News Round Up 2018

[wareagle57]

News

New magicband colors!

https://wdwnt.news/18110502

I didn't bother actually reading and jumped on MDE to change my selection. Silly me, thinking Disney would make these available for free.

 

[CJK]

I didn't bother actually reading and jumped on MDE to change my selection. Silly me, thinking Disney would make these available for free.

I did the exact same thing!

 

[rteetz]

I didn't bother actually reading and jumped on MDE to change my selection. Silly me, thinking Disney would make these available for free.

You’re expecting too much

 

[mfly]

Yep I believe MK is now fully decorated.

Really? We were in MK yesterday and both of us commented that we thought only a fraction of the decorations must have been put up so far. It just felt really sparse compared to when we were there last December.

I can’t pinpoint anything that was “missing,” it was just a feeling. I’m probably wrong!

 

[rteetz]

Really? We were in MK yesterday and both of us commented that we thought only a fraction of the decorations must have been put up so far. It just felt really sparse compared to when we were there last December.

I can’t pinpoint anything that was “missing,” it was just a feeling. I’m probably wrong!

They had the train station, and Main Street decorated, Jingle Cruise running, and the tree up. Not sure there is anything else to do.

 

[rteetz]

News

Nutcracker and the Four Realms made just $20 million in its opening

https://www.wdwinfo.com/news-stories/the-nutcracker-and-the-four-realms-faces-disappointing-opening/

 

[jknezek]

News

Nutcracker and the Four Realms made just $20 million in its opening

https://www.wdwinfo.com/news-stories/the-nutcracker-and-the-four-realms-faces-disappointing-opening/

And people wonder why Disney does so many sequels.... because they make money. Wrinkle in Time? Bomb. Nutcracker? Bomb. Marvel movies? Money rains from the sky. Incredibles 2? WiR2? Animated to live action? Mary Poppins 2? Money flows. They aren't going to do original because original is a money loser right now.

 

[dlavender]

And people wonder why Disney does so many sequels.... because they make money. Wrinkle in Time? Bomb. Nutcracker? Bomb. Marvel movies? Money rains from the sky. Incredibles 2? WiR2? Animated to live action? Mary Poppins 2? Money flows. They aren't going to do original because original is a money loser right now.

You’ve got a point.

But to be fair, at least on this one, I think the early negative reviews are playing a big part.

 

[jknezek]

You’ve got a point.

But to be fair, at least on this one, I think the early negative reviews are playing a big part.

You mean the movie stinks? Probably true. Wrinkle in Time certainly stunk. That's the thing, original is hard. You are going to have more bombs. So it's kind of a circular argument. I also think the cost of going to the movies has gotten so expensive, relative to the quality of watching at home, that people are more reluctant to take chances on original content.

In other words, the audience is driving the bus, while complaining about the lack of originality. This is not uncommon. We all want lower airfare, but we all complain about the service when we keep selecting the cheapest option. We all want better quality consumer goods, but we shop at Walmart. The consumer is driving the bus into the ground, but it doesn't stop the hypocrisy.

Disney would be smart to do even less original content, at least until they run out of sequels and remakes.

 

[Tiki Birdland]

And people wonder why Disney does so many sequels....

Have you seen the trailers for that movie? Scary for children! Not particularly interesting for adults either IMO.

I think they need to spend more time in story development, less on special effects.

 

[jknezek]

Have you seen the trailers for that movie? Scary for children! Not particularly interesting for adults either IMO.

I think they need to spend more time in story development, less on special effects.

The biggest movies of the year have been more on special effects and less on story development. People pay to go to movies where special effects are huge because it can't be replicated at home. They don't go see Best Picture nominees on the big screen because they generally don't have special effects and it's a lot cheaper and just as good to watch them at home.

The economics don't really support this assumption. The very best theater going movies, like Black Panther this year, have both story and special effects. But if you want to win the box office, you are better off shading to special effects and away from story right now...

 

[tlmadden73]

Nutcracker:

The thing is .. this IS a sequel.
But, Was it a movie anyone wanted? Are consumers excited about it? How many modern-day movie goers are familiar with the actual story behind the Nutcracker Suite ... as a ballet (and that probably doesn't appeal to everyone. For those who know and enjoy the ballet are they clamoring for a sequel? To top it off, the trailer didn't excite. Okay .. another movie about some fantastical realm .. just like tons of other movies that are out there (Narnia, Wrinkle in Time, etc.). Nothing really made it stand out.

Are they doing any marketing on that sort of thing? Or is this just a pet project someone in the film industry is able to lobby and get made?

Just not sure who the audience for Nutcracker is.

 

[jknezek]

Nutcracker:

The thing is .. this IS a sequel.
But, Was it a movie anyone wanted? Are consumers excited about it? How many modern-day movie goers are familiar with the actual story behind the Nutcracker Suite ... as a ballet (and that probably doesn't appeal to everyone. For those who know and enjoy the ballet are they clamoring for a sequel? To top it off, the trailer didn't excite. Okay .. another movie about some fantastical realm .. just like tons of other movies that are out there (Narnia, Wrinkle in Time, etc.). Nothing really made it stand out.

