Bob Iger steps down as Disney CEO... and Comes Back Again

[Filmfreak]

As well as - Mission Impossible and Flash.

This is one thing that I'm surprised hasn't been brought up more.

Among the top financially failing films of the year - Ant Man, Indiana Jones, Mission Impossible, Flash.

On the other hand, the eight top earning films of last year at the worldwide box office - two featured a female in the lead (Barbie and Little Mermaid), two featured Black leads (Spiderverse and Little Mermaid), one is one of the most diverse franchises out there (Fast and the Furious), and another the anti-woke mob initially complained about Peach being a "girl boss" before the box office receipts came in. That's to say if there is one trait that most movies in the top eight shared in 2023, with Barbie being on top, it is these films are the ones that prominently featured diversity.

(Top 8: Barbie, Mario, Oppenheimer, Guardians, Fast X, Spiderverse, Little Mermaid)

The anti-woke mention Little Mermaid like it was the most unsuccessful film of 2023 when in reality - it broke even and is the eighth highest earning film of the year worldwide. That's something Mission Impossible couldn't even state (9th place). And it would have made more if (like many films in 2023) it had a more realistic than inflated budget.

I'm not great with the logistics but Mission Impossible probably broke even eventually. It had a 70 million return due to covid inflating its budget, thus going from 290 million to 220. Also, as stated multiple times before, it was the release date that hurt the film, rather than audience not turning up because they had no interest.

 

[Cap2024]

I'm not great with the logistics but Mission Impossible probably broke even eventually. It had a 70 million return due to covid inflating its budget, thus going from 290 million to 220. Also, as stated multiple times before, it was the release date that hurt the film, rather than audience not turning up because they had no interest.

Mission Impossible had a 291 budget, only made 567 worldwide. With the classic 2.5x - break even point would be 727.5 mil.

Not performing as usual is one thing, here it was a seventeen year low. That’s more than just underperforming.

While Mission Impossible faced Barbenheimer, it also came in a year where audiences in mass signaled they were tired with long running franchises.

There wasn’t superhero fatigue as much as there was overall long running franchise fatigue (Fast and the Furious also saw a record six year low and Indiana Jones completely fell apart). Probably due to Covid impacting audience’s tastes, like 9/11 brought grit and realism - Covid likely brought audiences needing more than “just the same” thereby hurting most long running franchises - only Guardians safely made it out (although that too saw a decline) and that was the last of its run. All other franchises that did well were either first or second installments.

This is all to say whatever happened last year wasn’t on MI alone, but a change of guard brought on by probably Covid. I’m wondering if last year was a terrible fluke, but this year will be the indication.

2023 Box Office in Review: A Year Where Filmmakers Flourished and Franchises Failed

Universal and Barbenheimer were the biggest winners in a year where the domestic box office hit $9.05 billion The post 2023 Box Office in Review: A Year Where Filmmakers Flourished and Franchises Failed appeared first on TheWrap.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Filmfreak]

Mission Impossible had a 291 budget, only made 567 worldwide. With the classic 2.5x - break even point would be 727.5 mil.

Not performing as usual is one thing, here it was a seventeen year low. That’s more than just underperforming.

While Mission Impossible faced Barbenheimer, it also came in a year where audiences in mass signaled they were tired with long running franchises.

There wasn’t superhero fatigue as much as there was overall long running franchise fatigue (Fast and the Furious also saw a record six year low and Indiana Jones completely fell apart). Probably due to Covid impacting audience’s tastes, like 9/11 brought grit and realism - Covid likely brought audiences needing more than “just the same” thereby hurting most long running franchises - only Guardians safely made it out (although that too saw a decline) and that was the last of its run. All other franchises that did well were either first or second installments.

This is all to say whatever happened last year wasn’t on MI alone, but a change of guard brought on by probably Covid. I’m wondering if last year was a terrible fluke, but this year will be the indication.

2023 Box Office in Review: A Year Where Filmmakers Flourished and Franchises Failed

Universal and Barbenheimer were the biggest winners in a year where the domestic box office hit $9.05 billion The post 2023 Box Office in Review: A Year Where Filmmakers Flourished and Franchises Failed appeared first on TheWrap.

www.yahoo.com

In terms of Mission Impossible, respectfully, you are wrong on both ends.

I agree that the fatigue is not just for superhero films, it's with some blockbuster franchises in general, as there were indeed numerous examples pointing to that last year, but there were no actual signs that MI was one of them. The numbers speak for themselves.

Fallout opened at 155 million worldwide while Dead Reckoning, two days earlier, at 235. Which means it had a very similar if not better debut than its predecessor that ended up making almost 800 million. Reviews and word of mouth have been extremely good too. Now the following week, which was the most crucial, it dropped at 65% but there's no doubt it happened because of the Barbenheimer phenomenon stealing both its hype and its screens. Oppenheimer ended up having IMAX exclusivity for over a month! You can see that it in week 3 it had a 45% drop and week 4 a 37%. Those were some damn good legs but by then it was too late.

It's clear that if it had opened at a date with less competition it would probably end up making something closer to what the previous two films did.

As for the ballooned (due to Covid) 291 million budget you keep mentioning ultimately doesn't matter because as I said it's the gross budget, whereas the net budget is 219 million because of a 71 million return the studio got last September by the insurance company. It was confirmed by Paramount itself and you can read about it here. It happened with The Marvels as well, where it originally cost 275 million, got some money back and ended up at 220. So if The Little Mermaid broke even with a 240 million budget, Dead Reckoning eventually managed to do it as well.

 

[Cap2024]

In terms of Mission Impossible, respectfully, you are wrong on both ends.

I agree that the fatigue is not just for superhero films, it's with some blockbuster franchises in general, as there were indeed numerous examples pointing to that last year, but there were no actual signs that MI was one of them. The numbers speak for themselves.

Fallout opened at 155 million worldwide while Dead Reckoning, two days earlier, at 235. Which means it had a very similar if not better debut than its predecessor that ended up making almost 800 million. Reviews and word of mouth have been extremely good too. Now the following week, which was the most crucial, it dropped at 65% but there's no doubt it happened because of the Barbenheimer phenomenon stealing both its hype and its screens. Oppenheimer ended up having IMAX exclusivity for over a month! You can see that it in week 3 it had a 45% drop and week 4 a 37%. Those were some damn good legs but by then it was too late.

It's clear that if it had opened at a date with less competition it would probably end up making something closer to what the previous two films did.

As for the ballooned (due to Covid) 291 million budget you keep mentioning ultimately doesn't matter because as I said it's the gross budget, whereas the net budget is 219 million because of a 71 million return the studio got last September by the insurance company. It was confirmed by Paramount itself and you can read about it here. It happened with The Marvels as well, where it originally cost 275 million, got some money back and ended up at 220. So if The Little Mermaid broke even with a 240 million budget, Dead Reckoning eventually managed to do it as well.

That’s good to hear the budget for all of these films became lower.

While MI opened big there is also the chance of it being another case of a film being front loaded with a noticeable drop off. It would be one thing if it simply underperformed , but it hit a *seventeen year low*. As said, it still reads to me like another franchise drop-off that runs along with the pattern last year of long-running franchises not doing well. All studios were surprised by just how much they each dropped.

 

[Filmfreak]

That’s good to hear the budget for all of these films became lower.

While MI opened big there is also the chance of it being another case of a film being front loaded with a noticeable drop off. It would be one thing if it simply underperformed , but it hit a *seventeen year low*. As said, it still reads to me like another franchise drop-off that runs along with the pattern last year of long-running franchises not doing well. All studios were surprised by just how much they each dropped.

I don't know. Mission Impossible has never been a front loaded franchise like Marvel. And the aforementioned subsequent legs alongside the extremely good reviews and word of mouth suggest it would have made significantly more if it wasn't for the big drop in the second week.

 

[Mysteryman]

In terms of Mission Impossible, respectfully, you are wrong on both ends.

I agree that the fatigue is not just for superhero films, it's with some blockbuster franchises in general, as there were indeed numerous examples pointing to that last year, but there were no actual signs that MI was one of them. The numbers speak for themselves.

Fallout opened at 155 million worldwide while Dead Reckoning, two days earlier, at 235. Which means it had a very similar if not better debut than its predecessor that ended up making almost 800 million. Reviews and word of mouth have been extremely good too. Now the following week, which was the most crucial, it dropped at 65% but there's no doubt it happened because of the Barbenheimer phenomenon stealing both its hype and its screens. Oppenheimer ended up having IMAX exclusivity for over a month! You can see that it in week 3 it had a 45% drop and week 4 a 37%. Those were some damn good legs but by then it was too late.

