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

[LittleBuford]

More than half of the countries Wicked has been released in are overseas.

These discussions are so US-centric that you probably don’t and simply can’t understand where I’m coming from.

ETA: I should have said “North-American-centric” given that Canada—and a number of Canadian posters—are part of the story. I could have corrected myself silently but feel I should acknowledge my own terminological slips.

 

[Ghost93]

Not to mention as I posted previously, the musical toured quite successfully in many overseas markets around the world.

This is why I have some hope that the Japan release will do well.

I’m quoting this separately because you have apparently misunderstood why this matters to me. This has nothing to do with my being a fan of the film or wishing to defend it. How it’s performing—or underperforming as the case may be—is simply a matter of fact, substantiated by numbers. And yes, those numbers show that the North American share of the box office is by far the largest. But those same numbers also show the absurdity of claiming that the film is doing only “modestly” in the UK. It was in response to that specific statement that I replied to @TP2000, not to disagree with the claim that Wicked isn’t a global hit. Why would I dispute what is factually irrefutable (even if others—and I don’t mean you—are apparently happy doing so)?

Ah, I see now. I was responding to the TP2000's general sentiment about the international box office and wasn't exactly paying attention to his inaccurate statements about the UK box office.

Also, I apologize for my "back off" comment. I think I may have read things in a harsher tone than intended and I think I was needlessly harsh/mean in my response. You didn't deserve that as you are among the more civil posters on this forum.

And yes, I was mainly looking at things from a US perspective (since I am an United States citizen and Wicked is a US film), but I probably should have been more specific in talking about the regions where it is underperforming. But in most U.S. articles about the box office, international totals tend to be lumped together in box office reports, which is why I did something similar.

 

[LittleBuford]

This is why I have some hope that the Japan release will do well.


Ah, I see now. I was responding to the TP2000's general sentiment about the international box office and wasn't exactly paying attention to his inaccurate statements about the UK box office.

Also, apologize for my "back off" comment. I think I may have read things in a harsher tone than intended and I think I was needlessly harsh/mean in my response. You didn't deserve that as you are among the more civil posters on this forum.

And yes, I was mainly looking at things from a US perspective (since I am an United States citizen and Wicked is a US film), but I probably should have been more specific in talking about the regions where it is underperforming. But in most U.S. articles about the box office, international totals tend to be lumped together in box office reports, which is why I did something similar.

It’s all good, and I apologise for embroiling you in my spat with another poster. I was pricklier than I should have been.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Wicked has always been a harder sell outside the anglophone world, although the show has still had much success over the years.

Wizard of Oz is an American classic, and Wicked is rightfully insanely more popular here.

The movie is a success regardless, and I am sure Universal is very pleased.

 

[TP2000]

That you’re describing even Moana 2’s global box-office performance as “modest” leaves me wondering what on earth you understand by that term.

In the context of the conversation here in the last few days, plus the box office data that have been used to compare it to other Disney live action remakes in the past decade, I feel confident in calling Moana 2 a modest success in that context.

It's not a huge global hit like 2019's The Lion King or Beauty & The Beast, but it's certainly not a flop like Dumbo. It's on a trajectory to be a modest success and get around $900 Million globally by the end of its run, and it has already crossed into profitability in its third week in theaters owing to its Made For TV production budget of only $150 Million.

 

[TP2000]

Wicked did what it needed to do. As of December 15, 2024, the film adaptation of “Wicked” has grossed approximately $361.7 million domestically and $166.1 million internationally, totaling around $527.8 million worldwide.

production and marketing budget of $250 million. film has surpassed its initial investment making it profitable.

Really? $250 Million for production/marketing? I had it pegged as only spending half its production budget of $145 Million on marketing, thus getting to a total of $225 Million. But they spent $100 Million on marketing? I can believe that actually, reflecting back on how many YouTube commercials I saw for Wicked, and the huge product pavilion on display at my local Target.

Wicked has achieved significant box office success and set records for a musical adaptation but Universal Pictures anticipated higher earnings and has not entirely met the ambitious financial expectations set by the studio, particularly concerning its international performance.

