I sometimes watch the box office report by Dan Murrel. He has been tracking the last 5 year before the pandemic, the years since the pandemic and comparing both to the current year. It is very clear that people are no longer going to the movie like they used to and it's become way harder to pick which movies will actually be successful
Funny events in anti-woke world
- Thread starter Agema
- Start date
Recommended Videos
They aren't being racist
You have two different definitions for who a white person. They are out by over 20 %.
You didn't understand what the census graph claimed. Some of those movies you claimed were race swapped cannot be classed as race swapped based on the definition of white from the census graph
They're not racist against white people. Disney are racist against minorities as they are underrepresented. You provided the proof from the census data. Thanks
The Coalition split up.... we're probably going to get a Sky News backed Nationals as the opposition in the long term
That Deadline article has the total cost for a major tentpole release at just over 2x production budget, nowhere near 3x-- it also has the box office ~100m lower than The Numbers.
Anywho, a lot of this seems to rest on those unreported numbers, and the possibility that they completely eat up the remaining revenue. Fair enough for Lightyear and Indiana Jones, that'd shift them into flop territory. Yet if we apply the same ballpark ratio as Deadline reports, most of those films are still turning a profit in the tens or hundreds of millions.
You need to understand the neo-nazi brain; to them white people not being seen as the default 100% of the time is racist to white people.
Because the US box office is a disproportionate percentage of global box office take (~30%). Europe is another huge chunk, and has at least reasonably similar demographics.
And why target your demographics to China, for instance, if China might decide to arbitrarily censor your movie for some ideological reason?
Exactly the opposite. Flatter, not fatter.
I'm just going to invoke my general statement on mods that anyone can mod a single player game however they'd like and it doesn't effect anyone else at all. If they really care about Astarion's ass that's on them.
Disney mostly creates their works by appropriating folk tales as a starting point, why not try to match the demographics of the time/place those folk tales originate from on a work by work basis? Or alternately completely let go of it in all cases - but then you can't complain if (for example) live action Moana has a lead that isn't a Pacific Islander, either.
It's the same logic that says having two men/women kiss each other on-screen is "shoving it down our throats", but full on hetero sex is great.
As I -- and others, now -- said, it fluctuates between two to three times depending on circumstances. Hollywood is just very practiced at obfuscating the true costs of a production, in every case to best-fit their bottom line and demands of their PR departments. It may come as a shock, but Return of the Jedi is one of the biggest flops in film history. Despite $475m in box office against a $32.5m budget, and the 42 years of almost certainly billions' worth of re-releases, residuals, royalties, and merchandise since, it's never turned a profit on paper. That's just how Hollywood operates.
Deadline did report Thor 4's box office correctly; you just didn't parse the itemization right. Deadline in fact reports worldwide box office as $760m. Then it itemized total revenue at $650m, of which theatrical revenue was $350m. Box office is gross and doesn't account for global distribution and revenue-sharing costs; studios don't get 100% of box office.
You don't have to take that from me. That's the rule of thumb as established by a consensus of experts on the film industry, insiders or outsiders. You'd have to work harder to find a source that says otherwise.
I never said otherwise. However, a hundred million dollars' revenue for one movie doesn't stretch very far when the next movie you're looking to fund will cost $250m to produce, let alone market and distribute. A 19% profit is still a 19% profit, whether the item from which you're profiting cost one dollar or a billion and that's maybe one of a half-dozen revenue sources for an entire fiscal year.
The general rule of thumb for determining whether a film breaks even at the box office is if a film makes 2-2.5x its production budget back.
Using the definition you want, Disney is being racist. Why would you make a character that's is described as white, not white? Why would you add girls to the lost BOYS? It's obvious Disney is purposefully casting for diversity just like it was obvious video game main protags were white men. You can't claim one to be racist/sexist, and not claim the other as well.
And, again, why even do this? You're not going to make a movie that's gonna replace a classic and that new race swap version of that character is not going to replace the iconic character. No one will watch the new Little Mermaid even 2 years from now. I bet people even forget they did a Peter Pan remake already.
