Disney at the Box Office - So what happens now?

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
I never said individual scenes couldn't have used improvement.
You are right, all of the special effects in their films aren't bad. The problem in my opinion, is the stuff that's bad, is REALLY bad. Just about every major film, and D+ show, has a few scenes that you just say, what the.... was that? And when you see these budget numbers it has to make you wonder how it happens.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
^ this is usually used for when people “make a dramatic exit” from a forum or thread, but works equally well for dramatically announcing “I’ve put you on ignore.”

this-isnt-the-airport-theres-no-need-to-announce-your-departure.jpg
This would be a great meme if individuals at airports announced their departures.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
You are right, all of the special effects in their films aren't bad. The problem in my opinion, is the stuff that's bad, is REALLY bad. Just about every major film, and D+ show, has a few scenes that you just say, what the.... was that? And when you see these budget numbers it has to make you wonder how it happens.
We know the VFX was rushed in some of these films, like Quantumania. The rush jobs put pressure on the VFX Teams and that caused them to push the budgets for the VFX to try to finish. Its a domino effect, if they would have a solid script that didn't require reshoots, that causes VFX to be rushed, then the budgets would be more in-line with a lower budget movie.

I bet if they wouldn't have rushed the VFX on Quantumania that could have cut at least $25-50M off the budget, potentially making it profitable.
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
We know the VFX was rushed in some of these films, like Quantumania. The rush jobs put pressure on the VFX Teams and that caused them to push the budgets for the VFX to try to finish. Its a domino effect, if they would have a solid script that didn't require reshoots, that causes VFX to be rushed, then the budgets would be more in-line with a lower budget movie.

I bet if they wouldn't have rushed the VFX on Quantumania that could have cut at least $25-50M off the budget, potentially making it profitable.
It was really a rhetorical question. At this point we know what causes the bad effects. It's just a wonder that the powers that be, watch these things and say. Yea, seems good enough to me! Let's put it out there! It's just a strange situation. They're willing to spend 250mil plus on a film, but then are ok with sending out clearly unfinished/rushed effects.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
It was really a rhetorical question. At this point we know what causes the bad effects. It's just a wonder that the powers that be, watch these things and say. Yea, seems good enough to me! Let's put it out there! It's just a strange situation. They're willing to spend 250mil plus on a film, but then are ok with sending out clearly unfinished/rushed effects.
They may not have had a choice. As I understand it, some of the movies had the VFX Teams still working on them up until the release date. You can't push the release date at that point.
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
They may not have had a choice. As I understand it, some of the movies had the VFX Teams still working on them up until the release date. You can't push the release date at that point.
I think they always have a choice. It's a conscious effort on the executives part. It's the arrogance of the company. They know before the ticket presales start, where they're at, yet still push forward. They have a schedule to keep, quality be damned. And I just find that strange when throwing that kind of money at a film. That's why I say they had a choice. They chose to over burden the effects teams with the unrealistic release schedules.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
I think they always have a choice. It's a conscious effort on the executives part. It's the arrogance of the company. They know before the ticket presales start, where they're at, yet still push forward. They have a schedule to keep, quality be damned. And I just find that strange when throwing that kind of money at a film. That's why I say they had a choice. They chose to over burden the effects teams with the unrealistic release schedules.
Speaking of the MCU specifically, I think its worked for them in the past and it hasn't recently. And by all accounts they know its not working and are making adjustments.

I'm sure the same goes for the rest of Disney. It just takes time to make major adjustments like that. This is why I said earlier probably for 2024 (whatever gets released) will still be of the "huge" budget variety, and after that going into 2025 is when the adjustments will be felt.
 

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
I think it’s hysterical for anyone to claim high standards of cgi. Almost all cgi is bad cgi. Homemade effects in the first Star Wars were better. Other than for structures and backgrounds, cgi almost always looks cartoonish and with poor perspective.

We/you (less me) all accept it in movies all the time. So once you accept it, you accept it. To me, “bad” cgi is just worse by degrees than “acceptable” cgi. To me, complaining about bad cgi is like complaining about bad Dominos pizza. I mean, you ordered Dominos, what do you expect?

I think I remember something looking stupid in Ant-Man 3, and I think (similarly) when what’s-her-face got big at the end of TLM. It barely registers, because I notice all of it. I notice it during Avengers battles, in the new Star Wars films, in films from every studio. It’s as yet an unperfected tech.

But I’d much rather see hand drawn animation vs balloon head Pixar characters as well. So I already have low expectations going in, and I accept it for what it is because who cares?

People accept lower quality on so many “advances.” Hard line phones will always sound better than cell phones, which mostly have worse cameras than stand alone cameras. Streaming sounds like crap and doesn’t get loud enough. Satellite TV goes out when it rains too hard vs. much steadier old cable.

So let’s not be snobbish about our shortcut vfx that could be done better and probably cheaper with old school models and animatronics.
 

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
I will say this about Wish: I wouldn’t have known it was opening this week if I hadn’t seen it on this site. I remember seeing ads for it constantly, everywhere, and then it seemed to drop off this week rather than build up or yell “this week!” Then again, I mostly watch TV commercials in fast-forward mode, so maybe they did.

