Before that I think Disney will have a bigger loss likely with Kingdom of The Planet of The Apes to look out for before Inside Out 2 possibly makes them some money.
That thing has a reported budget of 270 million. Wowzers.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs
- Thread starter Disney Analyst
- Start date
Before that I think Disney will have a bigger loss likely with Kingdom of The Planet of The Apes to look out for before Inside Out 2 possibly makes them some money.
That thing has a reported budget of 270 million. Wowzers.
Where have you seen a reported budget for the new Apes? I can't find that number anywhere, other than as an inflation-adjusted budget for the 2014 movie.
https://www.thefilmik.com/kingdom-of-the-planet-of-the-apes-budget-revealed-its-reportedly-massive/ Here is one place that low estimates it at 200-220 million pre marketing.
Other sources have it higher.
I read that as $200m-$220m where the real cost to Disney was less than that due to incentives. e.g. the $60m in incentives they got for Dial of Destiny. [Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/caroli...a-jones-whips-up-130-million-loss-for-disney/]
"According to verified reports, the production budget for 20th Century Studios’ ‘Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes’ is around $200-220 million, excluding prints and advertising costs, making it a massively budgeted film for the production. With a $200-220 million budget, ‘Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes’ also becomes the most expensive film in the overall franchise, followed by the $170 million-budgeted ‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,’ the $150 million-budgeted ‘War for the Planet of the Apes,’ and the $93 million-budgeted ‘Rise of the Planet of the Apes.’ Not only that, but it also stands on the list of the most expensive films of the year, alongside ‘Deadpool 3,’ ‘Gladiator 2,’ and ‘Argylle.’"
Oooh... neat, are we trading quotes to prove we read the article? I said I read it.
"The primary reason for this film exceeding its budget is the pandemic, but since most of the work on the film has been done at Disney Studios Australia, the Australian Government has provided numerous facilities for filmmaking. According to reports, significant incentives have also been granted, making the film more cost-effective."
Glad you read it?
I was just being more specific. It is not all about you. Ugly attitude.
Glad it answered your question though?
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I more so meant if Disney will pretend it doesn’t exist. Though your point is taken it is actually ahead of Strange World (significantly) and Lightyear.
Strange World is almost bad enough that it could have warranted a content impairment write off. Though I don’t think Iger wants to take Warner Bros approach with its original studio.
Who said anything was about me?
My point is just that if you link an article, you don't then need to make a separate post that's solely a large excerpt from said article, especially if you're just going to omit important context from the very next paragraph.
Those credits are a big deal, and we are usually not really privy to how they affect the bottom line. Case in point, the last time TP did a patented chart on IJ5, he said it lost $213m. Forbes has reported that figure is actually $130m. Why the big difference? Because of things like these production credits.
I don't know how big Australia's credits are, but that will probably make the effective budget of Apes less than $200m.
Your question was the reported budget numbers. They were provided. The credit given is unknown. As of right now, those are just random guesses.
Surely a Great point to make. I don't need to do anything. I wanted to for those who did not want to click the link to read it. I am glad you were here to make sure that everyone else felt the same way as you when it comes to posting excerpts from links.
With your permission, I will post that it is likely about 10 to 16.5 percent. https://www.ausfilm.com.au/incentives/
It will probably have the budget still landing around 200 million as without it reports from trades have said 2020 million to 270 million.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
I'm not sure how much faith we put into what "filmik" says, I'm not sure how reputable a source that really is. None of the mainstream trades has picked up that number yet, so I'd take it with a grain of salt for right now.
