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

[celluloid]

The Color Purple is estimated at $50 million after 8 days of release. It could make over $100 million by the end of its run.

When was the last time, if ever, 2 live-action musicals made over $100 million domestically in the same season? And from the same studio no less?

2018. Mary Poppins Returns and The Greatest Showman.(WB's Wonka will likely surpass both)
2017 Lala Land and Pitch Perfect 3,
Further stretch of release dates though.

But Disney did not own 20th Century Fox just yet. So more rare on the same studio part.

But according to some who want to paint a more grim box office picture than there is, somehow, we can't possibly have situations like those glory days that can never return when films people want to see are made.

Another note is when is the last time Disney has lost all of their release categories', animation, family, live action and superhero genre to their competition?

 

[erasure fan1]

I think the problem is streaming as a landscape came in wildly undercharging and it's been hard to unwind that perception for consumers.

That might be true. But the other side of the coin is, does it take off if it's not cheap? I'm going to say absolutely not. The reason most latched on to it, was to save money over cable/satellite. If streaming came out at double the price, it doesn't see the adoption rate it has in my opinion. I guess it's what's the lesser issue. Come out with a price that is significantly higher and have a very slow adoption rate. Or get people into the ecosystem fast and with large subscriber counts, then boil the frog?

So much of what's on the Internet works on such a different scale, it's silly. I only need to get 2 hours of entertainment out of a streaming service every month? And my whole family can enjoy it at the same time? What a bargain. There are more shows/games/whatever being created than ever before and everyone has somehow been convinced that everything should be a) always available to them and b) virtually free.

For me it boils down to, it's not just the cost of D+, or Max.... It's a combination of all of them. It's gone from paying for a cable package every month, to paying 7 plus companies. Sure if you only want Disney content, D+ isn't that bad. But as you compare things, it's as much as I was paying for satellite, maybe more when you factor in the extra internet cost. So I see why people complain about prices. It's also a lot more inconvenient having to deal with a bunch of different companies.

 

[Minnesota disney fan]

And Amazon Prime just offered a no ads option for $2.99 extra a month.
I don't like the ads, so I took the offer. About 3 dollars extra a month seems fair to me for no ads.
I also have cable and Netflix. Out of all of them, we watch netflix the most for movies and cable for other viewing. We love the local PBS and watch it about 40% of the time. It all evens out for us.

 

[brideck]

Entertainment is being pumped out at a much higher volume with much more competition. VHS came from a generation where you owned a hard copy of that thing you were happy you could. Subscription as a service gives let's you watch from a library.

The 1980s to now are as far to now as the 1940s were to the 1980s. We can't think of entertainment prices to what was the norm then.

Shouldn't we, though? Creators have still got to be compensated, and now there are even more of them. In a world where no one wants to pay enough for these things, audio/video entertainment becomes little more than a slew of amateurish YouTube videos and podcasts because all the creators of means have collapsed on the side of the road.

Netflix's greatest sin is not only making us believe that cable TV was way too expensive for what you get, but that it should only cost 20-25% of what it does. To use erasure fan1's terminology, I'm more than ready for the frog boiling to begin before we lose too much as collateral damage. If I have to pull back on what I subscribe to as a result, so be it. There's not enough time in the world anyway, and we've always had to make choices.

Your other examples are of physical technology, which is apples to oranges. Those will always get cheaper over time due to economies of scale, unless there are safety concerns or the like driving more cost into things.

And there certainly are plenty of entertainment options that cost more today than they have in the past -- think sporting events or, I don't know... theme park tickets.

 

[crispy]

After 11 days of release Migration has made about 5x its opening weekend and will have out grossed Wish by end of day tomorrow.

It's now pacing similar to Puss in Boots 2, which by the end of its second weekend (12 days of release) was at $61 million.

It's already hit $100 million worldwide so it's well on it's way to turning a profit since it's budget was at $70 million. It's only $2 million behind Wish in domestic box office.

Trolls Band Together is almost at $200 million worldwide which is about $25 million more than Wish.

