Article

“The Flash,” a superhero adventure starring Ezra Miller, emerged victorious over Pixar’s “Elemental” in a battle of box office lightweights.

This weekend’s two new releases were once expected to ignite the summer blockbuster season; instead, both entirely missed the mark. “The Flash” stumbled with $55 million and “Elemental” collected just $29.5 million in their respective debuts. Both films fell short of already-low expectations. Worse, they were pricy endeavors, costing $200 million to make and roughly $100 million to market, so they are shaping up to be huge disappointments in their theatrical runs.

In the lead-up to “The Flash,” executives at Warner Bros. worked hard to convince the public that the film is “one of the greatest superhero movies ever made,” per newly minted DC Studios co-chief James Gunn. Directed by Andy Muschietti, the story picks up as Miller’s Barry Allen a.k.a The Flash travels back in time to prevent his mother’s murder and inadvertently cracks open the DC multiverse. (Cameos abound!)

But a tepid “B” CinemaScore from opening weekend crowds suggests that the moviegoing masses didn’t entirely agree with the lavish praise bestowed on the film by the people who made it. Without positive audience scores or strong word-of-mouth, >“The Flash” will struggle to rebound in the coming weeks, especially as summer season heats up with the release of “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” on June 30, “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” on July 12 and Christopher Nolan’s “Oppenheimer” on July 21.

“This is a weak three-day opening for a superhero [film],” says David A. Gross, who runs the movie consulting firm Franchise Entertainment Research. “There have been similar openings that grew into big numbers,” he adds, referring to 2015’s “Ant-Man,” which opened to $57 million and ended with $519 million worldwide, as well as 2018’s “Aquaman,” which debuted to $67.4 million and finished at $1.15 billion globally. “But we do not see that here.”

“The Flash” also stumbled at the international box office with $75 million from 78 markets, bringing its global tally to $139 million. Unless its box office fortunes rebound, “The Flash” looks to fall more closely in line with Dwayne Johnson’s $200 million-budgeted “Black Adam,” which opened last year to $67 million and failed to reach $400 million globally, ultimately losing money in its theatrical run.

Analysts believe that several factors, one of them being those unenthusiastic audience reactions, are to blame for the film’s weak initial turnout. Another roadblock is that “The Flash” landed on the big screen without a traditional promotional push. That’s because Miller has become a controversial figure in recent years due to legal troubles and assault allegations. The actor, who has apologized for past erratic behavior and went to treatment for “complex mental health issues,” made a rare public appearance at Monday’s premiere of “The Flash” but didn’t engage with press or other publicity efforts that would be standard for a tentpole of this scope.

Also, “The Flash” is the second of four DC films to open in 2023 before the studio’s new overlords Gunn and Peter Safran take the comic book universe in an entirely new direction. That’s left “The Flash” and “Shazam! Fury of the Gods,” one of the biggest superhero misfires in recent memory, hanging in the balance. It’s apparently hard to get comic book fans to care about an interconnected universe that’ll soon be abandoned and rebooted in favor of different Spandex-clad heroes. “Blue Beetle,” starring Xolo Maridueña as a boy who bonds with an alien symbiote, opens on Aug. 18. “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” is set for Dec. 20.

“Elemental,” an animated adventure about opposites who attract, added a muted $15 million at the international box office for a global total of $44.5 million. Unlike “The Flash,” “Elemental” has been embraced by its audience, who awarded the film an “A” CinemaScore. So there’s a chance that ticket sales could recover even slightly in the next few weeks, especially since there isn’t much competition from family films on the horizon.

But there’s no sugar-coating the debut of “Elemental,” which landed by far the worst start in modern history for Pixar, ranking below some of its more forgettable attempts like 2015’s “The Good Dinosaur” ($39 million) and 2020’s “Onward” ($39 million). The animation empire behind “Toy Story,” “Up” and “Ratatouille” hasn’t been able to rebound from the pandemic, when several of its titles were sent directly to Disney+ and family audiences were trained to expect those movies at home.

It’s been a difficult market for films with original stories like “Elemental,” which revolves around the relationship between the two seemingly different elements of fire and water. Brand recognition has been a big part in the success of recent family films, such as “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” and “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse.”

“‘Elemental’ is not based on established IP,” notes Gross. “Of the recent animation titles, this is clearly the most challenging to open.”

