tirian
Well-Known Member
It will. It’ll take time, though.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Mulan coming to Disney+
- Thread starter J4546
- Start date
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
It’s has to be available at some point. If not, Disney+ is officially a broken model.
Disney is just cool with taking advantage of people who can’t wait (which is fine; that’s supply and demand).
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Thanks for your answers. It has to become available for regular subscribers, right? I don't mind waiting.
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
I would be curious if Disney is using this opportunity to market research a tiered package. Though I can’t see theatres agreeing to the system.
Assuming that doesn’t happen, I would assume 6 - 9 month turnaround from release to streaming.
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
We’re already seeing some movement in this area. Whether this is a temporary or permanent shift remains to be seen.
AMC, Universal agree to shrink theatrical window to 17 days
The agreement repairs a rift between AMC and Universal brought on by the on-demand release of “Trolls World Tour” in April.
www.google.ca
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
It is quite interesting to watch the spectrum of reactions to this. We clearly overpay for the experience of a theatre and severely underpay in the new streaming model landscape.
Forcing the two together in an unnatural way is causing a lot of people to have very dichotomous reactions. Sticking the movie on VOD will ultimately mean it will come faster to Disney+ for all subscribers than turfing the movie to 2021 for theatres. But the way everyone is reacting you wouldn't think it's ever going to be 'free'.
I understand there is a component of feeling this undermines actual first run original content by setting a precedent... but we also must acknowledge Mulan is a lavish tentpole. It is not a Disney+ Original that the service can realistically support throwing on it for free. Streamers are never going to make 200 Million dollar budget movies for their service alone.
Forcing the two together in an unnatural way is causing a lot of people to have very dichotomous reactions. Sticking the movie on VOD will ultimately mean it will come faster to Disney+ for all subscribers than turfing the movie to 2021 for theatres. But the way everyone is reacting you wouldn't think it's ever going to be 'free'.
I understand there is a component of feeling this undermines actual first run original content by setting a precedent... but we also must acknowledge Mulan is a lavish tentpole. It is not a Disney+ Original that the service can realistically support throwing on it for free. Streamers are never going to make 200 Million dollar budget movies for their service alone.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Now imagine if they had made Mulan a Disney Movie Club exclusive... 
Jedijax719
Well-Known Member
Agreed. These are unprecedented times and Disney has to make hard decisions about a movie they spent a LOT of money on and just cannot get it out to theaters safely. I completely understand their move as it is a desperate one. But they HAVE to be desperate at this point. You cannot expect something that would have cost $8-$15 per ticket in normal circumstances to suddenly be free "just because". They have to make some kind of money off of this thing.
Sadly for them, it won't last long. Movies make money over time due to (1) word of mouth, (2) people waiting for crowds to die down, and (3) opening up their schedule to have time. Mulan won't face such obstacles (for #2 and #3 at least). So those who really want to see it will do so quickly and the money it makes through VOD will die out VERY quickly. Also, those who DO pay for it really really want to see it quickly. Even they have to realize that it will be a main part of D+ at some point in the not-so-distant future.
tirian
Well-Known Member
This announcement raises several questions about Disney’s aspirations for Mulan.
First, there are concerns that by releasing it directly to VOD, Disney loses most of its marketing hype. A massive theatrical experience contributes to the appeal of tentpole action movies. This is obvious, but people stuck at home want something new to watch.
Second, I’m confused why Disney and its team of social media influencers are trying to take the same angle as Black Panther. Asian markets have vibrant film industries, and China has won Oscars for its movies. Many of them feature strong female protagonists. Most showcase martial arts and epic battles. Some do very well in American theaters. (Crouching Tiger... comes to mind.) In other words, while Mulan might be an excellent film, it’s not unique in the same sense as Black Panther, who was part of the MCU. It won’t necessarily make hundreds of millions in China simply for existing, and both Wall Street and Disney seem to think they’ve got a built-in audience. This is ignorant. Compared to worldwide cinema, Mulan isn’t special except it was made by an American studio.
Let’s also be a bit cynical and say maybe Disney isn’t afraid of large groups gathering for one $30 rental because of Covid.
That said, if Mulan is an excellent movie, and if it’s the first live-action remake to actually improve upon the animated original, word-of-mouth could explode. This could potentially open a new door in high-profile VOD. Trolls World Tour was a sequel. Mulan is the real test.
First, there are concerns that by releasing it directly to VOD, Disney loses most of its marketing hype. A massive theatrical experience contributes to the appeal of tentpole action movies. This is obvious, but people stuck at home want something new to watch.
