DVDizzy.com

Home | Reviews | Schedule | Cover Art | Search The Site
DVDizzy.com Top Stories:

It is currently Wed Nov 26, 2014 2:26 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:13 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:06 am
Posts: 8086
Quote:
Hollywood isn't seeing as much green in 3-D re-releases as it had hoped. Considered an easy new revenue source after the 3-D re-release of Walt Disney Studios' "The Lion King" popped out of the screen and grossed nearly $100 million last year, most such follow-ups have landed with a thud in 2012. Disney's "Beauty and the Beast" and "Finding Nemo" were both disappointments, grossing $47.6 million and $40.7 million, respectively, in the U.S. and Canada. That makes the stakes high for Wednesday's 3-D re-release of "Monsters, Inc."

Disney executives were particularly disappointed by the weak 3-D box-office take for "Nemo," one of Pixar Animation Studios' most beloved and successful pictures. A soft performance by Pixar's "Monsters" probably would make Disney — and other Hollywood studios — rethink their strategies. "There's a certain cultural cachet for parents bringing their kids to movies like 'The Lion King' the same way their own parents did for them 20 years ago," said Vincent Bruzzese, motion picture president at research firm Ipsos MediaCT. "But many of these movies, people have watched it at home with their kids, so 3-D may not be something new or extra enough to pay the exorbitant cost of going to a theater."

The cost of converting animated movies, particularly those made with 3-D computer technology, is extremely low compared with a new production. Disney spent only about $3 million adding 3-D effects to 2001's "Monsters, Inc." Pixar guru John Lasseter, chief creative officer of Disney Animation, said in November that the conversions are a worthwhile effort regardless of their commercial success. "We're going through all of the Pixar titles just so we have them," he explained. "I just like it, it's kind of cool. How we use it and how it plays in the marketplace? I don't know."

But for the executives at Disney's movie studio, the marketplace matters very much. Advertising and releasing a family film nationwide costs tens of millions of dollars, and ticket sales have to be split with theater owners. That makes it difficult to turn a profit on a box-office gross of less than $50 million. In addition, 3-D re-releases of films that have already been out on DVD and played on television don't enjoy the substantial post-theatrical revenue that provide the majority of profit for new movies. Nor do they tend to do well overseas — with notable exceptions such as "Titanic." Internationally, the 3-D versions of "Beauty and the Beast" and "Finding Nemo" grossed only $17.3 million and $16.5 million, respectively.

Pre-release surveys show "Monsters, Inc." is headed for a modest opening, lower than the $16.7-million start for "Finding Nemo." The best hope for it to perform better than its underwater predecessor is a lack of new releases for families with young children over Christmas. Still, Disney does not appear optimistic about continuing its recent 3-D re-release spate. It has no more planned after next September's "The Little Mermaid."

"3-D reissues are a title-by-title consideration for us, and there are several factors we look at," Disney's executive vice president of theatrical distribution, Dave Hollis, said in a statement. "The most important drivers are the timelessness of the story and the characters, the appeal across multiple generations, and the opportunity to meet a demand in the family market. We remain very judicious about our choices and continue to refine our offerings as we learn more about what drives consumers to these special engagements."

Turning a profit on any of them may require more modest marketing budgets. To promote "Finding Nemo," Disney brought journalists from around the country to a media day at the California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco. There's no similar media junket planned for the 3-D re-release of "Monsters, Inc."
Source: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/en ... 5738.story

_________________
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:19 pm 
Offline
Collector's Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 5:06 pm
Posts: 623
I wonder if BatB would've performed better had they released it before or alongside the BD release. As it was, people have been able to watch it at home for almost 2 years prior to the 3D release.