Also this weekend, Lionsgate’s horror satire “The Blackening” opened in sixth place after earning $6 million in its debut. Directed by Tim Story, the film pokes fun at the common horror trope that Black characters are often the first to die. It follows a group of Black friends who gather at a remote cabin to celebrate Juneteenth. The film cost just $5 million.

Elsewhere at the box office, Sony’s “Spider-Man: Across the Spider Verse” landed in third place, earning a mighty $27.8 million in its third weekend of release. The superhero sequel is already a big box office winner with $280 million in North America and $489.3 million worldwide. A third entry is scheduled for 2024.

In fourth place, Paramount’s “Transformers: Rise of the Beasts” added $20 million as ticket sales collapsed by 67% in its sophomore outing. Still, the tentpole managed to cross $100 million at the domestic box office with $103 million to date. With its $200 million budget, the studio needs the seventh “Transformers” installment to resonate at the international box office to justify that hefty price tag. Over the weekend, “Rise of the Beasts” generated $37.2 million from 68 markets, bringing its international tally to $174.3 million.

Disney’s “The Little Mermaid” rounded out the top five with $11.6 million in its fourth weekend in theaters. The live-action remake has amassed $253 million in North America and $466 million to date, which would have been a good result… had the movie not cost $250 million to produce. At this rate, “The Little Mermaid” is struggling to break even in its theatrical run.

In limited release, Wes Anderson’s “Asteroid City,” starring Scarlett Johansson, Jason Schwartzman, Maya Hawke, Bryan Cranston and dozens of other Anderson regulars and newcomers, collected $790,000 from six theaters in New York and Los Angeles. Those ticket sales translate to $132,211 per theater, ranking as the best average since 2016’s “La La Land” ($176,220 per theater).

For “Asteroid City,” which takes place as a cosmic event disrupts a fictional desert town, the bigger obstacle will come when the film expands next weekend into 1,500 theaters. That’s been a huge challenge for other acclaimed indies, like “Tár,” “Triangle of Sadness” and “Beau Is Afraid,” all of which also scored notable arthouse openings but eventually failed to translate that interest to mainstream audiences.

elmofire YES DEAD TO DCEU dumpster-fire

Pixar keeps making mid films

also this article doesnt mention it but the newest Dreamworks film about the kraken and the siren was their 2nd worst box office performance behind spirit untamed

looks like people only care about the spidermans 🕷

  • Mindfury [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    all will crumble before the almighty Barbie, the epic of our time

    • LibsEatPoop [any]
      ·
      1 year ago

      To me, the only saving grace for that movie is Gerwig. She’s a genuine talent and so I trust her to make a good movie. But the trailers so far just… don’t do it for me. Like, I get what they’re going for, but I’m not convinced they’re doing a good job.

      Oppenheimer, too. It’s either going to be a bloated mess and a slog to get through, or a genuine, intense thriller. Both are making me anxious.

  • 4zi [he/him, comrade/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Have they not considered that people don’t give a fuck about formulaic capeshit? Literally Spider-Man is right there, doing well because of its great animation work and refreshing writing, and the executives go, “no it needs to be poorly animated with writing and design that is indistinguishable from the other 5 trillion capeshit movies”

    • Albanian_Lil_Pump [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      DC is just dogshit at creating soyable products. They only have Zac Snyder, and his movies and fans are too insane to reach mega mainstream appeal like Guardians of the Galaxy. Not to mention, pretty much everyone from the DCEU have either expressed that they're uninterested in returning or they're Ezra Miller. So all your stars and big name directors want nothing to do with your properties or have too much radiation, and so you churn out 500 different iterations of Batman within 2 years to compete with Chris Pratt dancing to boomer music for 3 hours and make $3 from ticket sales

    • thelastaxolotl [he/him]
      hexagon
      M
      ·
      1 year ago

      ceo's are probably looking at AtSV and thinking: multiverse stuff is what people want!!

      like how the mcu started adding multiverse plotline to their movies/shows since the first spiderverse movie, i dont think they will learn anything

      • 4zi [he/him, comrade/them]
        ·
        1 year ago

        The whole multiverse trend fucking sucks. I don’t even like Spider-Man in general, and I hate capeshit, but I watched the miles morales movies because it’s a) different b) does something new c) well crafted. This is not hard to understand why it’s doing well. Dumbass MBA’s who mistake the forest for the trees.

