Theatrical Future/PVOD Thread

[Jerroddragon]

Disney better step up their game...Amazon is coming for them

Not saying it will be easy but Disney needs to focus less on having more and more and just making every film a hit...if its not a hit then send it to Disney Plus to fill out the library but Disney also needs better critics or who ever makes those choices because Chip and Dale and Disenchanted are both fun family films people want....and Buzz and Strange Worlds are what we are getting in theaters

 

[Nick]

Disney better step up their game...Amazon is coming for them

Not saying it will be easy but Disney needs to focus less on having more and more and just making every film a hit...if its not a hit then send it to Disney Plus to fill out the library but Disney also needs better critics or who ever makes those choices because Chip and Dale and Disenchanted are both fun family films people want....and Buzz and Strange Worlds are what we are getting in theaters

You basically just described Disney’s strategy theatrically, but the movies just haven’t been of high enough quality.

I have numbers to back this up but am at work right now. Once I get home I’ll respond further.

 

[Nick]

Disney better step up their game...Amazon is coming for them

Not saying it will be easy but Disney needs to focus less on having more and more and just making every film a hit...if its not a hit then send it to Disney Plus to fill out the library but Disney also needs better critics or who ever makes those choices because Chip and Dale and Disenchanted are both fun family films people want....and Buzz and Strange Worlds are what we are getting in theaters

Okay. I'm home, i've eaten, and let's go more in depth on this. First off on the "better choices" bit, I 100% agree. The first thing Iger did upon his return was fire the middle man Chapek installed to decide where each project went. Under Iger, creatives have always had control over where their content goes. If they wanted it to be theatrical, it went there. If it was meant to be a smaller scale Disney+ film or home video thing, then that's where it went. Chapek took that control away and a finance guy had full say in where every project went, which has ultimately been a disaster.

"Needs to focus less on having more and more" - I agree here to an extent... Less crappy streaming movies and perhaps a few less Searchlight movies. However Searchlight makes extremely cheap and normally high quality films, so to me those are not a problem.

"Focus on making every film a hit" - I agree here as well, although i'm not sure if for the same reason. If a movie debuts in theaters and doesn't make a ton of money or bombs, then to me, that's a film you need to bail on and send it to streaming shortly after. However, if a film proves to be a big success at the box office, let the film succeed. Don't undercut it by announcing a date that the film will go to streaming ahead of time. As long as the film is making bank at the box office, you should keep it there. What's the rush to get things onto streaming? Just look at the Glass Onion situation for example. Sure, it's a Netflix original movie. But what's the rush? This movie would be great counter programing against Avatar all the way into January but instead Netflix is going to undercut it's earning potential and send it to Netflix where it will make $0 and people who are already subscribed anyway will get to watch it at no extra charge.

Now at the same time, they are following Iger's strategy in terms of the type of films being made to attempt to make hit films. Three MCU per year, Animated releases (Turning Red, Lightyear, and Strange World) in March, June, and Thanksgiving week. No Star Wars in December, but Disney still has a big Blockbuster coming out in December with Avatar 2. A slew of sequel/prequels (Disenchanted, Hocus Pocus 2, Ice Age 6, Death On The Nile), remakes (Pinocchio, Cheaper By The Dozen), and the newest entry into the Disney canon - Horror/Thrillers (Fresh, Barbarian, No Exit, Prey) and Awards bait (Amsterdam, See How They Run, The Banshees Of Inisherin, The Menu).

The bones of what Disney typically does is there, but the quality control has gone out the window. They had fails in every category I listed except for Horror really (and there was still a major fail there in them not releasing Prey to theaters. Disenchanted, Pinocchio, Amsterdam, Cheaper By The Dozen, Strange World, Lightyear, all either were just bad or bombed. I also don't think anyone will really argue too hard to say that the MCU has been perfect, either. It seems everybody has an issue with at least one of the MCU theatrical releases this year which wasn't always the case.

Disney will have released 63 films or documentaries in 2022. 16 of them got released in theaters worldwide. 19 were Lain American/Brazilian/Indian only releases. 28 were released as either Hulu or Disney+ originals. I don't think it's the number of releases that's the issue to me though, I think it's purely the quality not being there consistently enough and some movies just being released to the wrong place (streaming instead of theatrical or conversely theatrical instead of streaming).

