Is the Magic Fading at Disney?

mkt

Disney's Favorite Scumbag™
Premium Member
Original Poster
Is the Magic Fading at Disney?
Company Struggles to Connect With Turbo-Charged Generation
By Frank Ahrens

Saturday, December 14, 2002


(WASHINGTON POST, E01) -- As the Walt Disney Co. salvages the shipwreck that the movie "Treasure Planet" has become, studio executives are mulling why the animated, set-in-space version of Robert Louis Stevenson's "Treasure Island" has foundered so badly that the company was forced to cut its earnings estimates for the year.

Theories abound, ranging from a badly timed release date to an unsympathetic lead character. Most intriguing, perhaps, is the idea that boys -- to whom the pirate adventure was marketed -- may be too distracted with louder, faster-paced entertainments to be interested in a stately, classically animated Disney epic.

The updated version of the classic adventure may feature a space-going, tall-masted clipper, but it performed more like a Cold War Soviet rocket -- exploding on takeoff and taking in only $16.7 million in its opening five days, beginning Nov. 27.

The initial damage was bad enough that Disney was forced to lower its 2002 pretax revenue estimate by $74 million, a step so dramatic that Disney studio head Richard Cook said he could not recall it happening before.

Even though "Treasure Planet" may do well in Europe and doubtless will rack up millions in VHS and DVD sales, Disney doubts it will ever break even. It cost $140 million to make and has brought in $23.7 million so far.

Critics were tepid on the film; it got an average grade of C+ from the 11 film critics who contribute to Entertainment Weekly's poll. Audiences were kinder: A survey of about 1,000 opening-night viewers done by CinemaScore Online Inc., a movie polling company, gave "Treasure Planet" an A-.

Given this, the film's poor performance raises several questions: Has Disney lost its touch with its core content, animation? Has the look of Disney's animated films become dated compared with computer-generated films, such as "Shrek"? Or was "Treasure Planet" a victim of bad timing in the kids market, hitting theaters in between the most recent "Harry Potter" installment and Disney's own "The Santa Clause 2"?

More pointedly, has Disney lost boy viewers to the likes of "Tony Hawk's Boom Boom HuckJam," a sensory-overload arena show featuring thrash music, choreographed skateboard tricks, motocross motorcycle jumping and BMX bike acrobatics? Another correlative possibility: that "Treasure Planet" was so long in production -- it was dreamed up 17 years ago and finally greenlighted in 1997 -- that it was bypassed by the explosion of turbocharged video games that didn't exist five years ago, which remain largely the province of boys.

"I think there's a lot more [boys entertainment] now than there was some years back and that the stuff that is available is a lot edgier and is a lot more advanced for the [age group] Disney was targeting," said Tom Wolzien, a media analyst with Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. "Let's say they were targeting 8- to 13-year-olds, hypothetically. Well, now your audience is reduced to single digits [in age] because by the time kids are 10, they're off doing something else" than watching Disney films.

Disney calls "Treasure Planet" an isolated dud and says larger conclusions cannot necessarily be drawn from its fizzle. But the company hasn't had a boy hit in some time. The last Disney animated film targeted at boys, June 2001's "Atlantis: The Lost Empire," opened at a disappointing $20.8 million, eventually racking up $84.1 million and breaking even.

The successful Disney animated films of recent history -- "Lilo & Stitch" and "Monsters, Inc." -- have targeted both boys and girls. Disney tried to make the main boy character in "Treasure Planet" appealing to boys in the "tween" age group; he flies about on a device that looks like a cross between a snowboard and a windsurfing board.

But he didn't click. "Cleary, when the lead characters are boys, its going to skew in that direction," Cook said. "Whatever it was, we didn't tap into the appeal of the character or the story or whatever. Whether that speaks to other issues or not, I'm not sure."

Some Disney officials think the potential boy audience for "Treasure Planet" was bled off by the most recent James Bond installment, "Die Another Day," which opened five days earlier.

Cook, who has headed Disney's live-action and animation studios since February, said "Treasure Planet" is not indicative of any larger problem with Disney animation.

"The simple answer is that none of the people we [marketed to] wanted to see it. It happens," Cook said. "You're going to have one of these once in a while. But I'll still keep our batting average."

A close look at Disney's animation average, however, might suggest the need for a few more swings in the batting cage.

"Lilo & Stitch," released in June, opened big, grossing $35.3 million in its first weekend. The film has gone on to be a box office hit, taking in $145.7 million. Likewise, "Monsters, Inc." has been a box office and DVD smash. But "Monsters, Inc." -- like hit films "Toy Story" and "A Bug's Life" -- was animated by Disney's partner, Pixar Animation Studios, and it has a different look than the films cranked out by Disney animators. Some say the look is fresher and the editing faster.

For movies done solely by Disney, the studio's batting average is down from its decade of dominance, from 1989 to 1999, when animated films such as "The Little Mermaid," "Aladdin," "The Lion King" and "Tarzan" routinely grossed more than $100 million each, often more.

