Narnia Outshines Tron & Tangled at the Box Office

[goonie007]

http://io9.com/5747305/how-much-money-does-a-movie-need-to-make-to-be-profitable

 

[nybound]

http://io9.com/5747305/how-much-money-does-a-movie-need-to-make-to-be-profitable

Interesting article. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Disneyfanman]

Disney took a risk giving up the Narnia Franchise. It may or may not pay off, but I understand the business decision. I understood letting M. Night escape as well, and that ended up looking pretty smart.

Based on industry trades and news reports. Narnia will earn a profit after everything is in. But not much.

Back to Tangled and Tron. Tangled was a wreck of a film before the re-do by all reports. Essentially it was made twice. It's going to end up on the fringe in profitability before DVD.

Tron is probably closer due to it's "lower" production cost. Again before DVD.

Add in Merchandising, music soundtracks (Tron is killing it there), and DVD sales and Disney is gonna do fine on both films.

And both films attracted attention in the theme parks. Especially the Tron after dark parties at DCA.

So JT, while I understand your point, you picked the wrong example. After merchandising, DVD, music, and awards bumps, all three films will cross the profit line for their respective studios. Your post came across as a sort of "na-na-nanana" dealio.

 

[jt04]

Disney took a risk giving up the Narnia Franchise. It may or may not pay off, but I understand the business decision. I understood letting M. Night escape as well, and that ended up looking pretty smart.

Based on industry trades and news reports. Narnia will earn a profit after everything is in. But not much.

Back to Tangled and Tron. Tangled was a wreck of a film before the re-do by all reports. Essentially it was made twice. It's going to end up on the fringe in profitability before DVD.

Tron is probably closer due to it's "lower" production cost. Again before DVD.

Add in Merchandising, music soundtracks (Tron is killing it there), and DVD sales and Disney is gonna do fine on both films.

And both films attracted attention in the theme parks. Especially the Tron after dark parties at DCA.

So JT, while I understand your point, you picked the wrong example. After merchandising, DVD, music, and awards bumps, all three films will cross the profit line for their respective studios. Your post came across as a sort of "na-na-nanana" dealio.

It was meant that way. But only towards those who have a knee jerk reaction to all things Narnia and who couldn't wait to claim it a failure all in a fruitless effort to try and make it go away. They know who they are. If you are not of that thinking there is no need to feel offended.

I hinted at the merchandising angle earlier and I agree with you.

My main point is that Eisner understood the value of the property and had he stayed I think Narnia would have mirrored the LOTR model. Specifically, it would have had increasingly improving numbers with each film and would have gathered momentum. He would have seen to the quality of the product. But it is still a sucess and will do great on DVD.

 

[Disneyfanman]

It was meant that way. But only towards those who have a knee jerk reaction to all things Narnia and who couldn't wait to claim it a failure all in a fruitless effort to try and make it go away. They know who they are. If you are not of that thinking there is no need to feel offended.

I hinted at the merchandising angle earlier and I agree with you.

My main point is that Eisner understood the value of the property and had he stayed I think Narnia would have mirrored the LOTR model. Specifically, it would have had increasingly improving numbers with each film and would have gathered momentum. He would have seen to the quality of the product. But it is still a sucess and will do great on DVD.

Now THAT I agree with. Well said.

 

[xdan0920]

Tangled production budget being 260 is a bit silly. First of all Disney does not release production budgets. So it is a guess, based on the film being in some form of production for a decade. It is an exercise in futility for us to try and figure a films net income. Tangled is already over 500 million world wide. It is a monster hit. Narnia on the other hand will never sniff 500 million at the world wide box office and it is DOA in the states. To try and claim Narnia is out performing Tangled is just ridiculous. Tron is a closer call. They are about equal.

