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

[celluloid]

When you handpick the few very successful movies and then compare them to all the subpar ones then:

1. You're describing the way the Box Office has always been.​

​

2. You're cherry-picking data... usually to make a pointed point.​

If you're going to do head-to-head comparisons, you have to look at all the movies released in the relatively same time period.

I could constantly post about how TLM is doing so much better than Teenage Kraken, or how Elemental is doing so much better than Teenage Kraken, or how Haunted Mansion is doing so much better than Teenage Kraken, or how Indy 5 is doing so much better than Teenage Kraken. Get the picture?

Sure, there are Disney movies not making a profit in the theatrical window. Why is each one being compared only to some other studio's block-busters, and not their bombs?

No picture to get. They all had movies that did not land well.

The differnces is ROI.

Nodboy spent as much money on the movies like Disney did. Nobody had as much riding on their summer release duds like Disney Did.


Universal barely breaks even on things like Knock at the Cabin and Chammpions lost some money. But they go to Peacock.

Disney spent near 250- 300 million on pretty much everything they released. They all broke even or lost, even by the time they go to Disney Plus.

For the sake of clarity let's play with small numbers.
You can drop 20 bucks and be ok with getting 19 back. That's what most studios did this year and WB and Uni definitely had their biggest duds with Fast and Furious and The Flash. They lost most of their big 40 bucks on those ones. Got only 10 back. Its ok. WB had Barbie and Uni had Mario and Oppenheimer to give them 100 dollars on their 20-dollar investments.

Disney has spent 40 bucks on most things and 20 to thirty on others. They have gotten 20s back on everything they did.

Furthermore. All of Disney's biggest losses were of Franchises that were ideally going to continue. I guess Uni finally lost Fast and Furious...but that has been on much longer than MCU. It is definitely time for an era to end there. Paramount had two with Transfrormers and kind of Mission Impossible but that is doing great worldwide wise, and we will see where it ends up. WB again, The Flash was their most notable tentpole flop but too many other middle ground hits such as Evil Dead.

All of Disney's continuations and hopes to continue franchise were mehs.

Hence, another reason Disney's losses are even more.

In a nutshell. ALL of Disney's movies were big tentpole investments. None of them stuck the landing to earn their profit goals.


The other studios had a couple big duds. And a small handful of the typical that were there are small gambles. And a handful of great ROI middle budget releases.

 

[Disney Irish]

We'll likely never know why Disney refused to release it, but it is a fact that Disney owned Sound of Freedom after its 2019 purchase of 20th Century Fox. If Disney had released it themselves, they would have made an extra $60 Million in profit and counting as of yesterday's box office receipts. In a summer where Disney is losing hundreds of millions of dollars at the box office, that would have helped.

Or is $60 Million not worth it any longer to Disney because they are just so successful at everything else they do?

Um, there is no guarantee it would have made any money had Disney released it.

 

[TP2000]

Sure, there are Disney movies not making a profit in the theatrical window. Why is each one being compared only to some other studio's block-busters, and not their bombs?

Three out of four of Disney's summer tent poles did not make a profit at the box office. Haunted Mansion looks like its going to make that four out of five for Disney. Ouch.

Disney's mega-budget tent poles are being compared to the #1 movie at the box office this week, because that makes more sense than comparing Disney's mega-budget tent poles to the #8 or #14 or #22 movie at the box office this week. Does anyone really care how Indy 5 did compared to The Blackening or Joy Ride? I doubt it.

That said, I thought it was terribly cute and clever of me how I underlined Barbie's box office data in bright pink, instead of just highlighting the top movie in yellow like I normally do.

 

[celluloid]

Um, there is no guarantee it would have made any money had Disney released it.

True, look how terrrible they have handled most of their releases this year!

 

[Disney Irish]

True, look how terrrible they have handled most of their releases this year!

Other movie performances aside, movies get shopped around all the time. One movie is owned by one studio and sold off to another studio, its the nature of the business. So it doesn't matter that Disney once owned it, that box performance is not indicative of how it would have performed under Disney and shouldn't be used as some slight against Disney.

 

[celluloid]

Other movie performances aside, movies get shopped around all the time. One movie is owned by one studio and sold off to another studio, its the nature of the business. So it doesn't matter that Disney once owned it, that box performance is not indicative of how it would have performed under Disney and shouldn't be used as some slight against Disney.

