'Strange World' Disney's 2022 Animated Film

_caleb

Well-Known Member
Ten dollars? Where do you live? Here, you can barely get in the door of a theatre for under $20.00 per ticket. We almost went to Glass Onion in the theatre just for the big screen, even though we have Netflix, but we decided on Bones and All instead, which turned out to be fantastic.
 

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
Ten dollars? Where do you live? Here, you can barely get in the door of a theatre for under $20.00 per ticket. We almost went to Glass Onion in the theatre just for the big screen, even though we have Netflix, but we decided on Bones and All instead, which turned out to be fantastic.
My Avatar 2 tickets for two adults were $47.58 plus $4.98 convenience fee.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
I think they care. They are losing big at the box office and losing big money in D+.

How much longer can they suck money from their theme park business to finance their big screen and streaming?

As a longtime fan and observer of The Walt Disney Company, and a former shareholder who wants to see the company return to financial success, this is exactly my question and serious concern as well.

How much longer can they keep this up? They can't blame Covid any more.

What's their excuse, and how much longer are they going to try to use that excuse?
 

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
What? Did you buy a ticket to see it from the back of a Banshee on the Flight of Passage screen at Animal Kingdom?
Screenshot_20221128-182838.png
 

BuddyThomas

Well-Known Member
Well in that case I suppose it was a resounding success.
It’s a resounding success because it is a quality movie and whether you like it or not, just because the initial box office was low, it now exists. I could rattle off an extensive list of films such as The Wizard of Oz and It’s a Wonderful Life that initially tanked at the box office but that are still right here with us….but of course, you already know that “mate”.
 

TwilightZone

Well-Known Member
Regarding the unattractive look to many of Strange World's characters, I just found this old footage on YouTube. When the film was initially in development several years ago by famed Disney producer Don Hall, the look of the people in the film was more natural, and far more Disney looking.



But back to the aesthetic look of the Strange World character. Here's a sketch of Ethan Clade from early in the film's development. He looks like a normal human that Disney animation would typically create...

View attachment 681551

But by the time the film ended up in mostly empty theaters this past weekend, the aesthetic look of Ethan Clade (and all of Strange World's people) had turned into something completely different. And completely unlike typical Disney animation. And not particularly attractive or aesthetically pleasing.

View attachment 681553

As I learned of the various plot twists and spoilers of this film, I did find it to be a really unique story. It's an idea that seems to have potential. But what if they had made the aesthetics of the film look more traditionally Disney (AKA attractive) and had throttled back the HR Committee ladies who apparently forced every category of "Important Representation!" into this film instead of just focusing on the story and the family dynamic that is universal?

The plot and story here in Strange World sounds genuinely unique and clever. But they shot themselves in the foot with the actual film and are in the process of vaporizing at least $100 Million dollars at a time of corporate crisis. Why???? And whose advice did they take to make the changes they did to Strange World? And how do they keep from repeating that mistake again???


Wow, this is interesting! I adore the concept art's style, if the movie had an aesthetic like "Spiderman: into the spiderverse", it could have been a visual darling for disney. I do enjoy the final movie's world designs from what I've seen of it, but part of me wonders "what could have been".

spiderman_into_the_spiderverse-5.jpg

Disney should really experiment with more unique styles in future films, while keeping to Disney sensibilities as more and more companies, like Dreamworks and Sony are creating more visually out of the box CGI films that look better than some modern Disney/Pixar films. I saw a clip of rapunzel unbraided that had a stunning "watercolor" style to it that the final movie doesn't have, which Disney absolutely should give another go.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
It’s a resounding success because it is a quality movie and whether you like it or not, just because the initial box office was low, it now exists.

Strange World had box office that was "low"? Low?

That's like saying the iceberg merely "brushed" the side of the Titanic. That'll buff right out when you get back to port.

The box office for Strange World was not just a giant bomb, it was a giant bomb that rewrote the history of box office bombs for Walt Disney Animation. And set new records for horrible Thanksgiving ticket sales. It wasn't just "low".

"Since its debut on November 23, the film has risen in the ranks to one of Disney’s biggest flops ever and could stand to lose $100 million at the box office...

The last time a Thanksgiving gross fared so poorly for Hollywood was 1994, and movie ticket prices averaged $4.08."

 
Last edited:

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
Honestly, this was the plan. From the beginning, Disney+ didn't intend to become profitable until fiscal 2024 (which is October 2023). Everything up to that point was seen as an all-in investment.
True. There should be no problem using the theme parks to finance efforts for this period of time and I think the demand at the theme parks will remain high for (at least) this time period.

That said, it is up to them to create movies and content folks want to watch.



ONLY THE STORY MATTERS.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TP2000

Well-Known Member
No, that's exactly the opposite of what he's doing. Getting it profitable mean's spending less, i.e. the wallet has been open and now it's closing.

As I said in the other post, I disagree but you read into what you will.

I agree that CNBC has nailed it in summarizing Bob Iger's employee town hall this morning. Per Iger's statements and financial media's interpretation of them: Hiring freeze still in place, cost cutting still in style, layoffs staff reductions still planned for the short-term.

And Iger specifically called out Disney+ and its unprofitability as a key headache right now. Duh. :cool:

"In a memo earlier this month, Chapek had announced plans for a hiring freeze, layoffs and cost cuts. Disney shares have fallen nearly 38% this year.

“It felt like it was a wise thing to do in terms of the challenges, and at the moment, I don’t have any plans to change it,” -Bob Iger, Monday, November 28th, 2022.


And I chuckled at the thought of all those LA hipsters doing the fake work-from-home charade on the Zoom calls with Merlot in their coffee cups when Bob Iger said this today, per that CNBC article...

"Iger said he wouldn’t make any dramatic proclamations about Disney’s work-from-home policies but said he felt creative businesses worked best when employees were together in-person."
 

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
I think Treasure Planet should have done better than $20M but it came out at a time where we already saw Treasure Island multiple times. Muppet Treasure Island came out six years before. Lilo & Stitch came out six months before Treasure Planet. Too many Disney movies in the same year.

Strange World looked like a stinker from the first trailer. Some people root for Disney a little too much to see that.
 

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
This illustrates the point I've been trying to make. Disney knows that many (most?) of the audience for its animated films also subscribe to Disney+. They don't care where you pay to consume their content, and they don't have to try to compete head to head with Minions or Top Gun to get your money anymore.
My thinking as to where you pay is, I paid for my D+ subscription annual sub cost was about what I would pay for the three of us to go to ONE movie; gas+tickets+concessions. My families viewing habits throws a wrench in the works as we have stopped going to the movies thanks to streaming.

Disney wishes they had a blockbuster like Top Gun. They could use one right about now.

No, we did not go to the theater to see Top Gun.
Yes, we will watch it on streaming as many times as we want.
 

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
Heck, even the Strange World premiere party at the El Cap was sponsored by Pepto-Bismol!

world-premiere-of-walt-disney-animation-studios-strange-world.webp


I do like this guy who wore the pink shoes though to match is wife's purse, he looks like a fun guy. Cute family! 😀
Wow I could not pull off the pink shoes but if my wife asked me to wear them I would.
Agreed! Cute family!
 

Cmdr_Crimson

Well-Known Member
You know I was thinking about it, and Wreck it Ralph also has the round face art style. Difference there is that WIR is trying to go for the cutsey video game mascot look, where those are to be expected. Strange World is trying to go for a pulp magazine art stylle.
And the plot of this is just The Jetsons Movie...
 

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

Back
Top Bottom