Both those movies together had a lower production cost than Wish.

 

[Miss Rori]

For me it boils down to, it's not just the cost of D+, or Max.... It's a combination of all of them. It's gone from paying for a cable package every month, to paying 7 plus companies. Sure if you only want Disney content, D+ isn't that bad. But as you compare things, it's as much as I was paying for satellite, maybe more when you factor in the extra internet cost. So I see why people complain about prices. It's also a lot more inconvenient having to deal with a bunch of different companies.

I live in a household(s) where different members of the family pay for different services. Due in part to D+ now having new Doctor Who episodes, I subscribe to that and the Criterion Channel (which never gets brought up in these discussions because while its pricing is more than reasonable for what you get, it is more esoteric than most), but besides those, I get the most use out of AVOD services like Tubi and Pluto TV. Max has some good stuff but it's degraded since the handover from HBO Max in terms of movie selection and quality.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

I think I'm at ~$230/month, and that's with me paying rack rates for YTTV (cable), Netflix, Disney bundle, Apple TV+, Paramount+, Max, and Prime, plus my Gig Internet service (which I need in order to work anyway). By my previously stated metric, if we're getting ~40 hours of entertainment in a month out of all of that combined, then it's money well-spent.

If people don't have room in their budget for that much entertainment spending, perhaps they just don't get to watch "everything they want." Or they can be like TP2000 (and many others) and endlessly rotate services, if it's worth that extra work for the access and the savings.

We can afford them all but it’s a diminishing return, they are all amazing when you first subscribe but after a few months we are kind of left waiting for new content, most of the services don’t have enough (good) new content to justify the price. This does lead to subscribing for a few months, then cancelling for a few months, etc, which is frustrating.

We find Netflix and Disney (bundle) the only services worth keeping. We only have Prime because it’s “free” since we have the service for free shipping.

Even with all those services we still struggle to find stuff to watch and end up watching YouTube more than any of them.

 

[celluloid]

Shouldn't we, though? Creators have still got to be compensated, and now there are even more of them. In a world where no one wants to pay enough for these things, audio/video entertainment becomes little more than a slew of amateurish YouTube videos and podcasts because all the creators of means have collapsed on the side of the road.

Netflix's greatest sin is not only making us believe that cable TV was way too expensive for what you get, but that it should only cost 20-25% of what it does. To use erasure fan1's terminology, I'm more than ready for the frog boiling to begin before we lose too much as collateral damage. If I have to pull back on what I subscribe to as a result, so be it. There's not enough time in the world anyway, and we've always had to make choices.

Your other examples are of physical technology, which is apples to oranges. Those will always get cheaper over time due to economies of scale, unless there are safety concerns or the like driving more cost into things.

And there certainly are plenty of entertainment options that cost more today than they have in the past -- think sporting events or, I don't know... theme park tickets.

I don't know if there is a should when it comes to choice in a free market system of entertainment.


If you want a comparison more direct. Terrestrial radio for entertainment. Changed the phonograph and recording world in the same way. Or tv broadcast making entertainment of that nature cheaper than ever. What you are saying starts to sound like what people back then could have said. Artists now are more compensated than ever. You don't have to be one of the select famous in the thousands. You can create on a platform and be successful with people enjoying what you do and supporting you. There are more millionaire and a lot of well to do per capita artists than ever, not less.


Theme parks have less direct competition than ever in their own industry in terms of corporate giants owning most of them. We have a situation where there are more big players and less smaller amusements. People go to those destinations now without the random hundreds of local of parks and centers. Most also offer more and arguably deliver more that you can't get anything close to at home sill to this day. Demand for those is sitll up. Entertainment streaming at home has a lot more competition for the demand there is.
That gets more into "funflation." theory.

No one would pay a quarter or dollar with today's equivalent for 15 seconds of flipping a Nickelodeon machine outside of random novelty or five dollars for a fifteen minute scenic train ride film the way people did in early 1900s. Things change.

 

[DKampy]

For those of us who actually saw movies in 2023 and haven’t just been bloviating about box office and so called “agendas”, what are your top films of the year? Mine are:

1. Oppenheimer
2. Barbie
3. The Iron Claw
4. Poor Things
5. The Color Purple
6. The Holdovers
7. The Little Mermaid
8. Saltburn
9. Leave the World Behind
10. Bottoms

Have not yet seen Killers of the Flower Moon, American Fiction, The Zone of Interest, Anatomy of a Fall, Rustin, lasted only 36 minutes of Maestro

Honorable Mentions: Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning, Godzilla Minus One, Strays, Cocaine Bear, Past Lives, How to Blow Up a Pipeline

Best horror:

Talk to Me, Thanksgiving, Evil Dead Rise, Knock at the Cabin, When Evil Lurks, M3GAN, Infinity Pool, The Blackening

What are your picks? Happy New Year!

I was really hoping to be able to watch American Fiction before giving my top 10… as I have a feeling that could place inside my 10… It is my most anticipated film I have yet to see, but I have a feeling it may not release by me till late in January so I will calculate my favorites I have watched this year

My top 3 were easily in those exact places… as they have been there all year since I first watch each one… The rest of the Top 10 could change places depending how I am Feeling on the day

There were a few that were so close to my top 10… they really just narrowly missed… those honorable mentions are Talk To Me, Past Lives, Mission Impossible, Infinity Pool, The Little Mermaid, Gozilla Minus 1, Joyride, Elemental, Bottoms, and Theater Camp

My Top 10 are as follows:
1. Oppenheimer
2. Barbie
3. Air
4. Poor Things
5. The Holdovers
6. Saltburn
7. The Color Purple
8. Guardians of The Galaxy vol 3
9. Fair Play
10 Iron Claw

 

[BuddyThomas]

I was really hoping to be able to watch American Fiction before giving my top 10… as I have a feeling that could place inside my 10… It is my most anticipated film I have yet to see, but I have a feeling it may not release by me till late in January so I will calculate my favorites I have watched this year

My top 3 were easily in those exact places… as they have been there all year since I first watch each one… The rest of the Top 10 could change places depending how I am Feeling on the day

There were a few that were so close to my top 10… they really just narrowly missed… those honorable mentions are Talk To Me, Past Lives, Mission Impossible, Infinity Pool, The Little Mermaid, Gozilla Minus 1, Joyride, Elemental, Bottoms, and Theater Camp

My Top 10 are as follows:
1. Oppenheimer
2. Barbie
3. Air
4. Poor Things
5. The Holdovers
6. Saltburn
7. The Color Purple
8. Guardians of The Galaxy vol 3
9. Fair Play
10 Iron Claw

Great list. Did you see Killers of the Flower Moon?

 

[DKampy]

Great list. Did you see Killers of the Flower Moon?

No… That’s one I was unable to see… I wanted to… but for some reason I am fine with 3 hours(Oppenheimer), but 3 and a 1/2 hours seemed a bit much to sit in a theater

 

[BuddyThomas]

No… That’s one I was unable to see… I wanted to… but for some reason I am fine with 3 hours(Oppenheimer), but 3 and a 1/2 hours seemed a bit much to sit in a theater

Same. I could never find a time to fit it in. Will wait for streaming and then watch in segments.

 

[Disney Irish]

That might be true. But the other side of the coin is, does it take off if it's not cheap? I'm going to say absolutely not. The reason most latched on to it, was to save money over cable/satellite. If streaming came out at double the price, it doesn't see the adoption rate it has in my opinion. I guess it's what's the lesser issue. Come out with a price that is significantly higher and have a very slow adoption rate. Or get people into the ecosystem fast and with large subscriber counts, then boil the frog?

For me it boils down to, it's not just the cost of D+, or Max.... It's a combination of all of them. It's gone from paying for a cable package every month, to paying 7 plus companies. Sure if you only want Disney content, D+ isn't that bad. But as you compare things, it's as much as I was paying for satellite, maybe more when you factor in the extra internet cost. So I see why people complain about prices. It's also a lot more inconvenient having to deal with a bunch of different companies.

