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

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I think this is a big part of it. A lot here are focusing on political stuff, but I think the idea it's been oversaturated with no clear direction has really taken ahold. I think you then add in how expensive theaters are, and that Disney has trained its customers to expect it to stream in a free months anyways, and you have this recipe. People want the politics inserted, but considering it's an issue in all markets, I think the training of hits to D+ is maybe the largest culprit for Disney at the box office at this point (with the saturation a specific Marvel issue at this point)

Oh it’s oversaturated and that won’t “reset”

It’s the oppo problem they had with Star Wars - honestly.

That was crap for a fanbase who really wanted more

Early MCU was excellent and they went too far

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I’m confused about posters complaining about not liking people posting stuff that runs contrary to their views. Are people forced to read this site and this very thread?

When you “pray to the D”…anything remotely thoughtful is offensive. And bad for bobs yacht fund

 

[AdventureHasAName]

 

[Joel]

Easily one of the best posts in this thread. I just wanted to comment on this one point:

6. The marketing had little appeal to hypermasculine men who like to see themselves in superheroes. It's hard to describe, but the movie felt much more overtly like a "chick flick" than other movies with female-led superheros, like Wonder Woman or Black WIdow. Maybe it was because there wasn't a strong male lead in the movie. Wonder Woman had Chris Pine's Steve Trevor. Captain Marvel had Nick Fury as a co-lead (in The Marvels he's reduced to a comic relief sidekick). Or maybe was because the movie de-emphasized action and thrills in favor of goofy location-switching shenanigans, planets where people communicate through song or silly sequences with the flerkens set to the tune of "Memories" from Cats.

I agree, except I think "hypermasculine men who like to see themselves in superheroes" is limiting the point a bit much.

For some reason, many guys have a harder time connecting with movies featuring an almost all-female cast, even though women have been tagging along to traditionally male-oriented movies for decades. Maybe it's because they are so used to having media catered directly to them that they aren't used to having to put themselves in someone else's shoes.

Men have been tagging along to traditionally female-oriented movies for decades, too. Women have had media catered to them for decades, too. The audience for Barbie was 66% female (according to this article), whereas apparently 65% of The Marvels' audience was male. Proportionally speaking, men more than did their part for a movie that at least appeared to be targeted toward women. There just wasn't enough of either gender, of course.

Even though I saw Captain Marvel (liked it), WandaVision (really liked it), and Ms. Marvel (appreciated what they did with it, but it didn't really grab me), I just don't have anywhere close to the same level of attachment to those characters that I do for certain other Marvel characters. (I will gladly sit through a less-than-stellar X-Men or Spider-Man movie because I am infinitely more emotionally invested in them.) The one character I do give a crap about (Nick Fury, arguably the best character in the MCU) got kind of ruined for me by Secret Invasion, which seemed to have been written by people who hated both him and their audience.

I think people, including Marvel themselves, really underestimated how big of a hurdle that was to overcome.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It’s kinda hard for a company that green lights 11 Princess movie sequels at a time to then teleport that audience into their mid 20’s and tell them they should be dressed up in capes like comic con watching lighting bolts come out Brie larsons hands…

When you try to live on the edge of the sword…make sure you don’t trip and go spread Eagle

 

[TalkingHead]

I’ve wondered what percentage of the audience still following Marvel are Disney fans first and foremost. Stands to reason there’s a substantial number who are Marvel fans because of the Disney ownership, which is a very different audience than the traditional geek/nerd comic fans.

Not sure you can cater to both audiences in 2023. Partially it’s a question of a tired franchise that’s run out of steam or new exciting ideas. But long term, given budgets, hard to see how these films can be successful without gimmicks, stunt casting, and/or Spider-man.

What’s Disney pivoting to? Frozen 4 isn’t a good sign of things to come.

 

[Phroobar]

Are people forced to read this site and this very thread?

Yes. The Mom makes us or we don't get to take the car out on Saturday night.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Yes. The Mom makes us or we don't get to take the car out on Saturday night.

…winner

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Peesume? We already have numbers. No presuming needed.

That was not what I meant by “presume.” I know we have the numbers. Zoom out for a sec, why should we presume that would be the case?

