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

[Disney Irish]

Sorry, I will try to clarify.
I am just a movie consumer, not a financial expert as many seem to be on these boards.

I watched Mufasa, its very nice, nothing unexpected. Whatever they did to produce this cost 200M. Fine.

I watched Wicked, I actually did not want to watch Wicked after I heard the runtime but my kid really wanted me to see it so, OK I finally saw it.

Forget that I liked Wicked, forget its a Universal movie, consider the the sets, the costuming, the props, all the talented players, the detail everywhere, there is a LOT there. I just ASSUMED it cost a lot to make. When it cost significantly less than, for example, Mufasa I was surprised.

Look, all of you are correct and I do not know about these things so I am officially waving the flag of surrender

You are all right and I am wrong in my thinking.

So then instead of assuming there is some type of embezzlement scheme with Mufasa (maybe you were half joking, but that is a serious accusation) maybe the better question should be how did Wicked keep their budgets low for what appears to be a large scale production. And as has been explained they spread the costs across two films.

Also if we use the average of $175M, that is only $25M less than the reported budget of Mufasa. Which you can attributed to it being CGI which is more expensive.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Also if we use the average of $175M, that is only $25M less than the reported budget of Mufasa. Which you can attributed to it being CGI which is more expensive.

If you say so. I surrender

 

[DKampy]

Not sure why there is Wicked budget controversy … out It seems filming both parts at the same time would greatly reduce cost…. Basically it cost 350 to film a 41/2-5 hour movie

 

[Disstevefan1]

Not sure why there is Wicked budget controversy … out It seems filming both parts at the same time would greatly reduce cost…. Basically it cost 350 to film a 41/2-5 hour movie

No controversy, I am wrong and everyone else is right. Both Mufasa and Wicked budgets are perfectly inline for what you get.

 

[Disney Irish]

No controversy, I am wrong and everyone else is right. Both Mufasa and Wicked budgets are perfectly inline for what you get.

There is nothing wrong with questioning the budgets, we all do it. I for one think they are still too high, and should be dropped another 10-20%, said so in this very thread just the other day. What is wrong though is the accusation that you made about "fishy" accounting practices in some embezzlement scheme by Disney. That is a serious accusation with no proof other than you saw a movie from other studio that you felt should have been more expensive but wasn't compared to Mufasa. That is the issue some of us took with regards to your comments.

 

[Disstevefan1]

There is nothing wrong with questioning the budgets, we all do it. I for one think they are still too high, and should be dropped another 10-20%, said so in this very thread just the other day. What is wrong though is the accusation that you made about "fishy" accounting practices in some embezzlement scheme by Disney. That is a serious accusation with no proof other than you saw a movie from other studio that you felt should have been more expensive but wasn't compared to Mufasa. That is the issue some of us took with regards to your comments.

You are right. I officially take back all accusations against TWDC that I posted on these boards.

Is it OK if I think it in my mind?

 

[Disney Irish]

You are right. I officially take back all accusations against TWDC that I posted on these boards.

Is it OK if I think it in my mind?

You can think and even post (within forum rules) whatever you want, just know when you make accusations like that in an open forum we’re going to ask for more receipts than “Well I saw another movie that was less expensive”.

 

[MisterPenguin]

You are right. I officially take back all accusations against TWDC that I posted on these boards.

Is it OK if I think it in my mind?

While you're feasting on rations in your bunker, consider these budgets:

Alice Through the Looking Glass - 170
The Jungle Book (Live) - 177
Aladdin (Live) - 183
Maleficent 2 - 185
Meet the Robinsons - 198
Oz the Great and Powerful - 200
Maleficent - 230
Beauty and the Beast (Live) - 250
Tangled - 260
The Lion King ("Live") - 260
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales - 280
John Carter - 307
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides - 411

And... The last 20 Pixar movies were all between $175 and $200 (except $150 for Soul).

 

[Disstevefan1]

While you're feasting on rations in your bunker, consider these budgets:

Alice Through the Looking Glass - 170
The Jungle Book (Live) - 177
Aladdin (Live) - 183
Maleficent 2 - 185
Meet the Robinsons - 198
Oz the Great and Powerful - 200
Maleficent - 230
Beauty and the Beast (Live) - 250
Tangled - 260
The Lion King ("Live") - 260
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales - 280
John Carter - 307
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides - 411

And... The last 20 Pixar movies were all between $175 and $200 (except $150 for Soul).

Wow big money!
On Stranger Tides - 411M in 2011 is 574M today!!!!
I will say it, IN MY OPINION, it makes the budget of Wicked in 2024 even more amazing!
All that CGI in Wicked must have saved them money - oh wait CGI is more expensive - never mind.
I happen to like John Carter. I really think if they titled it better it would have done better.
I OFFICIALLY TAKE BACK WHAT I SAID ABOUT MUFASA
How did you know I retreated to my bunker???!!!!!??? Are you surveilling me????
Mmmmmm I am loving this SPAM....

