Elemental (Pixar - June 2023)

[Disstevefan1]

So you say you want stories that bring people out to the theater but aren't willing to go out to the theater yourself. Got it. So you aren't willing to put your money where your mouth is.

I prefer to purchase and watch movies at home and I won't apologize for it.

My point is if the world is still going call a movie a success by the box office, they gotta get folks to show up and buy tickets.

"So you aren't willing to put your money where your mouth is". That's just funny. You have no idea the truckloads of money I spent on all variety Disney products. Actually I don't want to know either

 

[DKampy]

Why? Watching movies at home is the best thing ever today! Crystal clear big screens, rewind, pause, fast forward, all the snacks I could ever want right in my kitchen! And I can pause the movie while I get my snack!

People say this… I am not sure what theaters you go to… maybe they are trash, but I yet to see someone’s home theaters match what I get at my local theater…nothing pulls me in or compares then my local theater with huge screen and great Dolby surround sound… plus I don’t have the distractions I have at home…

 

[Disney Irish]

I prefer to purchase and watch movies at home and I won't apologize for it.

I'm not saying you should apologize for it. Just when you say "The only solution is to create stories that will get folks to buy tickets and go to the theater. " but then fail to buy a ticket yourself, you end up being part of the problem of an audience not showing up.

My point is if the world is still going call a movie a success by the box office, they gotta get folks to show up and buy tickets.

Well that is a different topic, and in my opinion the idea of the box office being the sole factor for a movies "success" is not only outdated, its overblown.

Many a movie over the years have been deemed not a success during its theatrical run but end up being successful post-theatrical.

And we're not talking cult movies, we're talking actual cinematic masterpieces -

Citizen Cane
Its a Wonderful Life
Cleopatra
Shawshank Redemption
Big Lewbowski
Fight Club

I honestly think we need to separate this idea of a film's success from the box office.

"So you aren't willing to put your money where your mouth is". That's just funny. You have no idea the truckloads of money I spent on all variety Disney products. Actually I don't want to know either

Not at all the point, but I'm pretty sure a majority of us on this site spend way more than we'd like to admit on Disney products.

 

[Disney Irish]

People say this… I am not sure what theaters you go to… maybe they are trash, but I yet to see someone’s home theaters match what I get at my local theater…nothing pulls me in or compares then my local theater with huge screen and great Dolby surround sound… plus I don’t have the distractions I have at home…

Home theaters can get pretty close especially if one is willing to spend the money, but I agree overall. Its the experience of going to the theater for me, rather than the "quality".

 

[Disstevefan1]

Many a movie over the years have been deemed not a success during its theatrical run but end up being successful post-theatrical.
And we're not talking cult movies, we're talking actual cinematic masterpieces -

Citizen Cane
Its a Wonderful Life
Cleopatra
Shawshank Redemption
Big Lewbowski
Fight Club

AGREED!
Citizen Cane - great movie in my opinion.
We watch It's a Wonderful life EVERY year, multiple times
Fight Club. My neighbor was in that movie, the character Lou. Oh boy, I just checked IMDB, he passed in 2021

I honestly think we need to separate this idea of a film's success from the box office.

AGREED! But in my opinion, the world will never change.

I'm pretty sure a majority of us on this site spend way more than we'd like to admit on Disney products.

AGREED! We spent too much on Disney and continue to do so, just not movie tickets in our case.

SEE WE AGREE ON A LOT OF THINGS!

 

[Disney Irish]

AGREED! But in my opinion, the world will never change.

Those critical of certain films or studio management will always point to the box office as barometer for whatever their grievance, so that will never change.

However I think with streaming and the post-theatrical market many, even in the industry, as starting to given less credence to the box office as being the sole determining factors for a movies success. Heck, its even part of the strike topics when it comes to compensation.

So I do see the world changing on this sentiment.

SEE WE AGREE ON A LOT OF THINGS!

Well its nice when posters can agree on things....

 

[doctornick]

So other than Lightyear, which is only a single film, what other stuff do you believe has caused a significant loss of brand trust?

I mean even the pandemic releases, Onward, Soul, Luca, and Turning Red, were all fairly well received by most audiences.

I don't think it's one thing, but there was definitely a sense that Onward (which did little in the brief time it was in theaters) and then the D+ films were all not up to Pixar's standards. Not that they were bad per se but that they were below the high standards previously set by Pixar. Also, Turning Red in particular seems to be somewhat divisive. So, I thing over that time, there was a shift in people's attitudes of "Pixar is so good, I'm going to run out and see all their films" to "well, I guess I'll see that Pixar film when I get the chance" then Lightyear was definitely not well received (and Strange World on top of that which contributed to diminishing the overall Disney animated brand, which Pixar is a part of) and I definitely think there is a trend where Pixar is now amongst the pack of just "regular" animated films and not its own special draw.