 

[tielo]

I think no one (not even Disney) is making a movie or series and want it to suck. There are only a few people in the business who (generally) have a good feeling about what is good and is going to be a (financial) success (it can still be good but financially fail (like for instance Blade Runner). It's afterwards easy to say a film should have gone to the theater but you need to add a huge budget to promote the thing making it A) a success or B) an even bigger flop. Saying there need to be better movies and series is fine but how? Even Walt has his share of flops, it's an unpredictable and very risky business.
Regarding Disney+ Iger said the following according to Screamscape:
"Iger also mentioned that there will be a major change in focus regarding their Disney+ streaming service, with the new mission to make it profitable, and no longer solely being focused on just adding new subscribers. No further details were mentioned regarding if this would be accomplished by increasing the subscription price or by cutting the production budgets for new programming, or both."
I think Iger will go for less for more, less (quality or expensive) programming for Disney+ and raise the price. Also I think we will see a return of the upcharge for a new movie, something the company is seemingly successful in.
I personally would continue the slew of Marvel and Star Wars series as that is what they have but I would go with less special effects, less CGI and more personal stories, no big stars or directors but indie makers that come up with unique content and expand the universes and not expand or explain stuff from the known characters/movies. Sure there will be one or two big extravaganza's but the rest will be produced cheaper as content is still king on streaming.

 

[pumpkinbot343]

Hey since this called Theatrical Future mind if I ramble on theaters for a bit.

 

[Jerroddragon]

I think no one (not even Disney) is making a movie or series and want it to suck. There are only a few people in the business who (generally) have a good feeling about what is good and is going to be a (financial) success (it can still be good but financially fail (like for instance Blade Runner). It's afterwards easy to say a film should have gone to the theater but you need to add a huge budget to promote the thing making it A) a success or B) an even bigger flop. Saying there need to be better movies and series is fine but how? Even Walt has his share of flops, it's an unpredictable and very risky business.
Regarding Disney+ Iger said the following according to Screamscape:
"Iger also mentioned that there will be a major change in focus regarding their Disney+ streaming service, with the new mission to make it profitable, and no longer solely being focused on just adding new subscribers. No further details were mentioned regarding if this would be accomplished by increasing the subscription price or by cutting the production budgets for new programming, or both."
I think Iger will go for less for more, less (quality or expensive) programming for Disney+ and raise the price. Also I think we will see a return of the upcharge for a new movie, something the company is seemingly successful in.
I personally would continue the slew of Marvel and Star Wars series as that is what they have but I would go with less special effects, less CGI and more personal stories, no big stars or directors but indie makers that come up with unique content and expand the universes and not expand or explain stuff from the known characters/movies. Sure there will be one or two big extravaganza's but the rest will be produced cheaper as content is still king on streaming.

The way the SW sequels and Phase 4 of the MCU feel like they are going out of their way to just spend money and not have a plan.

Disney used to be great at characters, the 90's was filled with characters you loved from each film....now each film feels like it has less and less characters we love and the remakes for many just suck, it's like someone with ZERO passion for the original films are making them.

With the MCU special's getting love, I feel like less i more and that they can do more if the people behind the teams of these projects get and love what they are working on. But did She Hulk feel like the writers loveddddd the character or even the subject it was based on? Not to me, Buzz felt like an indie film mixed with a crapped 80 movie and instead of embracing Buzz they made a movie that goes out of its way to make him not a hero....which once again in a Indie movie cool but this is a family film from Pixar, who asked for this film?

While Chip and Dale and Disenchanted feel like just fun films, which from the internet seems to be what many want from Disney. Fun characters, good music and if you have a message make it something people are interested in /simple vs you trying to force your philosophy on everyone. If your idea is cool, people will enjoy it but if seems like your preaching at people many will just reject and even good lesson.

 

[DK745]

Was ‘Glass Onion’ a Success? Peeling Back the Layers on Netflix’s Box Office Gambit

Theaters begged Netflix to let them play Glass Onion in more theaters and for more than 1 week but Netflix wouldn’t let them. They also didn’t really allow theaters to talk about how successful Glass Onion was doing in theaters.

