Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Over in the "What if TRON fails?" thread on the Live Action board, I posted a link to the latest Harry Knowles article on AICN. He claims that news of a green light for the next TRON film will happen soon. I was shocked at first, but now... I'm starting to think that maybe Disney might be onto something here. When it comes to the Live Action part of the studio, Disney only has Pirates as a bankable franchise. Narnia is gone, Sorcerer's Apprentice was a bust, so what do they have but Capt Jack? And how many more films can Depp keep the franchise afloat? Maybe Disney feels they can actually nurture TRON into a profitable brand if they continue developing it. I know there's going to be an animated TV series, and many insiders have claimed that the proposed TRON-based E-Ticket for TL encompasses brand new technology that will knock the riders' socks off. Heaven knows MK could use something like that, like 10 years ago! It's definitely a gamble. But if the rumors are true, I guess Disney feels like it has no other choice but to dance with the date they done brought.>> I really, really have huge doubts about that. TRON was supposed to be HUGE for Disney. I was told by a Studios guy at an Emmys week function that 'this is our Avatar' ... now he was drinking (naturally!), but still ... Disney is the Tea Party of the Studios. As conservative as they come. And they're going to throw hundreds of millions more (maybe a billion) into a 'franchise' that isn't? Just don't see it.
Originally Posted By Anatole69 According to Box office mojo the original Tron had a production budget of $17 million and a domestic gross of $33 million. That doesn't sound like a bomb to me. - Anatole
Originally Posted By Anatole69 ^^ For the original tron or the sequel? Kind of strange since Avatar hadn't even been made when the first film came out. lol. In any event though, I wouldn't classify the first film as a bomb. - Anatole
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>Kind of strange since Avatar hadn't even been made when the first film came out. lol.<<< The second one, of course.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA The first TRON has historical value, if you're a special effects nerd (guilty!). Beyond that, I would not call the first TRON a popular or financial success. That said -- I'm not of the opinion that an attraction at a Disney Theme Park has to be based on a popular, money-making movie franchise.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<According to Box office mojo the original Tron had a production budget of $17 million and a domestic gross of $33 million. That doesn't sound like a bomb to me. - Anatole>> It was widely considered a flop ... Disney expected Star Wars the first time or something close and they expected Avatar or something close the second time. That doesn't mean they won't push more TRON product forward as they are dry in the franchise department unless it's coming from Pixar. Lots of chatter ...
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I really, really have huge doubts about that. TRON was supposed to be HUGE for Disney. I was told by a Studios guy at an Emmys week function that 'this is our Avatar' ... now he was drinking (naturally!), but still ..." What in the world was he thinking? TRON in no shape or form could ever be as ground breaking or as huge as Avatar was. As of January 12 TRON's worldwide box office is $293,675,806. Here's how TRON's domestic results stack up against the top sci-fi films released over the past three Decembers: <a href="http://boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?id=decemberscifi.htm" target="_blank">http://boxofficemojo.com/showd...cifi.htm</a>
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer ^ Dry in franchises?They still have PotC, Princesses and Tink running around...
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper Tink isn't a franchise. And if you're a movie studio with one franchise(Pirates), you're not happy.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer ^ They are certainly trying to act like she is. And they have Pixar's. But you are on the right Track... Sir Iger of Synergy wants more.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Tink isn't a franchise." The hell she isn't. The Disney Fairies franchise is huge.
Originally Posted By Daannzzz So I guess if the have to, they could do Marvel's Superhero Polynesian review.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<^ Dry in franchises?They still have PotC, Princesses and Tink running around...>> Dry in Live Action franchises. We've been discussing this over on the Live Action board. Pirates is pretty much it for Disney now. Other attempts to develop new live action franchises (Narnia, Prince of Persia, Sorcerer's Apprentice) basically failed.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt That'll probably change as they start bombarding us with Marvel movies.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<The hell she isn't. The Disney Fairies franchise is huge.>> No. No it's not. It hasn't sold nearly as well as they hoped, and the only fairy thats popular is Tinkerbell. Besides to be a movie franchise you know...need to have blockbuster movies.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "It hasn't sold nearly as well as they hoped, and the only fairy thats popular is Tinkerbell." "As they had hoped" is the operative phrase here. According to Disney Consumer Products the franchise has generated $1.3 billion in sales. Who knows what they aimed for, but it's a huge sum by any measure. >>Since its launch in 2005, the Disney Fairies franchise has evolved into a global phenomenon generating $1.3 Billion in worldwide retail sales through a comprehensive publishing program and lifestyle merchandise assortment.<< https://www.disneyconsumerproducts.com/Home/display.jsp?contentId=dcp_home_ourfranchises_disney_fairies_us&language=en&imageShow=0&pressRoom=US®ion=0
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Try this: <a href="http://tiny.cc/gtmoa" target="_blank">http://tiny.cc/gtmoa</a>
