i'm really glad that KOTE wasn't shelved the story seems really interesting and I think I will be really good.
I agree, it sounds like a really interesting story that fits the "Disney" style very well. I'm excited about it!
Also I don't think Winnie the Pooh will do so well ... It only made $6m+ in the U.K and the advertising for the movie was poor, no trailers on tv or interviews with cast members to promote the movie etc.
I'm not sure it has to make that
much. It didn't cost too much to make in the first place. Yes, I know in the states it is going up against the last "Potter" film, but I honestly think most of the folks that would go to "Potter" are probably not the same people that want to see a new "Winnie-the-Pooh" movie. Most rational parents are going to take their young children to see "Pooh," NOT "Potter." Plus, if it stays in the theaters for any amount of time, it will most likely make it's money and some.
I think the fact that it was put late in the summer says a lot as well. Disney wasn't betting the farm on "Pooh." Their box office hopes were tied to "Pirates 4" and "Cars 2," and both delivered. Anything more "Pooh" brings is just cherries on top of the ice cream. I don't think we need to worry yet. It cost $35 million and has already grossed just over $6 million. And that is without opening in the US yet, which is most likely were it will make the bulk of it's money. It only needs $30 more million and anything past that is profit.
Of course, Disney executives are going to think CGI > hand-drawn, because the CGI film happened to make more money.
Maybe if they promoted their hand-drawn films as well as their CGI ones, more people would go see it. Even the crappiest of movies will get viewers to go if there's a commercial for it every 5 minutes.
It almost feels like they're not confident enough to put money into advertising their hand-drawn films because they think people won't see it. Meanwhile they're actually hurting themselves by doing the exact opposite. Like it's "safer" to promote the CGI film.
I mostly agree with you. I think we see this in how Disney has handled the "Disney Afternoon" shows on DVD, or even their new "Generations Collection" on DVD. Somewhere, their corporate hot shop ad guys decide what will and will not do well, and then they push like mad, almost to the point of force, in getting people into what they want them into (like Blu Ray or 3D movies) and then kind of only half hearted push things they don't really want to succeed, like the "Disney Afternoon" shows. They have been doing the same crap with their animation unit the last few years. It's frustrating, but it's Disney. The Disney of today anyway.
If it's true that Disney is in fact gearing it's traditional hand-drawn films towards the pre-existing fans, then it also has to be expected that these films will not make as much profit in the end. That is something that is bothering me about the company these days. It feels like they are deliberately marketing these films to specific demographics then acting surprised that they only sell to those demographics. Then to rub salt in their already self inflicted wound, they blame the film itself for it's short comings. Not to sounds all conspiracy theorist or anything, but the company cannot be blind to these reactions. I think the company has a plan to phase out hand-drawn animation slowly, after seeing how ripping it away from us had backlashed against the company. Of course, I'd rather see a new hand drawn film every few years than have them go away completely.
Bingo! They are toying with the entertainment market me thinks to try and make it in the image they feel it should look like, instead of letting the market decide what should be.