What? Not some slight. In business there are regrets all of the time. So it does make it relevant to the bad business choice it was to pass it to another studio. If you feel my joke was a slight, than that is all it was. A joke.

But it should in fact be a minor regret to someone for passing that one up in such a year where other studios had movies that interested the going public more than Disney did for the investments.

 

[Disney Irish]

What? Not some slight. In business there are regrets all of the time. So it does make it relevant to the bad business choice it was to pass it to another studio. If you feel my joke was a slight, than that is all it was.

But it should in fact be a minor regret to someone for passing that one up in such a year where other studios had movies that itnerested the going public more than Disney did for the investments.

Wasn't talking about your post.

Also since that movie has another studio using a pay-it-forward model to get tickets sold, I doubt Disney has any regrets toward it. As its really unknown its true performance outside of the pay-it-forward model. Hence why it shouldn't be discussed in terms of what Disney "missed out on".

 

[celluloid]

Wasn't talking about your post.

Also since that movie has another studio using a pay-it-forward model to get tickets sold, I doubt Disney has any regrets toward it. As its really unknown its true performance outside of the pay-it-forward model. Hence why it shouldn't be discussed in terms of what Disney "missed out on".

It does not really matter to Disney how the money is made. I don't think they have an ethical dilemma about what sort of marketing model sold tickets.

All marketing has gimmicks to earn more dollars.

Disney has done a pay it forward model before. I was a Cast Member when Give a Day Get a Day program was a huge push.

 

[Disney Irish]

It does not really matter to Disney how the money is made. I don't think they have an ethical dilemma about what sort of marketing model sold tickets.

All marketing has gimmicks to earn more dollars.

Disney has done a pay it forward model before. I was a Cast Member when Give a Day Get a Day program was a huge push.

I'm not saying they have an ethical dilemma toward it, I'm saying it wouldn't have been done as that has not been Disney's modus operandi regarding movie ticket sales. Marketing has not ever done a whole movie release where the primary ticket sales used a pay-it-forward model. Sure there have been giveaways and buy one get one free promotions, but not the primary ticket sales. That is the whole point. Hence why its not really Disney "missing out on it".

 

[celluloid]

I'm not saying they have an ethical dilemma toward it, I'm saying it wouldn't have been done as that has not been Disney's modus operandi regarding movie ticket sales. Marketing has not ever done a whole movie release where the primary ticket sales used a pay-it-forward model. Sure there have been giveaways and buy one get one free promotions, but not the primary ticket sales. That is the whole point. Hence why its not really Disney "missing out on it".

People paid double the price to see Avatar, MCU films etc... in 3D and Imax, motion theaters, laser projections. Some went because there was a marathon or trivia night. We will never be ale to break down those numbers.

Not everyone that has gone to see Sound of Freedom has particpated in that.

Let. It. Go.

A gimmick is a gimmick.

And even if Sound of Freedom only earned half of the box office revenue. Pretend it only deserves half if it makes you happier, still a smash hit for its budget.

 

[Disney Irish]

People paid double the price to see Avatar, MCU films etc... in 3D and Imax, motion theaters, laser projections. Some went because there was a marathon or trivia night. We will never be ale to break down those numbers.

Not everyone that has gone to see Sound of Freedom has particpated in that.

Let. It. Go.

A gimmick is a gimmick.

And even if Sound of Freedom only earned half of the box office revenue. Pretend it only deserves half if it makes you happier, still a smash hit for its budget.

You're right I'm sure Iger is really staying up at night and thinking about the $60M the company lost out on by passing on the movie.

 

[celluloid]

You're right I'm sure Iger is really staying up at night and thinking about the $60M the company lost out on by passing on the movie.

Now you are not discussing in good faith. You are deflecting and shifting the conversation into Iger does not care.

Which is wildly known worldwide right now.

Its fair to say bad business choices have regrets. Someone regrets not perusing and producing that script.

Your post is particularly funny considering your quote from Forbes in your signature.

 

[Disney Irish]

Now you are not discussing in good faith. You are deflecting and shifting the conversation into Iger does not care.

Which is wildly known worldwide right now.

Its fair to say bad business choices have regrets. Someone regrets not perusing and producing that script.

You have no way to prove that Disney is having regrets over passing on the film. You're arguing things you cannot prove, just like trying to say they lost out on $60M or whatever based on a release model they don't use.

