358
'Moana' Bombs at Box Office, Bound to Lose $100M-$125M Box Office (deadline.com)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/movies@piefed.social
134 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 204 points 4 months ago (11 children)

There is a beautiful version of Moana already. I can't imagine needing to see this. I don't hate these remakes for existing, but I just don't see the point.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 42 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    Studios don't like risks nowadays. So they'd rather remake successful past movies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 71 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Apparently it's not as risk-free as they thought.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Against the billions they have made churning these out? Yeah, it is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    I mean yes on average but potentially no on the trend. The whole point is to de-risk their bullshit, if they view this as a trend instead of an isolated incident other projects might be more likely to get greenlit instead of recycled stories. Pretty much any soulless cash grab bombing incentivizes making actual art.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago*

    If they were looking at things collectively this way, they wouldn't be making so many remakes and would be making more original movies.

    This movie is the result of the risk analysis of each project, not the risk over a time period with multiple projects.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Ah yes, losing $100,000,000 seems very low-risk.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    To them? Yes it is

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    No, no it's not.

    They can absorb the loss, but it's by no means small

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Low risk is still risk

    The movie's made nearly 100 mill worldwide. With brand new IP there's no guarantee to even get that much. Plus you'd need more marketing, etc.

    They lost, but the risk was smaller than it could've been.

    Think about two different scenarios:

    1. Brand new IP, movie costs 250 mill to make, it could be the next Avatar and make well over a billion, or it could make 10 mill because nobody cares

    2. Existing IP, almost certainly going to make under a billion, but there's essentially no way it'll make significantly under 100 million against the same budget of 250 mill.

    Which one is low risk and which one is high risk?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent