.

The space battles we see in Andor and the Mandalorian tend to be small in scale. We're not getting a fleet of ships attacking a Death Star or Starkiller base. TV shows aren't typically delivering on the same scale as theatrical movies.

Game of Thrones started as a relatively low budget affair. It was only after it became a huge hit that they were able to stage large scale set pieces. Movies still tend to go big from the start because they can market that and trailers sell tickets. Will studios risk spending big bucks on a TV show from the start?

Silo, The Studio, Gilded Age are all good. TV shows usually deliver better writing than movies because they don't have dinosaurs or space battles to save a so-so script. Those shows do not offer the spectacle movies do. That's what we may lose.

We might just be in the golden age of television. It's not that everything will be low quality garbage, but I do feel we will lose something if the theatrical model goes away.

 

[Disney Irish]

Andor was high quality but it was based on a hit movie so there was safety in spending money on it. It still only got two seasons in part due to budgetary issues, from what has been said.

The space battles we see in Andor and the Mandalorian tend to be small in scale. We're not getting a fleet of ships attacking a Death Star or Starkiller base. TV shows aren't typically delivering on the same scale as theatrical movies.

Game of Thrones started as a relatively low budget affair. It was only after it became a huge hit that they were able to stage large scale set pieces. Movies still tend to go big from the start because they can market that and trailers sell tickets. Will studios risk spending big bucks on a TV show from the start?

Silo, The Studio, Gilded Age are all good. TV shows usually deliver better writing than movies because they don't have dinosaurs or space battles to save a so-so script. Those shows do not offer the spectacle movies do. That's what we may lose.

We might just be in the golden age of television. It's not that everything will be low quality garbage, but I do feel we will lose something if the theatrical model goes away.

Obviously a tv show is a different type of storytelling, but the point is still the same, streaming has been willing to spend money on streaming content that do have quality. It'll be no different for movies.

Also if budgets are cut it might force studios to go back to basics and bring back the idea of more for less type of production. Idea is that we don't actually need $200M-$300M budget to get a large scale quality movie, so having to scale back might be a good thing without actually affecting quality.

And lastly, its not like every single movie push to theatrical is some high quality movie. There is still a lot of crap out there with only a few "quality" movies. So lets not split hairs here, the theatrical model is not required for that. The same can still be done with a streaming model, a few "quality" movies and lots of crap.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Obviously a tv show is a different type of storytelling, but the point is still the same, streaming has been willing to spend money on streaming content that do have quality. It'll be no different for movies.

Also if budgets are cut it might force studios to go back to basics and bring back the idea of more for less type of production. Idea is that we don't actually need $200M-$300M budget to get a large scale quality movie, so having to scale back might be a good thing without actually affecting quality.

And lastly, its not like every single movie push to theatrical is some high quality movie. There is still a lot of crap out there with only a few "quality" movies. So lets not split hairs here, the theatrical model is not required for that. The same can still be done with a streaming model, a few "quality" movies and lots of crap.

Will the same level of production that currently goes into movies translate to streaming? I'm skeptical. Many of the top films on Netflix are not comparable to the best theatrical offerings IMO. They have a built in audience and they simply don't need to put in as much effort to get eyeballs on content and keep the subscriber base intact.

We have to consider the time and expense that has contributed to many movies becoming classics. They spend months trying out dozens of designs for things like characters and spaceships. That process is why a Darth Vader or Millennium Falcon are so iconic. That's less likely to happen with a budget conscious streaming movie.

Jurassic Park started out planning to use stop motion dinosaurs. They had the time and money to develop the film, and that's why we got CGI dinosaurs that were revolutionary for the time and changed the industry. In a world where that movie goes straight to streaming that may not have happened.

Not to say the technology wouldn't have changed eventually, but the movie as we know it may have been very different and not the huge franchise spawning hit that it was.

 

[Disney Irish]

Will the same level of production that currently goes into movies translate to streaming? I'm skeptical. Many of the top films on Netflix are not comparable to the best theatrical offerings IMO. They have a built in audience and they simply don't need to put in as much effort to get eyeballs on content and keep the subscriber base intact.

We have to consider the time and expense that has contributed to many movies becoming classics. They spend months trying out dozens of designs for things like characters and spaceships. That process is why a Darth Vader or Millennium Falcon are so iconic. That's less likely to happen with a budget conscious streaming movie.

Jurassic Park started out planning to use stop motion dinosaurs. They had the time and money to develop the film, and that's why we got CGI dinosaurs that were revolutionary for the time and changed the industry. In a world where that movie goes straight to streaming that may not have happened.