 

[Disneyfanman]

Tangled production budget being 260 is a bit silly. First of all Disney does not release production budgets. So it is a guess, based on the film being in some form of production for a decade. It is an exercise in futility for us to try and figure a films net income. Tangled is already over 500 million world wide. It is a monster hit. Narnia on the other hand will never sniff 500 million at the world wide box office and it is DOA in the states. To try and claim Narnia is out performing Tangled is just ridiculous. Tron is a closer call. They are about equal.

True about the production budgets. All the sites state clearly that they are a total guess. JT is right though about the "2 to 1" rule that states that a film must gross twice its production budget to make a profit. That takes into account the fact that the studios only get about 50% of the receipts back. Also overseas returns are iffy at best due to exchange rates and irregular payment agreements.

I read a story last year that Harry Potter "The order of the phoenix" didn't make a profit after grossing nearly a billion dollars due to many factors (salaries, FX, promotion, etc). I'm not sure I believed it, but it seemed to have its facts well researched.

So IF Tangled cost 260 million (maybe) and it returns 520 M then it should make a profit before DVD and Home. It will. IF Tron cost 200 million and returns 400 million it should make a profit before DVD and Home. It MAY do that. IF Narnia cost 160 million and it returns 320 million (already has) it will have made a profit before DVD and Home. Lots of ifs.

None of these films are home runs, but they all will have returned a nice profit to the studios after all is said and done.

As an interesting side note, NOBODY expected Tangled to perform like it has. Disney made a decision at some point to continue production (They could have just written off the early cuts as a loss of capital) even though it became the most expensive animated film ever made. That decision now looks really really smart. It could have been a disaster if the movie had tanked.

Remember all of the posturing just before release about not doing princess movies anymore? That was all to lower expectations and protect Disney from a Wall Street hit in their stock if the movie did average business. Disney was nervous after last years TPATF which did NOT make a profit during its theatrical run (Though again....it did fine after DVD, Home, and Merchandising). And it cost less than half of Tangled by ANYONE's yardstick.

But coulda, shoulda, woulda........outside of a couple of misses (Persia and Apprentice) Disney had one heck of a year at the studios. No wonder their stock is up.

 

[xdan0920]

As an interesting side note, NOBODY expected Tangled to perform like it has. Disney made a decision at some point to continue production (They could have just written off the early cuts as a loss of capital) even though it became the most expensive animated film ever made. That decision now looks really really smart. It could have been a disaster if the movie had tanked.

Remember all of the posturing just before release about not doing princess movies anymore? That was all to lower expectations and protect Disney from a Wall Street hit in their stock if the movie did average business. Disney was nervous after last years TPATF which did NOT make a profit during its theatrical run (Though again....it did fine after DVD, Home, and Merchandising). And it cost less than half of Tangled by ANYONE's yardstick.

But coulda, shoulda, woulda........outside of a couple of misses (Persia and Apprentice) Disney had one heck of a year at the studios. No wonder their stock is up.

That is a very astute statement. Expectations are the real measuring stick for films.

Using Narnia as an example. The first film was a huge success compared to expectations. The film made 750 million world wide. That is almost 100 million more then the first Pirates film made.

Now the second Narnia comes out. The production budget of course goes up, but you expect the 1st sequel to at least match the performance of the orignal. Instead it comes up WAY short. Even though it makes a profit, it falls well below expectations and Disney dumps the franchise.

The third Narnia falls somewhere between the 1st and 2nd. The expectations were much lower for this film coming off the failure of the 2nd film. The 3rd Narnia will finish its run with about the same numbers as the 2nd film, but with lower expectations, it will be looked upon as a moderate success, rather the the failure that the 2nd film was.


Looking at Tangled. For this film to cross the half a billion mark is blowing away expectations. The fact that Disney is going to be able to break even, or turn a profit during it's theatrical run has got to be considered a huge win. This could have been an unmitigated disaster. Instead it has become a money maker for the company.

 

[Iakona]

Seems that using Narnia as an example without the caveat that Disney was partnered with Walden Media leaves out an important aspect in the decision making process for Disney.