Originally Posted By skinnerbox Interesting how all of the TRON talk has died off, just like the box office numbers. (TRON supposedly fell out of the top 10 this past weekend.) And two major contributing "insider" posters to the TRON threads on MC have been banned and suspended. Make of that what you will. Worldwide box was still under $350 million, roughly $345 million, this past week. Updates to the foreign numbers will bring a slight increase, but not by much. Overseas ticket sales have been much worse than even I was expecting, especially in Asia, which is typically more favorable to geeky nerdy films like TRON. TRON has had plenty of time both here and abroad to generate buzz and positive word of mouth. But this movie is not strongly resonating with audiences. Anywhere! It's definitely a niche film with a small but ardent fanbase. (Yes, I'm looking at you, Dave.) At the rate this film is losing traction, it won't even do half of what Alice did. It will fall short of that figure ($512mil) by at least $100 million. And that's got to be disappointing to Disney, no matter what the TRON fans believe and post online. Is it too soon to call this film a failure? Not anymore.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo TRON Fanboi and proud of it. But then again, I have never been mainstream (except maybe my Star Wars geekyness) For Sarah and I to go, it cost us $32 just for the movie and a pair of 3D glasses. Needless to say, we do not go to the movies often when we can buy 2 DVDs for that.
Originally Posted By JeffG >> "Is it too soon to call this film a failure? Not anymore. " << Whether or not the film can be considered a success is highly debatable and probably will never really be decided as the film turned out to be neither a blockbuster nor a bomb. This sort of "in-between" film is really hard to measure. There are ample ways to spin the box-office to support either viewpoint. I suspect Disney will be closely looking at home video and merchandise sales to make the final determination of whether to continue the franchise. On merchandise, I've heard both good and bad from different "inside" sources. Again it seems to depend on whether the source has a generally positive or negative view towards the film and/or the current management at the studio. Personally, I really don't know, although I think it is pretty questionable to use the word "failure" to describe any film that grossed in the $350 million range. -Jeff
Originally Posted By Longhorn12 >TRON has had plenty of time both here and abroad to generate buzz and positive word of mouth. But this movie is not strongly resonating with audiences.< I'm starting to think the campaign to get buzz generated was started too early. The original is a lovable, but very campy film. I think people lost sight of that and went into Tron 2 expecting the next Avatar. I loved the movie and was extremely satisfied with it, because I got Tron 2. Not Avatar 1.5 3D gamechanger edition.
Originally Posted By Christi22222 ^^^I think both are good points. Buzz too early is really starting to be a problem. For a really solidly established franchise (Harry Potter, Pirates), you seem to be able to get away with it. For others, it seems to lose the momentum somewhere. And expectations are definitely a biggie for film goers. Buzz is good, but you sure as heck better not over-promise and under-deliver. Kiss of death on the big blockbuster wannabe films. (Avatar, anyone?)
Originally Posted By Christi22222 ^^^^OOOPS!! In that last quip, I meant "Last Airbender." Around our house, we still call THAT show, Avatar. My bad!
Originally Posted By JenniBarra >>But then again, I have never been mainstream (except maybe my Star Wars geekyness)<< I guess you haven't met some of the Star Wars geeks I have. (And I say that as a SW fan myself!) I once overheard a bizarre conversation about a specific episode of the Clone Wars TV series and what if acid saliva had been added to their gene pool...
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Hey -- I used to think I was a Disneyland Fan -- that is, until The Intrrnet went mainstream and I found that my fandom was very very mild in comparison.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Lol - so true Jim. True Jennibarra, for 5 years my son had a Jedi tail, and we put Jedi as our religion in the last census.
Originally Posted By JenniBarra >>Hey -- I used to think I was a Disneyland Fan -- that is, until The Intrrnet went mainstream and I found that my fandom was very very mild in comparison.<< I thought you were going to start talking about Patton Oswalt. <g> >>True Jennibarra, for 5 years my son had a Jedi tail, and we put Jedi as our religion in the last census.<< I had wondered about that - how many list it as a true religion vs. smart alecks and/or social commentators. I don't know if you've ever seen it, but Wikipedia actually has an entry called something like "Jedi census phenomenon."
