Culture Why Disney Can't Make Hits Like It Used To

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Link (Archive)

Why Disney Can't Make Hits Like It Used To​

Once a sure thing at the box office, Disney has experienced an unprecedented string of box office flops both domestically and in critical markets such as China.

Despite strong showings with Avatar: The Way of Water, which brought in a whopping $2.3 billion around the world, and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.3, which has made almost $850 million globally, the past year has been lackluster for Disney.

What once would have been sure fire hit such as Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, which is Harrison Ford's last outing as the famous archaeologist, has made just $369 million globally, only a tad more than its budget of $295 million.

"Remember that of the $369 million, the studio will only garner about 60 percent of that amount or $180 million," Mark Young, from the School of Accounting at the University of Southern California (USC), told Newsweek, highlighting just how much of a flop the film has been.

Other titles which underperformed for Disney over the past year include Marvel's Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania, Lightyear, The Little Mermaid and Strange World. Pixar animated studios also suffered its worst opening in 28 years with Elemental, which made just under $30 million on its opening in the U.S., according to Box Office Mojo.

The disappointing returns at cinemas has cost Disney at least $1 billion, according to Forbes, a fact not lost of the company's CEO, Bob Iger.

"The studio has had a tremendous run over the past decade, perhaps the greatest run that any studio has ever had, with multiple billion dollar hits... that said, the performance of some of our recent films has definitely been disappointing and we don't take that lightly," Iger said during the company's 2023 third-quarter financial results call on Wednesday.

"As you'd expect, we're very focused on improving the quality and the performance of the films that we've got coming up. It's something that I'm working closely with the studio on. I'm personally committed to spending more time and attention on that as well."

The reasons behind Disney's bad box office run might seem obvious, such as how cinemas are still trying to bounce back after the COVID-19 pandemic, but experts argue the studio needs to start making more "bracingly fresh films." Recycling old intellectual property (IP), like Indiana Jones or the live action remake of The Little Mermaid, has turned audiences off.

Young said since acquiring Marvel and churning out endless movies and TV shows on its streaming service, Disney+, people are suffering from "superhero fatigue because these movies tend to be highly formulaic."

For UCLA lecturer and film producer Tom Nunan, Disney has mistakenly lent into "an over-reliance on the familiar."

"When we see Barbie from Warner Bros Studio and Oppenheimer from Universal performing so well, the message seems clear: 'make original, bracingly fresh films and the audience will show up,'" he told Newsweek.

"By most measures, the bets they took were considered reliable ones and anyone in their position would've likely done the same. Disney's efforts have been substantial, upscale, and professional—just uninspiring and not as groundbreaking as what's called for these days."

In the 2000s, Disney went on a shopping spree, buying up studios such as Marvel, Pixar and Lucasfilm, which gave us both the Star Wars and Indiana Jones franchises.

All of these studios only make big budget content, whereas prior to the acquisition, Disney had different budget levels for its productions. And where there is a lot of money being spent comes big risk. So it makes sense the studios would rely on a formula proven to work.

"One cannot blame a studio for following formulae as this approach has been successful in the past, but I think things have now come to a head. Studios need to get ahead of the curve and deliver something very new," Young explained.

Even though Disney may struggle to make its money back on these films from cinema sales, they will continue having value on Disney+ for years to come, according to Kimberly Owczarski, associate professor at the Texas Christian University.

"They released too many films in a short time frame in what was already a crowded summer of competition," she explained, and added: "They have relied too much on franchises that are either skewing older or there are too many texts to keep track of in theaters and on streaming, like with the Marvel properties.

"Word-of-mouth wasn't great on several of these films, either, which certainly kept those who weren't diehard fans from going to theaters and instead they just wait for their streaming debuts. With such a short turnaround from theaters to Disney+, there's no real need to spend so much money going to a movie theater for a less than stellar film."

Allègre Hadida from the University of Cambridge Judge Business School agreed, and added that the rising cost of living means people will more likely wait to watch a title on Disney+, especially because of the convenience of being able to watch "ATAWAD (anytime, anywhere, on any device)."

"This effect may be amplified as purchasing power is affected by high inflation rates," she explained to Newsweek.

But even though Disney has had some unprecedented box office failures this year, it was still on track to be one biggest distributors and earners of the year with all of its releases combined.

"While some theatrical releases have underperformed and Disney+ subscriptions have decreased over the past few months, Disney is still very much a force to reckon with in the global entertainment industry. They lead the global box office in 2022 and in the first six months of 2023 (with US$3.4 bn in revenue)," Hadida explained.

So how does Disney bounce back?

"I think they need new IP and totally new characters and a new vision for the studio. It seems clear that going back to the same well over and over again will only lead to more failure. In other words, a new strategy is needed and this is going to require a new deal with the writers," Young explained.

