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

[Phroobar]

Miramax was owned by Disney at the time Pulp Fiction was released.

Yup. Just found that. But there is no Castle at the beginning.

 

[BrianLo]

But during the fiscal quarter that Soul was released on Disney+, Q2 of Fiscal '21, Disney+ lost over $250 Million in just those 90 days that Soul was being offered "for free!" on Disney+.

So Disney already lost $250 Million while streaming Soul on Disney+ back in the winter of 2021. That doesn't "pay" for the movie that was supposed to go to theaters, it means Pixar failed to recoup their production budget of $150 Million. And on top of that, Disney lost a lot more doing it that way on Disney+.

Sure, if you really, really want to posit it that way. But you cannot also (which you will want to) start claiming Disney is 750 million in the hole this year after Soul, Turning Red and Luca.

Beyond that, while D+ lost 250 million that quarter, it also made 4 billion in revenue. Was none of that the responsibility of Soul then? Soul lost 250 million and every other release that quarter I guess was just neutral? Unfortunately, for your argument, the company already wrote off a lot of content from back then. So they blamed the loss on ‘that content’ and paid off Soul.

The point is the company has already amortized away the production costs on all of these films via D+ and publicly declared them success stories on D+. So as much as you are going to be all too eager to start counting up those loses for this year, you cannot… unless you want to rewind time and actually make D+ profitable? Which you don’t want to do either.

Gotta pick an intellectual lane on this one.

If you really want something to annoy you, I wouldn’t be surprised if they report the box office take on these films as DTC revenue. I think D+ essentially is the distributor in technicality.

 

[Disney Irish]

Yup. Just found that. But there is no Castle at the beginning.

And there is no castle intro in front of Poor Things either. None of the 20th Century or Searchlight movies have the castle intro in front of them. So its no different then when Disney had Miramax or using Touchstone or Hollywood Pictures.

 

[TP2000]

So it was paid for by the subscription fees, whether you want to accept that or not.

Yes, it was paid for by the subscription fees of a Disney operating division that lost $250 Million that fiscal quarter.

 

[Disney Irish]

Feels like it’s 1989 again and we’re arguing over Blaze.

I just thought about it, this is no different then when Color of Night was released. Who remembers that was a Disney movie.

 

[Disney Irish]

Yes, it was paid for by the subscription fees of a Disney operating division that lost $250 Million that fiscal quarter.

And what is your point? It was paid for, whether the overall division that paid for it lost money operationally isn't relevant.

Think about it a different way, sub fees paid for the content they bought. The rest of the operational expenses is what lost the division money. If that makes it easier for you to accept.

 

[Andrew C]

Pretty Woman.

 

[TP2000]

Sure, if you really, really want to posit it that way. But you cannot also (which you will want to) start claiming Disney is 750 million in the hole this year after Soul, Turning Red and Luca.

I wouldn't count the massive losses from those three movies that happened back in 2020-2022 against 2024. That's double counting a failure. But I still don't understand how their lack of box office results and internal shell game payments from a money-losing division of the same company back in 2021 means those films are already "paid for". They aren't. They already lost huge amounts of money for Pixar back in 2020-2022.

If anything, I expect the 2024 box office results from those three Pixar films to be rather trivial. Perhaps disastrously ignored by the marketplace who already saw them "for free" on Disney+. And since they already lost hundreds of millions of dollars on those films several years ago, why rub their noses in it?

I may be snarky at times (after 6pm mostly), but I'm not mean.

 

[BrianLo]

Yes, it was paid for by the subscription fees of a Disney operating division that lost $250 Million that fiscal quarter.

If you want to make an argument D+ shouldn’t have been onboarding expensive theatrical films? Ya, that’s very much a discussion we can have.

On one hand it sort of saved Disney’s stock price in the pandemic. While other travel and leisure companies were in the pits, Disney hit an all time high. On the other hand the aftershocks have destroyed urgency to see Pixar films in theaters (you’re welcome @Andrew C). Very evident in Elemental that clearly didn’t suffer the same lack of audience desire that many of their other films did this year.

I think it was one of Chapek’s great follies in hindsight and probably the biggest thing that got him fired.

 

[Phroobar]

I just thought about it, this is no different then when Color of Night was released. Who remembers that was a Disney movie.

Oh yeah. Hollywood Pictures. If it Sphinx...it Stinks.

 

[MagicMouseFan]

I just thought about it, this is no different then when Color of Night was released. Who remembers that was a Disney movie.

I remember Night Crossing

 

[Disney Irish]

I remember Night Crossing

Not even comparable when talking about Color of Night.

 

[Disney Irish]

Oh yeah. Hollywood Pictures. If it Sphinx...it Stinks.

