News Round Up 2017



Well, why does Hollywood (not just Disney) get on the sequel train? An original movie has maybe a 50/50 chance of being a hit, regardless of how good it is. A sequel/franchise movie is successful about 80% of the time. As others have pointed out, in recent years when Disney tried something new (Tomorrowland, John Carter, BFG) it often flopped. The re-dos of live action movies are like 5-for-6. (Only the Alice sequel tanked.) It why we are getting so many more. It's why Disney bought Star Wars. It's the norm now. Now, animation is a little different than live action, as there is a much higher rate of success with new ideas - but then you get Good Dinosaur making $125 million while Finding Dory makes $486 million.

That said, new franchises can't start without original ideas, so I really think the SHOULD devote at least 1 or 2 releases a year to new concepts. (Even if "new" is like Pirates.)


Well, the other option is you try new stuff with a lower budget - like all the Blumhouse horror movies, the first ones always have very low budgets. Disney doesn't seem to be able to do anything with a low budget. Even animation, Dreamworks spends a lot less on their films than Disney does (not saying they are the same quality as Disney but you could alternate with a full blown/high-end one and a lower budget one that takes more of a chance on an original concept.)
 
Well, the other option is you try new stuff with a lower budget - like all the Blumhouse horror movies, the first ones always have very low budgets. Disney doesn't seem to be able to do anything with a low budget. Even animation, Dreamworks spends a lot less on their films than Disney does (not saying they are the same quality as Disney but you could alternate with a full blown/high-end one and a lower budget one that takes more of a chance on an original concept.)

I really agree with this. If you have an interesting idea and maybe pull in an old actor who people remember but hasn't been working lately (ie Ethan Hawke for The Purge) you've spent around $5 million and make over $100 million domestically.

I'd love to see Disney make a movie about kids/teenagers in the vein of older kid adventure movies. I feel like they could do this without spending more than a few million.
 


I really agree with this. If you have an interesting idea and maybe pull in an old actor who people remember but hasn't been working lately (ie Ethan Hawke for The Purge) you've spent around $5 million and make over $100 million domestically.

I'd love to see Disney make a movie about kids/teenagers in the vein of older kid adventure movies. I feel like they could do this without spending more than a few million.

Something like the Goonies or even something like Stranger Things would be really cool

Heck, I'd even take a movie version of Kingdom Keepers
 
Well, the other option is you try new stuff with a lower budget - like all the Blumhouse horror movies, the first ones always have very low budgets. Disney doesn't seem to be able to do anything with a low budget. Even animation, Dreamworks spends a lot less on their films than Disney does (not saying they are the same quality as Disney but you could alternate with a full blown/high-end one and a lower budget one that takes more of a chance on an original concept.)

It's weird that more studios don't go the Blumhouse route.

More often than not those Blumhouse movies make well more than their budget.

I'm growing less and less hopeful that someone will make a Star Wars movie that won't be called Star Wars.

Meaning, there could be someone out there that has the best idea for a franchise that will work, but it's not based on anything so the studio's won't give it the attention, time, or money it deserves.

I really agree with this. If you have an interesting idea and maybe pull in an old actor who people remember but hasn't been working lately (ie Ethan Hawke for The Purge) you've spent around $5 million and make over $100 million domestically.

I'd love to see Disney make a movie about kids/teenagers in the vein of older kid adventure movies. I feel like they could do this without spending more than a few million.

With Stranger Things and IT being hot right now, you'd think they would want to capitalize on the trend. Pump out a movie like Goonies, don't be afraid to scare children a little.

EDIT: @TheMaxRebo beat me by less than a minute :)
 
I've always thought studios should look at more mid-budget movies. I think the reason they don't is that a $20 million movie that makes $150 million is still not as good as a $250 million movie that makes $1.4 BILLION.

It was sort of a shame the way back in the nineties there were all these indie studios, and then the big studios bought the indie studios up, and when they weren't making enough money, the shut them down. (I'm talking about studios like Miramax.)

The fact is, a company like Disney isn't going to do "little" anymore. You have to look to places like Hulu and Netflix for this kind of stuff.

And let's not wish that Disney tries to mimic Stranger Things and IT lead to a whole bunch of terrible "80s inspired kids in peril" stuff. I mean Stranger Things was amazing, but so lightning in a bottle. Disney trying to do this would be absolutely terrible.
 
I've always thought studios should look at more mid-budget movies. I think the reason they don't is that a $20 million movie that makes $150 million is still not as good as a $250 million movie that makes $1.4 BILLION.

It was sort of a shame the way back in the nineties there were all these indie studios, and then the big studios bought the indie studios up, and when they weren't making enough money, the shut them down. (I'm talking about studios like Miramax.)

The fact is, a company like Disney isn't going to do "little" anymore. You have to look to places like Hulu and Netflix for this kind of stuff.

And let's not wish that Disney tries to mimic Stranger Things and IT lead to a whole bunch of terrible "80s inspired kids in peril" stuff. I mean Stranger Things was amazing, but so lightning in a bottle. Disney trying to do this would be absolutely terrible.

maybe we just have to wait until they get their streaming system out and then I could see some small/mid budget movies go straight there and save the movie theater releases for the big movies

and they can do new serials too ... I mean, Star Wars Rebels, while a cartoon, was/is really pretty good
 
Something like the Goonies or even something like Stranger Things would be really cool

Heck, I'd even take a movie version of Kingdom Keepers

Kingdom Keepers would be interesting because they'd have to use the parks.