Owczarski agreed, saying, "original stories typically cost less to make than franchise properties, so investing a bit more in them may lead to some bigger returns in the long run," and pointed out that while they had slow starts, Elemental and The Little Mermaid eventually brought in good audiences.

"[They] played well in theaters since their debut because of the lack of family-oriented films in the market this summer. Disney performs its best when it can tap into that audience and they have made fewer films geared to it in recent years. So they need to focus on films for the family audience again," Owczarski added.

Disney also has an "unparalleled" library of IP that it can tap into, but it can only do so if they "approach their content with the same boldness, audacity, fun, and depth as Warner Bros did with Barbie," according to Nunan.

"Today's audience is looking for really fresh, startling uniqueness. It's all within Disney's reach," he said.

"Failure usually leads to one of two outcomes: fear and retrenchment, or bold reinvention. My hope is the company will embrace bold reinvention in the feature space. The franchises and characters are beloved—let's hope the Disney folks embrace courage over fear."

Young suggested "as a different strategy," Disney+ should go into its catalogue and bring out more movies that baby boomers and Gen X'ers find appealing, with the potential of also finding new audiences.

"Many of their great films are not on the service. Disney has a catalogue of over 800 properties... in some cases, there might be rights or restoration issues, but it seems to me that these costs pale in comparison to creating another $200 million blockbuster," he said.

"My point in mentioning this is that executives may be completely unaware of what they have in their libraries and younger employees may not be old enough to even know about these classics so there is a disconnection."

As for Disney's outlook, Owczarski does not feel too concerned for the Mouse House's future.

"Disney may be experiencing a rough patch with its properties this summer in theaters, but the rest of the year has some strong box office potential," she said.

"They will likely remain the top overall distributor globally, even despite some key challenges in 2023."
 
A bad public image, recycling old properties nobody cares about anymore and worsening economic issues throughout the world have made it hard for a company to make money.

Who knew?
 
How does the phrase go? Get woken up get less money? They’ve basically killed two of their biggest ips with retarded virtue signaling. Even my fish heads could make better business decisions.
 
It's been Hollywood as a creative engine as a whole, not just Disney. They've become incestuous and would rather sit around and massage each other's egos than try new things. Most people would probably be fine with some sort of Transformers / Fast and the Furious movie, but you rarely get those, because everything is racist, sexist, etc (and Hollywood is enforcing this shit with diversity quotas). Everything is now propaganda, and even if it doesn't come off as propaganda, they'll go to Twitter to let you know you need to have the correct mindset to enjoy their shit house movie.

They did it to themselves, let them burn.
 
Word-of-mouth wasn't great on several of these films, either,

It doesn't help when the word-of-mouth goes like this:

"Indy gets lectured by some girlboss about colonialism in the Dilator of Destiny."

"They replaced Ariel with a nigger in the Little Mermaid."

"I honestly thought Lizzo was going to eat Baby Yoda.(:_("

Starting a fight with the State of Florida because Florida is against teachers grooming kids in schools didn't help either.
 
Who could of guessed that a creatively and morally bankrupt company that hates the artist that defined its legacy would have trouble making things that anyone beyond shambling dead-eyed drooling dispositions would find worthwhile? Certainly not anyone with a functional brain and basic critical thinking skills.
 
Well a good movie typically starts with a good script...

ctrl+f
"script " 0
"writer" 1 (related to the strike)

The article about why things aren't working for Disney doesn't seem to address the most obvious place to start, excellent :story:
 
Disney built up decades of goodwill from audiences and theme park attendees, then started dialing back quality rapidly to cut costs.

Used to be, you went to the Disney movie in theaters even though you knew your kid would beg for merch, because you could just about count on it being the best kids' movie out there at the time. You went to Disney theme parks and overpaid, but it was the best theme park experience you could have: the overpriced meals fed two people easily, the parks were spotless and free from trash or maintenance issues that plagued smaller venues.

But that is no longer true. Now going to a Disney movie means either being preached at or seeing a small middle chapter of a big IP story. Disney parks have overflowing trash cans and puny portioning, plus a slew of new "features" that keep you glued to your phone if you want your kids to actually ride some rides instead of just shopping all day.

They're not the worst movies out there, or the worst theme parks out there, not by a mile. But Disney charged premium park and merch prices based on a perception of best-in-breed quality they can no longer meet. They burned up their goodwill and it will be nearly impossible to earn it back without a decade or more of excellent leadership that steers the company back to its brand values.
 
"When we see Barbie from Warner Bros Studio and Oppenheimer from Universal performing so well, the message seems clear: 'make original, bracingly fresh films and the audience will show up,'" he told Newsweek.
There's lots of original properties that bomb, there's lots of tried and true movies that do, too. I think the correct answer is "Make movies that don't suck." I think Disney's biggest movie so far this year is Guardians of the Galaxy 3, yet another sequel.