Second, I’m confused why Disney and its team of social media influencers are trying to take the same angle as Black Panther. Asian markets have vibrant film industries, and China has won Oscars for its movies. Many of them feature strong female protagonists. Most showcase martial arts and epic battles. Some do very well in American theaters. (Crouching Tiger... comes to mind.) In other words, while Mulan might be an excellent film, it’s not unique in the same sense as Black Panther, who was part of the MCU. It won’t necessarily make hundreds of millions in China simply for existing, and both Wall Street and Disney seem to think they’ve got a built-in audience. This is ignorant. Compared to worldwide cinema, Mulan isn’t special except it was made by an American studio.
Let’s also be a bit cynical and say maybe Disney isn’t afraid of large groups gathering for one $30 rental because of Covid.
That said, if Mulan is an excellent movie, and if it’s the first live-action remake to actually improve upon the animated original, word-of-mouth could explode. This could potentially open a new door in high-profile VOD. Trolls World Tour was a sequel. Mulan is the real test.
tirian
Well-Known Member
That’s the catch. Streaming started as a digital video rental store, most of which had dropped to $1/night by the time Netflix broke out of disc-by-mail to launch its online service.
Netflix upended the streaming model by creating its own content, and they raised prices significantly, but already had a massive user base financing the Netflix originals. Today, Netflix simultaneously produces Stranger Things, Kingdom, and other effects-heavy, cinematic series as part of a standard monthly rate.
On the other hand, Disney+ is primarily a video-rental model with a few direct-to-video specials and films that are cheaply produced. That’s why the subscription is inexpensive. That’s also why they can’t afford to drop a lavish tentpole like Mulan onto it for free.
I believe Chapek when he says Mulan is a VOD test, not the new plan, because they need to see how many customers are willing to shell out $30 for something Netflix has trained them to expect. Disney+ would have to substantially raise its prices to compete with the Netflix Originals model.
Lucky Rabbit
Well-Known Member
I agree with your overall point, but in certain situations Disney is outspending Netflix.
Disney Plus' Marvel TV shows will reportedly cost up to $25 million an episode. Here's how that compares to TV's most expensive series.
Apple TV Plus' "The Morning Show" and "See" will reportedly cost $300 million and $240 million for two seasons, respectively
www.businessinsider.com
And the Mandalorian:
Disney's 'Star Wars' TV series, 'The Mandalorian,' cost $100 million to make — but its Marvel shows cost even more
Disney CEO Bob Iger confirmed that "The Mandalorian" cost around $100 million to make at this week's Vanity Fair Summit.
www.businessinsider.com
But I’m sure a factor in allowing some shows to have large budgets is merchandising. Disney will make a LOT more off MCU and Star Wars shows than Netflix makes from Stranger Things.
Let’s also be a bit cynical and say maybe Disney isn’t afraid of large groups gathering for one $30 rental because of Covid.
You can play it as often as you want once you pay for it. So, it can be watched one at a time over and over for each individual!!
tirian
Well-Known Member
Hahahahaha!
tirian
Well-Known Member
I agree with your overall point, but in certain situations Disney is outspending Netflix.
Disney Plus' Marvel TV shows will reportedly cost up to $25 million an episode. Here's how that compares to TV's most expensive series.
Apple TV Plus' "The Morning Show" and "See" will reportedly cost $300 million and $240 million for two seasons, respectively
And the Mandalorian:
Disney's 'Star Wars' TV series, 'The Mandalorian,' cost $100 million to make — but its Marvel shows cost even more
Disney CEO Bob Iger confirmed that "The Mandalorian" cost around $100 million to make at this week's Vanity Fair Summit.
But I’m sure a factor in allowing some shows to have large budgets is merchandising. Disney will make a LOT more off MCU and Star Wars shows than Netflix makes from Stranger Things.
They must be depending on merch.
100 Million people saw Endgame in theaters. If they're fans of the MCU, the hope is they'll all subscribe. Theoretically, that's $700 million a month for D+.
Plus merch.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Not for nothing, but I would at least argue that The Jungle Book "live action" movie was a significant improvement on it's "animated" original.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Well, a few of those people all live in the same households and I doubt they'll each individually have a Disney+ subscription....
I think the original MCU content for Disney+ is viewed as symbiotic with movies - by having them interconnected, they are hoping to have increased revenues for both the films and Disney+ subscriptions by inspiring people to participate in both markets. Especially since the chronology of the MCU means you tend to have to see the "next" showing to make sense for what comes after (so, for example, you can't just skip seeing a movie in the theater and wait for it to be on streaming for free).
tirian
Well-Known Member
Most critics disagree, but right now it’s difficult to appeal to critics for anything since they’re all over the place. *shrug*
Still, to each his own.