I agree with you the box office is not as dire as some people thought and it is great that so many movies are opening above 40 Million in the last month… but going by the standards people have set in these forums… Ghostbusters Frozen Empire does not appear it will
Make any profits in the theatrical window
The Ghostbusters sequel has a budget of a 100 million…. Afterlife grossed 204 worldwide…Domestically…Even though Frozen opened a tiny bit more… it is now running about 15 million less then Afterlife at the same point in their theatrical runs…Not to sure how the worldwide was at this point… but Ghostbusters has always been more of a domestic franchise than international…I only bring this up because people wanted to tell me Poor things was a flop until it reached 100 million which was over 3 times it’s budget.. and even then wanted to deny it was profitable
I am not saying Ghostbusters will not be profitable in the long run… as I am not one who thinks box office is the end all be all… just going by the standards people use against Disney movies in this thread
My post was made before second weekend results were official, but it is difficult to tell as Frozen Empire is still in its first three weeks of release and there are Rated R films as the two major releases this weekend with other films that are varying in interest.
I think people still don't define terms of bomb, flop or disappointment.
Ghostbusters Frozen Empire will likely make dollars by the time it leaves the box office, but probably not much.
Internationally, it will be difficult to say as well. Ghostbusters is not allowed to release in China, as it deals with the supernatural afterlife. Too early to tell how it will do worldwide elsewhere as it keeps playing. Let's revisit in a month or so and see. what the 40 year old supernatural comedy fourth installment that was critically panned before relase(with one bad branding spin off in 2016) does in an unsure box office market. Not a smash hit financially likely by any stretch of imagination predicting. By all accounts of logic with the last year, it should be bombing, yet already passed Haunted Mansion and Wish for example of scale and scope with a much smaller budget than those had in both production and marketing.
However, the point remains of the box office of this year is up per release of the box office of last year.
It was an incredible March.
We also don't know the Pinewood incentives;-) Which by fact is one of the most generous.
Last edited:
Disney Irish
Premium Member
What's interesting though is that if tracking holds, and we'll see how the rest of the year turns out, but 2024 domestic will end up being ~$2B less than 2023. Which puts it in-between 2021 and 2022. So the strikes really did hurt the box office badly.
Of course they did. But what it does prove is that there is a growing number of people wanting to go to the theaters more frequently again, there just have not been as many produced and released during the strike time.
It is incredible to be projected at only 2 billion under considering the strikes, and 2023 had large Superhero Blockbusters, Oppenheimer, Barbie and Mario rocking the industry with so much of Avatar 2's revenue in there as well.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
The real question is how much is that "growth" really going to be longer term beyond just this year. If it goes back to historical trends, that ain't good. This is something we've had discussions about before. So we'll see what happens the rest of this year, and into next.
Enough for movie theaters to be around in our lifetimes and beyond as a major source of Hollywood income.
Wars, Pandemics, home video strikes, war, strikes, pandemics, home theaters, war, strikes Streaming services better sound and picture quality at home, pandemic, strikes...
Theaters and hollywood are both fine making money.
There should be a much larger gap without Mario, Barbie, Avatar 2, Oppenheimer, Guardians 3, SpiderVerse 2 and no writer's strike major impacts into the mix. 2024 is quite interesting already.
The real question, is how much longer can Disney survive without major changes if 2024 is too similar to their 2023?(luckily for their studio, not likely as bad)
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Yeah that one is debatable. I think theaters will continue to be around, even if its just as a boutique venue. But as a "major source" of income, maybe not. But rather than belaboring the point, lets just agree to disagree, and say that neither of us can accurately predict how the future will turn out with any certainty.
It is currently, a fact. Theaters make a majority of films more money than they do through streaming or home media. It is not even debatable., or close to being.
What evidence of there even of a shift that there is more income in it?
It is not saying that Streaming is not an income, of course it is a huge one, but majority is truth in this case,. The movie industry still makes most of its money for movie studios off of theaters.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Yes in 2024 its still currently a major source of income. That wasn't even a debate.
Agree to disagree, we had this discussion in this thread and others before. We don't know what the landscape will be 5, 10, or 15 years from now. So again don't want to belabor the point. You think that theatrical will still be the primary source of income for the foreseeable future, some of us don't. Only time will tell how it turns out.