What's odd is that nothing in the article mentions the utter disarray in Disney management, from Iger on down. Lucasfilm is by far in the worst shape, but I don't think any of the studios are run particularly well. I also have no idea where Marvel goes from here. That The Marvels movie looks like crap, but audiences may very well eat it up.
 
Start telling stories to entertain again, and stop preaching. It’s that simple.
They have properties that should be blockbuster shoe-ins. Indiana jones is like James Bond - there’s a formula to it, you have a great lead actor and to get it wrong is tough, yet both bond and jones have been rubbish on their last outings. We do t want sensitive bond. We want Bastard psychotic but attractive bond, foiling some dastardly plot, a decent villain, Bond girls frolicking in bikinis, great set pieces, some good one liners and excitement and a few martinis.
Just stop preaching, stop casting on identity, and make great stories again.
Great older films have mixed diverse casts and it worked brilliantly because the actors were great - lethal weapon for example. Ghostbusters. Older films have great female leads - alien for example. You just have to put STORY first. People want story, and they have since they sat round campfores and told about how Grug Took Down Aurochs Alone.
It’s not hard. Give me some money and I’ll write you the next Indiana jones and the next bond and they’ll be hits.
It’s all so dreich.
 
Disney made it clear if you don’t agree with “The Message” then they don’t want your money. Now they’re all surprised Pikachu that they are losing money.
 
The hayday of Hollywood are over and the whole media/movie market in general will shrink. See there is only so much you can do in a 90-270 minute flick and most of these things have been done already. And I am not even talking about obscure dramas from the 70s but action movies, 3d animations, horror, comedies, you name it. There is more stuff out there to last you for a lifetime really, especially if you touch grass and dont consume media 24/7.
This is exacerbated by "society" becoming more isolated so watching the newest flick in cinema with your friends/girlfriend just isnt an event anymore like it was for boomers and that there is no Zeitgeist you can put on the big screen like for example how Spielberg included the cliche of an all American, suburbian family life into his movies. The contemporary Zeitgeist on the other hand is total insanity and the degeneration of humanity into niggercattle, which cant be put on the big screen except I guess you want to spend 10 bucks to see a troon clown farting into the microphone while talking about cp in IMAX.

Really in the last 10 years the new movie market crystallized: there is two or three or even just one big super blockbuster release which breaks box office records, then there are some indie flicks appealing to zoomers making good money but not enough for a big studio and thats fucking it so Diseny better come up with some kind of business model because nobody fucking cares about Pixar slop anymore and if I want to enjoy some quality time with my hostage family I just watch fucking Monsters Inc. cause why wouldn't I?

Also niggers
 
I believe this current streak of low creativity with them is being caused by lack of competition.

Disney is in the same stagnant position it was in in the 1970s and 80s, when they where the main juggernaut of animated movies. Don Bluth, who I believe was a former animator for Disney, quit and started whooping their ass in movies with his own firm. that competition prompted Disney to step outside of their box and create the 1990s animated movies (Alladin, Beauty and the Beast, etc) that they are currently famous for, which even Disney fans call a Renaissance period.

Disney is once again in a stagnant position because they outgrew themselves. they swallowed up a bunch of popular media franchises and are in a position where creativity is dangerous. Eventually someone else will pull a Don Bluth and yank the rug out from under the Mouse, but until then I'll be sitting back to watch the dumpster fire.
 
I think they need new IP and totally new characters and a new vision for the studio. It seems clear that going back to the same well over and over again will only lead to more failure.
Well, no shit. Don't need an expert to tell you that.

We do t want sensitive bond. We want Bastard psychotic but attractive bond, foiling some dastardly plot, a decent villain, Bond girls frolicking in bikinis, great set pieces, some good one liners and excitement and a few martinis.
I don't want any Bond at all in AD 2023. The formula has run its course. It's kind of embarrassing to keep churning out more and more Bond films like it was the Carry On franchise. Some things are simply a product of a certain era and should not be milked ad infinitum for nostalgia and because there is risk involved in making a completely new creation succeed.
 
I believe this current streak of low creativity with them is being caused by lack of competition.

Disney is in the same stagnant position it was in in the 1970s and 80s, when they where the main juggernaut of animated movies. Don Bluth, who I believe was a former animator for Disney, quit and started whooping their ass in movies with his own firm. that competition prompted Disney to step outside of their box and create the 1990s animated movies (Alladin, Beauty and the Beast, etc) that they are currently famous for, which even Disney fans call a Renaissance period.

Disney is once again in a stagnant position because they outgrew themselves. they swallowed up a bunch of popular media franchises and are in a position where creativity is dangerous. Eventually someone else will pull a Don Bluth and yank the rug out from under the Mouse, but until then I'll be sitting back to watch the dumpster fire.
There's no one really talented left at the company. Everyone who made the company great is either dead, retired, or driven out. This extends to the theme parks as well, where they can no longer create original ideas, and just an off-the-shelf ride (usually a legacy ride) with an IP slapped on it.
 
Back
Top Bottom