POC - Good Enough yet? / Weekly Update

[HB2K]

HB2K, you are considering Nemo to be a success now? You say that it has legs? About six weeks ago, I posted a similar question related to Nemo. "Can we call Nemo a success?"

Your comments, were let's see. It has only been a week or 10 days. You ripped my calling Nemo a success, and were only able to bring up points about how Nemo was a Pixar film. Now, you are using Nemo as the "standard of success".

I vaguely recall the thread, and I think the point I was making was the same I'm trying to make here.

It's too early to call Pirates a success, and it's WAY to early to determine if Pirates has legs.

Nemo is the current standard of success, since it's the highest grossing film of the year. In this thread I have not discussed or compared Pirates to Nemo in any terms other than box office results.

It seems like you're trying to bait me into an arguement on Pirates vs Nemo....and I'm sorry but I won't be drawn into that debate for two reasons.

1) I have not seen Pirates
2) This will pull the discussion off topic....which is whether we can call Pirates a success after one week.

No No No! This is exactly what I mean by twisted!!!!!!

Sorry...Still don't see how I'm twisting (although there have been plenty of attempts to hijack our discussion).

I gave you four (count em) four reasons why I feel this movie has legs - which it does!!!!

I think the proper wording should be the movie MIGHT have legs. See next comment

Now you need the main stream press - which is what I had suspected all along - who we all know are not going to even attempt to take this story to print before another weekend passes.

(((Shaking Head)))

Don't you think there's a reason the mainstream press waits before making this statement?

Heck using your one week standard can you call a baseball player with who goes 4 for 4 in his first game a success for the season?

I'm really not trying to convince you of this as it is very difficult for anyone who has yet to see this movie to fully grasp its' propensity. The trailors don't do it any justice at all.

Yours or my opinions of the film are not the discussion. The general public's reaction is....and one weekend (especially this day and age) is not enough to predict a box office run.

 

[Another Voice]

Wow – you go away for a couple of days to make a movie and you come back to find your car all scratched up and the windows busted in.

But that's show business.

Let's start chronically, shall we?

"". And yes, people around these boards are passionately in love with the movie but that means nothing for the general public. " ***

Does the same opinion apply for every other topic discussed on this board ?"

You have a self-selected audience on these boards that are passionate enough about Disney to post on the Internet. I'd hardly say everyone around here is a good representation of the average American's attitude to the company's product. You'd get the same thing over on a Britney Spears board.

That's show business.


"I guess we should have saved that 20 bucks for a more rewarding form of quality entertainment like a peep joint or video arcade."

Going out a movie theater is very much a hassle for the average person. It takes a lot just to get them to show up. People who go to the theaters these days are the ones most interested in seeing the film – they like the premise or the stars or the ad campaign or whatever. Again – it's a self selected crowd. So naturally you're more likely to get the "everyone in the theater loved the movie!!!!!" crowd than the public at large. Because people only midly interested in the film didn't show up. How many of you went out your way to go see The Core a few months ago? Wasn't worth the time, money and effort, was it. Shocking as it may seem, many people feel the same way about Pirates.

The trend for the last several years is that those people who want to see the movie in a theater see it the first weekend. Unless it's really, really good and a lot of people tell all their friends and neighbors about it – a movie burns through its audience very fast.
The only way to really tell what's going on is to see what the week over week fall off is. Word of mouth takes time.


"Not everything is as grim as L.A.!"

Again the effort of "going to the movies" is a serious problem for Hollywood. People have a lot of choices about when to see a film. So the people most anxious to see it (and most likely to like it) are the ones most likely to rush out to the theaters. That statement doesn't imply anything about one's grimness other than they really wanted to see a movie.

"Everyone loves Pirates because the three people in the row in front of me had already seen it before" doesn't really predict how well the movie is going to do. Believe – I've sat in plenty of theaters watching films I have worked and that the audience really enjoyed – only to sit in an empty theater the next weekend.


"LXG did not shock anyone in our house"

It was a shock because that film had been receiving such bad word of mouth. People are chalking up its success (and Pirates as well) to the public's desire to new material – no one wants to see lame sequels and remakes anymore.


"This isn't about being a Disney "apologist" - its just about enjoying a film that was well made, well written and a lot of fun - and hoping it is a huge success!"

Disney is in the business of making movies that will please 30+ million people – and that's rather hard to do. The unanswered question is if Pirates pleases enough people to be a business success rather than just a personal favorite.


"who would have seen the movie no matter what the reviews said, etc."

Exactly. Funny how when Treasure Planet came out people were pillaring the critics as morons and idiots. Now suddenly all those same people are wonderful human beings…all because they happened to like the same movie as you.