Shouldn't we, though? Creators have still got to be compensated, and now there are even more of them. In a world where no one wants to pay enough for these things, audio/video entertainment becomes little more than a slew of amateurish YouTube videos and podcasts because all the creators of means have collapsed on the side of the road.

Netflix's greatest sin is not only making us believe that cable TV was way too expensive for what you get, but that it should only cost 20-25% of what it does. To use erasure fan1's terminology, I'm more than ready for the frog boiling to begin before we lose too much as collateral damage. If I have to pull back on what I subscribe to as a result, so be it. There's not enough time in the world anyway, and we've always had to make choices.

Your other examples are of physical technology, which is apples to oranges. Those will always get cheaper over time due to economies of scale, unless there are safety concerns or the like driving more cost into things.

And there certainly are plenty of entertainment options that cost more today than they have in the past -- think sporting events or, I don't know... theme park tickets.

I live in a household(s) where different members of the family pay for different services. Due in part to D+ now having new Doctor Who episodes, I subscribe to that and the Criterion Channel (which never gets brought up in these discussions because while its pricing is more than reasonable for what you get, it is more esoteric than most), but besides those, I get the most use out of AVOD services like Tubi and Pluto TV. Max has some good stuff but it's degraded since the handover from HBO Max in terms of movie selection and quality.

We can afford them all but it’s a diminishing return, they are all amazing when you first subscribe but after a few months we are kind of left waiting for new content, most of the services don’t have enough (good) new content to justify the price. This does lead to subscribing for a few months, then cancelling for a few months, etc, which is frustrating.

We find Netflix and Disney (bundle) the only services worth keeping. We only have Prime because it’s “free” since we have the service for free shipping.

Even with all those services we still struggle to find stuff to watch and end up watching YouTube more than any of them.

And this is where you are starting to see subscription bundles being offered. So the old model of cable tv will be replaced by subscription bundles where you get multiple services, ad based, for a lower rate overall. Want anything different well that’ll be an add-on at ala-carte pricing.

It’s starting now and you’ll see more and more of the services offering it.

 

[DKampy]

Same. I could never find a time to fit it in. Will wait for streaming and then watch in segments.

I will do the same…I am hoping it will be on Apple Plus before the Academy Awards if nominated… I usually like to see all the best picture nominees before the awards

 

[Prince-1]

Same. I could never find a time to fit it in. Will wait for streaming and then watch in segments.

Fantastic film. Killers, The Holdovers, and The Color Purple were all amazing and they all deserve to win best picture.

 

[TP2000]

1000x this. This is not directed at anyone in this forum in particular, but I will never understand how people think that $12 or $15/month is too much for any of the streaming services. I've always calibrated my sense of the value of entertainment to the cost of a movie ticket. Given the current average ticket price, that'd be about $6/hour of entertainment. Buying a $60 video game? I'm hoping I'll get at least 10 hours of fun out of it. Buying a $25 hardcover? Yeah, that should take me at least 4 hours to read. Buying a $12 CD? If I've listened to it even 3 or 4 times, I've gotten my money's worth.

So much of what's on the Internet works on such a different scale, it's silly. I only need to get 2 hours of entertainment out of a streaming service every month? And my whole family can enjoy it at the same time? What a bargain. There are more shows/games/whatever being created than ever before and everyone has somehow been convinced that everything should be a) always available to them and b) virtually free.

What makes streaming so much fun is that you can cancel it in ten seconds or less with 3 clicks at the remote control.

And then re-subscribe a few months, or half a year, later in the same amount of time.

I do that all the time with Netflix, and did it with HBO Max just recently. As of January 1st, 2024 I do not subscribe to any streaming services. I'm happy to wait until there's something good I want to see to re-subscribe. For a month, before I cancel.

 

[Disney Irish]

What makes streaming so much fun is that you can cancel it in ten seconds or less with 3 clicks at the remote control.

And then re-subscribe a few months, or half a year, later in the same amount of time.