I liked a lot of the Hollywood Pictures movies. And while they had some stinkers just like any other studio, there was a lot that was good. One of my favorites, Mr Holland's Opus, was a Hollywood Pictures release.

 

[BuddyThomas]

I liked a lot of the Hollywood Pictures movies. And while they had some stinkers just like any other studio, there was a lot that was good. One of my favorites, Mr Holland's Opus, was a Hollywood Pictures release.

Yup, they had quite a few hits, including The Sixth Sense, which made a bazillion dollars.

 

[brideck]

Just to get ahead of the forthcoming breathless posts (sorry to using your post as a jump off). These three Pixar movies are already paid for. This is more akin to re-release and calculating profitability based on ‘the rules’ does not apply. I’d say they are hoping for several million dollars on these things. Certainly not more than very low 8 figures, definitely not hundreds. They are just taking advantage of the dearth of releases to make a quick buck and theaters will happily allow it because they also have nothing to show.

It looks like AMC is offering all-day matinee prices for these 3 releases. So, not the "$5 fave" price point, but still at a discount. I imagine other chains might be doing something similar, although I haven't looked. If there are families that still wander into theaters looking for something to watch, it could be pretty tempting to them given the current (lack of) choices.

 

[Disney Irish]

Yup, they had quite a few hits, including The Sixth Sense, which made a bazillion dollars.

I had to go back through the list because there were many I forgot that were released under the banner.

Just to name a few that I liked in my late teens and beyond -

Quiz Show
Dangerous Minds
White Squall
Tomb Stone
Medicine Man
Hand that Rocks the Cradle
Swing Kids
The Rock

 

[MagicMouseFan]

Not even comparable when talking about Color of Night.

John Hurt vs. Bruce Willis

 

[Disney Irish]

John Hurt vs. Bruce Willis

Maybe I'm missing what you're trying to say here. Or maybe I'm forgetting Night Crossing, but I don't remember it being very graphic. But I'm guessing you've never seen Color of Night and how graphic is was for being a Disney movie under Hollywood Pictures. Which is why I brought it up comparing it to Poor Things being a Disney movie under Searchlight.

 

[MagicMouseFan]

Maybe I'm missing what you're trying to say here. Or maybe I'm forgetting Night Crossing, but I don't remember it being very graphic. But I'm guessing you've never seen Color of Night and how graphic is was for being a Disney movie under Hollywood Pictures. Which is why I brought it up comparing it to Poor Things being a Disney movie under Searchlight.

Need to watch it again… hard to believe Disney made it.
“Night Crossing” is a 1982 film based on the true story of two ladies of the night from East Germany who, in a quest for cocaine, defied the odds by building a hot air balloon to create the first mile high club. Set during the Cold War era, and filled with drug fueled orgies, this dramatic film showcases the challenges and dangers hookers faced under the surveillance of the East German government. The calls girls determination and resourcefulness are central themes, as they secretly construct the balloon despite continuing to work in raging orgies. The movie highlights the stark realities of life in East Germany and the lengths to which people went to seek the incredible strip clubs in West Germany.
Or maybe that wasn’t it… it’s been awhile since I watched it.

 

[TP2000]

Need to watch it again… hard to believe Disney made it.
“Night Crossing” is a 1982 film based on the true story of two ladies of the night from East Germany who, in a quest for cocaine, defied the odds by building a hot air balloon to create the first mile high club. Set during the Cold War era, and filled with drug fueled orgies, this dramatic film showcases the challenges and dangers hookers faced under the surveillance of the East German government. The calls girls determination and resourcefulness are central themes, as they secretly construct the balloon despite continuing to work in raging orgies. The movie highlights the stark realities of life in East Germany and the lengths to which people went to seek the incredible strip clubs in West Germany.
Or maybe that wasn’t it… it’s been awhile since I watched it.

1982, and this movie is from Walt Disney Productions? That would have been the tail end of the Ron Miller era. He was a genuinely good man who tried to get "Disney" into the late 20th century. But Eisner took over by '84 and got the credit.

I've never really been a movie person, it was always more a societal thing you had to do if you had a cute enough date.

But somehow I have vague recollections of this movie, with a hot air balloon escaping East Germany at night. Did I see it in the theater in '82? Possible. Or maybe I just stared at the movie poster in the lobby for too long trying to figure it out while my date was in the mens room before we saw E.T. and then went to 13 Coins for deep fried ice cream? Also possible.

I'd love for this movie to come back as a cult classic, if only to show the younger generation how awful Socialism was for those stuck behind the Iron Curtain back then. Because the plot sounds hilarious! I had no idea it involved call girls.