Originally Posted By leemac <<I really like 'Hunchback of Notre Dame' The animation is really first-rate all around. The opening scene with Clopin is just fantastic -- and the 'Hellfire' sequence is beautifully done. And, overall, the songs are quite good. As you mentioned, had the comedy of the three gargoyle sidekicks been toned down just a bit (and their ridiculous musical number in Act Two been eliminated), it would be a better movie in my opinion. I'm a big fan of 'Tarzan' too.>> I knew there were a host of reasons why I like you Jim! Hunchback is exactly the type of animated feature that WDAS should be making sporadically - an adult-focused feature dealing with adult themes. I also find the A Guy Like You sequence to be entirely superfluous but the rest of the movie is amazing. Heaven's Light/Hellfire is not only Menken's best work ever but the animation is jaw-dropping (Disney should never have let the Brizzi brothers leave - even their work in the DTV stuff like A Goofy Movie and DuckTales the Movie is excellent) - second only to the Firebird Suite as the finest animated sequence from the past 20 years IMHO. TARZAN is also an excellent feature. I'm also surprised that the music seems to have stood the test of time - it was definitely risky to pick Collins (and it should only have ever been for one feature - Brother Bear's music didn't work at all) but not having first-person "break into song" moments worked for TARZAN.
Originally Posted By leemac <<<<It has nothing to do with accounting - it is purely a summation of the costs. The accounting is complex - you typically capitalize costs and amortise over the life of a product>> LOL Only someone that does not work in accounting would say that. How the accounting looks is all that counts and no modern Corp uses a cash basis in their accounting. Management will only see GAAP and TAX basis numbers which can be night and day different from the actual cash received. Outside of Walt Disney Studios the individual movies will not even be broken out on the balance sheets.>> Thanks for the chuckle. andyll, meet Lee - CPA. Management accounts often present information that doesn't conform to GAAP and external reporting. Studio accounting is hugely complex and they often won't know the true accounting for a feature until the quarter-end when the SEC filings are due (you can't look into your crystal ball to determine the amortisation period until the movie is released). Therefore monthly management accounts are often prepared on a different basis. Rich Ross will unquestionably know exactly how much each movie costs and what its revenue streams are - they are needed for participant royalties etc. GAAP is rarely the basis for calculating back-end deals. Just ask Katzenberg about the machinations of Disney's studio accounting.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>andyll, meet Lee - CPA.<< "Boy, if life were only like this!" >>Maximus and Pascal were, at best, no better than Abu, and Abu wasn't even the main comic relief in Aladdin. etc.<< Well, that's opinions for you. Maximus and Pascal were FAR better than Abu - better timing, better animation, and funnier. And if by "main comic relief" you mean the Genie then that's apples and orangutans, and if you mean Iago, well he wasn't even funny. I will DEFINITELY argue about the "relative mediocrity" of the songs. Like I said, I just saw Little Mermaid immediately followed by I See the Light. No relative mediocrity there. Being unable to keep track of Tangled's plot is not Tangled's fault. Gothel's deal with the brothers, for example, was that they would get "the girl with the magical hair" AND revenge on Flynn in exchange for the crown. And did you even SEE the end? Different strokes, I guess. I liked Tarzan ... somewhat. Couldn't really get into it, though, and haven't watched it much since it came out. As for Hunchback? Blehh. I really don't get what it is about Hellfire that people are so nuts about.
Originally Posted By Christi22222 >>and if you mean Iago, well he wasn't even funny<< Funny you say that! In my house, we don't re-watch Aladdin even though we all liked it a lot. But even when my son was little, none of us could stand listening to Iago!! Of course we also don't watch Mermaid because same son is now 12 and he has this huge thing about not liking mermaids. My husband keeps saying wait a year, because then my son will have a different huge thing about mermaids and we can watch it all the time! lol! Eeek!
Originally Posted By leemac <<Different strokes, I guess.>> Ain't that the truth! I'm still amazed that an animation aficionado like yourself can't understand what an incredible piece of animation the Hellfire sequence is from Hunchback but then raves about Tangled which is about as unique and original as a tin of Spam. Thank God that creativity appreciation isn't objective - life would be dull. ))
Originally Posted By leemac <<But even when my son was little, none of us could stand listening to Iago!!>> Iago isn't really Iago - he is Gilbert Gottfried as an animated character. I'm not a fan by any stretch but I always thought that his ranting wasn't excessive. He also is an important character - he isn't a throw-away sidekick. It is incredible how many of those movies from The Little Mermaid through to Home on the Range utilized well-known actors merely playing themselves (or playing themselves as their most famous creations) - and it is amazing how some worked exquisitely (Robin Williams as the Genie), some worked some of the time (David Spade as Kuzco) whilst others failed (Roseanne Barr in HOTR). On the other hand it is amazing how Pixar have hit the voice talent out of the ballpark with every movie.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>can't understand what an incredible piece of animation the Hellfire sequence is<< Tell ya what ... I'll watch it again first chance I get - it's been awhile - and come back and report. My main recollection of it was "OK, seen this before." Which, I guess with the current discussion, is pretty dang ironic, huh.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>how many of those movies from The Little Mermaid through to Home on the Range utilized well-known actors merely playing themselves<< Well, actually The Jungle Book through Home on the Range, and toss in Alice in Wonderland for good measure. Yoo-oo-oo, I wanna be like you-oo-oo! ;-)
Originally Posted By leemac ^^ Very true - I don't know much about the likes of Phil Harris and Stirling Holloway compared with the comics of the past few decades (was Stirling even a comic?). And thanks for trying Hellfire again. Please send royalty payments to WDAS - they need the help.