      • DesertComrade [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        They don't do multiverses because it does well in the box office They do it because it allows them to put as many of their properties as possible The spiderverse movies are unique in that they use unique characters But the blueprint for multiverse movies is no way home

        • innocentlurker [he/him]
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think the multiverse is attractive to execs because you can reboot a franchise and say it's an alternate universe and the fans lap it up.

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
      ·
      1 year ago

      Literally Spider-Man is right there, doing well because of its great animation work and refreshing writing

      I mean, Into the Spiderverse got a sequel for a reason. I imagine we'll see the execs lean farther in that direction, if for no other reason than animation is cheaper than live action so the profit margins are wider.

      Even then, I suspect a lot of the Miles Morales incarnation of Spiderman is the fact that Spiderman is just such a hot property on its face. All the Spiderman movies do well, even the MCU capeshit nostalgia bait.

      By contrast, people just don't give a shit about The Flash. Its not a good franchise. They'd do better sticking to Sonic the Hedgehog, who at least has a following, rather than continuously trying to make the B-List cast of the DCU do numbers.

      • Wheaties [comrade/them]
        ·
        1 year ago

        You wanna sell tickets? Flash V. Sonic

        only problem is, the IP lawyers wouldn't let either win because it would 'damage the brand'

        • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
          ·
          1 year ago

          Versus movies are consistently awful. If you want to sell Sonic movie tickets, you need to do Sonic: Origins and then set up a spin-off movie for every ancillary character, before bringing them all back in again for Robotnik's Revenge, where everyone dies and comes back again half a dozen times.

  • GnastyGnuts [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    A long time ago there was an interview or podcast or some shit with some major, respected directors (I wanna say Quentin Tarantino was in it) where these movie folks suggested that, given the sheer size of some of these capeshit movies, eventually there would be a big enough dud (or series of duds) that would start tanking whole studios and discouraging surviving studious from continuing to do superhero films.

    God willing, we are witnessing the beginning.

    • AlicePraxis [any]
      ·
      1 year ago

      That sounds nice, but this is a late-stage DCEU movie centered on a character nobody really likes, starring an actual groomer. It's not really that surprising that it failed. When a big MCU movie flops that'll be something.

    • W_Hexa_W
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      deleted by creator

      • ssjmarx [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Theaters have gotten more expensive while simultaneously losing their competitive advantage. Back in the day theaters could draw in huge crowds just by having air conditioning, but now the prevailing attitude is "why bother".

        • came_apart_at_Kmart [he/him, comrade/them]
          ·
          1 year ago

          totally. the summer blockbuster phenomenon was driven by "damn, it's hot as shit out. let's go to a movie this afternoon and get giant sodas." straight up, last time i went to a movie in the theater was when some jacked up summer storm knocked out the power to my neighborhood for a few days. i went and saw some slop to cool off. the movie sucked, but the AC was chefs-kiss

          growing up, an afternoon movie was fairly affordable. now it's like $20. if you want anything to drink, it's like another $10. and, it being america, there's a nonzero chance some Qanon+MK Ultra+Gladio asset is gonna activate in the lobby or whatever and i'm gonna get got because i slipped on some swedish fish making a play for the exit.

          • AlicePraxis [any]
            ·
            1 year ago

            the only reason I saw Dr. Strange 2 in a theater was because there was a massive heat wave and there were no actual good movies out

          • Bloobish [comrade/them]
            ·
            1 year ago

            Honestly it's a lot of that last part as to why I stay away from theaters. All the theaters by me are part of malls and would be killing grounds for demented 4channer/whatever the fuck else is going wrong with them. I've also slowly been working on making a better entertainment system for my own place and buying movies I know I'll like on BluRay cuss fuck streaming compression quality

        • W_Hexa_W
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          deleted by creator

      • GnastyGnuts [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Good lord. I was never much of a theater-going person to begin with, but I couldn't imagine paying that much to see most of the shit they make nowadays.

