Lilo Numbers Update

[All Aboard]

Through Tuesday, Lilo stands at domestic gross of $130m. Continuing the Tarzan comparison, the loin-clothed one had collected $145m through the same day three years ago. At that point, Tarzan had reached 85% of its ultimate total.

Lilo's legs are tiring faster than Tarzan's. While at nearly 90% of Tarzan's cumulative at this point, the daily comparisons are at 60% to 70% right now (and that keeps shrinking.) If we estimate that Lilo is at 90% of her ultimate total (it actually could be higher), she will finish at $144m.

That would be just slightly better than 4x the $35m opening weekend. That's rather low for a Disney Animated feature, which tend to do 5x or a little better.

I really thought solid word of mouth was going to carry this film further after the very good opening.

 

[Bstanley]

You know...Lilo is a lot smaller than Tarzan...and Tarzan had all those vines to swing on...

Come on $150M!

 

[kidzmom3]

it seems a real shame, because I thought it was a very good movie. But i won't take the kids to see it again until it goes to Hollywood hits (a discount movie theatre).

 

[DisneyKidds]

Time for my prognostication....

While Lilo may have tired quicker, I bet she'll continue on at her slower pace longer than the king of the jungle did. I know quite a few people who haven't seen Lilo who will still be going - my family included. Couldn't have said the same thing about Tarzan. I think the strong opening and good word of mouth will help Lilo to linger and make it to round $155 million before she gets knocked out.

 

[Bob O]

I think even if L & S ends with 140 mil. that is a very good box office total and alot better than disney's recent releases. And i agree with thedscoop that their is alot more competition for the movie dollar today as compared to years ago. Even movies like Spiderman/MIB/Attack of the clones will affect animated movies as some of the audience will see those movies several times which leaves less money to see L & S. Every wek it seems their are several movies coming out and if they arent R rated kids that would see L & S may see the new releases. As good as Lion King was i think in the curent movie market place it may not have done as well with all the different movies being geared to kids being released.

 

[DisneyKidds]

I think having more kids movies out there at one time is one of the reasons many of these movies will linger longer (producing smaller weekly numbers, but for a longer period of time) than animated features in the past. There is a lot of competition for the kiddies these days and it will take more time for families to get around to all the movies. Wasn't long ago that DW and I commented that there were no movies we could take our daughter to. Now we have a long list.

 

[Another Voice]

The accusations about “what went wrong with ‘Lilo’” are flying around the Disney lot like bullets in a Jerry Bruckheimer movie. Some see the movie’s fate as simply proof that they were right about the future of traditional animation; others see it as a self-fulfilling prophecy brought about by people with caused all the problems in the first place. I’ll have more later.

 

[raidermatt]

Very bizarre. (But as AV keeps telling us, many things are screwy in Hollywood...)

$140-150 million may not be what was HOPED for, but jeez, what could they have made for the same price that would have had better odds of making more?

Factor in the inevitable sequels, tv show, plush sales, DVD/vidoes, etc, and they've got quite a profitable franchise. Never mind the benefit to the parks in that they have some new characters that people want to see.

As much as I like the Rookie and The Princess Diaries, they aren't going to have the franchise power of L&S.

Whatever "went wrong" went a lot better than previous non-Pixar efforts, and still figures to be a top 6 or 7 movie at the end of the year.

Where exactly do they feel they are going to get better return on their investment, particularly within the film division?

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

i guess disney execs only have visions of TLK b.o. returns that danced in their heads.

 

[lrodk]

As much as I like the Rookie and The Princess Diaries, they aren't going to have the franchise power of L&S.

The franchise power of L&S pales in comparison to what they could have had if they hadn't snubbed Peter Jackson and sold away the rights to Lord of the Rings. This further supports AV's contention that Disney is it's own worse enemy at the box office.

 

[Walt's Frozen Head]

Where exactly do they feel they are going to get better return on their investment, particularly within the film division?

Do the words Return To Neverland ring any bells?

It's been mentioned once or twice that I was conspicuous in my absence from the "Guess the Gross" thread. There were two reasons for that, one of them being that I have felt for some time that L&S would be Disney animation's last hurrah. That there was no way for L&S to _ever_ make enough money to compare favorably to the cost/net ratio of DTV "movies" like the Tigger movie and Return to Neverland. That it was a foregone conclusion that the suits would be unhappy with the results, and that feature animation would end up paying the ultimate price.

Scheduling shenanigans mean that Treasure Planet is still in the pipe, but I don't have much hope that it's going to do any better than L&S, particularly not enough better to make feature animation look "profitable enough" to the suits.

It's always darkest just before it goes completely black.

-WFH

 

[Planogirl]

If some of you are right about Disney being ready to give up on animation (and I pray that you're completely wrong) then I'm glad that there's so much competition. Someone will have to step up and take up the slack, at least until Disney gets its act back together. For now though, I refuse to give up hope.

(Go away NOW, Eisner!)

 

[raidermatt]

Do the words Return To Neverland ring any bells?

Why yes, they do. And that only supports the idea that L&S should be considered a very successful venture, ESPECIALLY by current Disney execs.

Scoop has laid out the immediate profits. RTL's "return on budget" is about 140%. L&S is about 75%.

Understood. If you can extrapolate out with 4 RTL's, you'll make more money than with one L&S.

HOWEVER, where do the RTLs come from? Answer: They come from successful franchises. As many as Disney has, the well will soon run dry, especially at the rate they are pumping out sequels. Because L&S exists, and because it is a $140 million dollar box office hit, Disney now has MORE sequels it can make.