 

[Jerroddragon]

Was ‘Glass Onion’ a Success? Peeling Back the Layers on Netflix’s Box Office Gambit

Theaters begged Netflix to let them play Glass Onion in more theaters and for more than 1 week but Netflix wouldn’t let them. They also didn’t really allow theaters to talk about how successful Glass Onion was doing in theaters.

I dont understand why you would not want to have your cake and eat it to

If you make something good, like Glass Onion making some money in theaters and then just having it on your platform a month later is enough. Most people will still stream it and you make some easy cash

 

[Nick]

I dont understand why you would not want to have your cake and eat it to

If you make something good, like Glass Onion making some money in theaters and then just having it on your platform a month later is enough. Most people will still stream it and you make some easy cash

Yup, it's also been proven that a hit theatrical film will go on to be a hit streaming film. Make money at the box office, cover expenses and then you basically have a streaming release that already has it's costs covered AND people will subscribe to watch it because some people just simply don't like going to the theater but would want to see the movie.

The Wall Street Journal and The Hollywood Reporter are both reporting that while this was certainly better than nothing, limiting it to 700 screens in only 50 markets across the country (meaning most of middle america was SOL when it came to seeing this film in a theater) rather than going all out for 3000+ screens for 2-3 weeks left so much money on the table. Probably hundreds of millions overall, but just in the first weekend alone it left tens of millions on the table by doing a limited release. Also, Glass Onion was only released in theaters in America, so if you wanted to see it anywhere internationally then too bad.

I think Netflix executives are going to look at these numbers and extrapolate them and realize how much they could've made and in the not too distant future Netflix will be a major theatrical competitor. Obviously Tall Girl 3 won't be a theatrical release. There's some movies that are just meant to be streaming movies. However, things like Extraction 2 or Red Notice 2? Those have blockbuster budgets and the original films were extremely popular and should be in theaters.

Just looking at the films Netflix released in 2022 though, these are the films I would've released in theaters:

Texas Chainsaw Massacre
A Madea Homecoming
The Adam Project
Hustle
The Grey Man
Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery
Guillerimo Del Toro's Pinocchio
White Noise

That's a solid slate of films with a great genre diversity, proven theatrical IPs, Big name actors/directors, and some awards bait in there as well. Netflix can still release original films straight to streaming like Disney+. But also like D+, they can have films that play in theaters first and are meant to be higher quality than the straight to streaming movies. Whether they actually are of higher quality is another thing, but honestly, I just don't see what is holding Netflix back from doing this.

 

[DK745]

Yup, it's also been proven that a hit theatrical film will go on to be a hit streaming film. Make money at the box office, cover expenses and then you basically have a streaming release that already has it's costs covered AND people will subscribe to watch it because some people just simply don't like going to the theater but would want to see the movie.

The Wall Street Journal and The Hollywood Reporter are both reporting that while this was certainly better than nothing, limiting it to 700 screens in only 50 markets across the country (meaning most of middle america was SOL when it came to seeing this film in a theater) rather than going all out for 3000+ screens for 2-3 weeks left so much money on the table. Probably hundreds of millions overall, but just in the first weekend alone it left tens of millions on the table by doing a limited release. Also, Glass Onion was only released in theaters in America, so if you wanted to see it anywhere internationally then too bad.

I think Netflix executives are going to look at these numbers and extrapolate them and realize how much they could've made and in the not too distant future Netflix will be a major theatrical competitor. Obviously Tall Girl 3 won't be a theatrical release. There's some movies that are just meant to be streaming movies. However, things like Extraction 2 or Red Notice 2? Those have blockbuster budgets and the original films were extremely popular and should be in theaters.

Just looking at the films Netflix released in 2022 though, these are the films I would've released in theaters:

Texas Chainsaw Massacre
A Madea Homecoming
The Adam Project
Hustle
The Grey Man
Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery
Guillerimo Del Toro's Pinocchio
White Noise

That's a solid slate of films with a great genre diversity, proven theatrical IPs, Big name actors/directors, and some awards bait in there as well. Netflix can still release original films straight to streaming like Disney+. But also like D+, they can have films that play in theaters first and are meant to be higher quality than the straight to streaming movies. Whether they actually are of higher quality is another thing, but honestly, I just don't see what is holding Netflix back from doing this.