The time as come to let this go.

 

[celluloid]

You have no way to prove that Disney is having regrets over passing on the film. You're arguing things you cannot prove, just like trying to say they lost out on $60M or whatever based on a release model they don't use.

The time as come to let this go.

I don't need proof to know a studio has regrets over passing on a movie that became a bigger ROI than any of their films that same release year.

When you lose an argument, that is when you turn to you can't prove that.

Yes, please do let it go.

A hit movie is a hit movie no matter how much the other films in the marketplace gross alongside it. - Forbes

 

[Disney Irish]

I don't need proof to know a studio has regrets over passing on a movie that became a ROI bigger than any of their films that same release year.

When you lose an argument, that is when you turn to you can't prove that.

Yes, please do let it go.

hit movie is a hit movie no matter how much the other films in the marketplace gross alongside it. - Forbes

Thank you for quoting my signature, which I agree with and hence why its still in my signature. And based on discussions last year about Disney's film performance compared to the rest of the box office.

I applaud that particular film for how its made its money, even if I didn't at first. I still stand by the fact that there is no proof Disney would have made the same amount, or more or less, and its a bad faith discussion to try and say otherwise. As I stand by the fact that there is no way to know if Disney the company has a real regret over passing on it, I'm sure someone within the company does, but the company as a whole, no way to prove that. You can have a different opinion if you like, which you apparently do.

And maybe you don't need proof in your beliefs, that is fine. But its doesn't help in discussions when you're basing your points on things you've made up in your mind.

Also I'm not here is win or lose. Its a discussion board not a tournament.

 

[celluloid]

Thank you for quoting my signature, which I agree with and hence why its still in my signature. And based on discussions last year about Disney's film performance compared to the rest of the box office.

I applaud that particular film for how its made its money, even if I didn't at first. I still stand by the fact that there is no proof Disney would have made the same amount, or more or less, and its a bad faith discussion to try and say otherwise. As I stand by the fact that there is no way to know if Disney the company has a real regret over passing on it, I'm sure someone within the company does, but the company as a whole, no way to prove that. You can have a different opinion if you like, which you apparently do.

And maybe you don't need proof in your beliefs, that is fine. But its doesn't help in discussions when you're basing your points on things you've made up in your mind.

Also I'm not here is win or lose. Its a discussion board not a tournament.

I don't consider ending a point with an eyeroll much of a discussion.

I don't need to make up the fact that Disney would love 60 million in profit.

Gosh, they would love for at least one of their projects to go from red to black that easily.

 

[Disney Irish]

I don't consider ending a point with an eyeroll much of a discussion.

I don't need to make up the fact that Disney would love 60 million in profit.

Gosh, they would love for at least one of their projects to go from red to black that easily.

No one is doubting Disney would like to have $60M in profit from a movie, especially right now.

The bad faith discussion is to say that that $60M would have happened had Disney released this particular film themselves. I could have said it would have lost $100M under Disney, its still the same bad faith discussion.

 

[celluloid]

No one is doubting Disney would like to have $60M in profit from a movie, especially right now.

The bad faith discussion is to say that that $60M would have happened had Disney released this particular film themselves. I could have said its would have lost $100M under Disney, but its still the same bad faith discussion.

No one said what Disney would have made to the exact number, but since you through. Bob not losing sleep over 60 million that is what we go with. And now you make it sound like yeah, he would sleep a little better right now with that kind of ROI they desperately need.

But no doubt they have people who regret on passing on it when it was optioned to them. They may not dwell on it, but regret happens all of the time. If there was no regret and lessons learned in business, gaining business sense, then people leading it would just believe it is all luck.

Bad faith discussion is using sarcasm and then an eyeroll.


And then later saying you discuss, not participate in a tournament.

 

[Disney Irish]

No one said what Disney would have made.

But no doubt they have people who regret on passing on it when it was optioned to them. They may not dwell on it, but regret happens all of the time.

Ok, my friend.

Lets just agree to disagree here, thank you for the discussion.

 

[celluloid]

Ok, my friend.

Lets just agree to disagree here, thank you for the discussion.

You can't disagree that a film was a hit and Disney did not want that one even though it was. It may be a could have but is also a should have in their business mind.

I mean you can. But you are really grasping.

Thank you for the points you did make.