More indicative of recent history was December 2000's "The Emperor's New Groove," which grossed only $9.8 million in its first weekend on its way to $89.3 million. Its relative failure remains a puzzle to Disney, whose setbacks have given traction to rival animators and their films, such as Fox's "Ice Age" and DreamWorks' "Shrek," which grossed $268 million in theaters.

Wolzien points out that kids may not feel an attachment to Disney because the company did not make its cable channel widely available as part of basic service until recently, while rival kids channel Nickelodeon has long enjoyed widespread distribution.

"Today's kids were raised by Viacom," Wolzien said, naming Nickelodeon's parent company, "not Disney."

At least one analyst said Disney's problems extend beyond an inability to connect with thrasher tween boys.

"I'm a little concerned that the Disney [animation] format has aged," said Jordan Rohan, a media analyst with SoundView Technology Group.

"I don't believe that people care to hear Elton John and Tim Rice anthems weaved into a movie anymore," Rohan said, referring to John's score for Disney's 1994 hit, "The Lion King." Sweeping scores have become a hallmark of Disney animation. "It's not fresh," he said.

Rohan contrasts "Treasure Planet's" dated -- or classic -- animation style and story with that of DreamWorks' "Shrek," which featured a breezier, computer-generated style and two hit songs by the pop group Smash Mouth.

Disney's animation studios are likely in for an overhaul anyway. Thomas Schumacher, the longtime head of Disney's animation division, is said to be moving to helm the company's Broadway division. Analysts will be watching Disney closely through the spring, as the company is set to release two more animated films, "The Jungle Book II" and "Piglet's Big Movie."

The punch line to "Treasure Planet's" initial flop, however, involves something more mundane than studio heads and analysts theorizing about what appeals to kids. It involves accounting. Because the film was released after the company estimated its 2002 earnings but before it filed its annual report on Form 10-K, accounting rules forced Disney to reduce its earnings estimate. Had "Treasure Planet" been released at almost any other time during the year, its drain on the company's finances might have been overlooked.
 

CAPTAIN HOOK

Well-Known Member
The Magic isn't fading, I think that its just a minor set back - I think that Lilo And Stitch was such an unexpected success and Treasure Planet has been launched too soon after it.
 

MKCustodial

Well-Known Member
Well, it's yet to open down here - January 31st, if I'm not mistaken - but it ain't gonna have any competition at all. All the heavy-hitters, ie. Harry, Santa Clause, Stuart Little and even a couple of local ones have already been on for a while. The only one TP's gonna be facing is Lord of the Rings, and it may be too much to face... But LotR starts on December 27, so MAYBE it won't present that much of a threat, it's gonna have one month to rule all alone.

I suppose TP had 2 major flaws, and this is coming from someone who hasn't seen it yet: it opened on a bad date in the US, and it was marketed TOO MUCH for the boys. Is there anything in it that might appeal to girls?
 

WDWspider

New Member
Could it be so simple -- People want Traditional Animated Features with some song, colorful characters and a friendly color scheme... space is cold, and all the Metallic colors and dark colors from the previews take away the family atmosphere of an Animated Feature. It should have been a live action movie.
 

MKCustodial

Well-Known Member
But the way the mixed CGI with trad. anim. was incredible. At least, what I read at Disney Magazine sure sounds incredible. I had no idea Silver's arma was CG. :eek:
 

wahooskipper

New Member
Disney needs to push the envelope a little more in their animated movies. If they want a soundtrack to accompany a film, don't go after the entertainers that will appeal to the kids parents...go after the entertainers that will appeal to the kids. One example, even though it wasn't used in the film, was NSYNC singing with Phil Collins on the Tarzan CD. (Though I don't care for NSYNC).

While kids are at home playing video games where they are killing people in gruesome ways, picking up hookers, etc the Disney movies are having a chipmunk talk to a princess, or something like that. I am certainly not saying there should be killing and gore in the Disney films but they may need to reach a little more.

Finally, the release date for Treasure Planet was awful. They went up against Harry Potter, their own Santa Clause II movie and a host of other kid-friendly movies. Does anyone know what kid movies were showing when Disney release Beauty and the Beast, Aladin or Lion King? No? That is my point.
 

MKCustodial

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by MKCustodial
Well, it's yet to open down here - January 31st, if I'm not mistaken - but it ain't gonna have any competition at all. All the heavy-hitters, ie. Harry, Santa Clause, Stuart Little and even a couple of local ones have already been on for a while. The only one TP's gonna be facing is Lord of the Rings, and it may be too much to face... But LotR starts on December 27, so MAYBE it won't present that much of a threat, it's gonna have one month to rule all alone.

They pulled Planet to January 10th down here, but Bond is opening on the same weekend, and the Thorneberys open one week later. I really don't know how it's gonna be, but I'll let you know...
 

General Grizz

New Member
Let's see some of their latest plans:

Atlantis II...oh, of course. #1 went so well, why not.
Lilo and Stitch..II - a year after the original was made. Yup, nice long-term thought there. We'll all be Stitched-out before you know it!

And I just got off the "Disney" Channel...and guess what I saw...of course! Pop stars! Those guys you can see 24/7 on 50 other channels and radios world wide. Yeah - even those girls with the half-sized shirts. Totally Disney-esque. I just can't get enough of the magic. Oh boy, I can't wait to tell my family about this one!

In general, not exclusively on a film level, there are lots of aspects to which, for me, I frown upon the executives. Some of their recent shady acts to me have been unquestionably contrary to Mr. Disney's ambitions and outsets just on the close of his 100th, and the start of his 101th birthdate anniversary. I don't even know if I want to refer to it as a Disney company anymore!!

I truly hope they can get a new staff in there to keep the magic going. If not, it can only live on through the hearts of those Mr. Disney touched personally or indirectly.

Yeah; I get on a roll...hehe. :brick: :lol:
 

SirNim

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by grizzlyhall
Let's see some of their latest plans:

Atlantis II...oh, of course. #1 went so well, why not.
Lilo and Stitch..II - a year after the original was made. Yup, nice long-term thought there. We'll all be Stitched-out before you know it!

And I just got off the "Disney" Channel...and guess what I saw...of course! Pop stars! Those guys you can see 24/7 on 50 other channels and radios world wide. Yeah - even those girls with the half-sized shirts. Totally Disney-esque. I just can't get enough of the magic. Oh boy, I can't wait to tell my family about this one!

In general, not exclusively on a film level, there are lots of aspects to which, for me, I frown upon the executives. Some of their recent shady acts to me have been unquestionably contrary to Mr. Disney's ambitions and outsets just on the close of his 100th, and the start of his 101th birthdate anniversary. I don't even know if I want to refer to it as a Disney company anymore!!

I truly hope they can get a new staff in there to keep the magic going. If not, it can only live on through the hearts of those Mr. Disney touched personally or indirectly.

Yeah; I get on a roll...hehe. :brick: :lol:
It's a roll, however, so true, genuine, and agreeable...
I agree with everything quoted above... There's little magic in the company anymore, aside from their old classic animated films and some of the park attractions... Music? with the pop stars? and the Disney Channel? Give me a break! :rolleyes: :) :fork:
 
I think there are a combination of factors contributing to Treasure Planet's failure:

1) Much more competition in the marketplace, especially for kids and families. In the late '80s/early'90s heydey, nobody was making quality kid or family movies. Now you've got 'em all over the place - Harry Potter, Shrek, Ice Age, etc. If Disney wants to open in the holiday season, they're forced to go against a lot of quality releases.
2) Seems to me that Disney's "action-only" flicks tend not to do as well. Recent examples - Atlantis, TP. Example from the recent "heydey" - Rescuers Down Under. You need something that will appeal to the parents too, I'd think. I certainly didn't want to see this film. (And I happily took my older kid to Lilo and Stitch and Monsters, Inc, and enjoyed them very much)
3) Didn't anyone else see the trailers and think "19th century boats in space - that's too weird"?


What's also very interesting to me is that (the wonderful) Lilo and Stitch was considered a "big surprise hit" after bringing in $145 million. Check out this site:
Lion King made $427 million in today's dollars.
Aladdin made $299 million in today's dollars.
It's not on that site, but in today's dollars, Beauty and the Beast made about $200 million, Pocahontas made about $190 million.

That's four movies released in a row that were well ahead of Lilo and Stitch's take. Granted, this is one of the all-time winning streaks by any studio, but back in the early-mid '90's, $145 million in today's dollars would have been considered a mild disappointment. Funny how times change...
 

wdwmaniac

Member
i think disney is just hitting a low spot like it did I the early 1980's than the Disney Decade happened and now we are feeling another low spot so it will take some time but I thnk it will get out of it.
 

TheChop_King

New Member
Originally posted by wdwmaniac
but I thnk it will get out of it.

Exactly. This is just a slump for Disney.
There are a lot of good things coming for Disney in the next few years. "Finding Nemo" and "Bears" are going to be HUGE!
TP was just made for the wrong type of audience. As said before, Disney needs to learn to keep sci-fi away from family animated movies. That lesson should have been learned after the poor run of Atlantis. I personally thought both films were excellent, but it's just not going to bring in the families that will make the film(s) a success.
 

MKCustodial

Well-Known Member
After having finally watched this movie, I can say for sure: its problems in the US were due to a miserable marketing campaign. The trailers are totally misleading, they don't show what the movie is really about, and you get the idea it's just another sci-fi flick, which is not. Also, it opened agains heavy hitters. Down here, it's opening with James Bond, 2 weekes after LoTR and one week before The Thornberrys and The Ring. But its true enemy is today's audience. Kids don't have it in them to appreciate deep stories anymore, and if Disney resorts to dumb movies, than it'll lose its older fans. It's a tight situation.
 

Tim G

Well-Known Member
My opinion??

No!!

But I can imagine, some people think it is.....

WDW will keep the magic................

And the Magic Will Always Continue.....

Believe me...
 

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

Back
Top Bottom