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

celluloid

Well-Known Member
There is no guarantee they will recover fully, if ever, back to prepandemic levels. That is an assumption that cannot be made.

This is true. Particularly globally.

But domestically, yes. It is fairly certain based on trend. It has risen about a billion or more every year since 2020. Certainly more than you can say it is dying. Because it is growing. It also does not have to be at prepandemic levels, to be viable.

It is on track to slowly go that direction (2024 will be rough with strikes pushing things around)
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
This is true. Particularly globally.

But domestically, yes. It is fairly certain based on trend. It has risen about a billion or more every year since 2020. Certainly more than you can say it is dying. Becuase it is growing. It also does not have to, to be viable.

It is on track to slowly go that direction (2024 will be rough with strikes pushing things around)
Again there is no guarantee, even with trends. Again that is an assumption that cannot be made, ie its not a foregone conclusion. Especially when include the strikes like you mention. That is going to end up disrupting things for potentially a couple years as things get pushed around more over the next several months.

Again look at the charts, non-inflation adjusted, 2023 is still $3.1B below 2019 levels -

1701117167257.png
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
I've mentioned this before, but I'm convinced that Disney's pivot to Direct-to-Consumer is also a pivot away from its emphasis on box office releases. Basically, I think Disney now sees its moviemaking business as a huge content machine for Disney+.

Because box office is not DTC, I think Disney is starting to treat more as a way to offset the cost of making a movie for D+ than as the primary way for a film to make money.

Obviously Disney needs to bring down costs per film. But for D+ to become viable in the streaming era, it needed lots of diversified content (both to add perceived value to D+ and to help Disney gauge interest and analyze user data). I believe what we’re seeing now is Disney knowingly going all-in on long run streaming strategies at the expense of box office, which are more of a short run strategy.

I may be wrong about this, but the alternative narratives (that Disney suddenly forgot the easy formula to making good movies, that they're motivated by agendas other than money, etc.) don't make sense to me from the big picture.
 

celluloid

Well-Known Member
Again there is no guarantee, even with trends. Again that is an assumption that cannot be made, ie its not a foregone conclusion. Especially when include the strikes like you mention. That is going to end up disrupting things for potentially a couple years as things get pushed around more over the next several months.

Again look at the charts, non-inflation adjusted, 2023 is still $3.1B below 2019 levels -

No guarantees in anything my friend. But condemning it is just as much, if not more rough when it has in fact grown the last three years by billions.
 

celluloid

Well-Known Member
I've mentioned this before, but I'm convinced that Disney's pivot to Direct-to-Consumer is also a pivot away from its emphasis on box office releases. Basically, I think Disney now sees its moviemaking business as a huge content machine for Disney+.

Because box office is not DTC, I think Disney is starting to treat more as a way to offset the cost of making a movie for D+ than as the primary way for a film to make money.

It is obvious that Disney would prefer to make money on both.

Other Studios have been able to do this.
 

ParentsOf4

Well-Known Member
Here's the interesting thing on budget. I quick checked 2019 vs 2023 for Disney (SO, open to corrections if I messed something up, like I said, I went quick with it). I believe there were 14 movies released this year so far to theaters, and I found the budgets for 12 of them. Those averaged a budget of $180.4 million. In 2019? The average was $180.4 million. SO, the top 12 movies both years cost the EXACT same amount to make. NOW, 2019 is skewed drastically. You had two MONSTER movies that were culminations of their two largest franchises that they spent a ton to make. But, you could say that about Indy as well. Also, this year, there were 7 movies that cost $200 million or more to make. 2019, that number is just 4. But it's interesting to me that the budgets may not be quite as out of hand as we believe they are. And I think it points to the idea there is a lot more in play than just "These movies are costing too much to make."

I think theater costs have risen too much (remember, I personally said no to Captain Marvel opening week cause I wasn't willing to pay the price. Well, Thanksgiving weekend, I went from like $15 a ticket to $8, and popcorn was discounted as well). I also think the way Disney retrained viewers to wait 2-3 months to watch it on D+ may be the LARGEST impact. I think if you are going to need to buy it for $30 anyways to see it within the next year, people will be much more likely to hit the theaters for it.
Respectfully, $180 million is a huge budget for a film, whether it’s 2019 or 2023.

This simply shows that Disney has not been able to control its production costs for years.

At the time, Terminator 2 (1991) was rumored to be the first film with a $100 million budget. (Although the exact budget is debated - certainly True Lies passed the $100 million mark a few years later.) Adjusted for inflation, that’s about $240 million. At the time, it was an outlier and its reported cost received a tremendous amount of attention in the press. Yet according to the link I provided earlier, T2 doesn’t even make the list of most expensive (adjusted for inflation) films ever made.

Now Disney has multiple films that are (by your calculation) averaging $180 million in production costs.

Disney has forgotten how to make small films. This means that films they produce are under tremendous pressure to make hundreds of millions at the box office.

As @celluloid wrote earlier, Eisner’s strategy was to mix it up, including going after Three Men and a Baby scale films, with an inflation adjusted production cost of about $40 million. The most financially successful film of its year, it brought in $240 million on a $15 million budget.