It's clear that if it had opened at a date with less competition it would probably end up making something closer to what the previous two films did.

As for the ballooned (due to Covid) 291 million budget you keep mentioning ultimately doesn't matter because as I said it's the gross budget, whereas the net budget is 219 million because of a 71 million return the studio got last September by the insurance company. It was confirmed by Paramount itself and you can read about it here. It happened with The Marvels as well, where it originally cost 275 million, got some money back and ended up at 220. So if The Little Mermaid broke even with a 240 million budget, Dead Reckoning eventually managed to do it as well.

THANK YOU!

 

[Cap2024]

I don't know. Mission Impossible has never been a front loaded franchise like Marvel. And the aforementioned subsequent legs alongside the extremely good reviews and word of mouth suggest it would have made significantly more if it wasn't for the big drop in the second week.

It is also rare that a film series hits a seventeen year low.

As said, I can’t be convinced that merely underperforming and hitting a seventeen year low are the same thing or are on remotely the same level; one is a minor bump the other - massive.

I love the MI films, but I just can’t see hitting a seventeen year low as simply underperforming.

 

[Filmfreak]

It is also rare that a film series hits a seventeen year low.

As said, I can’t be convinced that merely underperforming and hitting a seventeen year low are the same thing or are on remotely the same level; one is a minor bump the other - massive.

I love the MI films, but I just can’t see hitting a seventeen year low as simply underperforming.

If competition by a global cinematic phenomenon in what turned out to be collectively the fourth biggest box office in movie history, doesn't convince you that is the main reason for a franchise's decline, which otherwise followed the footsteps of previous entries, then you'll see how well MI8 is going to perform. If it has similar reception and not as huge competition as Dead Reckoning, I can guarantee you it's going to make big numbers again.

 

[Cap2024]

If competition by a global cinematic phenomenon in what turned out to be collectively the fourth biggest box office in movie history, doesn't convince you that is the main reason for a franchise's decline, which otherwise followed the footsteps of previous entries, then you'll see how well MI8 is going to perform. If it has similar reception and not as huge competition as Dead Reckoning, I can guarantee you it's going to make big numbers again.

And if it and other long-running franchises continue to perform not up to par with years past you’ll see that there has been a changing of the guard.

Ps. I’m not saying anything radically new concerning how films performed last year. As shown in the attached box office breakdown article and even Iger straying from the classic Hollywood thought pattern of milking film series as long as one can. From 2023, audiences post covid want newness rather than fourth, fifth, sixth, etc. iterations of the same.

Adding: I should clarify this doesn’t mean non-IP, rather new-to-film IP a la Barbie, Mario, and most recently Dune.

Disney CEO Bob Iger Says MCU Needs ‘Newness,’ but There’s ‘Nothing Off’ About Marvel Brand: ‘Do You Need a Third and Fourth’ Sequel?

Disney CEO Bob Iger is questioning whether there needs to be three or four sequels for any given Marvel character.

variety.com

 

[Filmfreak]

And if it and other long-running franchises continue to perform not up to par with years past you’ll see that there has been a changing of the guard.

Ps. I’m not saying anything radically new concerning how films performed last year. As shown in the attached box office breakdown article and even Iger straying from the classic Hollywood thought pattern of milking film series as long as one can. From 2023, audiences post covid want newness rather than fourth, fifth, sixth, etc. iterations of the same.

Adding: I should clarify this doesn’t mean non-IP, rather new-to-film IP a la Barbie, Mario, and most recently Dune.

Disney CEO Bob Iger Says MCU Needs ‘Newness,’ but There’s ‘Nothing Off’ About Marvel Brand: ‘Do You Need a Third and Fourth’ Sequel?

Disney CEO Bob Iger is questioning whether there needs to be three or four sequels for any given Marvel character.

variety.com

Oh I already mentioned that I absolutely saw fatigue and a tired audience in numerous instances last year, even beyond superhero films. I get your point and I generally agree that people now seem to want to go to the cinema to see things that don't feel more of the same, even if it means a fresh twist in a familiar property. They need convincing that they shouldn't wait for something to hit streaming and in many cases they'll embrace a cinematic event if they feel it's worth it. All signs show to me that MI can be that experience if it is released under normal circumstances.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

• pandemic altering audience taste and behavior like 9/11/2001 did
• too many movies made (too much supply and not enough demand)
• audiences have not returned to theaters at pre-2020 rates
• consumer money and time spent on home video streaming doesn't end up as money spent at a theater (one method's gain is the other method's loss)

I think there's a lot of factors at play. These are just some.