Originally Posted By andyll <<andyll, meet Lee - CPA.>> Then you know management can make the numbers say what you they want. Want it to look successful finacially? Write off all the earlier work as a failed project and included only the direct costs of the final film. Want it to look like a failure... include the full 260 <<Management accounts often present information that doesn't conform to GAAP and external reporting. >> Certainly they do. And I've seen plenty of examples of spliting, combining, aggregating, grouping, and footnoting the numbers to best present the face you want to present. <<Studio accounting is hugely complex and they often won't know the true accounting for a feature until the quarter-end when the SEC filings are due>> They also go across segments. I just looked at the latest filings and they don't break down the Studio segment into individual films. (other then footnotes) I'm sure within the segment itself they have detailed balance sheets but I don't know how that handle cross segment expenses/revenue. I did see they impair failed project capital costs so their accounting would allow them to do that for part of Tangled if they want to.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <I knew there were a host of reasons why I like you Jim!> It's a short list leemac -- but thanks! And right back atcha! <^^ Very true - I don't know much about the likes of Phil Harris and Stirling Holloway compared with the comics of the past few decades (was Stirling even a comic?).> Phil Harris was a popular guy for the animators of the 1960s -- he was on the Jack Benny show, had his own TV show and so forth...Maybe you could liken him to a Jerry Seinfeld in his day. Sterling Holloway was a utility character actor, starting in the silent era even, and of course all his voice work in Disney movies. But I think the animators -- and Walt -- used actors who they knew and who were popular. Even Louis Prima was big. Anyway...blah, blah, blah...
Originally Posted By cheesybaby Tangled continues to hold very nicely, particularly weekdays. Based on its first couple of weeks, the conventional wisdom (on the boards) was that it would top out at $150m. But it is at $146.9m now, and still doing over $2m per day. On Monday 12/27 it came in at #6 and did $3.2m, more than any day of its weekend.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo It will be interesting to see how it does when it opens in the UK at the end of January. No real advertising as of yet over here except for one toy ad. Though DLP converted the Rapunzel tower in Storybookland to look more like the one in Tangled.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: You'll have to be the one who goes out and advertises Rapunzel's movie, then, davewasbaloo, duckling. I mean, if Disney hasn't been doing a very good job of it where you live, then you'll have to do it for them. Do it for Rapunzel, herself, because she needs you and deserves all the help she can get! ORGOCH: I guess...Anyways, here in Morva they don't have no movie theatres so if'n we wants ta see a show the local 'talent' goes an' acts out all the latest movies in the town square. Sometimes they does it in the afternoons an' sometims they does it at night. They's been actin' out the story a Rapurplepunzel fer the past month, now, ta record crowds. I think I must a counted close ta 20 peasants watchin' it just yesterday. ORDDU: Really? That's much more than the number of people I counted watching Morva's version of Harry Potter. When they acted that one out, there were only 10 peasants watching...
Originally Posted By cheesybaby $168m domestic as the kids go back to school. Still #6 after 6 weeks of release. Great hair. I mean, legs. I mean,... hairy legs?
Originally Posted By basil fan For those of you who liked Tangled, it comes to DVD this spring. Disney Villains <a href="http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/disney/villain.html" target="_blank">http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/...ain.html</a>
Originally Posted By Erjontem Now at $190MM domestic! (Or rather, 189.6.) And we're looking at $440MM+ internationally, with still quite a bit of time left in some major markets! Not too shabby! Not phenomenal by the standards of recent CGI blockbusters (including Despicable Me and How to Train your Dragon), and no better than Tarzan if you adjust for inflation... But still, this movie has legs, and even the optimistic opening-weekend-adjusted estimates of the fall predicted a range starting around $175MM. Methinks WDAS has nothing to be disappointed about! Now the question is: will the movie break $200 MM domestic?
Originally Posted By Erjontem For what it's worth, I predict a final gross of just under $200 MM domestic, and just OVER $500 MM worldwide. Pretty good numbers, all things considered!
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Well it opened in the UK 3 days ago ( crazy as it is competing with Gnomeo and Julliet, and it is not school vacation time for 6 weeks). It will be interesting to see how it does. They now seem to be pluging it hard on TV. The ads do nothing for me, I would be unlikely to bother if it were not for the rave revues I read on here.
