Disney's Live Action The Little Mermaid

[MrPromey]

Wasn't meant to be out of context, that is why I wrote "Just to add to what was already said.." I was just pointing out that in addition to the accounting practices they are using being normal, it is also normal to be losing money on a new venture like this for a while. I wasn't making a judgement or assumption or even trying to comment on your thoughts about how they are going about it or how it impacts the parks. If it came across that way, it wasn't meant to.

Oh, no - I didn't take you as doing it on purpose. I typed... too much yesterday.

But when I brought that up, it was in reference to how it appeared to give them a nice little way to "make money" for other parts of the company while it didn't really matter that they were losing money, themselves. For instance, LFL getting something like Willow green-lit because D+ didn't necessarily have a choice on that, only for it to be off D+ a few months later.

That worked out great as a little bump for LFL who might not have found any willing partners in the wider world for a new spinoff series from a movie released in the 80's that wasn't really a franchise.

It's also convenient that D+ quickly shelved it here in 2023 when they're still allowed to lose money.

I mean, if it had hit - great and they have a new franchise to milk but it clearly didn't and they wasted no time iceboxing it. I'm sure people with residuals weren't thrilled but LFL got paid so it was probably good on paper for them, right?

But either way, it was no-risk in 2022-2023 when the loss could be hung around the neck of D+.

Kind of makes me wonder if that would have gotten made during D+'s future "profitable" stage...

Likewise, D+ can't afford to cover their own payroll but they can find $100 million to pay for streaming rights to TLM which takes that to profitability for the studios who are under much heavier scrutiny to perform than D+ is at the moment.*

Not saying any of this is illegal or anything (Hollywood accounting and so on) - just noting that it's possible D+, in the short term, may be giving Disney Co. an opportunity for some unique creative accounting and wondering what happens next year when that opportunity closes.

Maybe that's when the parks roll out G+x to pick up the slack?

*To be clear, I think Disney could have shopped streaming rights for TLM around and probably gotten a pretty good deal so I'm not trying to use that as some "smoking gun" example - just pointing out how one part of Disney paying another part of Disney with money the first part doesn't even have somehow makes that other part profitable... Which I'd like to see someone pull off with their own household budgeting.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Yes, but the numbers, while disappointing, aren’t going to discourage them from making further remakes, because the film’s failure outside the US is clearly an aberration tied very much to the controversies surrounding this specific project.

I agree with this, I just don’t think they’re happy about it.

They had one chance (this generation) to make a fortune off this movie and it broke even. It’s a huge lost opportunity.

I have no doubt they’ll carry on with the remakes searching for the next billion dollar box office.

 

[Disstevefan1]

it is also normal to be losing money on a new venture like this for a while.

Except of you are the Star Cruiser

I know, I know, all things Theme parks must not only make money, but must hit targets.

 

[LittleBuford]

I agree with this, I just don’t think they’re happy about it.

They had one chance (this generation) to make a fortune off this movie and it broke even. It’s a huge lost opportunity.

I have no doubt they’ll carry on with the remakes searching for the next billion dollar box office.

I’m pretty much alone here in thinking that at least some of the Disney bigwigs knew this was a gamble that may not pay off. I agree they would be disappointed, but not necessarily surprised. (I actually expected the film to do much worse than it has.)

 

[MisterPenguin]

Welcome to Hollywood, where exec's think stuff they make will bring in truckloads of money. This isn't just a Disney thing.

Cf...

Mattel Has Gone Insane

Mattel Has 45 Toy-Based Movies In Development https://comicbook.com/movies/news/mattel-toy-movies-in-development-barbie-hot-wheels/ https://comicbook.com/movies/news/j-j-abrams-hot-wheels-movie-emotional-grounded-gritty-mattel/...

forums.wdwmagic.com

 

[Sir_Cliff]

I’m not looking forward to the live-action Moana either, but yesterday I discovered that a friend of mine who’s never seen any of the other remakes is beyond excited about it. She totally brushed off my objection that Moana was too recent to be remade; all that mattered to her was that she would be getting more of an IP she loves.

I have no idea whether others share her view, but it was interesting to hear nonetheless.

This is where I kind of throw up my hands when it comes to the remakes.

I don't like them or see the point, but a lot of other people obviously do and I don't have to see them. Honestly, if Iger turned up at my front door tomorrow and anointed me the new CEO of Disney in a move more head scratching than Chapek's sudden elevation, I would probably struggle to justify closing off that revenue stream!

 

[MrPromey]

Cf...

Mattel Has Gone Insane

Mattel Has 45 Toy-Based Movies In Development https://comicbook.com/movies/news/mattel-toy-movies-in-development-barbie-hot-wheels/ https://comicbook.com/movies/news/j-j-abrams-hot-wheels-movie-emotional-grounded-gritty-mattel/...

forums.wdwmagic.com

These truly are the end times...

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

This is where I kind of throw up my hands when it comes to the remakes.