"Hey I can say this on several levels which will hopefully serve to alleviate those too tame to stick their necks out and brave taking a hit once in a while."

See how brave you are when you have $180,000,000 on the line.

That's show business.


"My guess is TombRaider 2 will be the frontrunner when it opens in another week but until then, Pirates has a great shot at luring more spectators."

Movies don't work like that any more. There is no "constant market" every week with movies fighting for their piece of the pie. In general, people go out to see a specific movie. If there's nothing they want to see, they stay home.


"All anyone wanted to know was whether or not the movie was any good. Not great. Not spectacular brilliant visionary masterpiece. Just plain old good. That's show business!"

If that's the best Disney can do than I'd hardly say it's time to bring out the dancing girls for the "Happy Days Are Here Again!" number. No one goes out of their way to see "good" – they go out of their way to see "GREAT!!!!!"

That's show business.


"I said "if it makes $180M in domestic box office", and if does that, then all foreign box office and video sales are gravy. And that's allotta gravy."

A good rough estimate is that Disney will probably receive about 35% of the box office take that you see. The rest will go to theaters, Bruckheimer, cast & crew, assorted middle men, "gifts" to distributors in foreign countries and all the other various people with their hand out.

Out of that 35% Disney has to pay the cost of the movie, the cost of the marketing of the movie, the interest on the cost of making the movie, corporate overhead, various "bonuses" so Bruckie does go wandering again and all the other people around town with their out. A lot of individuals will get rich off Pirates, but The Walt Disney Company isn't going to see much.

That's show business.


"Why not direct some of that negativity to the real problem areas?"

I am – spending horrendous sums of money to make mediocre movies is a big problem for Disney. Look at their financials and see exactly what kind of return Disney earns selling films and DVDs. They'd be better off putting the money in a passbook savings account.

That's show business.


"First, I personally know of 4 individuals who have seen Pirates twice"

I had to sit through Oceans 11 six times. Does that make it a rousing success?


"When I mentioned Bruce Almighty, I wasn't trying to draw a parallel regarding a movie sustaining top box office billing…"

I guess I will then.

After eight days in release Pirates has pulled in $92.5 million. In eight days Bruce pulled in $111.1 million, Terminator 3 had $87.1, Nemo had $109.8, Hulk had $87.4, Matrix scrapped up $164.0 million and X-Men 2 had $120.0 million after eight days.

Going back a bit LOTR: The Two Towers earned $135.7 million in its first eight days. And for Disney, Signs pulled in $97.6 million in its first eight.

I guess you can say that Pirates had a good first week, but it's hardly record breaking.


"The script is excellent! The line delivery is mesmerizing and the acting is brilliant which calls people back."

If you want a professional opinion, that will have to wait because this post is long enough already.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Going out to a movie theatre is very much a hassle for the average person.

My God man, on what have you been imbibing? With movie numbers going through the roof for such crap (not 'POC' btw) how can you even suggest this? People go to the movies way more than ever before and nowdays don't even think twice about repeats.

I agree that there is almost always a 'target group' for big films these days (looking for that automatic box office) including a small theme park contingent for 'Pirates', but I don't think it's a huge factor in anyones particular favor. In fact, for many reasons you often preach, I think there may be some built in bias against things with the Disney name on it. I hope 'Pirates' will go a long way toward erasing that misconception...It is a fantastically entertaining movie with great individual performances, especially Johhnny Depp (PlanoGirl was right and I don't often get to say that!)...

 

[KNWVIKING]

In a previous post you commented something to the effect that 9-outa-10 flicks lose money. With PotC costing 180 mil, per boxofficemojo- and Disney only getting approx 35% of the gross out of which they have to pay all expenses, why would they bother to make such a flick ? Now if the answer to that question is future revenue from rentals,dvd sales,toys,plush, renewed interest in WDW/DL, etc, then would the box office take be mostly irrelevant ? Especially when you state the difficulty studios have in getting people to go out of their way to go to a theater. TP may have been a box office failure, but when the last dvd and toy are sold, will TP still be covered in red ink ?

 

[Killer Fish]

Everyone can say what they want. All I know is I can't remember the last time all of my lazy college friends all wanted to see a movie. I have seen the movie twice with a bunch of friends. All of the people I work with have seen it or want to and these are the people who made fun of me for seeing nemo so many times. These are not just the disney fans. This movie is getting the attention of college students where other movies like hulk and T3 failed to get at least most of my good friends off their a$$ to go see. So UCF loves pirates.

 

[rwodonnell]

Originally posted by Another Voice
A good rough estimate is that Disney will probably receive about 35% of the box office take that you see. The rest will go to theaters, Bruckheimer, cast & crew, assorted middle men, "gifts" to distributors in foreign countries and all the other various people with their hand out.

