@THRThe linked report claims that due to weak domestic box office performance and a "tent-pole feature" budget, the Disney Company will be forced to post quarterly loss of between $80-120 million dollars.
'John Carter' Will Cost Disney $200 Million in Operating Losses http://t.co/CD14wMqM
Disney [...] will post a loss of from $80 million-$120 million, the company said. During the same quarter a year ago, Disney reported operating profit of $77 million. John Carter marks the fourth year in a row that Disney has had to take a large write-down due to a poor performing movie.The problem is, other reported numbers don't agree with this report.
Mr. Hulett has opined prolifically about the "organic" nature of production studio budgets. In previous posts, he states that feature budgets ebb and flow as the production studio desires and not always in line with actual costs. In the case of Disney's John Carter (if Mojo's numbers are to be believed), it seems that in the three weeks its been out has almost made up its supposed $250 million price tag once you include the foreign box tally.
Personally, I've heard varying reviews of the film. Most of my trusted sources (people I know whose opinions I've come to trust through years of friendship and experience) have told me not to miss seeing it in the theaters. I've also been told that the effects are of the highest caliber and a fine example of where the technology is today.
One could easily conclude that given a healthy run in the theaters, this film will make up its "costs" and find itself in the black. Its also apparent that ticket sales outside our fine United States seem to be making up the bulk of the overall tally. This fact seems to be the norm these days, and its a wonder why those figures weren't included in THR's report.
In the end, its important to remember the wise words of Hulett:
Nothing prevents our fine entertainment conglomerates from moving costs to some other movie's production number, or charging development to "studio overhead" to make stockholders less unhappy or participants of "net" profits less rich.
So, no matter what the numbers say, its apparent that Disney thinks John Carter was a stinker.
Posts
34 comments:
This is very unusual for Disney to announce so early (and wrongly once you include domestic numbers)that any film is a flop.
The discussion on Face Book and other places is there seems to be something else at work here. Could there be some reason they want to have a bad quarter? Lower stock prices? are they in some sort of negotiation?
Something feels very wrong about this.
I began to wonder about Disney's number-crunching when it started spinning that the Muppet movie was a success. And those numbers didn't add up either. Give me a break!
Or maybe Disney's just gone nuts. The Muppets' next appearance will be on: The Bachelorette.
I am not making that up.
The film is OK. Nothing special, and not the worst ever made. It IS a storytelling mess, however, and not amount of flashy effects can cover that up in the long run.
Can't believe they threw in the towel so quick on this one. Wonder if it has something to do with getting those losses in before the summer.
Disney have to be transparent to their shareholders.
Disney didn't want a bad quarter.
Good, bad or just okay, the film is a flop.
Really? I can't believe they didn't throw in the towel on this at script, or premise even? Did Disney not see they were making Cowboys vs. Aliens? Wild, Wild West? It makes no sense for people to be trying to lay this bomb at the feet of marketing. What the hell was Disney thinking? Convoluted plot, confusing set ups, horrible character material (hence horrible acting). This movie had no voice, no point of view, no direction. 250 million dollars for THAT?!? Walt Disney Co, just stick to the theme parks - they're great, we love 'em. Love the rides, the nice landscaping, the whole package. Fun for the whole family. Did you forget that horrible steam punk rocket ride that never got off the ground in the Tomorrowland redesign? Yeah, well, not a movie either. Stop listening to the fanboys. Steam punk is still born. Make a note.
Whether you love or hate the film (or love or hate Disney or Pixar) it's pretty clear Disney screwed up the domestic marketing as only Disney can.
All I need to do is point to the Tron sequel. They are still trying to put positive spin on that bomb.
Disney made a decision over a year ago to kill this film when they needed to make their licensing deals. There are none.
The main poster for the film is nothing more than a still from the film.
Something is wrong here. I've never seen a studio to declare a film a bomb when there is still something positive to say about it and the fact that it is #1 internationally is still positive - not to mention all the "fanboys" and critics that are linking arms to defend the film.
I'm not a fan of over-marketing a film (I'm already sick to death of hearing about Hunger Games), but when no attempt had been made whatsoever you have to wonder why.
Now this is some kind of Disney/marketing conspiracy? Disney killed the film a year ago? And their real plan was to lose 250+ million buckaroos so they could...could... could do what exactly? Piss off their shareholders? Sorry. Crap idea + crap filmmaking + crap studio leadership = box office bomb. End of story. Anything BUT writing off the film immediately would signal to shareholders complete incompetence, stamping "I actually did believe for a second that this movie might be a hit for us." on Iger's head. And he did not want that, I am certain of that. Bad marketing? Try bad everything.
^^^Spoken like someone who hasn't seen the film...
Good or bad film, conspiracy or just stupidity, I agree, I've never seen a studio write off a film so quickly
Oh, please, stop. Yes, I did see it. Very. Unclear. Movie. Confusing plot, it asks you to buy far to much up front. Too many threads to track, so none get serviced well. In fact, most collapse from their own weight. Hero pretty much lays there like a wet blanket. But to be fair, there is no interesting material for characters to work with in between the usual CG fireworks. The character work is the stuff that matters, remember? Writing? Actors? That stuff? The material reads like a really bad fanboy fantasy epic scribbled in the margins of his math homework. It reminded me of a bad version of Dune - yeah, that thing is a masterpiece compared to this. Could they have at least released an app with the movie so I could translate the weird names? It would have helped me follow which Roman legionnaire I was looking at, which weird named dude they were talking about. This film was a disappointment. Having said that, the thing everyone is talking about in town is how you can blow that much money without realizing you bought an E ticket on a runaway train to box office hell.
I hope you're not working in features in story.
You blather like a critic who thinks he knows something. Lots of nice catch phrases, but no support to any of them.
You also seem confused about what is being discussed in Hollywood as well. You're listening to how Disney wants to spin this. It appears this is turning into an attempt to oust Ross.
That's what I'm hearing. Not what you're hearing on the morning news via press release from Disney
This is from a fan of the film so I'm sure some will look at it with suspicion, but it feels right and headed in the right direction:
http://thejohncarterfiles.com/2012/03/our-view-its-now-clear-disney-has-been-treating-john-carter-like-a-hospice-patient-all-along/
"Good or bad film, conspiracy or just stupidity, I agree, I've never seen a studio write off a film so quickly..."
"Treasure Planet" was written off the Monday following its release, if memory serves correctly.
Look friend, no offense, but you cannot defend the quality of this movie. You just can't. It's just not a well-crafted film. Sure, some of the effects were interesting, but so are fireworks. We all go ohhh, ahhh, etc. But that's not why people see movies. It's everything people hate about being suckered into throwing down a twenty on a Friday night - sucker punched by bells and whistles. It delivers nothing new, nothing to hang your hat on, nothing particularly special. You don't have to be an expert on story to know that. That's exactly the type of arrogance that gets directors and writers in trouble - well, they just don't understand. They haven't read Joseph Campbell. They don't get the Cosmological Function, the Monomyth, yada, yada.
Yeah, well, no one really gives a crap. It's a Hollywood movie. Spend that much money, you better hit the right beats where they matter. It took, what, twenty minutes to even figure out John Carter was worth following? Twenty minutes of 'dark, mysterious, cool stranger!...who disappeared and his nephew has to find out what happened to this guy we are supposed to think is amazing and cool!' It took putting the guy on Mars and calling him Virginia to make him interesting. Ugh. Talk about bad foreplay. Take the viagra already and let's get on with it, grandpa. I could go on, but why.
And I'm not the one drinking the kool aid if you're busy trying to figure out who they are going to pin this on and why. The studio is only doing what they do best, covering their asses. Of course heads will roll.