Makes sense. If they spent $250 Million on Wicked, they must have planned for it to do better. Especially overseas, where box office was mostly dismal for a big budget Hollywood musical like that. Hmm...

 

[MagicMouseFan]

Really? $250 Million for production/marketing? I had it pegged as only spending half its production budget of $145 Million on marketing, thus getting to a total of $225 Million. But they spent $100 Million on marketing? I can believe that actually, reflecting back on how many YouTube commercials I saw for Wicked, and the huge product pavilion on display at my local Target.



Makes sense. If they spent $250 Million on Wicked, they must have planned for it to do better. Especially overseas, where box office was mostly dismal for a big budget Hollywood musical like that. Hmm...

The film adaptation of the musical “Wicked” is being released in two parts, each with a production budget of approximately $150 million, totaling around $300 million for both films.

What Was the Wicked Budget? How Much Money the Movie Cost

Wicked is the most expensive musical ever made, but fans are curious about the budget for the two-part film. Details on the budget, the cast’s salaries and more.

www.intouchweekly.com

While the exact marketing expenditures haven’t been publicly disclosed, industry estimates suggest that the marketing budget for each part could range between $50 million and $100 million.

Casting a Marketing Spell: Inside Wicked’s Road to Box Office Success | Brand Vision

The much-anticipated Wicked movie adaptation is poised to take center stage as one of the biggest blockbusters of 2024. Universal Pictures is sparing no effort in promoting this two-part film, with a comprehensive marketing strategy that features a series of high-profile brand collaborations

www.brandvm.com

This brings the combined estimated cost for production and marketing of both parts to approximately $400 million to $500 million.

 

[Disney Irish]

In the context of the conversation here in the last few days, plus the box office data that have been used to compare it to other Disney live action remakes in the past decade, I feel confident in calling Moana 2 a modest success in that context.

It's not a huge global hit like 2019's The Lion King or Beauty & The Beast, but it's certainly not a flop like Dumbo. It's on a trajectory to be a modest success and get around $900 Million globally by the end of its run, and it has already crossed into profitability in its third week in theaters owing to its Made For TV production budget of only $150 Million.

View attachment 831304

Not sure why you insist on using Disney live-action remake as the comparison to an Disney animated feature. As has been mentioned before you should be using other Disney animated features such as Frozen 2.

 

[BrianLo]

Honestly… I thought this film would open to way less, better than I thought, if this is the case.

100 percent.

If it’s walking away with that sort of global take that’s much more than my super low expectations; which was like 20-25% of the original akin to The Marvels or Alice Through the Looking Glass. International may very well save this one.

 

[BrianLo]

Looks like it would be more than Dumbo ($46 million) and less than Cinderella ($68 million), unadjusted for inflation. Mermaid had a $96 million opening last year. 2019 Lion King had a $191 million opening weekend.

Mermaid actually did fairly well domestically. But that was kind of hard for people to comprehend/acknowledge early last year.

For better or worse we had four more movies that calendar year which showed us what “bad” truly was.

 

[LittleBuford]

It's on a trajectory to be a modest success and get around $900 Million globally by the end of its run

You really are using the word “modest” in a very idiosyncratic, highly nonstandard way. But I think you know that beneath the veneer of informed analysis.

 

[BrianLo]

You really are using the word “modest” in a very idiosyncratic, highly nonstandard way. But I think you know that beneath the veneer of informed analysis.

It doesn’t really matter, I’m looking forward to demonstrating to TP how the holiday box office window actually works, since he’s never had the chance to see it in effect for a WDAS film. There’s nothing considered modest In the film world about 6-7x the budget in the box office window.

I’d reserve the word modest for Mermaid and Elemental. Or disappointing and surprising, respectively. But it’s all completely needless semantics.

 

[TalkingHead]

The problem with analyzing Disney’s releases is it doesn’t just boil down to the box office tally. Because the company has tied itself so closely to IP franchises, general audience approval is a more important metric than it might otherwise be.