I don't like them or see the point, but a lot of other people obviously do and I don't have to see them. Honestly, if Iger turned up at my front door tomorrow and anointed me the new CEO of Disney in a move more head scratching than Chapek's sudden elevation, I would probably struggle to justify closing off that revenue stream!

Same, I haven’t seen a single one of them in the theater but I’ve seen them all (I think) on video/streaming… I’m personally not a fan but it’s hard to argue against the revenue they bring in, they’re hit or miss but overall they make money.

 

[Disney Irish]

This is where I kind of throw up my hands when it comes to the remakes.

I don't like them or see the point, but a lot of other people obviously do and I don't have to see them. Honestly, if Iger turned up at my front door tomorrow and anointed me the new CEO of Disney in a move more head scratching than Chapek's sudden elevation, I would probably struggle to justify closing off that revenue stream!

I think anyone who is honest would have a hard time justifying turning off that revenue stream as well, creatively bankrupt as they maybe.

 

[Disstevefan1]

This is where I kind of throw up my hands when it comes to the remakes.

I don't like them or see the point, but a lot of other people obviously do and I don't have to see them. Honestly, if Iger turned up at my front door tomorrow and anointed me the new CEO of Disney in a move more head scratching than Chapek's sudden elevation, I would probably struggle to justify closing off that revenue stream!

Revenue as in less revenue that it costs to make and market?

Or just keep making them and hope for the best in the long run?

I guess if you can keep getting that sweet ESG financing to make them, why not?

They do employ vast numbers of people.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Yes, but the numbers, while disappointing, aren’t going to discourage them from making further remakes, because the film’s failure outside the US is clearly an aberration tied very much to the controversies surrounding this specific project.

Which raises a question I’ve asked but which hasn’t really been answered - do the folks glorying in TLMs failure want authoritarian governments to have a veto over American entertainment products? I was livid when Transformers: Age of Extinction halted its “narrative” to present what amounted to an ad glorifying the Chinese government, and I’ve been highly critical of Disney’s relationship with that government. A lot of the anti-TLM posters are the same who constantly bring up China to try to divert from American political issues, so I ask again - should Disney base creative decisions on how they think China (or Russia, or Saudi Arabia, etc) will react?

 

[Disstevefan1]

Which raises a question I’ve asked but which hasn’t really been answered - do the folks glorying in TLMs failure want authoritarian governments to have a veto over American entertainment products? I was livid when Transformers: Age of Extinction halted its “narrative” to present what amounted to an ad glorifying the Chinese government, and I’ve been highly critical of Disney’s relationship with that government. A lot of the anti-TLM posters are the same who constantly bring up China to try to divert from American political issues, so I ask again - should Disney base creative decisions on how they think China (or Russia, or Saudi Arabia, etc) will react?

Authoritarian governments DO NOT have a veto over American entertainment products. China will be China no matter what TWDC creates.

It bothers me more that the budgets of these movies are so bloated TWDC needs China's box office to make money on a movie.

I know Iger loves China, but still, he should not have to rely on their box office.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Authoritarian governments DO NOT have a veto over American entertainment products. China will be China no matter what TWDC creates.

It bothers me more that the budgets of these movies are so bloated TWDC needs China's box office to make money on a movie.

I know Iger loves China, but still, he should not have to rely on their box office.

It’s odd that the party line seems to have become “we want cheap films.” Maybe it’s just me, but one (or even several) underachieving films doesn’t make me want Pixar to become Illuminations - I enjoy some of their films on a very non-demanding level, but they aren’t what one might call “good.” And it’s funny to read legitimate grousing about the sometimes lackluster cgi in Marvel films and then have folks shouting to spend LESS money on them. It’s almost like folks want to complain about Disney regardless of what they actually do…

 

[Sir_Cliff]

It’s odd that the party line seems to have become “we want cheap films.” Maybe it’s just me, but one (or even several) underachieving films doesn’t make me want Pixar to become Illuminations - I enjoy some of their films on a very non-demanding level, but they aren’t what one might call “good.” And it’s funny to read legitimate grousing about the sometimes lackluster cgi in Marvel films and then have folks shouting to spend LESS money on them. It’s almost like folks want to complain about Disney regardless of what they actually do…

Yes, I can imagine the protest outside Disney's Burbank headquarters with people chanting "make cheaper films!"

Kind of a strange cause for Disney fans to be championing!

 

[Disstevefan1]

It’s odd that the party line seems to have become “we want cheap films.” Maybe it’s just me, but one (or even several) underachieving films doesn’t make me want Pixar to become Illuminations - I enjoy some of their films on a very non-demanding level, but they aren’t what one might call “good.” And it’s funny to read legitimate grousing about the sometimes lackluster cgi in Marvel films and then have folks shouting to spend LESS money on them. It’s almost like folks want to complain about Disney regardless of what they actually do…

It's odd when folks discuss trying to control the budgets of any film, it translates to “we want cheap films.” Nobody wants cheap films.

