Disney Films' all-time domestic rankings

[Whatsthegoodword]

I started this research because of the whole Lilo & Stitch fan claim that that particular film had such a big following. I wanted to see how it did compared to other Disney films (It's #61 among unadjusted numbers for Disney films. Adjusted numbers aren't available, since it's not in the Top 200). That led me to find this ranking at boxofficemojo.com. It's the top 200 films domestic all-time gross, adjusted for inflation. Think of it as the number of tickets that were sold at the theatre, multiplied by the average cost of a movie ticket today. I've taken out the non-Disney related films from Gone With The Wind (#1) to Porky's (#198). What's left is all films released by either Disney, Buena Vista, or another film like Star Wars that they now own, or Avatar that they have a theme park agreement with. I think the list is interesting, and answers lots of questions... but poses lots of new ones. This list shows fifty films - a quarter of the top 200 - that Disney owns the rights to. Here's a link: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

The point of this is to see where Disney might be headed with new releases or new attractions in its domestic theme parks.

Please note that the world rankings tacked on the back end are not adjusted numbers. Those numbers can muddle the whole conversation, as it presents a very small window of time. ...but then again, the present is what Disney seems to be most concerned about...

Here's the data that I pulled out: (Domestic Rank / Adjusted Gross / Film / World Rank if in top 100)

#2 $1.542B Star Wars
10 944M Snow White
11 936 The Force Awakens (World #3)
12 865 101 Dalmatians
13 850 The Empire Strikes Back
15 842 Avatar (World #1)
16 814 Return of the Jedi
18 782 The Phantom Menace (#22)
19 772 The Lion King
21 767 Raiders of the Lost Ark
23 719 Fantasia
27 677 Mary Poppins
29 666 The Avengers (#5)
32 638 The Jungle Book; 1967
33 629 Sleeping Beauty
41 584 Pinocchio
48 560 Pirates; Dead Man's Chest (#18)
50 552 Bambi
55 533 Finding Nemo
57 522 Cinderella
63 514 Revenge of the Sith
73 483 Lady and the Tramp
84 474 Finding Dory
87 466 Swiss Family Robinson
90 464 Indiana Jones & the Temple of Doom
91 463 Avengers: The Age of Ultron
92 463 Attack of the Clones
94 454 Aladdin
95 452 Toy Story 3 (#19)
100 439 Pirates; Black Pearl
104 428 Indiana Jones & the Last Crusade
105 427 Monsters, Inc.
106 425 Frozen (#9)
108 423 Iron Man 3 (#10)
114 414 Toy Story 2
119 407 Cap America Civil War (#12)
125 395 Peter Pan
127 393 Beauty and the Beast
128 391 The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe
130 389 Pirates; At World's End
137 392 Indiana Jones & the Crystal Skull
138 380 Toy Story
156 364 Alice in Wonderland, 2010 (#23)
157 364 The Incredibles
161 363 The Jungle Book, 2016
163 357 Guardians of the Galaxy
180 341 Zootopia (#24)
184 340 Iron Man 2
185 340 Up
194 330 Who Framed Roger Rabbit

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

So what does this mean? Nothing. ...and everything.

What are the top "franchises?" ...that we can expect to see more of...in both the theatre and theme parks?

• Star Wars
• The Avengers, etc.
• Pirates of the Caribbean
• Indiana Jones

Of course those are obvious, but when you look at the numbers above it helps explain why.

There's the "classic" films that keep resurfacing in one way or another:

• Snow White; Why did they just spend piles of money on a new centerpiece attraction in Fantasyland? Because she's still the "fairest of them all."
• 101 Dalmatians; I had no idea that it was their #2 animated film. This explains why we keep seeing iterations of it.
• Jungle Book; At #5, it just recently proved its relevance once again. I'll be that Jungle Book will be coming back to theatres, and to Animal Kingdom in a bigger way.
• Toy Story; Certainly not a "classic", but all three of the films are in Disney's top 20. We'll keep hearing from Woody and the gang.
• Nemo & Dory; Again, not a classic, but do you think we'll see #3? Are they both in the top 13? Uh-huh.
• Mary Poppins; Why are we getting a new Mary Poppins? Because she's their #8 all-time live action film. If you consider only "franchises," then she's #4.

Why do we not see more from these?

• The Lion King; It's their #3 animated film.
• Fantasia; They tried a few years ago with Fantasia 2000. I suppose that's why we don't see much from it...but it's still represented in spirit in Mickey's Philharmagic.
• Sleeping Beauty; I'll bet that this one is in the live-action que not too far behind Beauty & the Beast.
• Swiss Family Robinson; This one is RIPE for live-action. But the question is how to tell that story again? Hmmmm...

Then there's everyone's favorite Disney decision to bash: AVATAR. At least that decision makes a little more sense when you look at this list - and especially the overall list at the link above.

 

[peg110]

So not to "Bash" your effort, but there is a problem with ranking by adjusted gross.
20 or 30 years ago, the only way to get the entertainment was in the theaters or TV. Obviously, the movie companies want you to go to the theaters as I believe they make more there and it gives them better metrics too.

Plus, many movies (in particular Disney) only got re-released every 7 years. So if you wanted to see them (or you wanted your kids to see them) you would take the family to see the movie. (there is Disney logic to this type of release cycle too). This is typically why you see the classics higher up on the ranking.

