I know advertising is something of use but my gawd. There are ads everywhere for this upcoming movie!
Anyone else notice this?
Anyone else notice this?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Maleficent 2: Ads, ads, and more ads
- Thread starter KBLovedDisney
- Start date
michmickey
Member
Yes! I have totally noticed this. My guess is that Disney is realizing that no one really needed or wanted a Maleficent 2 as the first one felt pretty complete. They are driving advertising so the movie isn't a huge flop but I think they're gonna be disappointed when it still is. I also didn't feel like the first one was that good so I'm not excited in the least bit.
I can't even scroll through my social media (Instagram, Pinterest, Facebook, etc.) without seeing an ad for this. It's crazy!
On how it will actually do though, I am gonna wait and see. I think the first movie was ok, but just ok.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
Looks like Iger has another live-action-remake-dud on his hands. Good!
deadline.com
‘Maleficent: Mistress Of Evil’ Has Bad Spell Stateside With $36M+, ‘Joker’ Still The Man With $29M+, ‘Zombieland 2’ Reaps $26M+
SUNDAY AM Update: Disney’s Maleficent: Mistress of Evil, despite being No. 1 this weekend, didn’t make enough money in the US to justify its $185M production cost before P&A. It cam…
deadline.com
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
The movie had a $36 million opening day weekend, about half of what the first movie opened to 5 years ago.
The movie cost $185 million to make + marketing. At the very least this is not the opening Disney was hoping for, and soon Frozen 2 will make everyone forget about this sequel until it shows up on Disney+
Mouse Trap
Well-Known Member
Looks like Iger has another live-action-remake-dud on his hands. Good!
‘Maleficent: Mistress Of Evil’ Has Bad Spell Stateside With $36M+, ‘Joker’ Still The Man With $29M+, ‘Zombieland 2’ Reaps $26M+
SUNDAY AM Update: Disney’s Maleficent: Mistress of Evil, despite being No. 1 this weekend, didn’t make enough money in the US to justify its $185M production cost before P&A. It cam…
You're gonna need to understand the film market a bit more than that. Especially for a company like Disney that has a far more complex strategy than just needing an overall numerical return at the domestic box office.
Domestic, yes it certainly is weak. But it's off to a very strong international debut, outpacing the original with a smaller amount of screens. China is solid and Russia is very strong, but surprisingly Japan is a bit weak. Either way the film won't make nearly the same profit, but saying the film is a "dud" and a "flop" is far from the truth as this strengthens Disney's international brand presence in two countries that are historically hard to crack. There's quite a few long-term wins here and the film will be profitable in more ways than one, but another sequel definitely won't be coming.
Last edited:
What has been the audience vs critic reviews on this? Anyone know?
CJR
Well-Known Member
Opposites. Critics dislike it on average and the audience has rated it well, with an "A" cinema score.
We liked it ourselves, actually. Knowing a bit of what to expect before the movie probably tampered expectations, but it was a decent followup, IMO. Definitely a watchable sequel, compared to Alice.
networkpro
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
I'm in the "didnt like it" category. Pretty, but its a hack job for the character of Maleficent and a reimaging that I don't agree with. Three strong female characters Good, story bad. Same issues as with the first retcon'd outing. Skeletor still looks pretty rough.
Mouse Trap
Well-Known Member
400M
Disneyfanman
Well-Known Member
Don't fool yourselves. The general rule is that a film has to return 2.5 to 3X its production cost in Box Office. This is because the studio only receives a percentage of the gross. It's a smaller percentage overseas too. The budget was 185 million. So they have to hit 463 to 555 million in Box Office to be in the black. That's conservative. This doesn't, however, include the revenues generated from VOD, DVD, and rentals. Disney is going to take a write-down of 100 million on this film.
Does it matter? With the year that Disney has had, it's a very minor bump. I'm convinced that Disney released it this year (it was supposed to come out next May) to bury it in a very successful year AND to get it to Disney+ as soon as possible. They knew it wasn't going to be a hit. If it ended up doing well then it was a bonus. Prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
I would guess that M3 is unlikely.
Disney still has Frozen 2 and Star Wars opening this year.
Mouse Trap
Well-Known Member
You're making stuff up and creating calculations based off your own personal estimates. I'm quite involved in the industry and even if I wasn't it's in plenty of credible articles and trades that Maleficent needs around 400M to break even. It's no secret... don't fool yourself.
Last edited:
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Source? I find it hard to believe given the movie's budget and how the break down is happening domestic vs overseas.
Mouse Trap
Well-Known Member
‘Maleficent: Mistress Of Evil’ Has Bad Spell Stateside With $36M+, ‘Joker’ Still The Man With $29M+, ‘Zombieland 2’ Reaps $26M+
SUNDAY AM Update: Disney’s Maleficent: Mistress of Evil, despite being No. 1 this weekend, didn’t make enough money in the US to justify its $185M production cost before P&A. It cam…
deadline.com
Anthony D'Alessandro is quite connected and credible.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
So far the movie has made $458 million worldwide, out grossing the original in some markets. Will likely make over $500 million.