Jump to content

InVy

Free Account+
  • Posts

    102
  • Joined

Posts posted by InVy

  1. 15 minutes ago, AJG said:

    The time where having a major animation studio spend make TV seeming like a sensible idea is well and truly dead. 

     

    I truly can't imagine the quality of this one. The animation will no doubt be top notch but a TV show being edited into a movie sounds like ass.

    considering Disney Animation never made TV shows themselves, may be it's for the best. They have DTVA for this which made wonderful Tangled series(and Alan Menken was not busy enough to make music for it compared to someone else)

  2. 9 minutes ago, Eric Creed said:

    Just realized there's precedence to make the Tiana show into a movie as well after this. Which I guess would work okay. Both Tiana and her movie are more popular than ever, and you can sell it as "2D animation is back!"

    the last 2D film Disney did was Winnie the Pooh in 2011. They need to hire or even train a lot of people for this because even for 100th anniversary short some animation was good, some was not. It's clearly a lost art at this point(if you want expensive hand-drawn animation that Disney was known for).

    • Like 1
  3. 1 hour ago, Eric Mouse said:

    Kind of realized something: what happened to the Lopezes? You would think after they wrote the songs for the biggest Disney movie ever, the most famous Disney song ever, they would be attached to every future Disney project like Alan Menken was in the 90s. But all they have done since then was a song for Coco and a song for WandaVision. And it's not like either of them are busy with other stuff. I guess Lin-Manuel Miranda's the bigger name, so Disney wants to have him in their movies instead? I dunno, it's weird.

    they made a whole musical romantic comedy Up Here for Hulu this year but nobody watched it. 

     

    I think Disney tries different things but Alan's run in the 90s was crazy(and his songs for Tangled the series were super good)

  4. 4 minutes ago, ZeroHour said:

    My two year old is obsessed with Cars on the Road and that alone makes Disney+ a necessity at my house. There's definitely an audience for these short form shows.

    Cars on the Road is like the best of these short animated shows. It's quality is close to the main films.

    • Like 2
  5. 19 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

     

    it opened low in Japan and legged out to 23M which is low. People here look at legs in a vacuum but it's the total that matters. For such a big market, that's low. AWOW didn't do well there either but it didn't need to cause it made billions everywhere else. Elemental legged it out to 48M and counting in SK so twice as much as TLM in Japan. Point being, it didn't have any significant market where it blew up, it was doing mediocre business due to low opening everywhere. I personally don't think that stunt casting could have shaved off more than 50M WW so there was never that much interest in TLM compared to BatB, Aladdin, TLK. Disney overestimated the deamnd for this IP. But because of stunt casting, people now think it lost 500M which is mathematically impossible yet perception persists. So it backfired. 

    so you are saying LM is as popular as Cinderella when on youtube LM is second to only Lion King among hand drawn animation? L - logic

  6. 5 hours ago, ZattMurdock said:

    Insiders with direct knowledge of the talks say that The Walt Disney Co. and Netflix are the most resistant to sharing additional viewership data for their streaming content. They fear that performers will use that information to justify bigger checks and to get a bigger piece of the revenues.

    it's strange because according to Nielsen Disney should just be paying to creators of Bluey & Mandalorian & Lin-Manuel Miranda & probably Seth MacFarlane. Everybody else will get 0.

    PS. I always thought Disney's budgets were so big because they bought everything so not to pay afterwards but they still need to pay? Then their budgets are too big though they probably pay their creators good so there's that.

  7. 2 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

    That J Law salary simply boggles my mind whenever I see it mentioned if it’s really true. It makes zero sense, and stuff like that is absolutely part of the problem too.  

    well, we have a case of 2 r-rated comedies opening near each other. One had J Law, another didn't. and when they go to streaming guess which one will Netflix users open first & most. 

  8. 1 minute ago, SpiderByte said:

    I swear if "Marvel just needs to shut down for a year and delay everything" is still a thing after the second time they've shut down for a year and delayed everything 

    I think 2 things are true. Kevin should concentrate on film stuff. Make stuff for D+ only when it's creatively needed. Let other people do Marvel stuff for tv not connected to MCU, those who know how to make tv. And more 2D animation stuff too.