They have played some films in theaters but again very limited. Cinemark has had Army of the Dead, The Grey Man, The Adam Project and some others for a week or two before streaming.

Pinocchio is playing but unfortunately nowhere near me. Saw a trailer advertising Matilda musical for theaters Dec 9 as well and got email from Cinemark about it.

 

[Nick]

Originally founded by the MLB, Disney has now acquired 100% ownership of the company that used to be known as BAMTech (the technology company that powers Disney+, Hulu, ESPN+, and other streaming services as well) after spending billions over the past 7 years buying stock in the company. They initially bought 33% for $1B in 2016, then proceeded to buy an addition 42% of the company in 2017 1.58B for a controlling share of 75%. Disney would then buy the NHL's remaining 10% ownership for $350M last year and now they have 100% ownership after finishing out the buyout of MLB's remaining 15% for $900M.

This is definitely a worthwhile acquisition since it is literally the company that runs their streamers and overall wasn't too expensive compared to what they will have to pay Comcast if they want to keep Hulu. Of course they could always turn around and try and sell Hulu and make money back from the Fox acquisition, but imo, Disney has tied themselves too closely with Hulu imo as far as Hulu originals go with FX, 20th Century, ABC Signature, 20th Television, and 20th Animation being the production companies behind most originals since 2019 to now go snd sell.

 

[Nick]

So, this has been a weird summer with a lot of box office bombs. We've seen Spiderman: NWH, Avatar: TWOW, Top Gun: Maverick, and Super Mario Bros all succeed with huge success since theaters reopening.

However, that's four movies. There's been some Marvel movies (Multiverse of Madness, Wakanda Forever, GotG 3) that have come close to $1B, but still fallen short and Across the Spiderverse is a huge financial success. The amount of box office bombs are becoming so much more frequent and I don't think this is necessarily any big indictment on the films themselves (although this summer's movies have been a bit mediocre so far).

I think we've reached the point where Disney and WB absolutely killed theatrical movie going by putting movies straight to streaming and we're now seeing the lasting effect it has had on audiences. Audiences are only showing up to theaters for big spectacles - to see things that are truly worth the hassle to go out to a theater rather than just wait for the movie to hit streaming or something that they simply can't experience the same way at home (in the case of Avatar).

All of these high budgets of $200M to even $300M for films is also a big part of the problem. At $300M, Indiana Jones 5 needs to make $1B pretty much to start making a profit and that's not happening with where it opened. Studios need to start to realize that the budgets on these films are unsustainable and this year has also proven that just because you release a movie tied to an existing IP doesn't mean it will be a hit (IJ5, Ant-Man 3, The Flash, Shazam 2, Transformers: RotB, etc). There's too many choices at home now - you need to stand out now if you want to actually do well as a blockbuster in this environment. Barbie may be that movie theatrically coming up or it could just be another dud.

 

[Freakenstein]

So, this has been a weird summer with a lot of box office bombs. We've seen Spiderman: NWH, Avatar: TWOW, Top Gun: Maverick, and Super Mario Bros all succeed with huge success since theaters reopening.

However, that's four movies. There's been some Marvel movies (Multiverse of Madness, Wakanda Forever, GotG 3) that have come close to $1B, but still fallen short and Across the Spiderverse is a huge financial success. The amount of box office bombs are becoming so much more frequent and I don't think this is necessarily any big indictment on the films themselves (although this summer's movies have been a bit mediocre so far).

I think we've reached the point where Disney and WB absolutely killed theatrical movie going by putting movies straight to streaming and we're now seeing the lasting effect it has had on audiences. Audiences are only showing up to theaters for big spectacles - to see things that are truly worth the hassle to go out to a theater rather than just wait for the movie to hit streaming or something that they simply can't experience the same way at home (in the case of Avatar).

All of these high budgets of $200M to even $300M for films is also a big part of the problem. At $300M, Indiana Jones 5 needs to make $1B pretty much to start making a profit and that's not happening with where it opened. Studios need to start to realize that the budgets on these films are unsustainable and this year has also proven that just because you release a movie tied to an existing IP doesn't mean it will be a hit (IJ5, Ant-Man 3, The Flash, Shazam 2, Transformers: RotB, etc). There's too many choices at home now - you need to stand out now if you want to actually do well as a blockbuster in this environment. Barbie may be that movie theatrically coming up or it could just be another dud.