The world doesn't equally see Disney movies or else the movies would be mainly Asian. Hollywood remade Oldboy for a different audience, the audience that mainly sees Hollywood movies... the same audience Disney makes movies for.
Even allowing for that, a good half of those films are making tens or hundreds of millions. Disney is not losing billions to endless flops.
You had two separate definitions for white
One definition you had was that white people are only European
The second definition of white being that was Europeans, Arabs, Hispanic, Latinos, Turks, Egyptian and other North African people
There is obviously a difference between these two definitions. Instead of noting this discrepancy, you have the fucking gall to blame everyone else for your own mistake.
Disney is not racist. You fucked up
Most of the movies you listed as making a profit did not make a profit. The only ones in your list that probably made decent money was Thor 4, BP2, and Guardians 3. Elemental looked like a massive flop, but it had really long legs and probably ending up making some money. That's not even half, let alone a "good" half.
You can't yell at me for using the wrong definition and then claim that by my definition (when it fits your argument), Disney movies had all these "white" people. Again, it was just the 1st result from a Google search and figured US census data wouldn't lump in latinos because on like every form I fill out, there's always a "white - non hispanic" option.
You're acting like my take is some weird fringe thing when it's not and it's fucking obvious, everyone knows it. Here's the Honest Trailer for Snow White that just dropped yesterday, this is obviously not some right-wing channel or anything. From the video, "and more virtue signaling than a Coachella land acknowledgement". Why are you gaslighting me like this isn't happening when everyone with 2 eyes that isn't heavily biased can see it? At 2:47 in the trailer you see 4 guards Snow White is talking to and it cuts from one guard that is latino, then one white, then the other 2 are black and asian; this is not how communities look today let alone in the time that a story like Snow White would be set at. You have to purposefully cast like this for that to happen. The US is really diverse for a country but that diversity is not spread evenly across the country, people tend to live with their own people, whether hundreds/thousands of years ago or today.
the dog murderer who wrote in her book proudly that she shot her own (kid's!) dog is quite a stunning display of, uh, what's the polite word for this - no wait don't help me I can be nice here for the heartless pet executioner if I try! ...um, stunning display of cognitive absence? it'll have to do, already wasted enough time coddling this psychopath's ego
I've had to put animals -- pets, working animals, and livestock -- down. For slaughter and humane reasons. In the foremost case, poor and rural in the late '80s and early '90s, that didn't mean vet-administered euthanasia. That meant taking the animal to a peaceful spot, giving them as good a thank you and farewell as you can, and using the caliber it takes to ensure it's instant and painless.
She's not wrong to say having to put animals down is a part of farm life. What isn't a part of farm is is poor animal husbandry, which is exactly what putting a puppy down for presumed untrainability, or an intact goat for being cantankerous, is. If you can't handle a 14-month-old pup or a goat that still has his balls, you're just shit at caretaking animals. And it really needn't be said, I sure as hell don't run into many farmers who brag on putting animals down.
Bud, even if we double the production budget, that only shifts 2 into loss territory.
I'm guessing you're considering Little Mermaid to have made money?
It Turns Out The 2023 Little Mermaid Lost Disney Money - IMDb
IMDb, the world's most popular and authoritative source for movie, TV and celebrity content.
www.imdb.com
Using the $250 million production budget, the film needed to gross at least $625 million to break even. Obviously, the film did not do that and thus estimates of its losses came in just shy of $60 million.
However, if you adjust the production budget to the new $297 million number provided by the UK government, the break even point moves to $742.5 million. Thus the losses have also increased to $127.8 million.
Report: 'The Little Mermaid' Production Budget Soared To Nearly $300 Million, More Than Doubling Its Losses At The Box Office
A new report details that recently released The Little Mermaid production budget soared to over $300 million instead of the previously reported $250 million estimate.
boundingintocomics.com