It's hard for the average person to see these astronomical budgets, see that ticket sales do not cover the expense, and just doing math, if we know we are not going to sell enough tickets, lower the budgets.

We see budget cuts all of the time in the parks. I know, I know, there is a double standard and that's just the way it is.

Besides, it's more about the story. If movie has mass appeal and sells a lot of tickets, no one cares what it costs.

 

[Disney Irish]

It’s odd that the party line seems to have become “we want cheap films.” Maybe it’s just me, but one (or even several) underachieving films doesn’t make me want Pixar to become Illuminations - I enjoy some of their films on a very non-demanding level, but they aren’t what one might call “good.” And it’s funny to read legitimate grousing about the sometimes lackluster cgi in Marvel films and then have folks shouting to spend LESS money on them. It’s almost like folks want to complain about Disney regardless of what they actually do…

And here is the rub of it all, movies and tv shows are only going to get more expensive.

The WGA and now potentially SAG are striking for higher pay, hence budgets are only going to keep increasing.

So while I agree overall that Disney needs to rein in budgets, there is a lot of fixed costs in Hollywood that they cannot control.

 

[erasure fan1]

I think anyone who is honest would have a hard time justifying turning off that revenue stream as well, creatively bankrupt as they maybe.

Anyone looking at it from a honest standpoint, wouldn't just look at the revenue. If it were me, I would definitely shut any live action remake down that has a crazy tent pole budget. 200/250mil is just too crazy for this kind of thing. $130mil tops, and that's for a top tier film like froen. If all the direct to home sequels from the 90s cost the same as the original lion king or beauty and the beast. How long do they continue to make them? Not long I would guess.

And the other factor to look at is just lke the direct to home sequels, what effect does that have on the brand image? It wasn't great for the direct to home stuff. So I get when people see something like mermaid making 520mil, it seems great. And with a more reasonable budget it could be.

The other side, and none of us have the information. Is how do the live actions effect merchandise. Is it a one for the other wash? Did they see an increase in overall sales in that IP? Because that is a huge part of the Disney way. Are the live action remakes giving them that sweet merchandise lift that they so covet?

 

[Sir_Cliff]

It's odd when folks discuss trying to control the budgets of any film, it translates to “we want cheap films.” Nobody wants cheap films.

It's hard for the average person to see these astronomical budgets, see that ticket sales do not cover the expense, and just doing math, if we know we are not going to sell enough tickets, lower the budgets.

Why do you care, though? Isn't that a problem for Disney and their accountants?

We see budget cuts all of the time in the parks. I know, I know, there is a double standard and that's just the way it is.

Well, are you happy when you see budget cuts at the parks? As a fan, do you react with satisfaction that the parks will be more profitable for the company?

 

[Disney Irish]

Anyone looking at it from a honest standpoint, wouldn't just look at the revenue. If it were me, I would definitely shut any live action remake down that has a crazy tent pole budget. 200/250mil is just too crazy for this kind of thing. $130mil tops, and that's for a top tier film like froen. If all the direct to home sequels from the 90s cost the same as the original lion king or beauty and the beast. How long do they continue to make them? Not long I would guess.

And the other factor to look at is just lke the direct to home sequels, what effect does that have on the brand image? It wasn't great for the direct to home stuff. So I get when people see something like mermaid making 520mil, it seems great. And with a more reasonable budget it could be.

The other side, and none of us have the information. Is how do the live actions effect merchandise. Is it a one for the other wash? Did they see an increase in overall sales in that IP? Because that is a huge part of the Disney way. Are the live action remakes giving them that sweet merchandise lift that they so covet?

You have to look at the entire revenue stream, not just box office. And given that its an easy money maker, even if not directly from the box office, it only makes sense to continue them. Again if we're looking at it honestly.

Also as I just mentioned, while I agree Disney needs to rein in the budgets there are a lot of fixed costs that are going to continue to only drive up budgets. So that $130M that you mentioned may not be enough after all the new contracts get signed post-strikes in Hollywood. Because its not going to be just the WGA and maybe SAG getting new contracts, it'll be all of Hollywood as its a domino effect once one contract is signed.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Why do you care, though? Isn't that a problem for Disney and their accountants?


Well, are you happy when you see budget cuts at the parks? As a fan, do you react with satisfaction that the parks will be more profitable for the company?

For point one, while I am sure the accounts are very creative about moving money around and fool shareholders into thinking all is well, but as a regular person sees a company, I am a fan of, losing money on movies, I wonder how long they can get away with it.

For point two, you took my post wrong, I dislike the double standard of the movie business allowed to hit and miss randomly and lose money and the theme park budgets are so tight, many times cuts are made.

The theme parks must make more and more money, take no chances, immediately shut down things that so not make "enough money".

I personally would put more money into the parks.

TWDC spends hundreds of millions of dollars on a movie, that loses money, that no one remembers in a month instead of building an attraction that can live for decades and folks can enjoy over and over again.