I do that all the time with Netflix, and did it with HBO Max just recently. As of January 1st, 2024 I do not subscribe to any streaming services. I'm happy to wait until there's something good I want to see to re-subscribe. For a month, before I cancel.

This experience is no longer unique to just streaming. Cable providers are now making it easier to cancel as well. While you still have to call in its no longer hours and hours on the phone waiting. I just recently did this with my cable provider in order to switch to DirecTV Streaming. Took me 15 minutes to cancel, that included a 5 minute wait. And then only took me 10 minutes to sign up and get DirecTV service. So less than 30 minutes for both sides of the process.

Obviously each provider is different. But I find that more and more companies are trying to make it quicker and easier for consumers.

 

[TP2000]

Okay, gang, have we all recovered from last night?

I have. Sort of.

So while we all rehydrate, here is the 2023 Box Office Final Tally for The Walt Disney Company. In total, in 2023 Disney lost a total $1.284 Billion (with a B) from its 15 different movies released this past year via its stable of seven different studios.

At the global box office, the only film to make money for Disney in 2023 was Guardians 3, which had a net profit of $60 Million. Every single other movie from a Disney owned studio lost money.

In no particular order here are those studios and their films, using the format of production and marketing budgets combined, with 60% of the domestic box office take and 40% of the overseas box office take, equating to a profit or loss. All figures are in Millions of Dollars

Marvel Studios = $234 Million Loss
Ant Man: $200 Production/$100 Marketing, $129 Domestic, $100 Overseas = $71 Million Loss
Guardians 3: $250 Production/$100 Marketing: $215 Domestic, $195 Overseas = $60 Million Profit
The Marvels: $220* Production/$100 Marketing, $51 Domestic, $46 Overseas = $223 Million Loss

Walt Disney Pictures = $276 Million Loss
Haunted Mansion: $158 Production/$75 Marketing, $41 Domestic, $19 Overseas = $173 Million Loss
The Little Mermaid: $250 Production/$140 Marketing, $179 Domestic, $108 Overseas = $103 Million Loss

Pixar Studios = $74 Million Loss
Elemental: $200 Production/$100 Marketing, $93 Domestic, $133 Overseas = $74 Million Loss

Walt Disney Animation Studios = $216 Million Loss
Wish: $200 Production/$100 Marketing, $37 Domestic, $47 Overseas = $216 Million Loss

Lucasfilm Studios = $212 Million Loss
Indiana Jones 5: $300 Production/$100 Marketing, $105 Domestic, $83 Overseas = $212 Million Loss

Searchlight Pictures = $120 Million Loss
Chevalier: $46 Production/$15 Marketing, $2 Million Domestic, $200,000 Overseas = $58 Million Loss
Theater Camp: $8 Production/$4 Marketing, $2.4 Domestic, $300,000 Overseas = $9 Million Loss
Next Goal Wins: $10 Production/$5 Marketing, $4 Domestic, $300,000 Overseas = $10 Million Loss
Poor Things: $35 Production/$15 Marketing, $7 Domestic, $0 Overseas = $43 Million Loss

20th Century Studios = $116 Million Loss
The Boogeyman: $35 Production/$15 Marketing, $26 Domestic, $16 Overseas = $8 Million Loss
A Haunting In Venice: $60 Production/$30 Marketing, $25 Domestic, $29 Overseas = $36 Million Loss
The Creator: $80 Production/$40 Marketing, $25 Domestic, $23 Overseas = $72 Million Loss

2023 Grand Total = $1,284,000,000 Loss

 

[TP2000]

Here are the figures for Searchlight.

Poor Things is still in theaters, and will gain a few more box office bucks in January, 2024. But according to Google, it will have a very limited overseas market and is only being released in the United Kingdom and Ireland this month. Much like other Searchlight releases, which have an extremely limited overseas presence and release schedule.

 

[TP2000]

Here are the figures for 20th Century Studios. The standout here is The Creator, which was the most expensive film that 20th Century had in 2023. But apparently global audiences didn't find AI to be a sympathetic figure to base a movie on.