And holy crap, there is actually a John Carter website devoted to delusion. What a world this is. Amazing.
Disney did the same with the Zemekis travesty of MARS NEEDS MOMS, it cut the film loose after a week. Sad to see it happen again and with so much money at stake.
wow, this really bothers you that a film you think is bad actually has a pretty big fan base and did receive some very passionate reviews.
BTW most of these other films you're comparing John Carter to had absolutely no one defending them.
This is more in line with Blade Runner than any of the films you and the negative press are trying to compare it to.
Okay, now I've seen it all. Someone just injected a Ridley Scott film into a conversation about a Disney Company vanity project. I quit. This is useless
That's the closest you've gotten to a true statement in all your ramblings.
Because you have an film school student's knowledge of film discussing real film with you is useless.
Dear either Steve,
Please close off the anonymous posting option so the folks who actually work on these movies can maintain the high level of denial that is required to cheerlead themselves through even the worst box office bombs.
Yes, please listen to the anonymous troll who's feelings are getting hurt because he can't convince anyone that he's right, dammit!!!
Clearly you aren't very knowledgeable or you'd know that virtually no AG members were involved in this film. Nice try though.
When Princess and the Frog disappointed, nobody questioned it. It was understood as a disappointment.
Now, John Carter clearly flops and it seems like every Andrew Stanton fan is rallying together to save its reputation.
Once again, that's a huge assumption on your part. And a wrong one.
I'm not a Stanton fan at all (in fact I disliked Wall-E and Nemo) and most of those I speak to couldn't care less about his past films.
It's this film that is gaining the support.
Stop trying to find a reason for the support other than it's a film that is liked.
and BTW Frog Princess was only a meh Disney film.
And Blade Runner is pretty awful, too.
Wait, let me get this straight. You didnt like Finding Nemo but liked John Carter?
Oh.
So, you're like, retarded.
Wait a minute...we're arguing with a 7 year old? Sorry. Tell your mommy you need to be read to from your Barney book so you can get to sleep.
BTW we tell your mommy you're using the R word either, but you might want to stop it before you get grounded.
No, I didnt mean retarded in the juvenile way.
I mean retarded in the literal way. As in "you are completely and utterly mentally deficient if you think Finding Nemo is bad and John Carter is good." I think you've demonstrated a case where it MIGHT be possible to have a wrong opinion, with a position that retarded.
We clear, retard?
PS) Im new to this conversation, so dont go lumping my comments in with whoever else you've been arguing with.
"Dear either Steve,
Please close off the anonymous posting option so the folks who actually work on these movies can maintain the high level of denial that is required to whaa whaa whaaa"
You don't have to read the comments if you don't like them. This is not North Korea, or Berlin circa 1970's.
Piss off!
d.
I always start reading these comments from the bottom of the list, so I can see where the conversation lead to, right up front.
Good to see the TAG comments in fine form, as usual.
Yes, it's a flop. Just go see the movie. It'll be on ABC Family next week. Next thread.
--> The Muppets' next appearance will be on: The Bachelorette.
--> I am not making that up.
Actually, Statler and Waldorf were on this week's edition of The Soup on E!. Yes, yes they were. C'mon, Disney, ... The Soup!?!?
--->> Disney did the same with the Zemekis travesty of MARS NEEDS MOMS, it cut the film loose after a week.
Actually, they cut that film loose when Christmas Carol bombed 15 months earlier. They were too far into pre-pro to just drop it, and the fall-out from the bad PR about Zemeckis needed to be attenuated somewhat. There were virtually no commercials ahead of its release, really none by comparison to any other Disney film. The DVD went straight to WalMart, with no ads at all for its release.
Mars who?
d.
Studios have been 'dumping' films almost since film began. Feature's left unreleased for years, films given no promotion, some just sent direct to video. Think spectacle and animated films are more visible due to their smaller numbers. Carter is no different than Cats Don't Dance or Rover Dangerfield.
Post a Comment