This. There’s a reason that Puss in Boots 2 performed well above expectations while Ruby Gilman is already one of DreamWorks’s biggest bombs ever. One was a great movie that lived on through word of mouth while the other just looked like a standard and forgettable kids flick.
I don't think that's the correct answer, we are in a weird time where everything is going back to being boxed in certain ways. Female lead animated IP content not princess related have underperformed at the box office since COVID and then blow up on streaming. Using Dreamworks as an example...Spirit Untamed was a show on netflix that did really really really well on streaming so the Dreamworks Animation CEO Margie Cohn was like lets put a film in production for this film because its clear based on streaming rates, the movie should do well. With an A cinemascore, the film bombed. However, the film did great via streaming.
Encanto is another example....while the pandemic was a consideration, it dominated streaming rather than box office and people came out for SING 2 in theatres. I bet if Turning Red did get a theatrical release we would see similar results.
I think we will see that as well with Ruby Gillman.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed
It's the same BS when people say animated or 2d films don't sell. More like you aren't making films people want to see and have to find any reason besides looking at your company and make better stories
Though, GA are very weird. They will see Avatar 2 which story wise to me is as strong as Antman 2.....but people saw it. The Mario Movie is good but Sonic 2 was a more entertaining film but didn't matter and ohhh yeah Jurassic World came out last year and made bank and that movie suckedddddd
So it's really hard for me to understand what makes people see movies because quality isn't always what makes you money, on the other hand we have Puss in boots 2 which like HTTYD (the first film also didn't start well in the box office) but grew because of word of month.
Interest and taste is subjective not objective. There are cultural, political, and societal impacts that go into what films are considered "good" and "bad" and you are simplifying something that is extremely complex in many ways. Why are some films popular in the states but very unpopular abroad? Why do some films make so much money overseas yet domestically flop? The GA acts exactly how the GA is supposed to react.
Avatar 2 didn't need to have a good story...no one enjoyed the first one really for the story. They enjoy the visual spectacle on their screen of something that was driven by pure passion. No one after seeing the first film were talking about how great the writing Avatar had. They were talking about how beautiful and amazing it looked.
People wonder why Illumination films do so well...its not because they are safe because many studios are putting out safe films. Illumination is like cocomelon, they use a formula that they know will delight people's brain via visual gags. There are reasons why kids become obsessive with Cocomelon and that's tied to the visual cues they use and how they cut and edit material. This same principle was applied in the Super Mario Movie, they are so many things going on the scene in the background of 75% of the film that is a positive sensory overload. Illumination does something similar with the minions but minions do well because it harks back to a time via three stooges, classic disney cartoons back in the 1920s and 30s, and looney tunes where you can understand very easily without understanding a word of what they are saying.
WOM does help a film but only if a film already fits the cultural and societal standards set by society. How many people complain and negatively talk about films they never watched especially nowadays?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The real issue these days is not the quality or the medium or the shorter box office.
The big issue is television. Television has replaced film. More money goes to television these days than film, People talk more about television shows than film. When people got to Netflix to rewatch something, it will more likely be a television show than a movie. Film were the place to watch things with huge budgets and spectacles you couldn't really get via tv shows. But nowadays, TV shows are giving the same level of quality and effort as film making people more willing to spend time watching a television show than a movie. Additionally with television due to the episodic nature, individuals are more likely to rush to finish a television show than a movie.
Secondary issues, thanks to streaming, film in general doesn't get the same boost it did when there was cable/local tv. Because you had to rent a film etc and rental fees were expensive for films not everyone got to go watch movies like we do now with Netflix but because of that, when films were in theatre more people were willing to go see it because it wasn't known how long it was until you could buy it on DVD, Blu Ray, or initial streaming services. Then when the film was being shown on tv, the networks and the studios would make a big deal about it which then rejuvenated the interest in the franchise....(Harry Potter Marathons on ABC Family for example really did a big boost as well as those who lived the 80s and 90s where ABC/NBC would have their movie day where they would show one of their films). Because there is a lack of urgency or limited time, no one really rushes to see a film outside of major fans.