And, yes, the pandemic (which has dampened box office sales) and streaming (which has led to more people "waiting" for films) play a role too but Pixar's drop was more precarious than others. Of course, when you have a higher ledge, it's a bigger fall so there's that.

But I do hope that Elemental's generally good word of mouth and strong "legs" will help to rehab Pixar's image. There's always going to be a lag where you have to have something change the attitude and it's the next film that will get the "benefit of the doubt" and potentially a better opening/strong pre-sales and anticipation.

 

[doctornick]

People say this… I am not sure what theaters you go to… maybe they are trash, but I yet to see someone’s home theaters match what I get at my local theater…nothing pulls me in or compares then my local theater with huge screen and great Dolby surround sound… plus I don’t have the distractions I have at home…

Meh. Everyone is different. To me, the reason to go see a film in the theater is:

1. Avoid spoilers
2. Being a part of the conversation for popular new media ("water cooler talk")
3. sometimes it is nice to be in a full theater and having the ambiance of the audience all responding

I personally don't care much about the video or sound, but I've never been all that awed by the big screen. I'm also one of those people who doesn't get worked up by "the special effects were so poor" either so whatever. I'm mainly focused on the plot and story.

If I could watch a movie at my home on the same day it is released in theaters, even at an inflated price, I would do that virtually 100% of the time. I loved Premiere Access for Disney+. So much to watch on my schedule, not have to drive to the theater, sit where I want, grab my own food, pause and go to the bathroom, whatever. Much better experience.

 

[Disney Irish]

I don't think it's one thing, but there was definitely a sense that Onward (which did little in the brief time it was in theaters) and then the D+ films were all not up to Pixar's standards. Not that they were bad per se but that they were below the high standards previously set by Pixar. Also, Turning Red in particular seems to be somewhat divisive. So, I thing over that time, there was a shift in people's attitudes of "Pixar is so good, I'm going to run out and see all their films" to "well, I guess I'll see that Pixar film when I get the chance" then Lightyear was definitely not well received (and Strange World on top of that which contributed to diminishing the overall Disney animated brand, which Pixar is a part of) and I definitely think there is a trend where Pixar is now amongst the pack of just "regular" animated films and not its own special draw.

And, yes, the pandemic (which has dampened box office sales) and streaming (which has led to more people "waiting" for films) play a role too but Pixar's drop was more precarious than others. Of course, when you have a higher ledge, it's a bigger fall so there's that.

But I do hope that Elemental's generally good word of mouth and strong "legs" will help to rehab Pixar's image. There's always going to be a lag where you have to have something change the attitude and it's the next film that will get the "benefit of the doubt" and potentially a better opening/strong pre-sales and anticipation.

I know some people on the internet say the quality/standards was somehow diminished with recent Pixar films like Onward and Turning Red, but I don't buy that.

Quality is subjective, to me all these films have been up to the same standards as Pixar movies in the past. So to me this is not a valid argument overall. So I really do think this gets back to the whole streaming aspect as being the largest factor.

Hopefully with Elemental that has changed the conversation, and Elio will be back to normal.

 

[Phroobar]

Now that's an interesting question. The exact cause of Pixar's decline is murky. Elemental's weak gross is indicative a broader struggle for the filmmaker to draw people out on the strength of the brand alone. Again, I'm hesitant to give an exact cause. What I can tell you is that all through the 2000s and 2010s Pixar's name on the marquee was enough to ensure success. Only the fluke Good Dinosaur was an outlier.

Peter Sohn directed both Good Dinosaur and Elemental.
I don't think Pete Docter should let that guy direct anymore.

 

[Phroobar]

I know some people on the internet say the quality/standards was somehow diminished with recent Pixar films like Onward and Turning Red, but I don't buy that.

Quality is subjective, to me all these films have been up to the same standards as Pixar movies in the past. So to me this is not a valid argument overall. So I really do think this gets back to the whole streaming aspect as being the largest factor.

Hopefully with Elemental that has changed the conversation, and Elio will be back to normal.

Pixar has been doing the same old buddy picture movie forever. Looking at the animation style of Elio compared to Spiderman or TMNT or Puss n' Boots there is nothing to get excited about. Even Inside Out 2 won't push the bar or make people want to see the movie. It is the same old stuff.

 

[Disney Irish]

Pixar has been doing the same old buddy picture movie forever. Looking at the animation style of Elio compared to Spiderman or TMNT or Puss n' Boots there is nothing to get excited about. Even Inside Out 2 won't push the bar or make people want to see the movie. It is the same old stuff.