Iger had tremendous successes with Pixar, Lucas Films, and Marvel Studios, but the public is fatigued with the endless stream of big budget films. These films no longer have the draw they once did.

It’s time to look in a different direction.
 
Last edited:

Disney Irish

Premium Member
No guarantees in anything my friend. But condemning it is just as much, if not more rough when it has in fact grown the last three years by billions.
Correct no guarantees in life. Its easy to say the last 3 years grew by Billions when coming from just over $2B due to pandemic. That is far different than saying its going to continue to grow by that amount to get back to prepandemic levels, which again is not a foregone conclusion, its an assumption.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
It is obvious that Disney would prefer to make money on both.
It is! That's why I'm talking about emphasis and strategy. Iger even addressed this directly on an investors call, as some were wondering if Disney was going to get out of the box office game altogether.

But we've seen this same strategy from Netflix, too: a short run in theaters before adding to the streaming library.
Other Studios have been able to do this.
Consistently? I haven't seen that. I see recent successful box office performance as outliers in an unstable industry rather than as indications that Disney's strategy is bad. Mostly, I think Disney's pivot has been driven by data (that we don't have access to). The outlook be very dire for Disney to take such an expensive risk on a high-stakes pivot like this.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
Disney has forgotten how to make small films. This means that films they produce are under tremendous pressure to make hundreds of millions at the box office.
Rather than assume they've forgotten how to make small films, I believe they are knowingly deciding not to make small films because of the blurring lines between films and series. Disney still makes small films, they just go Direct to Consumer on D+.

The huge budgets are indeed too big to be sustainably profitable, but I think the big spending was indicative of how seriously Disney was taking the pivot to streaming. Disney is supposedly working to reduce costs now.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
A little late to make that assumption.
Sorry, I don't follow. I've been saying this since Disney first announced Disney+. I'm definitely a nerd about fandoms, and I've been really interested in Disney's adjustment to changes in the audience landscape.
 

Miru

Well-Known Member
Rather than assume they've forgotten how to make small films, I believe they are knowingly deciding not to make small films because of the blurring lines between films and series. Disney still makes small films, they just go Direct to Consumer on D+.

The huge budgets are indeed too big to be sustainably profitable, but I think the big spending was indicative of how seriously Disney was taking the pivot to streaming. Disney is supposedly working to reduce costs now.
In D&D terms, the modern Disney “small” films range from Tiny to Fine; they’re on par with made for TV or direct to video films in terms of production as opposed to “real” movies. There are some exceptions; but many small to medium films are originally made for theaters but later pushed to D+; Disney later realized that and only makes much smaller stuff for D+.
 

celluloid

Well-Known Member
It is! That's why I'm talking about emphasis and strategy. Iger even addressed this directly on an investors call, as some were wondering if Disney was going to get out of the box office game altogether.

But we've seen this same strategy from Netflix, too: a short run in theaters before adding to the streaming library.
A few things:
That is only really a breakthrough for Netflix. They tested the waters with Glass Onion and it was good. Netflix has been a production studio for streaming for a long time.
Netflix is the only true profitable streaming service among them all.

Disney is not going to get out of the box office industry when most movie making profits are still there, particularly for their competition that is slamming them. They want the audience that has a membership but will still go and see it in theaters.

For the other major studios, their streaming services have just replaced a lot of TV and most of hard copy home video. Not profitable enough to ditch box office.
 

DKampy

Well-Known Member
Disney has forgotten how to make small films. This means that films they produce are under tremendous pressure to make hundreds of millions at the box office.
Disney still makes smaller films… just not under the Disney title, but rather 20th Century or Searchlight pictures… Films like Theater Camp, Next Goal wins, Haunting in Venice, and The Boogeyman were all produced by Disney this year
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
A few things:
That is only really a breakthrough for Netflix. They tested the waters with Glass Onion and it was good. Netflix has been a production studio for streaming for a long time.
Netflix is the only true profitable streaming service among them all.
Which is why it makes sense to me that Disney might be pursuing similar strategies.
Disney is not going to get out of the box office industry when most movie making profits are still there, particularly for their competition that is slamming them. They want the audience that has a membership but will still go and see it in theaters.
I did not say Disney is getting out of the box office industry. But it is clear to me that it is no longer the primary focus as they pivot to DTC. I'm pretty sure they know what percentage of their subscribers will also go see a film in the theater, and I think that's a shrinking number.
For the other major studios, their streaming services have just replaced a lot of TV and most of hard copy home video. Not profitable enough to ditch box office.
Right. Which is why Disney's pivot to streaming is so remarkable (and risky). It's not that they're moving from one stable, reliable model to another. They're moving from what has become a volatile, unpredictable (and dying) model to one they've got to build out in order to make anywhere near the money they used to from entertainment content.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
If it really was to sell them to China, maybe have them be exclusive to there?
Other than some edits for censors and marketing changes I never saw them trying to specifically make films for the Chinese market. Heck even the Mulan remake which is the closest to be seen as made for the Chinese market was panned by many in the region.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom