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

[brideck]

Shawshank bombed. Forest gump was the biggest movie of the year (about the same as the lion king)…

Which one was better? Doesn’t matter…Forest gump was the hit. Hollywood likes that. So does Wall Street.

Did we really just compare the #1 rated movie of all-time (per IMDb) with <checks notes> the #11 rated movie of all-time? The "entertaining" one succeeded because that's the one that always succeeds. The masses (writ large) are always merely seeking to be entertained, or even worse as I hear often these days, merely looking for something to "put on in the background".

Movies that seek to do anything other than entertain are largely ignored by the masses, and therefore by your definition can never be good. Entertaining tentpoles from the last few years did their job (see Gutman's list), but failed to penetrate people's awareness/existence.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

As I pointed out in the post that began this exchange, most of the posts tying Disney’s failures to its supposed agenda are coming from the company’s critics, not its defenders. Multiple members of this forum have stated that they oppose Disney’s films for featuring gay characters, belittling men, “race swapping”, etc. These people aren’t being accused of anything; they’re opening owning it.

And I ignore or call out those people…quite often on threads.

However I know who isn’t one…and I’ll be the expert on that.

Example:
I think TLM was a terrible idea. It lacked any creativity and was boilerplate…I also think it was cynical and cultural appropriating on DISNEY’S part.

There’s a stance that never came up, huh? But I thought it 5 mintues into it. It’s a disrespectful, outdated Hollywood approach.

So when I was told - speaking for only me
- what I was “like” by strangers…I didn’t really respond. Because I don’t need to prove my character or detail a now long history for believing in sticking out my neck for other humans who are 100% like me.
Here Endeth that lesson.

Now back to inside out…cause relitigating 2023 failure is a cry for help.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Did we really just compare the #1 rated movie of all-time (per IMDb) with <checks notes> the #11 rated movie of all-time? The "entertaining" one succeeded because that's the one that always succeeds. The masses (writ large) are always merely seeking to be entertained, or even worse as I hear often these days, merely looking for something to "put on in the background".

Movies that seek to do anything other than entertain are largely ignored by the masses, and therefore by your definition can never be good. Entertaining tentpoles from the last few years did their job (see Gutman's list), but failed to penetrate people's awareness/existence.

Over a latte at Starbucks is there no comparison? Maybe

Both are great movies…by the way.
But this is a DISNEY forum. You can’t check what Disney does and their goals at the door when convenient.

They’d pick forest everyday of the week and twice on Sunday over shank If they released this Friday.

People disagree…that’s why we come here and do this…
But nobody can declare victory irrelevant of the details. And for gods sakes…we’re talking about one of the two biggest entertainment corps in the western world…not undergraduate film projects

 

[Casper Gutman]

This.

A lot of bad movies do very well, and a lot of great movies fall on their face. Truth is that time and place have a huge role to play in how well a movie does. Not that being a great movie doesn't help, of course it does, but it is by far the sole determining factor.

As for the rest of the last few pages, the hate network, as people are calling it, doesn't influence many who aren't already on team anger or who aren't at least hate curious. Obviously, they have some influence, but most people who have their backside permanently clenched because someone, somewhere may do or say something they don't agree with are already on board.

Thankfully, they out themselves pretty quickly and generally all have the same simple narrative.

• Movie is a failure and has something they don't like?
  • It failed because it had that thing I object to, and this proves the majority agrees with me!
• Movie is a failure and has nothing objectionable to their world view.
  • It was just a bad movie.
• Movie is a success and has nothing they deem inappropriate?
  • See, I was right, exclude the objectionable thing and it succeeds.
• Movie is a success and has something objectionable?
  • Pretend the objectionable part doesn’t exist or reinterpret it to prevent the kind of cognitive dissonance that would come with acknowledging they enjoyed a movie with that kind of content.

With the caveat that I don’t think the hate network is the primary determining factor in a target films success or failure, I think folks here consistently underrate its effect. Huge numbers of people get their news from Facebook, where members of the network dominate the most circulated and viewed posts. Major news networks and prominent public figures amplify it. It is not fringe, it is mainstream. Even the many people who reject its excesses reason that it must have some truth to it (“the truth is in the middle”). It creates “vibes” that influence people without conscious thought and determines what people see as “for them” or “against them.” Even if its message is fully rejected, it politicizes escapist entertainment in an unappealing way. We’ve seen ample evidence of its ability to influence. A small, online hate movement focused on video games incubated an ideological movement that has become one of the dominant forces in the country and elected numerous powerful public officials.

In short, this isn’t just about watching some idiot screaming on YouTube.

 

[Casper Gutman]

And I ignore or call out those people…quite often on threads.

However I know who isn’t one…and I’ll be the expert on that.

Example:
I think TLM was a terrible idea. It lacked any creativity and was boilerplate…I also think it was cynical and cultural appropriating on DISNEY’S part.

There’s a stance that never came up, huh? But I thought it 5 mintues into it. It’s a disrespectful, outdated Hollywood approach.

So when I was told - speaking for only me
- what I was “like” by strangers…I didn’t really respond. Because I don’t need to prove my character or detail a now long history for believing in sticking out my neck for other humans who are 100% like me.
Here Endeth that lesson.

Now back to inside out…cause relitigating 2023 failure is a cry for help.

“Cultural appropriating”

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

With the caveat that I don’t think the hate network is the primary determining factor in a target films success or failure, I think folks here consistently underrate its effect. Huge numbers of people get their news from Facebook, where members of the network dominate the most circulated and viewed posts. Major news networks and prominent public figures amplify it. It is not fringe, it is mainstream. Even the many people who reject its excesses reason that it must have some truth to it (“the truth is in the middle”). It creates “vibes” that influence people without conscious thought and determines what people see as “for them” or “against them.” Even if its message is fully rejected, it politicizes escapist entertainment in an unappealing way. We’ve seen ample evidence of its ability to influence. A small, online hate movement focused on video games incubated an ideological movement that has become one of the dominant forces in the country and elected numerous powerful public officials.

In short, this isn’t just about watching some idiot screaming on YouTube.

So did the hate network bomb 7 of 8 2023 movies or was it only a minor factor?

I’m spinning trying to keep up with the “vortex of revisionism”

 

[Dranth]

With the caveat that I don’t think the hate network is the primary determining factor in a target films success or failure, I think folks here consistently underrate its effect. Huge numbers of people get their news from Facebook, where members of the network dominate the most circulated and viewed posts. Major news networks and prominent public figures amplify it. It is not fringe, it is mainstream. Even the many people who reject its excesses reason that it must have some truth to it (“the truth is in the middle”). It creates “vibes” that influence people without conscious thought and determines what people see as “for them” or “against them.” Even if its message is fully rejected, it politicizes escapist entertainment in an unappealing way. We’ve seen ample evidence of its ability to influence. A small, online hate movement focused on video games incubated an ideological movement that has become one of the dominant forces in the country and elected numerous powerful public officials.

In short, this isn’t just about watching some idiot screaming on YouTube.

Which is a problem when you put out a less than stellar movie like Strange World. It gives people who think that way something to glom onto instead of focusing on the actual problem which is Disney made a very pedestrian and boring movie. "It failed cause it has the gay" is the talking point that helps reinforce the tin foil tendencies.

Once something is popular, they are suddenly on board while having to perform an amazing display of mental gymnastics to explain why the thing they claim the majority cares about suddenly doesn't matter.

Barbie is a great example of this. Those groups were out in DROVES trying to put the fix in before it came out. The narrative was being spread in all the usual places, and they were ready to pounce only Barbie didn't fail and instead they had to come up with gems like "Barbie is actually anti-feminism".

Let's put it this way, they have more influence the worse the delivered product is because there are no opposing forces making people actually take a closer look for themselves.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

This.

A lot of bad movies do very well, and a lot of great movies fall on their face. Truth is that time and place have a huge role to play in how well a movie does. Not that being a great movie doesn't help, of course it does, but it is by far the sole determining factor.

As for the rest of the last few pages, the hate network, as people are calling it, doesn't influence many who aren't already on team anger or who aren't at least hate curious. Obviously, they have some influence, but most people who have their backside permanently clenched because someone, somewhere may do or say something they don't agree with are already on board.

Thankfully, they out themselves pretty quickly and generally all have the same simple narrative.

• Movie is a failure and has something they don't like?
  • It failed because it had that thing I object to, and this proves the majority agrees with me!
• Movie is a failure and has nothing objectionable to their world view?
  • It was just a bad movie.
• Movie is a success and has nothing they deem inappropriate?
  • See, I was right, exclude the objectionable thing and it succeeds.
• Movie is a success and has something objectionable?
  • Pretend the objectionable part doesn’t exist or reinterpret it to prevent the kind of cognitive dissonance that would come with acknowledging they enjoyed a movie with that kind of content.

Acknowledging the existence of nonsense like Michael bay and the fast and furious does not flip the paradigm upside down and lead us too: “people reject the good and gobble up crap”

Ok…maybe Taco Bell proves that…but not entertainment

 

[Casper Gutman]

So did the hate network bomb 7 of 8 2023 movies or was it only a minor factor?

I’m spinning trying to keep up with the “vortex of revisionism”

It was A significant factor along with many others that included, yes, the quality of the film. The “network” (and I’m sorry I can’t go into more specifics because of the nature of these boards) creates a miasma that permeates all discourse, whether one rejects, accepts, or ignores its message.

TLM is the most useful example here. I hate the live action adaptations with a passion, but TLM was no worse then films that performed much better at the box office. Was the hate campaign solely responsible for the difference? Of course not. We are in a particularly tumultuous box office moments, with all sorts of forces at work. But it played a part.

 

[Disney Irish]

I just don’t think there’s as much of a market for that kinda movie today…adult rom com/action

Like bird on a wire or something?

I don't think the rom com is dead, as last years Anyone But You got 220M and then blew up on digital and streaming.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It was A significant factor along with many others that included, yes, the quality of the film. The “network” (and I’m sorry I can’t go into more specifics because of the nature of these boards) creates a miasma that permeates all discourse, whether one rejects, accepts, or ignores its message.

TLM is the most useful example here. I hate the live action adaptations with a passion, but TLM was no worse then films that performed much better at the box office. Was the hate campaign solely responsible for the difference? Of course not. We are in a particularly tumultuous box office moments, with all sorts of forces at work. But it played a part.

Tinfoil might need adjusting

Could It be they ran out of runway on the remakes?

Highly possible…they have beaten them into the ground. To the point they’ve resorted to “modified remakes” which probably drives away a segment that just wants the same in different format?

I mean…are we sure this lion king is gonna do well? There’s nothing to tie it too.

Or the notorious dwarves?

I say this all the time…but it is terrible management.

We’re along way from the “twist” live actions like malificent, alice and cruella…and the “classic remakes like Cinderella and BATB.

Maybe as they have learned with marvel…can’t just throw the spaghetti on the wall with a label on it and hope it sticks.

 

[Dranth]

Acknowledging the existence of nonsense like Michael bay and the fast and furious does not flip the paradigm upside down and lead us too: “people reject the good and gobble up crap”

Ok…maybe Taco Bell proves that…but not entertainment

Not exclusively but it does tend to lean that way more often then people want to believe. Taco Bell, reality TV, Godzilla Vs. Kong. We love our junk food in all its forms.

Good movies still have the best chance of succeeding in my view but is far from a sure fire thing.

 

[DisneyNittany]

I mean…are we sure this lion king is gonna do well? There’s nothing to tie it too.

This is the first I'm hearing of it, but I'll most likely pay to see it, since I'm a sheep for Lion King (and the Parks).