 

[Disstevefan1]

You can think and even post (within forum rules) whatever you want, just know when you make accusations like that in an open forum we’re going to ask for more receipts than “Well I saw another movie that was less expensive”.

I am wrong and everyone else is right.
Both Mufasa and Wicked budgets are perfectly inline for what you get.

 

[Disney Irish]

I am wrong and everyone else is right.
Both Mufasa and Wicked budgets are perfectly inline for what you get.

Again you're missing the point, but lets move on.

 

[Ghost93]

While Wicked made very good use of its $145 million budget and is a great example of not overspending, it makes sense that Mufasa cost more due to the fact that it's almost entirely CGI and all of the characters have to be animated in every single frame. While Wicked has some CGI, it was able to get away with using a lot of built/practical sets. The only fully CGI characters are the flying monkeys, and they only show up in the last 20 minutes of the movie.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Again you're missing the point, but lets move on.

I thought that was the perfect correction, admission, concession, profession of my wrong view. Oh well.

 

[Disstevefan1]

While Wicked made very good use of its $145 million budget and is a great example of not overspending, it makes sense that Mufasa cost more due to the fact that it's almost entirely CGI and all of the characters have to be animated in every single frame. While Wicked has some CGI, it was able to get away with using a lot of built/practical sets. The only fully CGI characters are the flying monkeys, and they only show up in the last 20 minutes of the movie.

I totally agree.

 

[brideck]

I thought that was the perfect correction, admission, concession, profession of my wrong view. Oh well.

The issue is that statements like "I am wrong and everyone else is right" don't connote any sort of sincerity.

Reading the last page of this thread is like trying to have a conversation with my Aunt Karen -- she has an inability to actually talk about something without just playing hurt and running away at the first sign of disagreement.

 

[Phroobar]

The issue is that statements like "I am wrong and everyone else is right" don't connote any sort of sincerity.

Reading the last page of this thread is like trying to have a conversation with my Aunt Karen -- she has an inability to actually talk about something without just playing hurt and running away at the first sign of disagreement.

Wait a minute. Your aunt name is Karen?

 

[Disstevefan1]

The issue is that statements like "I am wrong and everyone else is right" don't connote any sort of sincerity.

Reading the last page of this thread is like trying to have a conversation with my Aunt Karen -- she has an inability to actually talk about something without just playing hurt and running away at the first sign of disagreement.

Thank you for your comment.

I did not run away at the first sign of disagreement. You need to drill back many, many pages and I stated my view over and over and over. Please drill back and you will see.

In the end, yes I did surrender I did not run away. I faced my opposition and conceded as my view apparently was not the consensus view and as posters said I had no receipts, just a feeling.

 

[brideck]

Wait a minute. Your aunt name is Karen?

Yep. And the jokes really do just write themselves.

 

[brideck]

Forget that I liked Wicked, forget its a Universal movie, consider the the sets, the costuming, the props, all the talented players, the detail everywhere, there is a LOT there. I just ASSUMED it cost a lot to make. When it cost significantly less than, for example, Mufasa I was surprised.

I'm going to go back to here because there is a potentially interesting point here. Disney has, for better or worse, pretty much becomes a production house that cranks out films full of VFX and that decision coupled with the rapid pace of production comes at a cost... both in higher budgets and in the ability to create something that truly stands out visually.

Only 14 of the 34 MCU films to date have been nominated for VFX Oscars (despite how many effects shots are in them), and none of them have won. Since 2008, only The Jungle Book has taken home that crown for Disney, and it truly was innovative at the time. In total, Disney has had 23 nominations in the category since 2008.

Contrast that with Production Design, which is for physical sets/props and overall look and feel. In the same time period, Disney has only had five nominations total in this category. Both Alice in Wonderland and Black Panther (the only MCU movie to receive a nod in this category) took home the trophy.

[Note: I am intentionally excluding the Avatar movies from the above counts as they are not Disney productions.]

It seems to me that Disney (for its live-action stuff) rarely strives to wow an audience with the way that a movie looks. They shoot for the okay plateau, and when they hit it, it's good enough to rake it in from the masses, provided its part of a franchise that folks care enough about.

To be honest, with the MCU in particular, despite there being a lot of opportunity there to create really interesting looking movies, I don't think their production strategy lends itself to that. It's hard to construct a great look and feel (much less physical sets) when you're still writing/tweaking the story while shooting. The VFX houses are notoriously run ragged by the time pressures on these movies. If you think about the movies from the last 10 years that really look great, they all had well-defined visions crafted before all of the actors were assembled.