I don't personally get excited by the specific animation styles at all, as I don't think that it in itself adds much to the story. Plus every studio to me has a "style" they start out with, which then tries to get copied among all the studios. Like for example TMNT looks pretty similar to both Spiderverse's and Last Wish, ie the 2.5D animation style, so it becomes old hat.

So to me it all comes back to the story, is it interesting enough to hold my attention. And personally I can say that like with TMNT for example, because I know their backstory from the other iterations, there was nothing new for me, other than teen April and Splinter have an afro I found it mostly predictable and boring because it was all done before.

 

[Phroobar]

I don't personally get excited by the specific animation styles at all, as I don't think that it in itself adds much to the story. Plus every studio to me has a "style" they start out with, which then tries to get copied among all the studios. Like for example TMNT looks pretty similar to both Spiderverse's and Last Wish, ie the 2.5D animation style, so it becomes old hat.

So to me it all comes back to the story, is it interesting enough to hold my attention. And personally I can say that like with TMNT for example, because I know their backstory from the other iterations, there was nothing new for me, other than teen April and Splinter have an afro I found it mostly predictable and boring because it was all done before.

All we know so far about Wish is the art type (2.5D animation) and the usual princess and talking animal buddy. People may do "a been there, done that before" and wait until Disney+ in February.

 

[BrianLo]

The closest off shore they are getting is the Disney studios here in Vancouver, which I doubt saves them that much money.


Also with talks of animators / VFX artists wanting to unionize…

Pixar also had a studio branch in Vancouver until like 2013 as well. They were just doing shorts and I assume on the more expensive side. They were located in Gas Town, so I can't imagine cheap office space... though I've just learned ILM moved in after the acquisition.

In a fun fact moment, I got to visit it in 2012. There was something they were working on that I honestly have no idea what it was but never saw the light of day. Some sort of dark creatures/monsters that was distinctly un-Monsters Inc.

 

[BrianLo]

Also, Turning Red in particular seems to be somewhat divisive.

I think Turning Red is actually under-recognized for its popularity. The divisiveness is more internet opinions than reality. That and Luca did quite well and stuck around in 2022.

Though Soul I think was a pandemic 'novelty' and Onward definitely got saved by the Pandemic fog. I agree it wasn't hot out of the gate and the Pandemic sort of gave it an easy out.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Pixar also had a studio branch in Vancouver until like 2013 as well. They were just doing shorts and I assume on the more expensive side. They were located in Gas Town, so I can't imagine cheap office space... though I've just learned ILM moved in after the acquisition.

In a fun fact moment, I got to visit it in 2012. There was something they were working on that I honestly have no idea what it was but never saw the light of day. Some sort of dark creatures/monsters that was distinctly un-Monsters Inc.

Right. ILM is here as is Disney animation now!

 

[Disney Irish]

All we know so far about Wish is the art type (2.5D animation) and the usual princess and talking animal buddy. People may do "a been there, done that before" and wait until Disney+ in February.

To me story beats out animation style every time. And if you have a bad or uninteresting take on the story you'll lose me.

However given this is Disney's first real attempt at the 2.5D animation style, plus a return to more "classic" Disney, I think more people will be interested in seeing it in theaters. But we shall see what happens in a couple months.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

So then is it possible that its not a brand issue but rather an audience that has been trained by the 4 pandemic releases to expect to see Pixar films on D+ instead of theaters?

Basically what I'm saying is that this idea that the Pixar "brand" is now persona non grata is a bit overblown in my opinion.

I'd definitely not argue Pixar is "persona non grata." That would suggest an active aversion to Pixar on the part of audiences. This change is characterized by apathy and not aversion.

I would say that the inherent trust and rapport Pixar developed with its audience has eroded. Pixar used to be like Apple. A company people felt passionate about. Pixar was more than a studio, it was a friend. Pixar still makes great films (though, not by box office performance metrics), but the passion is gone. Pixar of the 2000s and 2010s could release shockingly successful films about fish, monsters, waste disposal robots on dystopic planets, and homes carried aloft by balloons. The company was inexplicably successful because of excellent storytelling and a deep and passionate relationship with its audience.

People loved Pixar in a way that I still can't quite believe. I'm still stunned by it years later. It was special. Hit after hit. The meteoric rise of Pixar still leaves me in awe. Pixar itself is one of the greatest stories of all time!

Now, for whatever reason, this storied company can't even get people into movie theaters. That is tragic. Perhaps part of the problem is Pixar's absorption into The Walt Disney Company. It feels like Pixar's identity is getting diluted. And Pixar used to be the young and scrappy insurgent charging into battle against all the odds. Today, Pixar is the face of the establishment. The movies also are no longer "events." Pixar movies were cultural moments that adults, teenagers, and kids could share. Everyone could see Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Up, and Toy Story 3. Elemental is not a movie that has anyone excited in a similar way.