Then again, I also just learned that I might belong to this so-called Hate Network™, so maybe that makes me a hate-filled sheep?!

I don't know. I'm so confused.

 

[erasure fan1]

In the last year we’ve seen the dismal failure of all sorts of very good films - Furiosa, Fall Guy, Dungeons & Dragons, Mission: Impossible… on and on.

Yea? I said that earlier. Was Pixars reputation built on mediocre to bad? Or was it built on consistent quality? The answer is unequivocally the 2nd.

The audience is a strange beast, I'll agree on that. I actually agree with some of what you say in that post. The problem is none of it really applies to what we've been talking about. I'm trying to find an example of all the movies that struggled over the last few years that were

"the dismal failure of all sorts of very good films"

Why? Because most were mediocre to meh, with good bunch of poor mixed in. And interestingly, elemental was good, not a failure. Inside out 2, good, off to a fabulous start. Guardians 3, good, not a failure... I just can't find one where I can say that should have been a hit. Am I missing some? Maybe, but that's the thing, nothing sticks out as all that memorable.

So when push comes to shove, quality will usually win out in the end. And sometimes, it might not. I can give plenty of reasons the films you mentioned might not have done all that well, it happens. There are exceptions to every rule. How did fast and the furious or transformers make money, they aren't quality by most standards? Sometimes you just want to see giant robots and car chases. There's not always a good logical reason.

 

[Disney Irish]

Did you even read what I said? I said in MOST situations. Yes, sometimes something that checks all the, this should be a hit boxes, doesn't do well. Just like something that has failure written all over it, becomes a hit.

Muppets mayhem was really good, one of the best D+ shows they've done. It didn't click, it happens. That doesn't mean some hate mob influenced people not to watch it because of minority leads. What it means is Disney has mishandled the muppets and people didn't care. So instead of looking at how it was received, the great buzz and a #1 album and building off it. They cancelled it.

Nothing is always or never and by this stage of life you should know that. Maybe the fallguy was a victim of the I'm just sick of remakes sentiment. I know remake is a loose term for it. Lots of people don't know that it's a show, but people Google, and if you see, based on the tv show from the 70s, you could just say I'm out. And people who do know, might have just rolled their eyes and moved on.

So because inside out 2s success means the hate network is debunked? You can't pick and choose the situations that only fit your argument. That's not how it works. People can't say if barbie was Disney it would have failed because they're not going after other studios. Well rings of Power says otherwise. If you don't think that good content gives studios the best chance to be successful, you're looking at things all wrong in my opinion. It kind of seems like it's being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.

My point was that those saying just release "good content" doesn't equate to instant box office success, which you appear to agree. Its not always so cut and dry why something fails, sometimes it could be due to political reasons other times it could be due to wrong timing of release and other times it could be fatigue, or a myriad of other reasons. Its not an all or nothing situation, which again you seem to agree.

I'm trying to find common ground here so we can have real conversations about this.

And no just because IO2 is finding success does not mean the "hate network" is debunked.

 

[Disney Irish]

The problem with The Fall Guy was the budget was too high.. Original Movies don’t usually make much more than 100 million domestic if they are good… yes it was based on an old 80’s series… but to most it was original….The original John Wick only made 43 million domestic

Well that and expectations were raised too high with it being the film that opened Summer…. It was originally Deadpool…. I think if both movies kept their release dates… people might be thinking differently on the films of 2024

There are lots of examples of original content doing over $100M domestic. Maybe post-pandemic those have become fewer, but it wasn't that long ago that $100M was the threshold to determine if something was good or not. Heck even The Good Dinosaur did over $100M domestic and that was considered a terrible film.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

None of those movies that failed were good…

They either pointless or just nonsense

 

[Tony the Tigger]

The idea that the quality of content determines viewership is so utterly ahistorical that it’s laughable. We can go through the history of filmed entertainment and find tens of thousands of examples of how untrue the idea actually is. The greatest TV show of all time, The Wire, suffered low viewership while garbage like CSI and Big Bang Theory thrives. In the last year we’ve seen the dismal failure of all sorts of very good films - Furiosa, Fall Guy, Dungeons & Dragons, Mission: Impossible… on and on.

