Originally Posted By leemac <<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"...>> Ever since b.o. grosses have "mattered" it has been a strange business. What other industry recognizes gross revenue on their product when their actual cut is significantly lower? Disney won't "book" $375m on TRON - it will book its take once the exhibitor has taken their cut (which isn't trifling). The odd thing is that most studios negotiate their own rates dependent on the movie - so some studios will make more than others on a similar release. All very odd.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Especially doing so without having a decent script.>> I blame JJ Abrams for a lot of this - it seems any writer/producer that works with him suddenly becomes hot and is given a free rein to do what they like. Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman worked on both Transformers movies and the atrocious The Island - plus Star Trek which I didn't like. Then you have Ed Kitsis and Adam Horowitz who did TRON: Legacy (both Lost alumni) - who are now writing the Ouija board game movie.
Originally Posted By Christi22222 ^^^I'd tend to agree, but I did like Star Trek quite a lot. What did you not like about it? Were you a Trekkie from another generation?
Originally Posted By Anatole69 ^^ I liked Star Trek a lot too, and I thought it was a good script. - Anatole
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA I'm not a Trekkie by any stretch of the imagination, but I did enjoy the new 'Star Trek' movie -- it has a respect for the original source material, and also has terrific sense of humor. It's unfortunate that humor is almost completely lacking from 'Tron: Legacy.' As a result, it just becomes boring. <who are now writing the Ouija board game movie.> of course there's a Ouija board game movie...*sigh*
Originally Posted By Christi22222 >>of course there's a Ouija board game movie...*sigh*<< Agreed!!! Originality, anyone? Anyone?
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Too bad Kitsis and Horowitz didn't use the Ouija Board earlier to help them write TRON: Legacy.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox So... the film's been out in the US for a little over 8 weeks now, and it's earned just under $170 million for domestic box. Foreign box continues to slug along; should be interesting to see what performance was for the past week. (The week prior to last, TRON only earned a bit more than $7 million international.) HEY LEEMAC!! Sorry... didn't mean to shout. Some poster over at MiceChat stated that his buddy inside Burbank claims TRON only cost $90 million instead of $170 million, and that execs are "relieved" with how the film has done. Earlier, you stated that it was actually more than the reported $170 million, and that distribution and promotional costs in the US alone were more than $100 million. I just don't see how Disney cannot be disappointed with the overall response to TRON, both in and out of the theater: * The film will not do even half of what Alice did, which is what studio execs expected. * The toys did not sell well; they're all now discounted and showing up in bargain bins. * The video game per Disney's own admission to the LA Times, sold only 20% of what they anticipated. * The Blu-Ray/DVD pre-orders on Amazon are far behind Deathly Hallows Part I and Tangled. Lee... what have you heard, if anything?
Originally Posted By FerretAfros The Annual Report came out a couple weeks ago (it was discussed at the beginning of the most recent LP Podcast, including some quotes about this), and it sounded like they were trying to make the best of an unfortunate situation. Iger's letter to the shareholders praised Tangled as a critical and commercial success, and discussed Alice's impressive numbers, while it simply mentioned that Tron had pretty visuals, avoiding any comments of real substance on the matter. While it doesn't say that it didn't perform up to expectations, I think the lack of comments about the finances of Tron tells us everything we need to know.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>>* The video game per Disney's own admission to the LA Times, sold only 20% of what they anticipated<<< there is a good reason for this, most Disney video games are of a VERy poor quality. Many gamers waited for the reviews and the reviews were not great.
Originally Posted By leemac Skinnerbox - we were told by a SVP at the Studio that TRON had $220m in production costs and $110m in marketing and distribution costs. You couldn't even buy the SFX for that movie for $90m! I would be amazed if a third movie was made. Sure it is possible if it fits into some grand master plan but I can't see the economic justification.
Originally Posted By leemac And the Company has never had a coherent plan for attacking the gaming market. It has tried both developing in-house and buying developers and neither has worked. A lot of capital has been wasted trying to compete in this sector.
Originally Posted By Longhorn12 >And the Company has never had a coherent plan for attacking the gaming market. It has tried both developing in-house and buying developers and neither has worked. A lot of capital has been wasted trying to compete in this sector.< < rant > The problem with Disney is they fall into the trap that most companies do. Shovelware. It doesn't matter if it's a good movie or show. Make a very basic and cheap side scrolling platformer/puzzle challenge. FOR EVERYTHING. Does Hannah Montana really need 6 or 7 games? When any company, especially Disney, has a good and original idea the results are usually great. Like... Donald in Cold Shadow Toy Story Kingdom Hearts Epic Mickey < /rant > tl;dr They have proven they can make great video games with their IPs they just decide not to, and can't figure out why people don't want to buy their bad video games.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Agreed, WDW Magical Racing, Kingdom Hearts and Epic Mickey (to a lesser degree) were all very good games (compared to other games on the market), but they are less than 5% of the games Disney has gotten out there (Pirates of the Caribbean, Cars, Wall-E, Toy Story Mania and others made it into our house, but they are very poor).
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo So now, we are less likely to buy a Disney game unless it has stellar reviews. Tron sadly has not, and I would love to have it. I bought Tron 2.0 when it first came out, and it was full of bugs. Never again, unless the reviews are great.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<Skinnerbox - we were told by a SVP at the Studio that TRON had $220m in production costs and $110m in marketing and distribution costs. You couldn't even buy the SFX for that movie for $90m!>> Precisely my thinking, Lee. Given the heavy use of vfx in this film and how heavily it was promoted to the comic/anime crowd, $220 mil for production plus $110 mil for distribution and marketing sounds about right. <<I would be amazed if a third movie was made. Sure it is possible if it fits into some grand master plan but I can't see the economic justification.>> Neither can I. Maybe if merch sales were stronger, but not as weak as they've been. As others have pointed out on other boards, the box for the sequel would most likely be worse, given how little repeat business the first film has done. Even if the second film could be made for $100 mil, why do it if ticket sales would be less and merch sales as weak as the first one? Disney simply does not roll that way. Thanks again, Lee!
