-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Tron might finally beat Narnia
- Thread starter Timothy W.
- Start date
It's very important to some to make sure Narnia does not look profitable. It's done better than Tron, Prince of Persia, & Sorcerer yet we are still being told by a few that Narnia 3 is not succesful even though Narnia cost half to make and market compared to Tron. I like Tron as well - hope it does good in media sales and a sequel gets a go. But to go back to the original post - it's all about will there be a Tron or Narnia attraction in the future. Narnia in Animal Kingdom would make sense, Narnia at Disney Paris would make sense - Europe, especially England & France are crazy about Narnia. Disney does not have another franchise with such a rich variety of mythical creatures that have stood the test of time through the novels and the endless film, animation, and tv versions of Narnia. We already know that Narnia 4 does have the greenlight - it is not up in the air like Tron. So will see how all this plays out, but I don't believe we have seen that last of Narnia in the parks.
Once again, Disney has nothing to do with Narnia anymore. They've given up the rights! There is zero chance you will see anything related to Narnia at Disney once Prince Caspian goes away. :brick:
flavious27
Well-Known Member
narnia cost 155 to make and 100 to market.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/03/news/la-ct-narnia-20101203
tron cost 150 to make and 120 to market.
http://www.deadline.com/2010/12/tron-legacy-3d-opens-to-3-5m-midnights-record-25-from-imax-theaters/
I don't know where you got the illusion that tron cost twice as much as narnia.
Also, disney no longer has the rights past the 2nd book so there will not be a narnia attraction added to any park.
It's kind of like saying Disney will not update Star Tours or we will never see anymore Indy Jones rides, by saying we will never see Narnia in the parks. Since the first Narnia movie did make 750 million more than Nemo, Lion King, - disney's top animated films - more people paid to see Narnia. Just that fact alone gives the potential of a possible Narnia attraction someday in the future. I also think you underestimate the desire of the billionaire who owns Narnia who has a strong desire to see Narnia in the parks.
jt04
Well-Known Member
Again, the links you are providing do not contain the numbers you are citing. Could you provide those links that do?
lebeau
Well-Known Member
I'm not getting the Tron vs. Narnia debate. Neither franchise is a winner. There may yet be some money to be made off both of them, but continuing either franchise is a big gamble.
As far as Disney is concerned, they disowned Narnia. There is no chance they will step back in to the franchise. Whenever they finally get motivated to remove the Prince Caspian "attraction" that will be the end of Narnia in the parks save for the odd prop or costume.
Tron seems a lot more likely to be included in the parks. With the cartoon, video games, etc. the franchise seems younger and more vital to me. But its primary advantage over Narnia is that Disney owns it.
If you're debating the likelihood of theme park attractions in the future, Tron is the hands down winner. I don't see much point in debating the box office prospects of either franchise since neither one has a lot of life left in it.
As far as Disney is concerned, they disowned Narnia. There is no chance they will step back in to the franchise. Whenever they finally get motivated to remove the Prince Caspian "attraction" that will be the end of Narnia in the parks save for the odd prop or costume.
Tron seems a lot more likely to be included in the parks. With the cartoon, video games, etc. the franchise seems younger and more vital to me. But its primary advantage over Narnia is that Disney owns it.
If you're debating the likelihood of theme park attractions in the future, Tron is the hands down winner. I don't see much point in debating the box office prospects of either franchise since neither one has a lot of life left in it.
jt04
Well-Known Member
Please provide the numbers to back up your claim. If you don't have that information than you are just engaging in subjective opinion.
There is a post earlier in this thread that points out that the 3rd Narnia film is doing better than the second in terms of real profit. So by any reasonable measure that indicates the franchise is rebounding and keeps open the possibility that it might very well be gaining momentum rather than losing it. We won't know for sure until the next movie is released.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
Even with numbers, this is a matter of subjective opinion. You guys are just going to go round and round shouting the name of your preferred franchise to no avail.
I don't follow Narnia news at all. But a quick Google search told me the project was "in development" meaning it is not even greenlit. Yet you talk about it as though it were greenlit. Best I can tell, it's not.
If either studio were happy with the box office of Tron 2 or Narnia 3, they'd have greenlit sequels by now and announced release dates. The fact that neither announcement has happened is indication that neither franchise is particuarily robust right now.
Things change. Maybe video sales will light a fire under one of these projects. I know Walden wants to continue the Narnia franchise. So maybe it'll get made. But if you look at the current state of the Tron and Narnia franchises, neither one looks like a sure thing right now.
It's like you guys are arguing over who is the better also-ran. If that's your thing, enjoy! But I don't really see the point of the comparisson.
jt04
Well-Known Member
Just responding to and refutting the spin of some posters. I would prefer this thread was moved or locked.
T-1MILLION
New Member
Profit in terms of production costs are different than popularity. That is why Narnia 3 is doing better business wise.
A movie that makes 103 million in theaters with 3D sales included in the price in 2010 is much different than the previous movies that did not have the 3D aspect nor the years of inflation difference that Disney then owned.
As a movie series there is not much rebound for either.
Disney no longer owns Narnia rights so a theme park attraction at their parks based on the other two films are not likely as that is very limited and the second one underperformed.
As for Tron getting attractions in the parks, also not likely.
You guys realize that more people saw the remake of The Karate Kid than saw Tron's major production budget and markted sequel right? Tron had the two biggest weeks of the movie theater year practically to itself and could still not get a profit from the domestic theatrical run.
To think Disney is happy in a business sense with Tron Legacy than one is not thinking clearly.