In Australia it came out before the BD release, so it really was like watching a film previously unavailable for almost a decade.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:49 pm 
Offline
Collector's Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 5:40 am
Posts: 624
Location: California
Well we all saw that coming. No one wants to go see something in the theater when they can just see it on tv or buy the DVD/Blu-ray & keep it forever. It's kind of hilarious when you think about it. Stupid bitches thought they were gonna rake in the cash :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:06 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:17 pm
Posts: 6527
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/p4uEmhAf2YQ" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Your Welcome :P

_________________
Want to Hear How I met Roy E. Disney in 2003? Click the link Below

http://fromscreentotheme.com/ThursdayTr ... isney.aspx


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:12 pm 
Offline
Collector's Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:22 am
Posts: 987
Location: Buffalo
Victurtle wrote:
I wonder if BatB would've performed better had they released it before or alongside the BD release. As it was, people have been able to watch it at home for almost 2 years prior to the 3D release.

In Australia it came out before the BD release, so it really was like watching a film previously unavailable for almost a decade.


Would've made more sense. The theatrical re-release was delayed by more than a year here.

Also, I'm positive I saw Finding Nemo on TV a month before its theatrical re-release.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:18 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 8:47 pm
Posts: 2363
I'm a big proponent of 3D releases, but at the same time you cannot expect everything to make as much money as the Lion King did. That's just absurd. It should have always been something decided on a per movie basis, what would have the most appeal both in terms of how much 3D can add and how willing people will be to pay to see them in theaters again. Nemo, I feel was just too recent to rake in the cash. Anything in the 2000s probably fits that description, so I don't think monsters inc will do that great, as much as I look forward to it its just too recent.

Mermaid might do well with women and their daughters, but it doesn't quite have the universal appeal as some of the more successful re releases. It does have the advantage of being out of the public's mind for quite a while, so we'll see.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:39 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 4:34 am
Posts: 2278
Surprised it took them this long to realize the part's over?! Ticket prices are too high before 3D, especially for families. So their answer is to market these films to families and charge even more for 3D? I think this time, Disney bit off more then they could chew!

_________________
____________________________________________________________
All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.

-Walt Disney


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 12:05 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:17 pm
Posts: 6527
I'm going to see Monsters Inc in 3D this weekend, mainly because I have a free ticket to see it.

_________________
Want to Hear How I met Roy E. Disney in 2003? Click the link Below

http://fromscreentotheme.com/ThursdayTr ... isney.aspx


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 12:12 am 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 1:33 pm
Posts: 1546
Location: New Jersey, USA
Well if it only costs a million to make the movie in 3-D and they get $40 million in ticket sales... Disney is still winning. They make no sense lol.

What about 3-D Blu-rays?

_________________
Check Out My Disney Music Videos now in HQ! :mickeyface:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 2:18 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:57 pm
Posts: 3529
Location: Puerto Rico
I blame it not on the fact that 3D movies are overstaying their welcome but on the movies themselves. Not saying that they are bad movies or that they don't have mass appeal. What I mean is that Lion King...

1) Is perceived as the better, more iconic movie, especially by 90s kids who were now old enough to either go back and experience it as adults or brought their own kids and share their love of the movie with a new generation.

2) Was the "first" 3D movie of its kind. I mean, everyone at that point knew how a CG and live action movie would look in 3D, but many were curious as to how a hand drawn (albeit a digital) movie would translate into the 3D medium and if it would benefit from it.

Combine those two aspects and you can see why Disney expect their other 3D re-releases to do much better. In Beauty and the Beast's case, the novelty was no longer there because months earlier people saw Lion King and either loved or hated the 3D, and it was widely available on Blu Ray (and 3D Blu Ray even) by the time it finally appeared in theaters. As for Finding Nemo and Monsters Inc. I am sure their problem was that they looked like a standard CG movie when converted to 3D, as in people knew what to expect.

Think of Disney being that one guy at a poker match whose first set of hands won a lot of money, those first hands was Lion King. But the first set of hands weren't as lucky, so he decided to back away before he loses anymore winnings. Those hands were the rest of the 3D re-releases.

_________________
ImageImageImageImage

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:22 am 
Offline
Collector's Edition

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 3:48 pm
Posts: 811
Location: Los Angeles
I think there are a number of factors contributing to this trend...

- Lion King wasnt just a very successful movie. It was an event. It marked a generation. It wasnt just ANY blockbuster. Also, it is old enough to benefit from nostalgia to add to its appeal. And not only that, its not a "princess" movie, which widens its appeal considerably.