 

[Filmfreak]

Short theatrical windows play a huge part as well. People just wait to catch most things at home if half of the movies appear in a platform in 3-6 weeks. And the fact that there's a big decline in quality lately makes the Hollywood fatigue seem more apparent.

 

[Sithborg]

Last year was bad because a lot of the backed up pipeline was finally starting to come out. There were a ton of blockbusters, almost every week it felt like.

 

[Cap2024]

Short theatrical windows play a huge part as well. People just wait to catch most things at home if half of the movies appear in a platform in 3-6 weeks. And the fact that there's a big decline in quality lately makes the Hollywood fatigue seem more apparent.

I’d say that’s the egg with covid being the chicken. Prior to covid theaters basically were able to restrict studios from tightening the windows. Once theaters went into a free fall due to covid, studios pushed for tighter windows as they all had streaming platforms and they had more room to negotiate. There were articles at the time about studios having more negotiating room.

I’m unsure if studios quite knew how much that would impact box office though. It was more an experiment, I think, and due to covid a prolonged one that retrained how general audiences choose when to go to the movies.

 

[Filmfreak]

I’d say that’s the egg with covid being the chicken. Prior to covid theaters basically were able to restrict studios from tightening the windows. Once theaters went into a free fall due to covid, studios pushed for tighter windows as they all had streaming platforms and they had more room to negotiate. There were articles at the time about studios having more negotiating room.

I’m unsure if studios quite knew how much that would impact box office though. It was more an experiment, I think, and due to covid a prolonged one that retrained how general audiences choose when to go to the movies.

WB is the worst offender, not just for back then where they simultaneously released an entire year's worth of slate in their platform, but even now after all this time and with a different regime taking over, one that supposedly supports theatrical releases, they still have a 45 days window, even for films like Barbie and Dune.

 

[Cap2024]

WB is the worst offender, not just for back then where they simultaneously released an entire year's worth of slate in their platform, but even now after all this time and with a different regime taking over, one that supposedly supports theatrical releases, they still have a 45 days window, even for films like Barbie and Dune.

Zaslav is absolutely terrible. He’s a cell phone guy, not a movie guy and it absolutely shows.

I also think he might be up to something. The frequency in which he cancels films for a tax cut is just odd. Especially the Coyote film.

Studios on the level sometimes cancel films, but that’s when those movies are beyond terrible. Coyote was raking in glowing reviews from everybody that has seen it. What makes that even odder is Zaslav admitted he hasn’t seen it.

He took what was once a prestigious company which creatives could trust and destroyed its reputation.

While Warners has still taken risks in recent years that highly regard the filmmaker - Barbie and Dune - I’m pretty sure both started before him.

 

[Filmfreak]

Zaslav is the absolute worst and that says something. He doesn't believe cartoon projects can make money and maybe thought it would be another case of Space Jam 2. Also he wants to make pocket change money in the short term and has no interest in investing in anything, including good relationship with talent. I don't think Coyote vs ACME has many chances of seeing the light of day but technically it hasn't been cancelled yet. Reports are saying it may still have a chance, so let's hope it does.

 

[blueharvest]

Nelson Peltz withholds votes from Disney CEO Bob Iger in proxy battle

The move is hardly shocking, given the acrimonious nature of the battle. In recent weeks, Disney has stepped up its attacks on Trian and Peltz.

www.cnbc.com

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Hopefully Disney tells Peltz to go pound sand.

 

[blueharvest]

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

Settlement reached in lawsuit between Disney and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' allies

Allies of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Disney have reached a settlement agreement in a state court fight over how Walt Disney World is developed in the future.

apnews.com

 

[DJ Kornphlake]

It’s amusing DeSantis thinks he’ll have a lasting impact on Disney.

 

[blueharvest]

 

[Cap2024]

Despite headline, thankfully there's this paragraph in it:

"With 1.8 billion shares outstanding, Disney may not have a lot to fear from just CalPERS., who is one of the top 40 shareholders in the company."

 

[Mysteryman]

Despite headline, thankfully there's this paragraph in it:

"With 1.8 billion shares outstanding, Disney may not have a lot to fear from just CalPERS., who is one of the top 40 shareholders in the company."

Funny how they BURIED that, isn't it?