Speaking of that, do you watch the new Mickey shorts? I love them and they use lots of elements from the old Mickey cartoons and the parks. Their latest episode involved Mickey and Minnie going on the Big Thunder Mountain train (though not really, you'd have to watch) and seeing the old Nature's Wonderland and it even used a scene from the DL railroad Grand Canyon.

It's weird that more studios don't go the Blumhouse route.


With Stranger Things and IT being hot right now, you'd think they would want to capitalize on the trend. Pump out a movie like Goonies, don't be afraid to scare children a little.

EDIT: @TheMaxRebo beat me by less than a minute :)

It's not that I want them to go the nostalgia route...It's more like I wish more studios could make kids movies where it doesn't involve the adults acting like brainless idiots. Something more real. Not sure if that makes sense to anyone since the Goonies did outrageous stuff, but the kids still felt real.

I've always thought studios should look at more mid-budget movies. I think the reason they don't is that a $20 million movie that makes $150 million is still not as good as a $250 million movie that makes $1.4 BILLION.

It was sort of a shame the way back in the nineties there were all these indie studios, and then the big studios bought the indie studios up, and when they weren't making enough money, the shut them down. (I'm talking about studios like Miramax.)

The fact is, a company like Disney isn't going to do "little" anymore. You have to look to places like Hulu and Netflix for this kind of stuff.

And let's not wish that Disney tries to mimic Stranger Things and IT lead to a whole bunch of terrible "80s inspired kids in peril" stuff. I mean Stranger Things was amazing, but so lightning in a bottle. Disney trying to do this would be absolutely terrible.

I feel like the big budget movies survive more on their toy/clothing sales than the actual movie themselves. I don't think IMDB even includes marketing in the budget for a movie. Sometimes I think even those billion dollar movies can have razor thin profit lines, then just make a ton in toy sales.

I am excited about all of Netflix's original content. Oftentimes I find myself going to Netflix for their original, low budget movies because I find them more entertaining than what is in theaters.

I kind of explained about where I was trying to go with my kids type movies. Not sure if I explained it super well though. I don't really need them to go for the nostalgia...just make something new and interesting and good.
 
Speaking of that, do you watch the new Mickey shorts? I love them and they use lots of elements from the old Mickey cartoons and the parks. Their latest episode involved Mickey and Minnie going on the Big Thunder Mountain train (though not really, you'd have to watch) and seeing the old Nature's Wonderland and it even used a scene from the DL railroad Grand Canyon.

I've seen a few but don't watch them regularly - sort of have mixed feelings on the style. That is neat that they reference the parks though
 
I've always thought studios should look at more mid-budget movies. I think the reason they don't is that a $20 million movie that makes $150 million is still not as good as a $250 million movie that makes $1.4 BILLION.

It was sort of a shame the way back in the nineties there were all these indie studios, and then the big studios bought the indie studios up, and when they weren't making enough money, the shut them down. (I'm talking about studios like Miramax.)

The fact is, a company like Disney isn't going to do "little" anymore. You have to look to places like Hulu and Netflix for this kind of stuff.

And let's not wish that Disney tries to mimic Stranger Things and IT lead to a whole bunch of terrible "80s inspired kids in peril" stuff. I mean Stranger Things was amazing, but so lightning in a bottle. Disney trying to do this would be absolutely terrible.

They might for their streaming service! They said they would be putting exclusive content on there and I sort of assummed thats where they were headed with that
 
I sort of like the Tiki Room one

I thought it was odd that some are regularly priced $24.95 and some are regularly priced $24.99 ... like, why bother having a 4 cent difference between them?

When we were there in September this promotion was going on too in many of the stores for a variety of t-shirts...we may have gotten a few t-shirts this way :rolleyes1

Anyways the pricing was like that as well. My guess is normally when they decide not to have this promotion those t-shirts included in the promotion may or may not be away from each other in the store thus the pricing difference. With these above shirts (the tiki room, HM, JC, etc) I'm guessing they were following the pricing structure as the other shirts they do in the promotion even though yes it is odd to place like-style shirts with a small price difference such that they did.

yeah, I get that they are combining different groups of t-shirts together for the promotion ... guess I just find it odd that it is still all Disney controlled why have any shirts at all, on all of property, be 4 cents different ... like have everything end in _.95 or _.99

but I guess I shouldn't be surprised

It's been quite some time, so my memory of this may be questionable. But, back when I worked for Mickey, I asked a follow Cast Member who worked in retail about this 4 cent difference. I was told it was a method used to track the age of the merchandise. If something doesn't sell, it the price gets changed (+/- 4 cents). When space is needed for new items, the old stuff gets sent to the outlets. Instead of scanning SKU codes, they can just grab everything based on the last number of the price.

Like I said, I'm not guaranteeing that information is correct. It's just what I remember.
 
It's been quite some time, so my memory of this may be questionable. But, back when I worked for Mickey, I asked a follow Cast Member who worked in retail about this 4 cent difference. I was told it was a method used to track the age of the merchandise. If something doesn't sell, it the price gets changed (+/- 4 cents). When space is needed for new items, the old stuff gets sent to the outlets. Instead of scanning SKU codes, they can just grab everything based on the last number of the price.

Like I said, I'm not guaranteeing that information is correct. It's just what I remember.

Thanks for sharing - interesting concept and at least provides a reason
 
I've always thought studios should look at more mid-budget movies. I think the reason they don't is that a $20 million movie that makes $150 million is still not as good as a $250 million movie that makes $1.4 BILLION.

I think you were dead on, but I'm glad movies like Moonlight still get made. I feel like the Oscars force the studios to make better movies, and I'm ok with that.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!






Top