. Most people are saying it’s enjoyable. So what should Disney have known better than to do?

In your other post, you claimed to not be able to speak for others as to why, yet you’re the one who asserted for others that of course they wouldn’t want to see this movie - prompting me to ask why.

 

[Tha Realest]

I saw an interesting stat today that Marvel Phase 1 was 746 minutes of content spread over 5 years, phase 2 was 757 minutes of content spread over 3 years, phase 3 was 1500 minutes of content spread over 3 years, and phase 4 (including D+) was 3500 minutes of content over 2 years.

Marvel released more content in 2021/2022 than in the previous 12 years combined.

They theorized this has resulted in Marvel NOT feeling like event movies anymore, if you miss the latest movie or show it’s not a big deal because Marvel will likely release something new to watch next week.

Absolutely.

1) The sheer volume of content - of variable quality and audience sizes - has overwhelmed even the fans who’ve been most ardent in the past. This phase (and the last one) has been very haphazard and incoherent, and I’m frankly ambivalent as to where it’s heading.

2) There still exists a hurdle to make a TV show (or Star) feel like a real big budget film or movie star.

3) Hiddleston and Pugh are movie stars. They can drop down and do the TV thing. But it also diminishes them a bit, and Vellani and Patti’s do not have that heft yet to help carry a film.

4) Mackie’s a movie star. So is Pugh, Steinfeld, Ford, Jackson, Hemsworth. A decent enough cadre of actors to build upon, but the brand and their films haven’t been lighting it up lately.

 

[flynnibus]

That was not what I meant by “presume.” I know we have the numbers. Zoom out for a sec, why should we presume that would be the case? You all act like Disney should know better than to xyz but then you tiptoe around the xyz.

Uhhh… you want to name one thing about why movies are successful or not? If you could do that everytime you’d be the #1 person in hollywood.

Maybe your postulates of why the film isn’t successful are full of it? Can you simply not accept people need to get hooked on something to want to invest in it… and maybe… just maybe… disney has failed to set that hook?

And besides, this conversation isn’t about one film. It’s the trend disney has demonstrated. You keep acting like its the boogie man somehow convincing 75% of a customer base to go and hide. Instead of just accepting when someone says “didn’t look interesting enough to me…”

Maybe after the shovelware of stuff like moonknight, etc people aren’t as willing to just jump in blindly anymore. Maybe there is more to wanting familiar characters… not late period comic characters that a majority of non-comic people never heard of.

Maybe disney has just done a lackluster job of breaking these new characters into audiences.

What we do know is… it hasn’t been working to the level they need.

 

[flynnibus]

The post you quoted explained the poster's position just fine. No one was attacking it, so what's the point of your post?

Should i link where i made basically the same post… but then got chided to say why I really felt that way? Repeatedly?

I didn’t want joel to feel left out

 

[Chi84]

Should i link where i made basically the same post… but then got chided to say why I really felt that way? Repeatedly?

I didn’t want joel to feel left out

No, that's fine.

Maybe it's time for all of us to try to raise the level of discourse around here a notch or two. It could certainly stand it.

 

[flynnibus]

Maybe it's time for all of us to try to raise the level of discourse around here a notch or two. It could certainly stand it.

Meanwhile… anyone planning on seeing wish?

It’s another that just seems like maybe i’ll watch it on D+ eventually. Not a single person around me is talking about i which seems to really nerf any urgency. Tho it seems the more recent promotions are focusing on the star character’s cuteness…. Which is a shift from what i saw earlier

 

[Tony the Tigger]

By the way, Tony, I love your new profile picture!

Thanks, Buddy. Been spending a lot of extra time with Kylie lately. I’m afraid she’s on her way out, we think it’s a matter of weeks. (Heart failure.)

Fourteen years old and the star of many trip reports, she’s been the best pup.

So far, she still wants to go for those late night short walks, hence the pic!

 

[Casper Gutman]

Thanks, Buddy. Been spending a lot of extra time with Kylie lately. I’m afraid she’s on her way out, we think it’s a matter of weeks. (Heart failure.)

Fourteen years old and the star of many trip reports, she’s been the best pup.

So far, she still wants to go for those late night short walks, hence the pic!