Out of that 35% Disney has to pay the cost of the movie, the cost of the marketing of the movie, the interest on the cost of making the movie, corporate overhead, various "bonuses" so Bruckie does go wandering again and all the other people around town with their out. A lot of individuals will get rich off Pirates, but The Walt Disney Company isn't going to see much.

That's show business.

Let me make sure I understand you. Are you saying that the expenses you mentioned are outside the $180M they call "production costs + marketing costs"? I mean, I understand the theaters make money and that cuts into it. And the gifts to foreign distributors you mention I would apply as an expense to the foreign box office. But I would have thought that Bruckheimer, the cast and crew and the assorted middle men would have been part of the $180M figure.

 

[Planogirl]

Mr Pirate, even I get lucky with my ideas once in a while.

Only time will tell about this movie. I don't know how anyone, whether regular moviegoer or expert, can begin to predict what the public will do. I personally don't see any rhyme or reason to which movies do well sometimes.

 

[HB2K]

With PotC costing 180 mil, per boxofficemojo- and Disney only getting approx 35% of the gross out of which they have to pay all expenses, why would they bother to make such a flick ?

Because Ei$ner thought he might have a Spiderman on his hands....they were expecting a bigger box office than they're currently getting. That's why so much was invested.

But I would have thought that Bruckheimer, the cast and crew and the assorted middle men would have been part of the $180M figure.

From what I've read in the past, their assorted salaries come out of the production costs, but most actors & producers sign deals which give them a % of the box office take.

When Arnold Shwartzenegger (SDK) was doing his promotional work for T3, he made a stop on the Howard Stern Radio Show. Howard brought up his salary ($30 mill), but Arnold said it was a bad deal since he gave up rights to the box office until the movie pulled a profit.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Because Eisner thought he might have a 'Spidemran' on his hands...

First off, Disney sure did not promote this as thye have in the past so I really don't think they were expecting a blockbuster. And while the numbers for 'Spiderman' are certainly something to chase, 'POC' is so much better, so far superior to 'Spiderman' in every way it isn't even funny. It's like comparing a filet mignon to horse meat...

 

[KNWVIKING]

*** "Because Ei$ner thought he might have a Spiderman on his hands....they were expecting a bigger box office than they're currently getting. That's why so much was invested." ***

Well, let's assume the math AV suggests applies to all studios,not just Disney. Sony spent $190 mil on spidy, box office of $403 mil. A 35% domestic gross means Sony lost ONLY $50 mil.

There has to be more to these numbers then meets the eye.

 

[crusader]

I'm not so sure he was looking for a Spidy return. Making a movie about Pirates was a serious gamble given that this type of movie hadn't performed well at the box office in decades - which probably explains the budget. If you're going to take such a risk, you better expend all efforts to do the thing right. Otherwise, this one was guaranteed to wind up on the video shelf faster than you could blink.

Spiderman had the whole Batman/Superman/X-Men genre to fall back on. They already knew there would be an audience. All they had do was make a good movie.

Going out a movie theater is very much a hassle for the average person. It takes a lot just to get them to show up.

I'll give you that for a young family it is a bit of a hassle to go to the movies. But for everyone else it really is a very big part of their local entertainment budget. Once stadium seating and pricey little coffee parlors were installed, the dating atmosphere gained an aura of sophistication at certain theatres. You should see the typical moviegoer these days - nouveau riche! There is never a Fri/Sat night around here where the parking lots aren't packed at the Ritz or Lowe's. Even if nothing good is showing people are willing to go out and spend $30 to be entertained on a mediocre selection of choices - And they're going to the theatres that charge the highest ticket prices.

How many of you went out your way to go see The Core a few months ago? Wasn't worth the time, money and effort, was it. Shocking as it may seem, many people feel the same way about Pirates.

No, many people do not feel the same way about these two movies. The Core just looked and sounded very unappealling and Hilary Swank doesn't have enough sizzle to get our attention. I can't remember what it opened up against or what time of year it was released but these are equally contributing factors. Pirates is a really good movie. People are hearing this on the street which is worth its' weight in gold. This happens to be the real deal.

I don't know how anyone, whether regular moviegoer or expert, can begin to predict what the public will do.

I usually can tell when a movie is going to do well after I've gone to see it. It's not as unpredictable as you think once the move is released. It's much more challenging to determine what to produce up front because in that sense I do agree that there really is very little you can rely on from any target audience. That's why making this Pirate movie was such a big risk.

See how brave you are when you have $180,000,000 on the line.