So L&S has to be seen for more than its $60 million or so domestic box office profit. Its sure to be a bigger selling DVD/Video than RTL, but more to the point, it can now spawn its own RTL (Return to Kauai, or Stitch Hits the Mainland, whatever).

I'm not saying this is the best way to generate quality original features. I'm just pointing out that even current management has, or should have, the motivation to continue looking to put out original quality features.

Its like a drug company's pipeline. In order to continue generating profits on the backend in the future, you must have products in the pipeline. You can't have sequels with names people flock to if you don't start with a successful original feature.

 

[Another Voice]

Well, actually Burbank considers that ‘Return to Neverland’ failed to meet expectations too. They totted the $50 million as a low ball goal in the press, and were hoping for a minimum of $75 - $100 million: it’s all about expectations! RtN was supposed to be a big PR success for Disney management where they “proved” the genius of their economy-minded direct-to-video sequels. But not only did the movie fail to reach even its low aim point, ‘Ice Age’ came out and stomped all over it big time. You’ll have noticed the abrupt slow down in announcements about other video sequels.

The present management is looking for easy money. That’s all. They are following trends looking to cash in instead of setting trends and building an industry. First it was direct-to-video sequels, last month it was CGI, now it’s “feature” version of children’s TV shows (‘Even Steven’ coming to a theater near you).

Disney execs don’t look at the world in the same way people are here. They don’t see ‘Lilo’ doing okay – they see ‘Ice Age’ doing huge. They don’t see ‘The Rookie’ doing okay – they see ‘Spider-man’ doing huge. They don’t want to do “okay” – they want HUGE. Anything short of that is falling behind. Call it envy, call it trying to build a resume, but whatever you call it – it’s an attitude that doesn’t hold the long term interests of Disney to be all that valuable.

 

[raidermatt]

Disney execs don’t look at the world in the same way people are here.

Apparently not. I saw RTL, and it was better than the other sequels I've seen. But after seeing it, I would never even dream that it could sniff $100 million. I honestly though it would do a little better than $48 million, but $75-100 million MINIMUM? Talk about delusions of grandeur.

I noticed the Rolie Polie Olie direct to video feature that's coming, and if that's a new trend, that's fine. Maybe it can make the same returns as the sequels do, but if they are expecting $100+ million for this kind of stuff in the theater, yikes. (If its true original quality stuff, maybe, but that hasn't been the trend with the sequels, so I'm sure it won't be with the "tv shows into features.")

They don’t see ‘Lilo’ doing okay – they see ‘Ice Age’ doing huge.

So what are they going to do about this? I don't agree with scrapping Lilo type movies, but at least I could understand the reasoning behind it if they decided Ice Age was the way to go. But even Ice Age is an original story done in CGI. Is Disney once again going to pursue this?

 

[Bob O]

The LOTR debacle was disney having no foresight which explains their inability to come up with few big movies!!! And it also explains why few major directors want to deal with the company and Ron Howard is the lastest to be done with them.
Town and country was a loser from the get go, while anybody with vision could have seen the possbility of LOTR.
Now New Line is making hundred of millions and disney is coming out with bombs like reign of fire/bad company and has to pray that Signs does well.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Since we are talking Disney animated features, including Tarzan, and related follow-ups and direct to video sequels I would just like to throw out that Tarzan and Jane is PATHETIC. I was just going to say with a capital P, but it warrants all caps! DTV sequels have always been sub par and disappointing compared to the great originals - ok. However, Cinderella - Dreams Come True and Tarzan and Jane take bad DTV sequels to new lows. Not only is the animation second rate and the non marquee voice talent disappointing, as with all DTV sequels, but there are no real story lines in these latest two DTV movies. They can't even come up with a bad original story line to support an hour. They rely on reminiscing over past events and have a few disjointed vignets. I imagine it is due to the lowering of the low budgets these DTV flicks usually have. Sadly, we can't wait to buy them. Can't exactly tell a 3 yo we aren't going to get the movie in order to boycot their lack of effort and quality.

 

[JACKSDAD]

reading all the figures and projections for L&S, it occurs to me that none of the overseas market grosses are taking into account. Why is this. L7S hasn't even been released in the U.K yet, surely this would gross a few more $'s for disney?

 

[Douglas Dubh]

Cinderella - Dreams Come True and Tarzan and Jane take bad DTV sequels to new lows. Not only is the animation second rate and the non marquee voice talent disappointing, as with all DTV sequels, but there are no real story lines in these latest two DTV movies. They can't even come up with a bad original story line to support an hour.

My kids watched T&J yesterday, but I didn't get a chance. If it really has a bad storyline, that's really sad, considering there were 24 books they could have used to base a sequel on.

 

[Another Voice]

‘Tarzan and Jane’ isn’t actually a movie – it’s a compellation of some episodes of the television series glued together with the “you remember when…” scenes. This, the ‘Cinderella’ video (episodes from an unaired series) and the possible ‘Atlantis’ show (from the cancelled series) are nothing but examples of “clip shows” used to squeeze money out of a dying franchise. Even the upcoming ‘Lilo and Stitch’ direct-to-video is rumored to be nothing more than two episodes of that series that have been glued together.

The entire direct-to-video line has fallen far, far short of the promises that were made for it. Rather than investing in making better movie, the emphasis is to cut costs faster than the revenues decline.