I’m so very sorry. Kylie seems wonderful.

 

[Casper Gutman]

It’s really shocking that some posters think the idea that the media is influential is far-fetched or controversial.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I think Ant Man 3's performance was very telling in hindsight.

The movie made about 50% of its total domestic gross in its first 3 days of release. That's absurdly front-loaded.

The movie had mixed reviews prior to opening, but there was clear interest in Marvel fans who felt that the movie was going to deliver in some way, regardless, and that it was worth seeing. Resulting in a big opening weekend.

When it didn't, word got out very quickly and by the end of weekend 2, most everyone who wanted to see it had and there were no legs from there.

To me, The Marvels reflects the impact of that. "Fool me once..." as they say. Guardians 3 was an outlier because it was the conclusion to its own story, built on the success of parts 1 and 2 and also being good enough to stand on its own.

I agree with others who say the volume of content and the lack of clear build up has ended the need to see these movies ASAP or at all. People will now pick and chose based on what stories or characters were of interest to them. That The Eternals, divisive as it was, made over $400 million is even more impressive in retrospect.

 

[Chi84]

No one said it's not. I said it doesn't address the size of the hole we know is there. The radical right media isn't going to convince hyper left people they need to boycott a movie over some ridiculous claim/agenda/whatever. That loud mouth doesn't have influence over the whole country or world... yet, we still see huge drops across all segments.

How exactly are these loud mouths convincing audiences that never listen to them and are diametrically opposed to their very existence?

The entrenched emotionally bound political sides are less than 40% of this country, and don't have a voice over seas either. The other 40% of the country thinks they are lunatics. That means they only have a sway over a minority of the audience... yet the majority of the audience is not buying.

This isn't politics where a loud few get to amplify their control through positions of power or can amplify voice through representation. Customers are freely making their own decisions day in and day out. No one is being forced to jump through hoops to see a movie, pass different tests, or goto different states to see a movie. The movie aren't being withheld from screens.. or pulled from shelves.

People are upset about these stupid campaigns and publications... and they are trash... but to think they have some new superpower to manipulate global audiences to their will... on this topic alone... is just clutching.

Those pundits don't have a voice over people outside sphere of influence.

No one in my liberal circle are skipping The Marvels because some youtube video preached to them about something.. they just aren't interested in what the film is marketing itself as. Many of the other recent films (especially in animation) have failed to span both the young and old together in their appeal. Meanwhile, many of them went out in costume to see Barbie... so what does that say? These aren't hillbillies complaining about the woke army taking away their films... they simply aren't being drawn to the films Disney is putting out.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting it’s the entire explanation - just a factor. So far changing audience behavior, Disney+ and uninspired content seem to be the biggest factors.

 

[Casper Gutman]

I think Ant Man 3's performance was very telling in hindsight.

The movie made about 50% of its total domestic gross in its first 3 days of release. That's absurdly front-loaded.

The movie had mixed reviews prior to opening, but there was clear interest in Marvel fans who felt that the movie was going to deliver in some way, regardless, and that it was worth seeing. Resulting in a big opening weekend.

When it didn't, word got out very quickly and by the end of weekend 2, most everyone who wanted to see it had and there were no legs from there.

To me, The Marvels reflects the impact of that. "Fool me once..." as they say. Guardians 3 was an outlier because it was the conclusion to its own story, built on the success of parts 1 and 2 and also being good enough to stand on its own.

I agree with others who say the volume of content and the lack of clear build up has ended the need to see these movies ASAP or at all. People will now pick and chose based on what stories or characters were of interest to them. That The Eternals, divisive as it was, made over $400 million is even more impressive in retrospect.

There’s a lot of truth here, but it’s worth noting that while Ant-Man 3’s was the biggest, MCU films have always tended to have enormous second week plunges.

I think it’s also worth noting that Ant-Man 3’s primary problem was glaringly obvious - it focused on the overarching narrative, “building to something,” rather then playing to the established strengths of the character. It’s strange, then, that so many people seem to think the solution to the MCU’s current woes is to emphasize the overarching narrative MORE. I understand the impulse given the success of the buildup to Endgame, but I have to wonder if it’s exactly wrong and more self contained films are the answer.