  9. 5 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

     

    But, it's only viable if they can make the original stuff cheaper.  I'm not sure Pixar can do Pixar at a lower cost...at least, they've never done it yet.  Disney can't take $100M losses b/c they can't bring the budget from $200M to $100M (where this leggy performance shows it would be viable)...

    the last PIxar original in theatres Coco "only" made 210 in USA. It only became a "classic" much later. Soul probably would have made more but still 200m being the ceiling for such a good film shows that even before Disney+ & Covid  it was tough for original movies.

    • Like 1
  10. 1 minute ago, FunkMiller said:

     

    This would be my dream. Disney have such a huge influence over the whole of Hollywood that if it turned away from the bloated budgets and IP strangulation, to favour lower costs and more original stories that carry less risk, then that would be quite marvellous for everyone. 

    Disney live-action will not go away from high budgets - even if they turn back to more original stuff, they'll make films like John Carter which cost a lot. They like to invest a lot in their films, and sometimes they do strike gold like Pirates or Mary Poppins - it is what it is. More risky less expensive stuff is being made by 20th century. 

    • Like 1
  11. 5 minutes ago, dudalb said:

    That Spielberg makes movies for 80 or 90 Million dollars that look like they cost twice that much proves to me he knows what he is talking about.

    didn't his last 2 movies cost too much & earn pretty much nothing in cinemas? I know he is not on the level of Scorsese's latest movies but still.

  12. 18 minutes ago, Jonwo said:

    With Peter and Wendy, the track record for Pan and the 2003 Peter Pan is probably the reason why it was going to Disney+

     

    There does seem to be a bit of an anti streaming and anti Disney vibe, are we suggesting Disney+ shouldn't have original content at all?

    but Lilo & Stitch are still popular & nobody apart from Disney can make a film based on them. Ask Lucasfilm to make Stitch from the same magic they made Grogu & send it to cinemas. Just strange decisions all around. And tv series are better for streaming than original films. Films should go to theatres first and then they will appear on the service and some of then will become Moana and will be streamed to death. And Disney still makes small films that appear on the service.

    • Like 1
  13. 2 minutes ago, JohnnyGossamer said:

    Did it? Didn't Homecoming and Far From Home have a similar increase from 1 to 2? Didn't Iron Man 2 stay the same or go down? A Thor movie didn't even make as much as Guardians Vol. 1 until Love & Thunder. 

     

    Guardians Vol. 2 is higher than any Thor movie, any Ant-man movie. Heck, Civil War didn't even gross that much more than Vol. 2 and it had 2/3 of the Avengers in it. 

     

    The reason the increase wasn't huge from Vol. 1 to Vol. 2 is because Vol. 1 was a huge hit that summer. Made a ton. It's pretty impressive that it increased from Vol. 2 without even adding any crossover characters from any MCU stuff. It's just the Guardians and some new faces. If I recall, Thanos isn't even in that one. Still managed to increase. Almost all of the other series add characters and still come up short (see Thor) of the Guardians DOM grosses. 

    well, you said it yourself. Vol.1 was the zeitgeist movie just like Black Panther, the only way is down now. 

  14. 3 minutes ago, JohnnyGossamer said:

    Still does mean sales should be lower than they were for Vol. 1 and Vol. 2 DOM. You expect some diminishing returns but with inflation since Vol. 2 you'd expect even with lower admissions that Vol. 3 could come close its totals both OW DOM and DOM TOTAL. Which, doesn't appear to be the case here... I think it has a lot to do with audiences feeling let down by most superhero movies since the pandemic hit really. I think the only two that were pretty widely liked have been The Batman and Wakanda Forever and, maybe, No Way Home. Guardians are more widely known as characters that ever before and they were not poorly received at all in Infinity War and Endgame... Those only boosted their popularity.

    Guardians' Xmas special is below 7 on IMDB. It has more to do with them than some other films. And No Way Home was widely liked. Spiderman and Batman are still the biggest superheroes by a mile.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.