- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: ‘Moana’ live action remake tracking to be a gigantic bomb for Disney
Posted on 6/24/26 at 4:25 pm to LSUPERMAN
Posted on 6/24/26 at 4:25 pm to LSUPERMAN
quote:
In your previous post you said they make about a $1 billion annually from Moana merchandising. Ok, I don't know if true or not but if you break even on a movie, or potentially lose money, and still make a $1 billion in merchandising, then why make the movie?
Also, for them to make money in streaming would require new subscribers and I don't think people is going to subscribe to see Moana.
The movie still generates new fans and new momentum for the brand, even if it doesn't have gangbuster box office numbers. That's, on average, 17 million tickets sold to see that movie (ChatGPT) if they hit $200m box office (breakeven). Think how many kids are now introduced to Moana, or kids that loved the first two have rekindled love for it. New toys, shirts, bedsheets, etc. Whatever it is they sell that's branded.
The $1b a year in Moana (from a couple different websites, it's an estimate) will eventually deteriorate each year if there is nothing being released. Releasing this keeps that gravy train going a little longer and deteriorating a little slower. The last movie was released I think over 2 years ago.
People will wait until it's on streaming as well and get introduced to other Disney IP. Not saying that's a huge piece of this, but it's a piece.
Again, I don't think it's their intent to lose money on the movie. I'm saying that this will still be a good outcome financially for Disney.
ETA:
Even if you discount that $1bn by 50% it's still a good outcome. My overarching point of my first post is that's it not all about the box office anymore for these major IPs. Ancillary revenue is massive.
This post was edited on 6/24/26 at 4:32 pm
Posted on 6/24/26 at 5:56 pm to Kinderman
quote:
Costing around $200M
WTF????
Why????
How????
Posted on 6/24/26 at 6:23 pm to Carson123987
quote:
I mean look at that shot of The Rock. CG backdrop, shitty/flat studio lighting, horrible wig
Looks like an SNL skit
Posted on 6/24/26 at 7:04 pm to Kinderman
Well The Rock is a box office bomb when he is the lead actor of a film.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 7:44 pm to Salmon
quote:well your anecdote is pretty damning for Disney because I’m sure that’s the target audience with this
Moana is probably my 7 year old's favorite movie and she gets angry when she see this trailer because "why does Maui look so weird?" and she says she does not want to ever see it
There is my anecdote
Posted on 6/24/26 at 7:54 pm to Smokedawg
quote:
Well The Rock is a box office bomb when he is the lead actor of a film.
I appreciated him taking a shot at actually acting again with Smashing Machine. He’s shown he can do good stuff when he tries. Unfortunately it bombed so I guess he’s back to lazy soulless shite like this.
This post was edited on 6/24/26 at 7:55 pm
Posted on 6/25/26 at 8:14 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
Everything except for Emma Watson was perfect. She just can't sing. It was very obvious they were cutting songs off too soon because she couldn't hold out notes she should have been able to hold out.
Literally every other actor in that movie could sing but her. Hell, Dan Stevens trained for months to learn how to sing and he was excellent, as was Luke Evans, who is a veteran musical theater performer. Don’t cast an actor who can’t sing when you’re making a musical, unless you plan to dub them. Emma Watson in Beauty and the Beast and Russell Crowe in Les Miserables are two of the most egregious examples of this.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 9:00 am to Kinderman
quote:
‘Moana’ live action remake tracking to be a gigantic bomb for Disney
1. I never cared for the idea of these live-action remakes, but as they made Disney money I understood they'd make more. If this one bombs maybe it'll get them to stop.
2. The Rock looks fricking old. He's still in good shape, and could kick my arse, but his character is supposed to be an immortal demigod... this just makes him look like he's tired and old.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 9:04 am to SouthEasternKaiju
quote:
Costing 200 million…
Each of The LotR trilogy movies cost less than 100 million.
But that was 25 years ago!
Yeah, and look at what it gave us. A huge cast, massive, large scale military battles, epic sword play, practical FX intermixed with peak CG that revolutionized the industry like Jurassic Park had done in the 90’s…
I don't know if studios will ever give a filmmaker the kind of rope they gave Peter Jackson to make those; the reason the Hobbit movies are bad (aside from them having to practically invent 75% of what's happening because they were turning a light novel into three feature films) is that they had him rush the job and cram shite in. All green screen, while the LOTR trilogy used practical effects.
There's a reason every Orc in the Hobbit looks more or less the same while all of them look unique in the LOTR trilogy - CGI vs practical make-up.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 9:05 am to BluegrassBelle
quote:
And their Cruella movie with Emma Stone was solid.
To be fair, this wasn't a remake. It's a little different than when they turn an animated movie into a live action one vs when they make a live action movie to act as a prequel for an animated one.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 9:10 am to skrayper
quote:
To be fair, this wasn't a remake. It's a little different than when they turn an animated movie into a live action one vs when they make a live action movie to act as a prequel for an animated one.
Sure. Same with Maleficient. But just an example of where live action based on an animated Disney character can work.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 9:23 am to BluegrassBelle
quote:
Sure. Same with Maleficient. But just an example of where live action based on an animated Disney character can work.
That's fair.
Popular
Back to top

0