There's also the John Lasseter issue... He, Catmull, and Jobs were Pixar's soul. Now they're all gone.

Ultimately, I just don't find the hypothesis that this is reflective of shifting consumer viewing habits to be a complete explanation. Not even close. The Mario movie proved that animated family films can storm the box office charts. People easily could have waited to see Mario in their homes, but they went out to experience it in theaters because they couldn't wait to make memories with their families and friends.

If this really is just an issue of people waiting to watch on Disney+, then Disney should make adjustments to their release strategy. But I doubt it's so simple. This seems like a more general malaise afflicting Pixar.

Well that is a different topic, and in my opinion the idea of the box office being the sole factor for a movies "success" is not only outdated, its overblown.

Many a movie over the years have been deemed not a success during its theatrical run but end up being successful post-theatrical.

And we're not talking cult movies, we're talking actual cinematic masterpieces -

Citizen Cane
Its a Wonderful Life
Cleopatra
Shawshank Redemption
Big Lewbowski
Fight Club

I honestly think we need to separate this idea of a film's success from the box office.

This is all well and good, but a film needs to be monetized. Box office results represent a key way for studios to recoup investments in their properties. Of course, the home entertainment market represents the other method of monetizing films. Unfortunately, The Walt Disney Company has embraced the massive overhead of running a streaming service. Simultaneously, Disney has decided to forgo the revenue it could have earned licensing to other services (remember the Netflix deal? good times...). Box office returns matter more in this context because other methods of monetizing the film are not in play (well merchandising, but I doubt Elemental is going to spawn a massive toy market like Cars or Toy Story). So the onus is on Disney films in this era to perform well at the box office.

And they aren't. So Disney is in the uncomfortable predicament of having to accept poor box office returns and high overhead in their streaming business. Not good.

 

[TP2000]

Based on what Pixar President Jim Morris says, it'll be profitable during its theatrical run.

I think you'd need to dramatically scale back the normal marketing spend to make Elemental profit during its box office run. Or get super creative with accounting and/or inter-departmental credits. Maybe a tax break for hiring a Canadian to voice the mom?

But if you pretend you spent hardly any money on marketing, which they may have done since being burned so badly by Lightyear and all their previous Disney+ debuts, you could maybe eke out a small profit at the box office? I did see several Elemental commercials on YouTube back in June, but maybe those are cheap? Or they used an old gift card to pay for them?

If you assume the normal (and very generous to the studio) 60/40 split of the box office for domestic/overseas takes from the theater chains, and then only spent $10 Million on marketing even though the movie cost you $200 Million to produce, you could earn a profit by Labor Day of maybe $1 Million? Fingers crossed?

Production $200 Million + Marketing $10 Million - $199 Million 60/40 Domestic/Overseas BO Take = $11 Million Loss As Of 8/9/23

 

[Disney Irish]

I think you'd need to dramatically scale back the normal marketing spend to make Elemental profit during its box office run. Or get super creative with accounting and/or inter-departmental credits. Maybe a tax break for hiring a Canadian to voice the mom?

But if you pretend you spent hardly any money on marketing, which they may have done since being burned so badly by Lightyear and all their previous Disney+ debuts, you could maybe eke out a small profit at the box office? I did see several Elemental commercials on YouTube back in June, but maybe those are cheap? Or they used an old gift card to pay for them?

If you assume the normal (and very generous to the studio) 60/40 split of the box office for domestic/overseas takes from the theater chains, and then only spent $10 Million on marketing even though the movie cost you $200 Million to produce, you could earn a profit by Labor Day of maybe $1 Million? Fingers crossed?

Production $200 Million + Marketing $10 Million - $199 Million 60/40 Domestic/Overseas BO Take = $11 Million Loss As Of 8/9/23

View attachment 736795

None of us here have the real production budgets, real marketing costs, or even the real box office breakdown, for any films for any studio, we have the "estimates".

As such sometimes we just have to accept that our "math" is not always going to be 100% accurate. Which is why the "rule of thumb" is not a end all be all for determining if a movie is profitable during theatrical. Its just a tool to tells the average of what films need to be profitable, but not all films fall into that average. Sometimes reported budgets are less or even more than estimated. Sometimes the marketing is less or even more than half the budget. Sometimes the breakdown of the box office splits are more or even less in the favor of the studio than the 60/40 average. So its all just an average for talking points, but its not necessarily the reality.

Also lets say your new "calculation" is more closer to correct, you do realize that under the "rule of thumb" that essentially puts it into break-even/profitability range now.

Basically we here are not the gatekeepers of whether a movie is profitable or not, it is the studio themselves that are the gate keepers. So yeah I'm going to end up believing the president of the studio over the math provided by mostly random posters on a Disney Fan Forum.