Not to say the technology wouldn't have changed eventually, but the movie as we know it may have been very different and not the huge franchise spawning hit that it was.

I think the problem is you keep trying to compare a future without theatrical to current streaming movies, which many are equivalent to lower quality direct-to-video fare we've had for generations now. And that can't be compared because its an unknown future in which you can't say that studios won't be making quality movies anymore just because its streaming.

There is no guarantee with anything in life. Tomorrow all studios could cut all theatrical movie budgets to $25M. And that would surely affect quality of any movie released theatrically.

The distribution method is less important when it comes to budgets and quality. So lets not just assume that because theatrical may go away in the future that studios won't still produce quality movies just because its distributed via a streaming or PVOD method.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

I think the problem is you keep trying to compare a future without theatrical to current streaming movies, which many are equivalent to lower quality direct-to-video fare we've had for generations now. And that can't be compared because its an unknown future in which you can't say that studios won't be making quality movies anymore just because its streaming.

There is no guarantee with anything in life. Tomorrow all studios could cut all theatrical movie budgets to $25M. And that would surely affect quality of any movie released theatrically.

The distribution method is less important when it comes to budgets and quality. So lets not just assume that because theatrical may go away in the future that studios won't still produce quality movies just because its distributed via a streaming or PVOD method.

I'm not saying anything is certain.

My point is that theatrical movies are made differently than streaming movies.

When it's said that Andor or Wednesday are great, therefore movies will continue to be great absent theaters, I'm skeptical. The loss of theatrical revenue, even if it's less than it once was, is significant.

People perceive straight to video movies differently than theatrical. There's a reason digital movies are marketed with "bring the theater home". When a movie like the new Jurassic Park is available to rent this week for $25, I get it. It's a new release of a theatrical movie.

If and when theaters go away, are people still going to pay a premium to rent a movie? How do you convince the public that Thunderbolts is a premium product compared to something that was never meant to be a theatrical release?

You likely don't spend hundreds of millions staging a Mission Impossible movie without being able to recoup at least most of the budget theatrically.

Again, I say none of this with certainty, but I find it hard to believe movies as we know them today will translate to a theater-less world with no downgrades.

 

[TP2000]

Hi gang, here's the latest on The Fantastic Four. No surprise, the box office chart below shows it has weak legs.

Nephews and their lovely wives are here for the week, and the big news is that Nephew #1 and his wife are now expecting their first child! I likely won't make it 21 years to teach that kid how to make a proper cocktail, but you can darn well bet I'm going to be there to take him or her to Disneyland for the first time! The nephews have always been very competitive, so Nephew #2 and his wife are now scheming on conceiving.

Pop Culture Temperature Check for Summer of '25: None of the family have any interest in seeing The Fantastic Four or any other movie out currently, and none of them want to go to Disneyland. The robot Walt didn't do it for them. Their summer activities are all about hipster restaurant reservations, family tennis death tournaments, and beach time, with spa sessions and lots of shopping for the girls.. There's no Barbie this summer for me to take them to!

With a $225 Million production budget, this is definitely an Oof.

 

[Disney Irish]

I'm not saying anything is certain.

My point is that theatrical movies are made differently than streaming movies.

When it's said that Andor or Wednesday are great, therefore movies will continue to be great absent theaters, I'm skeptical. The loss of theatrical revenue, even if it's less than it once was, is significant.

People perceive straight to video movies differently than theatrical. There's a reason digital movies are marketed with "bring the theater home". When a movie like the new Jurassic Park is available to rent this week for $25, I get it. It's a new release of a theatrical movie.

If and when theaters go away, are people still going to pay a premium to rent a movie? How do you convince the public that Thunderbolts is a premium product compared to something that was never meant to be a theatrical release?

You likely don't spend hundreds of millions staging a Mission Impossible movie without being able to recoup at least most of the budget theatrically.

Again, I say none of this with certainty, but I find it hard to believe movies as we know them today will translate to a theater-less world with no downgrades.

Obviously we're at least a few years, most likely a decade or two, away from having to find out.

I just point back to what I said before, remember what happened just 5 years ago. Studios were looking at a potential world without theaters due to the pandemic. So they were looking at ways to still have the theatrical model at home via PVOD and streaming. Remember Premier Access on D+ where Black Widow and Mulan were offered for a price? So yeah they obviously have ways to still make money at home if theatrical goes away completely. Now will you get to $1B or more in that model, maybe not. But with not having to split with theaters you don't need to. You can still make a $200M movie and charge for it in a PVOD model. All you need is 8M households spending $25 for it and you recoup your $200M cost, any more and that is profit. Or lower the price point and just get more households to buy it. I mean compare that to the 28.4M tickets sold for Superman so far for example just to get to approximately the same return.