Moana 2 has done good business but the audience satisfaction is fairly weak for a franchise sequel. Inside Out landed better with audiences suggesting the next sequel will have an easier path to success.

Mufasa appears to be closer to Moana 2 for audience response. Which means The Lion King franchise is probably dead as it relates to new theatrical releases which makes a mediocre box office that much worse.

 

[coffeefan]

 

[TP2000]

Not sure why you insist on using Disney live-action remake as the comparison to an Disney animated feature. As has been mentioned before you should be using other Disney animated features such as Frozen 2.

I think that came about because of the compare/contrast to Wicked. Plus Mufasa opening this Friday. But your point is valid, and we can certainly compare Moana 2 to Frozen 2. There's only five years between them, after all.

Adjusted for the wild inflation of the past few years of course, I think it's safe to say the words "Modest Success" apply perfectly to Moana 2 when you compare it to Frozen 2. Especially the rather dismal overseas box office for Moana 2. Oof!

You really are using the word “modest” in a very idiosyncratic, highly nonstandard way. But I think you know that beneath the veneer of informed analysis.

I had to step back and think for a moment, questioning myself that I was using the word "modest" correctly in a sentence. It makes me chuckle, because about a year ago at my barber's I learned from the young barber next to my chair that the word "sick" actually means something is good, or positive. Has the word "modest" also gone the same way and it now means something is below average, instead of being... modest?

I looked it up in my Funk & Wagnall's and "modest" still means the same thing. Moana 2, compared to many other Disney family films of the past decade, appears to be a modest success in the global box office.

Honest question, what's your definition of the word "modest" when used in the context of "modest success"?

 

[MisterPenguin]

I wish I had half a billion dollars so that I could live a modest life.

 

[TP2000]

I wish I had half a billion dollars so that I could live a modest life.

For a lifetime income for one person, $500 Million would be a bonanza.

For a movie that cost $225 Million to produce and get to market, $500 Million would be a modest box office take for a studio.

 

[TP2000]

But yes, by all means continue to pretend that you can't speak good English.

I still know exactly what the word modest means. Compared to other recent Disney films, Moana 2 is a modest success.

 

[MagicMouseFan]

In the context of the conversation here in the last few days, plus the box office data that have been used to compare it to other Disney live action remakes in the past decade, I feel confident in calling Moana 2 a modest success in that context.

It's not a huge global hit like 2019's The Lion King or Beauty & The Beast, but it's certainly not a flop like Dumbo. It's on a trajectory to be a modest success and get around $900 Million globally by the end of its run, and it has already crossed into profitability in its third week in theaters owing to its Made For TV production budget of only $150 Million.

View attachment 831304

To be fair, if Wicked hits 900 million globally it’s more than a modest success. I mean.. $900 million globally on a $250 million budget would be considered a major success, not a modest one.
Maybe not greatest of all time type numbers and maybe studio was hoping for more but the studio should be happy if it hit 900 million mark by end of run.

 

[DKampy]

I think that came about because of the compare/contrast to Wicked. Plus Mufasa opening this Friday. But your point is valid, and we can certainly compare Moana 2 to Frozen 2. There's only five years between them, after all.

Adjusted for the wild inflation of the past few years of course, I think it's safe to say the words "Modest Success" apply perfectly to Moana 2 when you compare it to Frozen 2. Especially the rather dismal overseas box office for Moana 2. Oof!

View attachment 831395



I had to step back and think for a moment, questioning myself that I was using the word "modest" correctly in a sentence. It makes me chuckle, because about a year ago at my barber's I learned from the young barber next to my chair that the word "sick" actually means something is good, or positive. Has the word "modest" also gone the same way and it now means something is below average, instead of being... modest?

I looked it up in my Funk & Wagnall's and "modest" still means the same thing. Moana 2, compared to many other Disney family films of the past decade, appears to be a modest success in the global box office.

Honest question, what's your definition of the word "modest" when used in the context of "modest success"?

View attachment 831396

View attachment 831397

Now compare Moana 2 to the first Moana

Also what was the budget inflation for Frozen 2?