Are they doing any marketing on that sort of thing? Or is this just a pet project someone in the film industry is able to lobby and get made?

Just not sure who the audience for Nutcracker is.

It's not really a sequel. Disney has never put out a Nutcracker movie that follows the original story or ballet. It's just a story that's been done before. A simple Google search will show you 20+ versions ranging from Barbie to a straight ballet. And despite all these tries, The Nutcracker has never really done well in the movies. So Disney tried to take the idea and name recognition and do something original. I wouldn't classify that as a sequel.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

And people wonder why Disney does so many sequels.... because they make money. Wrinkle in Time? Bomb. Nutcracker? Bomb. Marvel movies? Money rains from the sky. Incredibles 2? WiR2? Animated to live action? Mary Poppins 2? Money flows. They aren't going to do original because original is a money loser right now.

That was my first thought too

2nd thought was they need to figure out how to make movies like this for less $ - would be much less of a loss if this movie cost $60m to make vs $135 or whatever

 

[mfly]

They had the train station, and Main Street decorated, Jingle Cruise running, and the tree up. Not sure there is anything else to do.

I’m not sure why I felt like something was missing!

On a related note, we rode Jingle Cruise for the first time and really enjoyed it!

 

[wareagle57]

Not many people want to watch a Christmas movie the weekend after October. A release closer to Thanksgiving would have made more sense, but I know they don't want to compete with WIR2.

I don't think the problem is making original movies (which this doesn't even qualify as IMO). Disney just seems to be really bad at making good ones. I go see just about anything they put out, but I almost never have any interest in their live action originals. Tomorrowland is the only one I can think of that I've seen in theaters in recent years.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Have you seen the trailers for that movie? Scary for children! Not particularly interesting for adults either IMO.

I think they need to spend more time in story development, less on special effects.

I also think they need to re-evaluate their marketing and how to get that social media and groundswell marketing work better. I mean, the marketing for Bohemian Rhapsody was so much more effective than for this

And to re-evaluate when they release movies. I think they assumed this would be a hit and start making money now and make money through the holidays - but I think it would have been better to release this even Thanksgiving weekend as people are more gearing up for the holidays (similar issue with (though not the only issue with) the release of Solo)

 

[Kaleidodad]

Nutcracker:

The thing is .. this IS a sequel.
But, Was it a movie anyone wanted? Are consumers excited about it? How many modern-day movie goers are familiar with the actual story behind the Nutcracker Suite ... as a ballet (and that probably doesn't appeal to everyone. For those who know and enjoy the ballet are they clamoring for a sequel? To top it off, the trailer didn't excite. Okay .. another movie about some fantastical realm .. just like tons of other movies that are out there (Narnia, Wrinkle in Time, etc.). Nothing really made it stand out.

Are they doing any marketing on that sort of thing? Or is this just a pet project someone in the film industry is able to lobby and get made?

Just not sure who the audience for Nutcracker is.

It's really more of a re-telling than a sequel, as it's essentially the same story as the original Nutcracker -- a single dreamlike night after Clara receives a gift from Drosselmeyer -- but with more of a backstory.

 

[scrappinginontario]

For our family, we have chosen not to see 'A Wrinkle in Time' or 'Nutcracker' due to it's dark content. Some like this type of movie but it also cuts out a portion of the viewing population too.

My 9yo did not/does not like the commercials for either of these movies. I choose to look at the reviews on 'Common Sense Media' when helping me decide what our family may/may not enjoy at the movie theatre. When I read things such as, 'Kids nearly plunge to their deaths, are whisked away in a twister, or are stuck for eternity, and there's a scary moment when three people are dragged to an evil overlord.' (AWiT) or, 'Expect some creepy scenes/characters that could be frightening to young kids.' (TNatFR), we choose to spend our entertainment dollars elsewhere. We'll wait for Ralph Breaks the Internet, The Grinch and Mary Poppins.

Different strokes for different folks, and sometimes this is reflected at the box office.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

For our family, we have chosen not to see 'A Wrinkle in Time' or 'Nutcracker' due to it's dark content. Some like this type of movie but it also cuts out a portion of the viewing population too.

My 9yo did not/does not like the commercials for either of these movies. I choose to look at the reviews on 'Common Sense Media' when helping me decide what our family may/may not enjoy at the movie theatre. When I read things such as, 'Kids nearly plunge to their deaths, are whisked away in a twister, or are stuck for eternity, and there's a scary moment when three people are dragged to an evil overlord.' (AWiT) or, 'Expect some creepy scenes/characters that could be frightening to young kids.' (TNatFR), we choose to spend our entertainment dollars elsewhere. We'll wait for Ralph Breaks the Internet, The Grinch and Mary Poppins.

Different strokes for different folks, and sometimes this is reflected at the box office.

I think that is a good point - especially when it comes to opening weekend. I think my oldest daughter (who is 9) might like the Nutcracker but I wanted to wait until more people had seen it to get feedback on if it would be appropriate for her.

Also, for things that we might be on the fence about, easier to watch at home and turn off if need be or pause and explain things, etc. We did watch A Wrinkle In Time - but we did it at home, and also after she had already read the book so she was more prepared