I have no idea what kind of promotions they spent
$100mil on. On broadcast TV I've hardly seen any
trailers and I have seen absolutely nothing else
At 09:39 PM 3/19/2012, David Kusumoto wrote:
I wonder how much the negative buzz that
preceded the film - turned out to be a
self-fulfilling prophecy for some. It seems the
industry loves a loser as much as it loves a
winner. But there's no doubt that the women I
know - had near zero interest to see this
picture. In the industry trades, I kept reading
about how the film ended up skewing toward older
men, as in WAY older men, not just simply "the over 25s." -d.
========================================
TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2011
Disney's $200 Million Charge
'John Carter' Proves a Huge Loss for Disney,
Spurs New Focus on Cutting Costs
By ERICA ORDEN FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Walt Disney Co. expects to lose $200
million on its science-fiction epic "John
Carter," the company said on Monday, citing the
costly movie's weak box-office performance.
As a result, Disney added, its movie
studio is expected to report an operating loss
of between $80 million and $120 million for its
fiscal second quarter, ending March 31. Disney
won't report its earnings for the quarter until
May, and rarely offers such advance financial guidance.
The studio recorded an operating profit of
$77 million during the same quarter last
yeareven though that period included another
big-budget flop, "Mars Needs Moms."
"John Carter," which cost more than $250
million to make and an additional $100 million
to market, has been a box-office bomb,
particularly in the U.S., where its cumulative
domestic earnings total $53.2 million during
its first 10 days in theaters. The movie has
fared somewhat better abroad, grossing $130.8
million outside the U.S. and Canada since its
March 9 opening. But those results are
disappointing for a film that was one of the studio's most expensive in years.
"It certainly didn't meet the expectations
of what I wanted or what I needed," Disney
Studios Chairman Rich Ross said in an interview last week.
The film, about a Civil War veteran
transported to a planet populated by alien
creatures called Tharks, came in third in the
weekend's box-office ticket sales results,
behind rivals "21 Jump Street" and "Dr. Seuss' The Lorax."
In addition to its significant expense,
"John Carter" suffered from an array of
handicaps, including a lack of recognizable
starsthe film featured actors Taylor Kitsch
and Lynn Collins, neither of whom are household
namesand a marketing campaign that was widely
considered indecipherable and visually unappealing.
During Disney's recent shareholders
meeting, Chief Financial Officer Jay Rasulo
brushed aside an inquiry about the movie's
results, saying that "it's very early to talk
about the financial impact of that film."
Partly in response to costly projects such
as "John Carter," Disney executives say they
have taken a tougher look at production budgets
for its films, most notably for upcoming
release "The Lone Ranger," on which the studio
halted production when its projected costs had surpassed $260 million.
In a statement on Monday, the company
emphasized the prospects of its upcoming films.
"As we look forward to the second half of the
year, we are excited about the upcoming
releases of 'The Avengers' and 'Brave,' which
we believe have tremendous potential to drive
value for the Studio and the rest of the company."
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [email protected]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [email protected]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