It’s a lot to get me to a theater to see an animated film. It’s extremely unlikely I’ll go see this one. Not my demo. I’ll have to be really bored or otherwise something has to pull me in for me to even watch it on Disney+ especially a princess movie.
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
We/you (less me) all accept it in movies all the time. So once you accept it, you accept it. To me, “bad” cgi is just worse by degrees than “acceptable” cgi.
Yes it's accepted. The difference is in something like the original antman, there were some fake looking effects. But the movie was a thousand times better than antman 3. People are much more willing to forgive questionable effects when they are invested in the story and characters. When you see something like Modok in antman 3. And how amateur the design and cgi was and couple hat with the mediocre story. Yea, it can take you right out of the film.
To me, complaining about bad cgi is like complaining about bad Dominos pizza. I mean, you ordered Dominos, what do you expect?
I would say you're off on this. Domino's isn't the blockbuster tent pole of pizzas. It's a $5.99 pizza that you get when you don't have a better option and need something quick. This isn't made for dvd or Disney channel content people are complaining about. These are 250mil plus high profile projects. I'm personally not going into the latest marvel, or star wars and expecting wizards of Waverly place effects.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
Do you think this:
I will say this about Wish: I wouldn’t have known it was opening this week if I hadn’t seen it on this site. I remember seeing ads for it constantly, everywhere, and then it seemed to drop off this week rather than build up or yell “this week!” Then again, I mostly watch TV commercials in fast-forward mode, so maybe they did.
Might have something to do with this?:
It’s a lot to get me to a theater to see an animated film. It’s extremely unlikely I’ll go see this one. Not my demo. I’ll have to be really bored or otherwise something has to pull me in for me to even watch it on Disney+ especially a princess movie.
I’m wondering if improved analytics and consumer behavior insights are leading them to be more targeted in their advertising?
 

TalkingHead

Well-Known Member

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Saturday update:
Estimate is now $32m-$33m for the 5-day, and looks like it may end up with less than Napoleon. Shocking.
I know this has been brought up before, but I do wonder whether Disney+ hasn’t played a role in disincentivising families with children from going to the cinema to see releases that they know they’ll be able to stream for “free” in a few months’ time. Either way, I agree things are playing out very badly for Disney at the moment.
 

EPCOT-O.G.

Well-Known Member
I know this has been brought up before, but I do wonder whether Disney+ hasn’t played a role in disincentivising families with children from going to the cinema to see releases that they know they’ll be able to stream for “free” in a few months’ time. Either way, I agree things are playing out very badly for Disney at the moment.
Perhaps. But Napoleon is an Apple TV production, which means it’ll be free on that soon, and it’s going to make more than Wish with a smaller potential audience pool.

Either way, Disney Plus has been a parasitic host that’s affected both the Parks and now theatrical division badly.
 

Vegas Disney Fan

Well-Known Member
I know this has been brought up before, but I do wonder whether Disney+ hasn’t played a role in disincentivising families with children from going to the cinema to see releases that they know they’ll be able to stream for “free” in a few months’ time. Either way, I agree things are playing out very badly for Disney at the moment.
I think it’s definitely a factor, along with people having massive TVs in their homes now, shorter attention spans, more content available than ever, some social issues, probably some lingering covid issues, some story issues… death by a thousand cuts.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Perhaps. But Napoleon is an Apple TV production, which means it’ll be free on that soon, and it’s going to make more than Wish with a smaller potential audience pool.

Either way, Disney Plus has been a parasitic host that’s affected both the Parks and now theatrical division badly.
A couple of thoughts:

I had in mind families with kids as the very demographic least motivated to spend time and money going to the cinema. A film like Napoleon is obviously going to attract a very different sort of cinema-goer.

Disney+ has many more subscribers than Apple TV.

There is a lot more brand recognition when it comes to releases from the Disney stable; people know those films will end up on Disney+ relatively soon. When it comes to non-Disney films, however, there is much less general knowledge about which studio made them or where they’ll end up steaming.
 
Last edited:

Chi84

Premium Member
I think it’s definitely a factor, along with people having massive TVs in their homes now, shorter attention spans, more content available than ever, some social issues, probably some lingering covid issues, some story issues… death by a thousand cuts.
My entire family loves Disney movies but not a single one of us will see them in theaters for the reasons mentioned above. Theaters are inconvenient, expensive and audience behavior leaves a lot to be desired.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
My entire family loves Disney movies but not a single one of us will see them in theaters for the reasons mentioned above. Theaters are inconvenient, expensive and audience behavior leaves a lot to be desired.
Your family isn’t alone, this is how more and more people are consuming entertainment content. This is why Disney has gone all in–literally risking everything–on streaming.

And why it’s stilly to try to evaluate Disney’s efforts based strictly off legacy metrics like box office performance.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
Your family isn’t alone, this is how more and more people are consuming entertainment content. This is why Disney has gone all in–literally risking everything–on streaming.

And why it’s stilly to try to evaluate Disney’s efforts based strictly off legacy metrics like box office performance.
It’ll take some time but they’ll figure it out. It’s the new reality.
 

drizgirl

Well-Known Member
Your family isn’t alone, this is how more and more people are consuming entertainment content. This is why Disney has gone all in–literally risking everything–on streaming.

And why it’s stilly to try to evaluate Disney’s efforts based strictly off legacy metrics like box office performance.
We should have this discussion when Disney puts out a critically acclaimed movie with lackluster box office performance.

2 things can be true at once. The industry can be changing. And Disney could be failing to put out good movies.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom