The Little Mermaid | Disney | May 26, 2023 | Queen Halle will rule the summer!

[grey ghost]

I think 300m with 100m OW is a reasonable expectation and would silence most the naysayers.

[scytheavatar]

13 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

I think 300m with 100m OW is a reasonable expectation and would silence most the naysayers.

 

We have no idea what the international split will be, 300m domestic is a garbage result and grounds for firing lots of people/cancelling lots of projects if the movie makes less than 300m overseas.

 

Go look at what the split is like for Black Panther films vs something like Aladdin and it should be clear that TLM is in big trouble.

Edited April 28, 2023 by scytheavatar

[TwoMisfits]

27 minutes ago, scytheavatar said:

 

Not sure how you can call 200M a success when we do not know what the budget of this movie is........... I think chances are high the budget is going to be higher than what most people expect. Seeing COVID costs and movies involving water being notoriously expensive.

 

I think anything less than 800M WW should be seen as not a success and a sign that Disney live action adaptations are no longer the easy money it used to be. And if the BOP numbers are not wrong then chances are this movie is already a flop. Cause we should not expect the international numbers of this movie to look pretty.

 

Well, I'm basing it on the rumored $150M budget and a 50/50 DOM/INT split (so a success would be $400M+ WW, which I think this does).  

 

But see, defining terms is great - less than $800M WW = not a success is MUCH higher than less than $400M WW = not a success.

 

Edit to Add: And my definition of success is not a flop.  There are levels to success.  I don't see this as being much more than a mild one...but with their recent live action pedigree and their placement of this on the calendar, they better be okay with a mild one...

Edited April 28, 2023 by TwoMisfits

[scytheavatar]

4 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

Well, I'm basing it on the rumored $150M budget and a 50/50 DOM/INT split (so a success would be $400M+ WW, which I think this does).  

 

But see, defining terms is great - less than $800M WW = not a success is MUCH higher than less than $400M WW = not a success.

 

Edit to Add: And my definition of success is not a flop.  There are levels to success.  I don't see this as being much more than a mild one...but with their recent live action pedigree and their placement of this on the calendar, they better be okay with a mild one...

 

Source of that rumor? Cause it's almost certainly not true, it's less than what Haunted Mansion is going to cost.

 

And you have to remember many if not most people perceive these Disney live action shows as being free money and guaranteed big successes based on past record........... for TLM to just be a "mild success" is going to shatter that illusion. It could make TLM the Love and Thunder of Disney live action adaptations.

[Jonwo]

38 minutes ago, scytheavatar said:

 

Not sure how you can call 200M a success when we do not know what the budget of this movie is........... I think chances are high the budget is going to be higher than what most people expect. Seeing COVID costs and movies involving water being notoriously expensive.

 

I think anything less than 800M WW should be seen as not a success and a sign that Disney live action adaptations are no longer the easy money it used to be. And if the BOP numbers are not wrong then chances are this movie is already a flop. Cause we should not expect the international numbers of this movie to look pretty.

Why do keep thinking every Disney released film will be a failure? 

 

[UnapologeticKenny]

Budged should be bigger than 150M imo. Somewhere from 200M to 250M (TLK had a 260M and it's all CGI, I believe - TLM has underwater effects which should be expensive to justify a higher budget).

 

With that in mind, I's say the break even point lands somewhere in the 600M/700M WW, depending on the split, of course. It's as lot to ask for but less than 800M for sure.

 

Anything that pays itself in the theatrical run should be seen as a success to me.

[TwoMisfits]

6 minutes ago, scytheavatar said:

 

Source of that rumor? Cause it's almost certainly not true, it's less than what Haunted Mansion is going to cost.

 

And you have to remember many if not most people perceive these Disney live action shows as being free money and guaranteed big successes based on past record........... for TLM to just be a "mild success" is going to shatter that illusion. It could make TLM the Love and Thunder of Disney live action adaptations.

 

Like the MCU, they've had a run of "middling" quality live action animated classics, some released direct to D+ and some released theatrically.  All of that will have an effect - Mulan and Cruella theatrically, and Pinocchio and Peter Pan and Wendy D+ (which is currently 70% from critics, while 37% from audiences - that's a split not seen for awhile on RT)...at some point, that convinces audiences, who already have your D+ product, to stay home and save their funds (which I think will be spent instead on Spidey:)...

Edited April 28, 2023 by TwoMisfits

[scytheavatar]

1 minute ago, Jonwo said:

Why do keep thinking every Disney released film will be a failure? 

 

 

Cause once upon a time Disney was seen as the final boss of Hollywood and the ultimate powerhouse. Their movies are making billions like nothing. Now Disney is increasingly becoming just another Warner Bros. Isn't that sad?

[Jonwo]

Not every Disney live action film has been the billion dollar hit nor to they have to be, see Pete's Dragon and Christopher Robin. There is this false narrative from some that Disney needs every film to do $1bn to be successful when it's clearly not the case. 

 

I know some of here are anti Disney but The Little Mermaid is unlikely to be a failure unless you have super high expectations of what is a hit and what is a failure.

