Disney's Divinity wrote:
This isn't what
estefan was referring to, but even if it were... So you're saying that Aladdin being conjectured to make only $500 million worldwide would be the same as "DOA" by
estefan, who just described Cinderella's $500 million intake in entirely different terms.

Sorry for the confusion. But in terms of describing the box office in different terms, that's perfectly valid as we're not comparing like for like. Cinderella made $543.5m against a budget of $100m. Aladdin's budget was $183m so straight away it needs to make more to be profitable and considered a success.
Add to that, Aladdin is one of the big 4 renaissance movies. Even if Disney do under value it, there's still greater expectations there. To give a more extreme example, Ant-Man making $500m is a success, Avengers making that amount would be considered, if not a flop, then a massive under performance.
Disney's Divinity wrote:
Well, hopefully now that the hit animated film has generated a hit Broadway show and a hit re-make, Disney will start to treat Aladdin the way it deserves again.
Agreed
nomad2010 wrote:
I’m sure Disney knew what they were doing releasing it when they did.
I guess. Given the massive slate they had for 2019, no doubt building up content ahead of the Disney+ launch in November, this year was always a balancing act where their own movies risked competing with each other. I still think they would have given it better slot (where it wouldn't lose IMAX after just 1 week) if they thought it would perform this well.
You are right, any sequel talk is Disney recognizing they gave it the toughest possible odds and it still did better than expected and realizing the true potential of the property.