      • Jennifer [she/her]
        ·
        1 year ago

        I never go to theaters unless it's Tuesday, where it's around 6 dollars a ticket

      • mkultrawide2 [none/use name]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah I only do Tuesdays as well. There used to be more free advanced screening programs but those seemed to have been scaled back a lot, and as far as I know some studios like Disney never did advanced screenings anyways.

  • HarryLime [any]
    ·
    1 year ago

    I saw someone tweet that they went to a screening of Elemental and the audience were all millenials who dragged their unenthusiastic kids there.

  • BelieveRevolt [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe you shouldn't have spent so much money on getting old actors for bazinga multiverse shit when the main character is played by someone who was exposed as a weirdo creep a while ago? surprised-pika

  • RonJonGuaido [none/use name]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    uh, okay, what if toys were people? bugs were people? fish were people? monsters were people? cars were people? what if robots were people? uh, what if emotions were people? (and ya know, like, if we want a sequel, maybe each emotion, uh, well, if it's a person, inhabiting a human person, wouldn't it also have to be inhabited by smaller emotional people, so in the sequel, you know, could we have even smaller homunculuses running around in amy poelhers head?) uh what if, um, mexican ghosts were people? okay, okay, now, what if, emm, elements, like, well,

    fuck off

    • buh [any]
      ·
      1 year ago

      What if chinese people were people pandas?

  • came_apart_at_Kmart [he/him, comrade/them]
    ·
    1 year ago

    i was a capeshit kid and i was very into DC junk. mostly batman superman. i stopped being as enthusiastic about comic movies in general, probably from oversaturation. it has been hilarious to me to see WB choke so hard at capeshit trying to reach the bazillion dollar stratosphere that marvel hits. they spend so much money on these movies, and they just suck across the board. it's like watching those clips of somebody doing a burnout in a supercar, losing control, and wrapping a million dollars of luxury italian engineering around the only lamppost in the parking lot. and the guy driving is Ben Affleck or some other jamoke.

    • DefinitelyNotAPhone [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      Me watching Man of Steel, circa 2012 or whenever that movie came out: "You have Bruce Timm on speed dial, you dense motherfuckers! How did you fuck this up?!"

      • Deadend [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        They had Bruce Timm making direct to dvd stuff. But instead they went “we want the guy who made sucker punch”

  • LGOrcStreetSamurai [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I am always curious how these studios can make 200 million dollar or more film and not have a single drop of taste. I know movie magic is hard to capture during the creation of it, but surely there is way to find some quality prior to release. Then again I think the same of “start-ups”. I just don’t understand how things can cost this much and have this little to show for it in returns

    • LaGG_3 [he/him, comrade/them]
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think because the budget is so high, and the studios expect a large ROI, they end up targeting such a broad audience that the only thing they can make is a bland mess that nobody likes.

      • LGOrcStreetSamurai [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think about that too. They keep getting these inflated budgets but all seem to be utterly devoid of the soul, texture, or artistry. I’m not talking about just the big budget blockbusters, movie have been declining pretty steadily (not as rapidly as people tend to say in my opinion) since the the mid 2000s. I really do think “big data” has really negatively impacted movies in way people don’t talk about enough.

        • LaGG_3 [he/him, comrade/them]
          ·
          1 year ago

          I really do think “big data” has really negatively impacted movies in way people don’t talk about enough.

          Imagine all the "you need to make it more like MOVIE P because GENRE Q viewers spent more time watching it" conversations that happen for movies produced by the big streamers. bear-despair

          • Deadend [he/him]
            ·
            1 year ago

            Big days did nothing.

            The thing is, you can make the data say whatever you want.

            It’s the same guys as before, but now they have an underling make a graph/chart.

            What it does mean, the ones with wild ass idea who can’t crank out a chart that the other execs Agree with lose more.

            The bigger problem is the amount of time in post-production doing audience testing.

            Also the extremely tight schedules on initial shooting. Most big movies are made fast on set, then go to post for ages and then reshoot for a month much later.

            The spreadsheet jockey stuff has gotten so tight, it’s “cheaper” To do it all in post, as a costume issue on set means losing time and money you don’t have. Therefore it’s considered better to decide what ant-man is wearing later on, as your exec will also change their mind based on the data so may as well just have Paul Redd not wear a costume when he’s fighting WE LITTERALLY HAVEN’T DECIDED YET BUT SHOOTING HIM REACTING TOMORROW.