[froztking]

1 hour ago, JohnnyGossamer said:

I initially thought Peter and Wendy might do as you said but watching it passively now while working... This might be that director's least memorable anything he's done ever. This is just plain blank and forgettable. I can see why it went directly to D+. 

the kid who plays peter pan is just dull nd boring he took away the whole mood of the movie a real bad casting from disney !

[scytheavatar]

Yeah problem is that Disney has plenty of billion dollar hits around the time of Pete's Dragon and Christopher Robin. Nowadays you need to start asking how Disney is going to pay for flops like Ant Man 3 and Strange Worlds. If some of Disney's 2023 movies end up making 1 billion then maybe it's not necessary for TLM to make 1 billion (unless its budget is like 300M) but.........

[froztking]

8 minutes ago, scytheavatar said:

Yeah problem is that Disney has plenty of billion dollar hits around the time of Pete's Dragon and Christopher Robin. Nowadays you need to start asking how Disney is going to pay for flops like Ant Man 3 and Strange Worlds. If some of Disney's 2023 movies end up making 1 billion then maybe it's not necessary for TLM to make 1 billion (unless its budget is like 300M) but.........

they already paid for strange worlds lost with avatar 2, wakanda forever, thor 4, doc strange 2 profit ! nd ant man 3 won't loose ton of money like lightyear or strange world nd or the rest u have to wait nd see ! now can u just stop ur doomsday posts ! u can comeback at year end or post wish rls nd repeat these stuff nd say disney is doomed or something 

[jedijake]

39 minutes ago, scytheavatar said:

 

We have no idea what the international split will be, 300m domestic is a garbage result and grounds for firing lots of people/cancelling lots of projects if the movie makes less than 300m overseas.

 

Go look at what the split is like for Black Panther films vs something like Aladdin and it should be clear that TLM is in big trouble.

What are you suggesting when you compare BP with Aladdin?

[JohnnyGossamer]

14 minutes ago, froztking said:

the kid who plays peter pan is just dull nd boring he took away the whole mood of the movie a real bad casting from disney !

Agree here. Whole movie is fine and respectfully made but just flat. Not very cinematic. It stunning that this came after Green Knight from the same filmmaker which had its flaws for sure but was EXTREMELY cinematic... Almost too much so.

[WittyUsername]

Wrong thread.

Edited April 28, 2023 by WittyUsername

[KP1025]

19 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

Like the MCU, they've had a run of "middling" quality live action animated classics, some released direct to D+ and some released theatrically.  All of that will have an effect - Mulan and Cruella theatrically, and Pinocchio and Peter Pan and Wendy D+ (which is currently 70% from critics, while 37% from audiences - that's a split not seen for awhile on RT)...at some point, that convinces audiences, who already have your D+ product, to stay home and save their funds (which I think will be spent instead on Spidey:)...

 

I agree with this except for the inclusion of Cruella in the category of middling quality films. That had incredible reception from the general audience, which is reflected in its 97% audience score on RT.

[keysersoze123]

Cruella was fantastic unlike some of the other Disney LA movies before COVID. Mulan was good but the animated movie was better. I dont see this one being better than the animated movie as well. 

[scytheavatar]

38 minutes ago, froztking said:

they already paid for strange worlds lost with avatar 2, wakanda forever, thor 4, doc strange 2 profit ! nd ant man 3 won't loose ton of money like lightyear or strange world nd or the rest u have to wait nd see ! now can u just stop ur doomsday posts ! u can comeback at year end or post wish rls nd repeat these stuff nd say disney is doomed or something 

 

LOL Disney paid 70 million for 20th Century Fox, Avatar 2 is but a drop in that bucket. Disney is in trouble because they used all the Iger era money on a very questionable deal, and right now it seems the free flowing money tap has been turned off.

Edited April 28, 2023 by scytheavatar

[froztking]

3 minutes ago, scytheavatar said:

 

LOL Disney paid 70 million for 20th Century Fox, Avatar 2 is but a drop in that bucket. Disney is in trouble because they used all the Iger era money on a very questionable deal, and right now it seems the free flowing money tap has been turned off.

i think u should check the thread name ! go to disney thread and speak about these stuff 

[Liiviig 1998]

12 minutes ago, keysersoze123 said:

Cruella was fantastic unlike some of the other Disney LA movies before COVID. Mulan was good but the animated movie was better. I dont see this one being better than the animated movie as well. 

Expect TLM to be like batb or Aladdin live action versions.

 

Jungle book is the best live action remake imo.

 

Unpopular opinion but for me Mulan is the worst . It doesn't copy and paste like the rest but in the end it's just undermines all the themes of the animated version. Chi plotine was dumb, laughable action sequences and some bland acting and really weird character choices.

 

TLK is just a rehash of the animated version but emotionless and bland. It's passable. The terrible thing about this movie is that it represents the lack of creativity and all the problems of modern day movie making.

 

Cruella was fun.

 

Cinderella was good.

 

Never going to watch Pinocchio