PDA

View Full Version : Bringing In the Money


KMovies
03-09-2003, 11:41 AM
This board is famous for Bringing Down the Mouse when one of its movies fail (of course, all studios have failures, just look at WB).

Anyways, Bringing Down the House has brought in 31.680 million this weekend. This movie will place Disney on top of all studios this year.

As of March 2, here was the line up:

1 New Line 14.1% $192.5
2 Disney 12.5% $170.1
3 Miramax 12.2% $166.5
4 20th Century Fox 11.2% $152.7
5 DreamWorks 10.7% $145.8
6 Warner Bros. 10.3% $140.4

With Bringing Down the House's 31.680, Jungle Book's 4.250, Shanghai Knight's 2.670, The Recruit's 1.400 - Disney will firmly be in #1

With Chicago's 6.950 - Miramax is even likely to hit #2

New Line only has LOTR which is really almost finished - don't know it's total yet this weekend but it will probably be around 1 million.

Disney has had a successful year thus far -

Jungle Book 2 is up to 39.510
Shanghai Knights is at 54.730
Recruit is at 50.300
And now...Bringing Down the House at 31.680 in its first weekend looks like it will be the biggest hit so far this year.

Piglets Big Movie comes out in a couple of weeks, so it should be good for another 40.0 million

Just wanted to let you know some good Disney news for once.

pheneix
03-09-2003, 05:04 PM
How does the old saying go?

"You may have won the battle, but we will win the war."

This is typically what I like to call "Cheap Movie Season." Compared to the big blockbusters (or at least that is what is expected of them) like The Hulk or Spiderman, most of the movies being released now are much less inexpensive to produce and have a much lower ROI needed to show a profit. However, most movie studio's profitability lives and dies from putting so much into the "blockbusters" like Termimator 3 or Pirates of the Carribean that the profits shown from these movies will eventually be insignificant.

But Bringing Down the House will at least help make up for Shanghai Knight's underperformance, so the year isn't in the gutter yet. For a movie studio like Disney, that is pretty good.

KMovies
03-10-2003, 12:37 AM
I guess Shanghai is performing OK and probably what they expected.

The first one cost 73 mil to make and grossed 57 in the US - and that was released during the Memorial Day weekend. Guess it made a profit.

This one cost 50 mil to make (unusual a sequal is much more) and has grossed 54 mil so far (without the help of the holidays and summer).

HB2K
03-10-2003, 05:06 AM
Jungle Book 2 is up to 39.510
Shanghai Knights is at 54.730
Recruit is at 50.300

WOW....I'm staggered by the success.

airlarry!
03-10-2003, 10:13 AM
How the heck did Shanghai Knights come in for a budget less than its original, Shanghai Noon?

I'm going see it this weekend, if I can still find it out here in the boonies. I was supposed to see it a while back...

HB2K
03-10-2003, 12:56 PM
You could put any number in these blanks and I'm quite confident that this quote would be the same.
Wrong. Ice Age was released about this time last year, and it put up SUCCESSFUL numbers. To call JB2 a success is a sham.

KMovies
03-11-2003, 10:30 AM
Jungle Book cost 20 mil to make - very low budget. Low risk - easily assured of making some profit.

Ice Age was very successful ... but the cost of the computerized films are about 100 mil. And to add, as successful as Ice Age's 175mil take was, it was short of Monsters, Inc. nearly 260 and Shrek's 265 +.

Panthius
03-11-2003, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by KMovies
Jungle Book cost 20 mil to make - very low budget. Low risk - easily assured of making some profit.


It may have been low budget/low risk, but it only further dilutes the Disney name in my opinion. This is a very short sighted way of making animated movies. Eventually, there will be no movies left in the vault to have low budget sequels made of, and what will happen at this time? There will be no more low budget/low risk options available to Disney. They would make a much nicer profit if they allowed Feature Animation to have the resources and freedom to create the next Jungle Book type animated movies, not the next Jungle Book 2.

Panthius

CasualObserver
03-11-2003, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by KMovies
Ice Age was very successful ... but the cost of the computerized films are about 100 mil.

Ice Age's budget was $65M
Jimmy Neutron was at $25M
VeggieTales was $14M
Shrek as $60M

Now, Pixar's budgets run around the century mark. Dinosaur was a complete abberation at $250M

C.O.

KMovies
03-11-2003, 07:36 PM
And they are ... Lilo and Stitch is a great example.

Of course, there is the Stitch sequal going direct to Video also.

raidermatt
03-11-2003, 08:15 PM
It may have been low budget/low risk, but it only further dilutes the Disney name Bingo! $20 million made off the theatrical release of one sequal, $30 million off another... That's chump change when compared to the $ impact of diluting the brand name.