            Basically, the people at the top have so much more control than ever and so much more room to fuck up without consequence.

          • LGOrcStreetSamurai [he/him]
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Big time agreed! I particularly think about how so much of “BIG DATA” was sold initially as this magic spell companies could cast and make things lean and productive. I know Hollywood and TVLAND is run by geezers and lunatics but I can see just about every dork with a data start-up probably sold them some gizmos and gadgets during the tech bubble. The amount of IP related stuff is bananas that has dominated the theaters and TV is insane

            Hollywood also has the big disadvantage of being so very hierarchical. Some big bean counter finance guy in Iowa can tell some executives in California that their quantitative analysis team based “IN THE CLOUD” told them this script is golden because the IP is good.

      • thisonethatone [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is exactly it. Most big movies are way too safe and suffer from constant executive meddling by suits who don't have taste.

    • Posadas [he/him, they/them]
      ·
      1 year ago

      Avatar 2 probably costed the same to produce (Overall $350-400 million because they filmed 2 and 3 together)

      But only one of theses looks like they used PS3 cutscenes.

      • LGOrcStreetSamurai [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah Flash’s CGI was dreadful. I liked its design but not how it actually looked. I like its composition but the visuals themselves looked like they were still in rendering. Like in a video game when the models haven’t fully popped in yet.

      • Deadend [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Avatar 2 also took years to make and involved inventing new ways of shooting, and pre-viz. that movie existed in everyone’s minds before they started shooting.

        The flash had rewrites and character changes After it was shot.

        • mkultrawide2 [none/use name]
          ·
          1 year ago

          Avatar and LOTR are good examples of what happens when you let good directors do the necessary amount of pre-production.

    • footfaults [none/use name]
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think Red Letter Media has a pretty good take on it, based on the discussion that Matt Damon had on hot ones.

      Basically the studios are tired of hitting singles and doubles and instead are just swinging for the fences on the bland shit.

  • Assian_Candor [comrade/them]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Pixar has a marketing problem, I have a 7yo and the only reason I even knew about elemental was because I googled movies near me

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
      ·
      1 year ago

      They have posters and shit all over town. I have to assume they're running ads on all the kids' channels. But the core idea is so far out of right field... who the fuck knows what an Elemental is at age 8? Unless you're just going hard in the paint for Kids Who Played D&D Way Too Soon, I can't imagine who this movie is even for.

      There's no cultural cache with parents or an appeal to family, like in Soul or Onward or The Incredibles. There's no fascination with machines like in Cars or Planes. There's no simple appeal to childhood fantasy, like with Toys or Brave or Monster's Inc. They aren't even pandering to the Chinese market like in Turning Red.

      What's the hook? I have no idea what would make you want to watch this movie.

      • Wheaties [comrade/them]
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is the rare sort of movie you don't really get quite so much of anymore, the

        We Upgraded Our Software, Look What We Can Do With The lighting/shading/particles/textures Movie

        • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean, this was literally what Toy Story was supposed to be. "Look, ma! Reboot, but its a feature length movie!"

          They just gave it some pastiche that got people in the door.

      • Findom_DeLuise [she/her, they/them]
        ·
        1 year ago

        It's for those home-schooled American kids whose parents won't let them learn about the periodic table, so have to learn the elements out of medieval alchemy textbooks

  • ssjmarx [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    inshallah Allah, I don't pray to you often, but please make this the year that every superhero movie flops and the genre dies.

  • kristina [she/her]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    at this point the only capeshit i give a shit about is spiderverse and those fuckers are milking it with DUMB AS FUCK cliffhangers

    very artistically beautiful movies though, probably some of the most impressive art in a movie ive ever seen

    • AlicePraxis [any]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I haven't seen it yet, but I find it appalling that a 140-minute animated movie got the Dune: Part One treatment. How do you not wrap up a cartoon in 2 hours and 20 minutes??

      • Averagemaoist [none/use name]
        ·
        1 year ago

        I was in a packed theater on a Tuesday night. No one I was with or near was complaining about how long it was, the only complaint was that there wasn't more. There's multiple conflicts in the story and the film fleshes everything out so you actually care about whats going on. It could have been slimmed down but it would have been a much worse film.