- Most Pixa films are too recent to be put back on screens. Also, they have been widely available on home video for a long time...and people tend to pick and choose which movies they will spend money on, specially when bringing the kids, and the premium cost of 3D.

- Going back to my earlier point... this re-release thing will only work significantly with very few movies. Movies that are major events. Titanic. Lion King. Star Wars. Even Nightmare Before Xmas is a "yearly event" for halloween time. Not every movie can enjoy that type of status.

- And then there is the frequency with which they are re-releasing these. It should be a rare event... not twice a year.

- 3D blu rays? Who cares??? 3D TV arent selling well, and the trend will pass soon enough...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:45 am 
Offline
Special Edition

Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 8:48 pm
Posts: 435
Thinking about the short term will only get you so far.

The greedy fuckers at Disney realize this now, of course, once the golden goose is raped featherless.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 7:38 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 1:19 am
Posts: 8134
Location: Appleton, WI
Kyle wrote:
I'm a big proponent of 3D releases, but at the same time you cannot expect everything to make as much money as the Lion King did. That's just absurd. It should have always been something decided on a per movie basis, what would have the most appeal both in terms of how much 3D can add and how willing people will be to pay to see them in theaters again. Nemo, I feel was just too recent to rake in the cash. Anything in the 2000s probably fits that description, so I don't think monsters inc will do that great, as much as I look forward to it its just too recent.

Mermaid might do well with women and their daughters, but it doesn't quite have the universal appeal as some of the more successful re releases. It does have the advantage of being out of the public's mind for quite a while, so we'll see.
this though in retrospect lion king did seem to get more prerelease attention didnf it?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:01 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 1:34 pm
Posts: 4523
Location: The Netherlands
There are no big family releases this Christmas so I think Monsters, Inc 3D will do considerably better than Nemo and Beauty and the Beast.

And I think The Little Mermaid has a better chance to break out as well. It hasn't been out on dvd for 6 years by the time it hits theaters again and it's an older film like The Lion King. It also defined a generation and brought on the rebirth of animated musicals. I could see people flocking to it like they did with The Lion King.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:43 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 5:59 pm
Posts: 3591
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Matt wrote:
Well if it only costs a million to make the movie in 3-D and they get $40 million in ticket sales... Disney is still winning. They make no sense lol.

What about 3-D Blu-rays?


The same quote posted also mentions it takes tens of millions to market these releases in addition to their conversion costs, and then the earnings are split amongst owners and Disney.

My guess is that 3-D blu-rays don't make that much money either considering their limited market share.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:43 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 5:33 am
Posts: 4429
Location: UK
To be honest, couldn't they just give their movies a regular cinema re-release like they used to? I'm sure people would flock to that, as there wouldnt be the inflated ticked prices.

BATB and NEMO are, you're right, too readily available to make people want to see it in cinemas again. With TLK, it was the same with all my friends "Oh my god, TLK is out !! we HAVE to go and see it, haven't seen it for YEARS etc etc". I think Mermaid will have the same effect...

I used to love when Disney released old movies in the cinemas (mind you, as I was born in 89, I only saw a few), but it was a magical experience, 3D or not.

_________________
… The Film That Gave Voice To A Whole Generation …

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:00 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:06 am
Posts: 8086
Matt wrote:
Well if it only costs a million to make the movie in 3-D and they get $40 million in ticket sales... Disney is still winning.


According to the article, the average CG film costs around 3 million to be converted. Perhaps for hand-drawn films it's a bit more.

_________________
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:24 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 5:33 am
Posts: 4429
Location: UK
Well, it is still vastly in profit either way, isn't it ?

_________________
… The Film That Gave Voice To A Whole Generation …

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:27 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:06 am
Posts: 8086
atlanticaunderthesea wrote:
Well, it is still vastly in profit either way, isn't it ?


Yes, but you know Disney. A decent profit is never enough for them. Everything has to be a blockbuster.

_________________
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:34 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 5:33 am
Posts: 4429
Location: UK
Which is probably why fundamentally, people are losing faith in them.

_________________
… The Film That Gave Voice To A Whole Generation …

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], taei and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group