Does quality play a role in determining popularity? Sometimes. But the idea that quality and popularity have some sort of direct, predictable relationship is, quite frankly, Populist nonsense. The audience is changeable, irrational, and persuadable - and it always has been.

Willy Wonka (1971) was a flop. Some folks here would have buried it and danced on the grave.

It found an audience (including me) on HBO, and is beloved to this day. As you know, there are so many examples.

As I pointed out in the post that began this exchange, most of the posts tying Disney’s failures to its supposed agenda are coming from the company’s critics, not its defenders. Multiple members of this forum have stated that they oppose Disney’s films for featuring gay characters, belittling men, “race swapping”, etc. These people aren’t being accused of anything; they’re opening owning it.

You should see how bad it is on less controlled sites! Btw I was liking your posts, not necessarily because I agree with you, but because you are being truthful and consistent.

With the caveat that I don’t think the hate network is the primary determining factor in a target films success or failure, I think folks here consistently underrate its effect. Huge numbers of people get their news from Facebook, where members of the network dominate the most circulated and viewed posts. Major news networks and prominent public figures amplify it. It is not fringe, it is mainstream. Even the many people who reject its excesses reason that it must have some truth to it (“the truth is in the middle”). It creates “vibes” that influence people without conscious thought and determines what people see as “for them” or “against them.” Even if its message is fully rejected, it politicizes escapist entertainment in an unappealing way. We’ve seen ample evidence of its ability to influence. A small, online hate movement focused on video games incubated an ideological movement that has become one of the dominant forces in the country and elected numerous powerful public officials.

In short, this isn’t just about watching some idiot screaming on YouTube.

There isn’t even a debate to be had. Maybe some here are “sheltered.” All anyone has to do is look at any official Disney post about TLM on any social media site and read the awful comments. You’ll find all the overt racism you can handle.

What I don’t understand is why some folks react to a statement like that with such volatility. Why deny it? If it doesn’t include you, why be averse to the facts?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Willy Wonka (1971) was a flop. Some folks here would have buried it and danced on the grave.

It found an audience (including me) on HBO, and is beloved to this day. As you know, there are so many examples.

You should see how bad it is on less controlled sites! Btw I was liking your posts, not necessarily because I agree with you, but because you are being truthful and consistent.

Cult classics are phenomenon that there is no “design” on…

It’s certainly not Disneys goal when they shell out a small country’s gdp.

They’re not gunning for Rocky horror, spaceballs, roadhouse or office space with these.

There isn’t even a debate to be had. Maybe some here are “sheltered.” All anyone has to do is look at any official Disney post about TLM on any social media site and read the awful comments. You’ll find all the overt racism you can handle.

What I don’t understand is why some folks react to a statement like that with such volatility. Why deny it? If it doesn’t include you, why be averse to the facts?

The question is not whether social media and reviews have trolls.

It’s how much that can tank a huge undertaking?
It more indicates the film doesn’t have the strength to power through.

I get the sensitivity with TLM. It brought out an ugly undercurrent (which as I said…it mostly because Disney can’t figure out how to avoid it…) but it really became a trigger for alot of D Fans. Rob Marshall for one…another in a long line of Disney sacred cows who cranks out bad stuff. Lose his phone number already??!

Beyond the troll vibes…there just isn’t any substance there. Maybe the audience is bored of what they are continually told they “love”?
Might be that simple

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

And no just because IO2 is finding success does not mean the "hate network" is debunked.

Nor can the power of this league of shadows ever be proven at all. Which is the point…it’s a convenient boogieman when excuses are made.

I’ll give you another one: Star Wars fans are all evil cause they hate Disney for putting girls in it…
Or maybe they can’t make an interesting character or plot to save their life?

Occam’s razor with alot of this.