        • AlicePraxis [any]
          ·
          1 year ago

          I'll have to reserve judgement until I actually watch it, but I've grown weary of every modern blockbuster being 2.5 hours.

          Though the bigger issue to me is releasing half a movie, it's a really annoying trend that began with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Maybe the movie should have actually been a bit longer so they could wrap up the story in a single movie. Or just make it a TV show or something, damn.

          • Averagemaoist [none/use name]
            ·
            1 year ago

            It was a coward move to not make it as long as Return of the King or the Godfather, but I understand it, 3.5-4 hours is a tough sell for most audiences. The movie is engaging enough that I wasn't bored despite the run-time. You may disagree

            • AlicePraxis [any]
              ·
              1 year ago

              Maybe we should bring back film serials. Break it up into 4-6 chapters and release them in theaters a month apart, at reduced ticket price. Then release it as a streaming mini-series shortly after the theatrical run.

                • AlicePraxis [any]
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  yes, but why does serialized entertainment have to be confined only to the home? many people like watching grand spectacles on a big screen with good surround sound, as an immersive shared experience with an audience.

                  Much of our experience of entertainment has become so isolated and asocial with the immediacy of TV/streaming. I'm glad home entertainment exists, but it's good to leave one's home and experience art with others sometimes too. And it could be cool if that was available for certain episodic shows and not just for 90-180 minute feature films.

                  I'd bet a lot of people would have liked seeing shows like Stranger Things or Game of Thrones in a theater, for example.

        • meth_dragon [none/use name]
          ·
          1 year ago

          i missed the easter egg because i had been holding my piss in for an hour and a half at that point and had to go

    • meth_dragon [none/use name]
      ·
      1 year ago

      i haven't watched capeshit in six years and the biggest gripe i had with the movie was that it had anarchist spiderman but no real marxist leninist spiderman and that it pulled the same lib shit as black panther in manufacturing the main source of conflict, pretty inconsequential as these things go

      was pissed at the cliffhanger too, but i figured it's the price we pay for the actual character development earlier

      agreed on the art, i kinda wanna go back just to rewatch the spidergwen parts

      • kristina [she/her]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        yeah the anarchist thing was weird. was pretty bad. cool af character concept tho

  • IlIlIlIlIlIlIlIlIlIl [none/use name]
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think we're also seeing a change in effective marketing strategy. I had no idea The Flash was out and had heard nothing about it. Basically the same thing with Elemental. For a long time I couldn't avoid the chatter about any of this crap, even avoiding traditional advertising it would trickle down through word of mouth - even if that word of mouth was discussing how bad it was.

    • PKMKII [none/use name]
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even the last Disney animated film, Strange world or whatever it was, had some really flat marketing, barely aware it was coming out (and when you’ve got a six year old in the house that’s a sign of failed marketing).

  • Des [she/her, they/them]
    ·
    1 year ago

    die capeshit die. star wars too except for now on everything from that franchise is made like Andor.

    in fact i decree everything shall become Andor

  • LibsEatPoop [any]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Elemental is good but not great. The film itself is very pretty and there’s some nice comedy and emotions. But it’s also… nothing new? I wish it did better and it might have some other time, but right now Pixar is tainted. My theater was a wasteland.

    I wish ATSV had better legs. It deserves a lot more but they have such stiff competition that took away the premier screens and got people into seats one after the other… even if they were all garbage and no one went again. Maybe BTSV, which will definitely get delayed from 2024, is able to get to the Big B.

    Blackening was hilarious but low budget and not really aimed at general (white) audiences. But it doesn’t need to make a $100m to be successful so it’s doing pretty good.

      • LibsEatPoop [any]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        IMO? String of bad decisions and mid movies, because Disney overworked them. Disney forced them to release genuine hits like Turning Red and Luca on Disney+ while marketing the shit out of Lightyear, which was a disaster. And Disney’s mediocre Strange Worlds did nothing to help the brand.

        It’s been 4 years since Pixar’s last hit with TS4 in 2019 and 6 years since their last original with Coco in 2017. It’s a similar problem Disney’s other ventures like Star Wars, it’s live-action reboots and even the MCU are facing. They’ll get out of it but it’ll take a while. Good movies take time and Iger needs to let the studios breathe and polish their works rather than just keep shitting out new projects every 4 months.

      • W_Hexa_W
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        deleted by creator