Today, however, even adjusting for today's ticket prices, there are MANY other ways to view the movies. So many people "Streaming" them (legal or illegal) or buying a DVD/Blue Ray (Once) and watching it multiple times. Furthering the DVD/Blue Ray issue, Even if I pay $30.00 for the DVD/Blue Ray, A whole family of 4 (or more) could watch it multiple times for far less money then watching it once in the theater. This has an even bigger impact in our day and age of Large screen TVs or even Projectors which can give folks a "Theater" feeling at home (some take that to a whole new level). Then you can add in the Pirating of the DVD's and other stuff like that.

Finally, I hate crowds, particularly in those locations where you have to go through an "Isle" such as theaters (or air planes, etc...) so when we do go to the theater, we frequently go to a Matinee (first or second showing of the day) and we only pay $6.00 each as opposed to the normal close to $10 per ticket.

So while the ranking is important for the companies in terms of dollars and cents (and metrics) it really is not reflective of how "Popular" a particular movie or character is.

My daughter (and even Wife) Love Stitch. My daughter has watched the movie DOZENS (if not hundreds) of times on DVD as well as streaming devices. I, and other family members have also watched it several times. Never once have we watched it on the big screen. So our $15.00 of a DVD purchase could have been in the THOUSANDS had we watched it as frequently in the theaters.

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

I think the ranking by adjusted gross tell us a lot. Mainly they are an indicator of what films have captured the public's imagination enough to go to the theatre and see them in mass; and indicate what folks might like to see again, or see in a theme park. Just look at the top ten for proof that the numbers are relevant. Movies from across the decades are represented there. In order: 70s, 30s, now, 60s, 80s, 00s, 80s, 90s, 90s, 80s. At least half of these films were available on tape or DVD shortly after their theatre run, but also have massive ticket sales.

Of course there are lots of ways to see movies these days, but movie-goers are buying more tickets than ever. The list is full of "modern" movies." There will always be folks that don't like going to theatres, but I'll bet that has always been the case.

Stitch obviously has a following, just not a large one. I think the best thing he has going for him is that he's different from most of Disney's other characters. I don't mean to marginalize your love for Stitch. Heck, my favorite character is Mr. Toad. I don't get to see much of him at all.

Still though, the fascinating part to me is the choices Disney makes for promotion/sales - and I think that this list offers a little insight. It's not perfect. Mickey Mouse hasn't been a "movie star" in eons, and where the heck is Winnie the Pooh??? ...but it does otherwise read like a who's who list of Disney secondary characters.

 

[peg110]

In order: 70s, 30s, now, 60s, 80s, 00s, 80s, 90s, 90s, 80s. At least half of these films were available on tape or DVD shortly after their theatre run, but also have massive ticket sales.

Hmmm... DVDs and Tapes shortly after release? Since VCRs weren't really available until LATE 60s and were not really that affordable to the masses until long after that (my first owned VCR was in the late 80's). DVD wasn't available widely available until much much later, so it's not surprising that the higher numbers are earlier.

The Internet and steaming wasn't widely available (or rather usable for) mainstream except within the last decade or so.

I am not disputing the value of the ranking for upcoming movie ideas and or park ideas, but since you started with the "Lilo & Stitch fan claim" but are basing it solely on something that as time passes, because of technology, can get skewed, it really doesn't disprove the "Fan" claim. Those numbers alone won't be an adequate measure.

Please don't get me wrong, I am not claiming the following is huge either. I am claiming, that your research, while valuable, isn't conclusive enough.

 

[Lvsdisney]

• Sleeping Beauty; I'll bet that this one is in the live-action que not too far behind Beauty & the Beast..

They essentially already made the live action version (Maleficent). But the numbers are interesting! Thanks for the research.

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

They essentially already made the live action version (Maleficent). But the numbers are interesting! Thanks for the research.

Why didn't I think of that? Of course they did! ...and a sequel is coming, supposedly...

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

Hmmm... DVDs and Tapes shortly after release? Since VCRs weren't really available until LATE 60s and were not really that affordable to the masses until long after that (my first owned VCR was in the late 80's). DVD wasn't available widely available until much much later, so it's not surprising that the higher numbers are earlier.

The Internet and steaming wasn't widely available (or rather usable for) mainstream except within the last decade or so.

I am not disputing the value of the ranking for upcoming movie ideas and or park ideas, but since you started with the "Lilo & Stitch fan claim" but are basing it solely on something that as time passes, because of technology, can get skewed, it really doesn't disprove the "Fan" claim. Those numbers alone won't be an adequate measure.

Please don't get me wrong, I am not claiming the following is huge either. I am claiming, that your research, while valuable, isn't conclusive enough.

VCRs or DVDs were available widely by the mid-80s, and Raiders of the Lost Ark was one of the films we bought first. There were more expensive back then! Then AAAAAAALLL of those Princess movies in the white VCR boxes... Irregardless, I do not believe that VCRs, DVDs, or even streaming have impacted the number of theatre patrons, but that's research for another day.

...and I never thought that this research is conclusive in any definitive way, only a guide "to see where Disney might be headed with new releases or new attractions in its domestic theme parks." Like I said above, Mickey, Donald, Goofy, & Winnie the Pooh are no where on the list so obviously it's not a direct indicator, but I do think it shows us some of Disney's more valuable properties; ones that they probably think they can (wring more profits out of and) provide more magical experiences around.