Movie theaters are too expensive. Cheaper to watch it at home in a month or two. A lot of the movies also have poop marketing as of late

 

[Nick]

Movie theaters are too expensive. Cheaper to watch it at home in a month or two. A lot of the movies also have poop marketing as of late

Yeah the marketing has been a weird thing. I do think part of that is late night shows being down (which is easy marketing), but also studios not wanting to put a large marketing campaign behind what they already see as money losers.

 

[MrBlonde]

Movie theaters are too expensive. Cheaper to watch it at home in a month or two. A lot of the movies also have poop marketing as of late

The theatrical window has practically evaporated. Movies can’t become sleeper hits at the theater if you can buy or rent at movie within a few weeks of opening weekend.

Studios have cannibalized their theatrical performance in favor of direct to consumer effort, which has shown to be extremely profitable. (sarcasm)

Mentally myself, if there’s a Disney or WB movie I’m curious about vs a Sony movie, I slightly lean towards trying out the Sony movie because I have no idea where their stuff will show up after.

 

[JungleSkip]

I think we've reached the point where Disney and WB absolutely killed theatrical movie going by putting movies straight to streaming and we're now seeing the lasting effect it has had on audiences. Audiences are only showing up to theaters for big spectacles - to see things that are truly worth the hassle to go out to a theater rather than just wait for the movie to hit streaming or something that they simply can't experience the same way at home (in the case of Avatar).

I think it has to do more with sustained poor quality of big IP tent poles. The MCU has stunk since Endgame, and the constant barrage of Disney+ shows burns people out even more. The DCEU always stunk. Indiana Jones’s primary audience is over 50, and the movie is mediocre at best.

People are just sick of paying out the nose for junk, and studios are spending more money on it than ever, like you said.

Dune 2 is coming out later in the year, and is visually better looking than anything live action Disney is putting out, and it cost around 150 million.

I went to packed showings of Elemental and Asteroid City this weekend. The former had some of the worst marketing I’ve ever seen. I went because it was the only thing running for my daughter, and wasn’t too excited. But it was great! And Asteroid City was a real life movie for adults, not adult fanboys, something we don’t see enough of.

Realistically studios need to realize the era of the shared universe, IP driven cash cow is over. Time to start looking for what comes next.

 

[Andysol]

Barbie may be that movie theatrically coming up or it could just be another dud.

Barbie has spent a fortune on marketing. If it’s a dud, yikes.

Mission impossible should do well. Might be the first MI to cross $1b. I think Tom Cruise’s stock just keeps going up as people realize there’s only a handful of movies left where he can do what he does. He’s 60 now- this might actually be it.

 

[Nick]

Barbie has spent a fortune on marketing. If it’s a dud, yikes.

Mission impossible should do well. Might be the first MI to cross $1b. I think Tom Cruise’s stock just keeps going up as people realize there’s only a handful of movies left where he can do what he does. He’s 60 now- this might actually be it.

MI7 is tracking the same as Dial of Destiny, however if there’s good world of mouth it could at least have legs.

 

[PerceptiveCoot]

Realistically studios need to realize the era of the shared universe, IP driven cash cow is over. Time to start looking for what comes next.

The problem with a lot of the big shared universe IP movies isn't just that they're bad but also that they're safe. There's no reason to see a movie that may be good, but follows the same safe beats as multiple other superhero movies, especially when you're asking someone to drive 30 mins to a theater.

 

[Jamesh22]

I echo some of the other comments - there just isn't much to draw people out to the theater at the moment. Superhero fatigue has definitely hit so a comic book movie needs to be a 'must see' in order to make serious money now, and most event pics just aren't event worthy.

Budgets are insane and always have been at Disney and to a certain extent at WB too.

Low/mid level budgets and more range in content might help. As would effective advertising campaigns that build interest/intrigue and don't ruin the entire movie. Saw one for Gran Turismo the other day and I now don't need to see the movie.