As lebeau seemed to touch on, it is all moot anyway as neither film franchises as of late have really benefitted Disney.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
Tellingly, Karate Kid 2 was announced within weeks of Karate Kid's opening weekend. This is how studios react when they are happy with a movie and view it as a viable franchise.
flavious27
Well-Known Member
Disney doesn't have the rights from narnia 3 - 7, they won't put an attraction in their parks for a franchise they gave up on.
flavious27
Well-Known Member
what?
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/03/news/la-ct-narnia-20101203
"Prince Caspian" was shot in New Zealand, England, the Czech Republic and Poland over 140 days and cost $240 million. "Dawn Treader," on the other hand, cost about $155 million and was almost exclusively filmed in Australia over 90 days, mostly on sound stages rather than costlier far-flung locations.
Fox and Walden will spend about $100 million to market "Dawn Treader" around the world. That could be money well spent: Each of the previous "Narnia" movies generated more than 60% of their ticket sales overseas.
http://www.deadline.com/2010/12/tron-legacy-3d-opens-to-3-5m-midnights-record-25-from-imax-theaters/
With a budget estimated as $150M, and a global marketing push estimated at another $120M, Tron: Legacy 3D had a ton of pre-sales domestically but will have to depend on international overperforming.
flavious27
Well-Known Member
Well the production was only $40 million, the gross was $358 million. With an average P&A budget of $40 million and the studio getting 60%, sony made more than $134 million.
slappy magoo
Well-Known Member
OT, but all the talk of budgets and marketing costs - info that, even if we had it, could be incomplete as studios often try to hide how much movies actually cost (or don't), reminds me of one of those stories from Paramount Pictures, sued by Winston Groom, the author of "Forrest Gump." Once "Gump" passed the $300 million box office mark, Groom inquired as to when he may receive his 3% on the net stipulated in his contract. He was given a lecture about how Forrest Gump actually lost $62 million. 
There was an out of court settlement.
Depending on the production, the sort of publicity a studio wants or does not want, budgets can be inflated to seem more important, but more often than not, studio accountants try to artificially inflate the budget by every conceivable dime, because then they only have to pay people whose contract stipulate a cut of the gross. Even then, a really powerful and savvy A-lister should fight to get a piece of each ticket sold, regardless of gross OR net. I don't know if it's been tried, but it oughta be.
Truth is, not even much of Disney's accounting staff will ever really know how much Tron made (or lost), but the fact that there's been no serious talk of a sequel doesn't bode well. I'm not saying it won't happen. But if I were a diehard Tronnie or whatever the hell they call themselves, I wouldn't hold out hope, so if it happens, it would seem like a happy surprise.
There was an out of court settlement. Depending on the production, the sort of publicity a studio wants or does not want, budgets can be inflated to seem more important, but more often than not, studio accountants try to artificially inflate the budget by every conceivable dime, because then they only have to pay people whose contract stipulate a cut of the gross. Even then, a really powerful and savvy A-lister should fight to get a piece of each ticket sold, regardless of gross OR net. I don't know if it's been tried, but it oughta be.
Truth is, not even much of Disney's accounting staff will ever really know how much Tron made (or lost), but the fact that there's been no serious talk of a sequel doesn't bode well. I'm not saying it won't happen. But if I were a diehard Tronnie or whatever the hell they call themselves, I wouldn't hold out hope, so if it happens, it would seem like a happy surprise.
lebeau
Well-Known Member
OT, but all the talk of budgets and marketing costs - info that, even if we had it, could be incomplete as studios often try to hide how much movies actually cost (or don't), reminds me of one of those stories from Paramount Pictures, sued by Winston Groom, the author of "Forrest Gump." Once "Gump" passed the $300 million box office mark, Groom inquired as to when he may receive his 3% on the net stipulated in his contract. He was given a lecture about how Forrest Gump actually lost $62 million.
Good story. The one I always think of is older, but it's more or less the same. Paramount again. Back in the day, they claimed Coming to America lost money to avoid paying someone too.
Your main point is a very good one. No one really knows how much a single movie made or lost because the accounting is very "creative".
It's kind of silly seeing people here fight over the numbers like they have any idea what the real costs were. You can really only judge the film's financial success or failure by the studio's reaction (and not their official reaction either).
CarlFredricksen
Active Member
I like both Tron and Narnia, however both franchises have been failures by industry standards at the box office. Similar to Prince of Persia. They wanted to make it a franchise, yet due to poor numbers, there will be no franchise.
The movies all made money, however not bigggggg money.
The Pirates and Toy Story franchises on the other hand have been great. I bring these up to provide an example of what has been deemed a succesful franchise by industry standards. Sure Narnia and Tron have made some money, but nothing even close to what the bar has been set at.
The movies all made money, however not bigggggg money.
The Pirates and Toy Story franchises on the other hand have been great. I bring these up to provide an example of what has been deemed a succesful franchise by industry standards. Sure Narnia and Tron have made some money, but nothing even close to what the bar has been set at.
hansel1
Member
I don't care what each movie cost to make or how well it did domestically vs. international or on dvd sales........
A tron attraction would rock the socks off of a narnia attraction. The look of tron is cool, geeky, techy. Imagine riding a light cycle in a Test Track type of tron setting or having to shoot discs in a Midway Mania type attraction.
Narnia is more suited for a living with the land dark ride.
A tron attraction would rock the socks off of a narnia attraction. The look of tron is cool, geeky, techy. Imagine riding a light cycle in a Test Track type of tron setting or having to shoot discs in a Midway Mania type attraction.
Narnia is more suited for a living with the land dark ride.