Exactly why the big guns in your industry are producing assembly line flash in the pan junk mixed in from time to time with very few quality hits. Nobody wants to risk losing on this type of investment. There are way too many egos in plastic land ready to catapult anyone who is remotely associated with a loser into obscurity.

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by Peter Pirate
First off, Disney sure did not promote this as thye have in the past so I really don't think they were expecting a blockbuster. And while the numbers for 'Spiderman' are certainly something to chase,

Seems odd they chose the "blockbuster" month of July to release the move then.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Oh sure, it IS their big movie of the summer but it didn't have all of that "blockbuster" hoopla like 'PH' did or even 'Hulk' and others this summer. Heck outside of The Disney Channel I didn't even see much promotion until just before release...

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by Peter Pirate
Oh sure, it IS their big movie of the summer but it didn't have all of that "blockbuster" hoopla like 'PH' did or even 'Hulk' and others this summer. Heck outside of The Disney Channel I didn't even see much promotion until just before release...

Well then once again Disney has not spent their money wisely..As the Hulk marking budget was less then that of Pirates. Surely Disney is not overcharging themselves on Disney Channel commercials?

 

[crusader]

Europa, I thought you liked this film. Why are we disney bashing this based on the marketing budget? Pirates will substantially exceed the Hulk in returns. What am I missing?

 

[KNWVIKING]

***" Surely Disney is not overcharging themselves on Disney Channel commercials?"***

Really ? Why not ? Why wouldn't they want to "overspend" for advertisement on ABC,Disney,ESPN or Family channels. They are just taking money out of one pocket and putting it back in another, maybe even over paying to make the bottom line on ABC look better.

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by crusader
Europa, I thought you liked this film. Why are we disney bashing this based on the marketing budget? Pirates will substantially exceed the Hulk in returns. What am I missing?

I'm simply disputing the opinion of the Pirate that Disney was not wishing for this film to be it's blockbuster of the summer. Why else spend so much money on marketing and release it in July if this was not their intention?

 

[HB2K]

First off, Disney sure did not promote this as thye have in the past so I really don't think they were expecting a blockbuster. And while the numbers for 'Spiderman' are certainly something to chase, 'POC' is so much better, so far superior to 'Spiderman' in every way it isn't even funny. It's like comparing a filet mignon to horse meat...

So if Disney spent roughly the same ammount as Sony did for Spiderman, wasn't it a bit foolish to not expect similar returns?

Spiderman had the whole Batman/Superman/X-Men genre to fall back on. They already knew there would be an audience. All they had do was make a good movie.

I thought that was the whole plan behind the ride movies? That the name had the built in recognition and audience....so using that assumption shouldn't your sentence above apply to Pirates as well?

Oh sure, it IS their big movie of the summer but it didn't have all of that "blockbuster" hoopla like 'PH' did or even 'Hulk' and others this summer. Heck outside of The Disney Channel I didn't even see much promotion until just before release...

So once again this was Disney's tent pole movie of the summer, it was HEAVILY invested in...almost to the point that without Spiderman type numbers it will be a loss leader, so they choose not to advertise it?

Great business plan.

Europa, I thought you liked this film. Why are we disney bashing this based on the marketing budget? Pirates will substantially exceed the Hulk in returns. What am I missing?

I'll speak for Europa here since I'm having the same trouble with your arguement.

IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU LIKE OR DISLIKE THE MOVIE.

It's business. To invest $180 in a movie, ANY MOVIE, and to poorly invest in the marketing campaign of said movie is dumb....no matter WHAT company makes & markets the movie. You could insert SONY in Disney's place and the arguement remains the same.

Really ? Why not ? Why wouldn't they want to "overspend" for advertisement on ABC,Disney,ESPN or Family channels. They are just taking money out of one pocket and putting it back in another, maybe even over paying to make the bottom line on ABC look better.

I see what you're trying to say, but with the Enron & Worldcom disasters, artifically inflating your bottom line in this manner will not make a difference and will be seen right through by investors.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Well, lets be clear that the marketing angle was my point and not Mr. crusader, Viking or rwodonnell. I do not wish to bring down their arguments with my possibly faulty (possibly not) logic. Let their arguments stand alone unless they choose to pick up this guantlet...

Great business plan

Well, we're only talking about one movie here, but it is a movie that is nearing 100M (probably with today's numbers) after only 9 days (with its 2nd weekend still to come!), so their plan, however it was laid out seems to be working.

 

[KNWVIKING]

*** "I see what you're trying to say, but with the Enron & Worldcom disasters, artifically inflating your bottom line in this manner will not make a difference and will be seen right through by investors." ***

I don't know that Enron & Worldcom's situation is a fair comparison but I see your point.