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo The reason we put it, besides being huge Star Wars fans, we are agnostic (ish). We believe there is a greater force, but cannot subscribe to Christianity, Judism, Islam, Buddhism etc. It was an apt fit. I was very upset when they converted our entry to Athiest. Again this year, we are likely to enter Jedi.
Originally Posted By Socrates Maybe you are a Deist? Socrates "The unexamined life is not worth living."
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Perhaps, though agnosticism is probably to most appropriate label to apply.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Personally, I really don't know, although I think it is pretty questionable to use the word "failure" to describe any film that grossed in the $350 million range.>> That makes no sense - it is all down to the production costs. If Avatar had stalled at $350m it would have been a disaster for Lightstorm and Fox as the production costs were north of $250m. However you compare that to a cheap movie that hits a home run - Passion of the Christ was a $30m movie that grossed over $600m globally. Anything that you whack out there as a tentpole is a gamble - as skinnerbox alluded it was a pretty disastrous year for the studio beyond two movies (and both TS3 and Alice cost $200m each before marketing costs) - the studio dumped $150m+ on Sorcerer's Apprentice (which was terrible) and $200m on Prince of Persia (not quite as bad). The entire slate is skewed - did the company genuinely believe that it could have 6 tentpoles last year? And then it only released another handful of movies (The Last Song, Oceans, Secretariat, Step Up 3-D, When In Rome and You Again). The balance is all out when you have 6 $200m+ movies in a year, 6 far smaller movies and nothing in the middle. The summer 2011 schedule looks equally odd with POTC4, Cars 2 and Winnie The Pooh within 6 weeks or so of each other. Granted I hated TRON: Legacy - it was a mess of a movie - but I just can't fathom why the company released two $200m+ movies in quick succession and expected both to keep their 3D and IMAX screens when they were in competition with each other and other (even worse - I'm looking at you Yogi) product.
Originally Posted By leemac <<As for TRON merchandise not selling well, in the UK, I have not seen any other than the sound track and game.>> To be fair DCP couldn't get many licensees interested in the movie. There were some odd premium specialty folks (Oakley had a pair of sunglasses and a backpack) but there were little in the way of toys. Tellingly the European Disney Stores opted to push the merch to the back for Christmas and only began to bring it further forward after the holidays - they didn't want to distract from the stuff that they knew would sell (like Toy Story and Christmas-branded stuff). Most toy stores are selling the TRON: Legacy toys for at least 25% off now.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Thanks much for the info, Lee. Domestic box has definitely dried up, and the international markets aren't doing much better. Domestic weekend estimates are less than $1.5 million; it's earning less than $2 million per week now. I can't imagine this film earning more than $175 million by the end of its domestic run in three weeks, which is barely what it cost to produce. Worldwide box will stall out between $400 and $415 million, which is $100 million less than even half of what Alice earned. For a film that was expected to do Alice numbers, this is a big fail for Disney.
Originally Posted By brotherdave I understand the "economics" of why, but it still boggles the mind that a movie that may gross just over $400 million is considered a "flop". Hollywood is such a strange "business"...
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA When it comes right down to it, Disney had no business making make 'Tron: Legacy' such a huge, expensive thing... Especially doing so without having a decent script.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Anything that you whack out there as a tentpole is a gamble... The summer 2011 schedule looks equally odd...<< Which really confuses me about the new studio approach. I don't remember if it was Ross or Iger, but I read something about a year ago that said that they were basically doing away with all of the smaller films and relying solely on the tent poles. It's completely in line with Iger's strategy of pushing brands, sequels, and existing content, rather than new creative things to actually create that kind of content. By removing the 'smaller' films, they lose a lot of the chances to make future franchises, and every single thing they make will need to be a hit. With all of those big-budget films, they simply can't afford to have an "okay" movie. And that's just not a smart gamble to make. Only part of the reason I'm getting pretty tired of Iger these days...
Originally Posted By Christi22222 I guess the part I actually like about this strategy is that it will kill itself very quickly!! If all of the movies have to be hits, and that is inherently impossible, they will have to change their ways. Yay! But along the way, I guess they need a lesson in hit making 101. I.E. if it were that easy, everyone would do it!