Its a win/win for everyone, studios get to recoup their costs and get to profit faster due to not having to split with theaters and consumers get a cheaper option and can watch more new run movies at home for the same prices they are paying now for just watching one in a theater.

 

[Nevermore525]

After yesterday’s earnings. For Calendar 2025 Disney Studios % of revenue stream

TV/VOD Distribution: 41% ($1.795B)
Theatrical Distribution : 33% ($1.466B)
Other (Stage Shows, etc): 26% ($1.142B)

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Obviously we're at least a few years, most likely a decade or two, away from having to find out.

I just point back to what I said before, remember what happened just 5 years ago. Studios were looking at a potential world without theaters due to the pandemic. So they were looking at ways to still have the theatrical model at home via PVOD and streaming. Remember Premier Access on D+ where Black Widow and Mulan were offered for a price? So yeah they obviously have ways to still make money at home if theatrical goes away completely. Now will you get to $1B or more in that model, maybe not. But with not having to split with theaters you don't need to. You can still make a $200M movie and charge for it in a PVOD model. All you need is 8M households spending $25 for it and you recoup your $200M cost, any more and that is profit. Or lower the price point and just get more households to buy it. I mean compare that to the 28.4M tickets sold for Superman so far for example just to get to approximately the same return.

Its a win/win for everyone, studios get to recoup their costs and get to profit faster due to not having to split with theaters and consumers get a cheaper option and can watch more new run movies at home for the same prices they are paying now for just watching one in a theater.

Do we know how any of the PVOD releases during covid performed? Wonder Woman was a big run as I recall. Did the revenue make up for the loss of theatrical?

It's not a perfect benchmark as there was pent-up demand for new material at that time.

The trouble with the notion of home viewing replacing theater viewing is there's a lot of crossover. Marvel fans are seeing Endgame in the theater AND buying a copy. It's not necessarily a one to one scenario of PVOD purchases replacing theater tickets.

This is demonstrated by the fact that historically, the better a movie does theatrically the better it does at home.

And again, how do you convince people that a straight-to-streaming Superman movie is worth it as a premium release, when there's so much content out there?

 

[Tony the Tigger]

As soon as you see a few more billion dollar movies, budgets will creep back up.

 

[Disney Irish]

Do we know how any of the PVOD releases during covid performed? Wonder Woman was a big run as I recall. Did the revenue make up for the loss of theatrical?

It's not a perfect benchmark as there was pent-up demand for new material at that time.

The trouble with the notion of home viewing replacing theater viewing is there's a lot of crossover. Marvel fans are seeing Endgame in the theater AND buying a copy. It's not necessarily a one to one scenario of PVOD purchases replacing theater tickets.

This is demonstrated by the fact that historically, the better a movie does theatrically the better it does at home.

I don't believe the specifics are known of the PVOD releases during the pandemic, at least not in any detail.

But you're still trying to look for a 1-for-1 to say that streaming/PVOD model with be 100% the same as the theatrical model. Again it doesn't need to be. You don't need a movie to get to $1B+ at home in order for it to be an End Game or Avatar level hit. Once you account for the theater splits a studio isn't taking that entire box office. Yet when you remove the need for a split they get 100% of any revenue generated by a streaming/PVOD release. So in the end they can get more revenue from a 100% streaming/PVOD model than they can from theatrical. This is the reason why studios were so invested in trying to spin up streaming/PVOD during the pandemic. They have set themselves up for an eventual future where theatrical is no longer viable.

And again, how do you convince people that a straight-to-streaming Superman movie is worth it as a premium release, when there's so much content out there?

How do you convince people now that any theatrical release is "worth it" with so many releases? Its not automatic just because its a theatrical release right, there is marketing that convinces people. Same can be done with any future model with streaming only releases.

 

[Phroobar]

As soon as you see a few more billion dollar movies, budgets will creep back up.

Not from Disney.

 

[Disney Irish]

Not from Disney.

So you don't think a Disney movie will make $1B+ again?

 

[Phroobar]

So you don't think a Disney movie will make $1B+ again?

Outside of a sequel IP, no.

 

[Disney Irish]

Outside of a sequel IP, no.

How many original non-IP/non-sequel movies have made $1B+ in the last decade by any studio? And the last 20 years?

Avatar and Frozen were the last ones in 2009 and 2013 respectively.

Original non-IP/non-sequel movies don't typically make $1B+ by any studio. So that is not unique to Disney.