So How To Train Your Dragon 2 is burning...

[Avilan the Grey]

I have not seen the movie yet, I loved the first one.
Reading Boxoffice Forums I see that it did VERY bad in the US, despite high praise from reviewers.

I have tried to stay away from spoilers, but to me it simply looks unappealing because the character models freak me out. They have aged everyone 5 years, but in the process almost all characters except Hickup and Astrid hits the Uncanny Valley something extreme (which is weird since they look so cartoony!). Also, is Hickup adopted? Now, all grown up, it is easy to see he does not resemble either of his parents at all?

[MLai]

I really liked the first one, but I didn't bother watching this one because...

I think it's because of the story. From what I know of it just from trailers, it doesn't sound very interesting at all. The premise of "We train our dragons with love, but the bad guys oppress them and force them to fight"... just feels so tired. Even Saturday morning cartoons have done that one.

I don't know why kids wouldn't watch it, though. Maybe everyone went to see Maleficent?

[Avilan the Grey]

I don't know why kids wouldn't watch it, though. Maybe everyone went to see Maleficent?

The little I saw that speculates either goes full hostile:
"Americans are too dumb to handle a mature animated movie" (said by lovers of the movie that desperately tries to explain to themselves why it "flopped" (it didn't, projections say about Wreck It Ralph numbers) or point out (more realistically) that kids don't like it because it is too dark (in the wrong way): I saw several witnes accounts from people who pointed out that the grown ups liked the movie, but the younger kids were dead silent and looked uncomfortable. This WILL give the movie a bad word of mouth quickly.

[Rockphed]

The little I saw that speculates either goes full hostile:
"Americans are too dumb to handle a mature animated movie" (said by lovers of the movie that desperately tries to explain to themselves why it "flopped" (it didn't, projections say about Wreck It Ralph numbers) or point out (more realistically) that kids don't like it because it is too dark (in the wrong way): I saw several witnes accounts from people who pointed out that the grown ups liked the movie, but the younger kids were dead silent and looked uncomfortable. This WILL give the movie a bad word of mouth quickly.

I won't go see it on the strength of Howard Taylor's review. If I were sure it followed the book about as loosely as the first movie, I would watch it, but they kinda burned the "its in the book" defense with the first movie.

[DigoDragon]

Is that movie out already? I think I saw one teaser trailer and then didn't hear anything about it until McDonalds released frisbees for them. Which... seem like a "meh" toy since I got two of them for my daughter and she just uses them for coasters. Maybe the marketing was bad, cause I didn't feel like they engaged me to want to see it. I own the first one on DVD and I remember there being a lot of hype for it.

[Avilan the Grey]

According to strong rumors, Dreamworks wants to end the trilogy like the book series:

Spoiler

Show

All dragons including toothless exinct or at least very much gone forever

.

If they do that, the last movie in the series will definitely bomb.

[Palanan]

The second movie is fantastic. Ignore the reviews and go see it for yourself.



I absolutely loved the first Dragon movie--one of my favorite movies in recent years--and I was fairly concerned about the prospects for the second one. I've now seen it twice in the theater, liked it the first time and really enjoyed it the second.

I hardly ever bother reading movie reviews, and I deeply dislike spoilers, so I went into it almost cold--apart from one huge plot point which the trailers unfortunately reveal. Even knowing that was coming, I still had a great time in both screenings, and in fact ordered the soundtrack the day after I saw it the first time. The music is superb, the story is involving, and the landscapes and environments are absolutely majestic. You really get a sense of how immense the world is, even with the freedom to explore it on dragonback.

So, so, so. Stuff the reviewers, get your dragon on and just go see it.

[Jayngfet]

The little I saw that speculates either goes full hostile:
"Americans are too dumb to handle a mature animated movie" (said by lovers of the movie that desperately tries to explain to themselves why it "flopped" (it didn't, projections say about Wreck It Ralph numbers) or point out (more realistically) that kids don't like it because it is too dark (in the wrong way): I saw several witnes accounts from people who pointed out that the grown ups liked the movie, but the younger kids were dead silent and looked uncomfortable. This WILL give the movie a bad word of mouth quickly.

This, sadly. The first movie was about young teens treating monsters like dogs and awkwardly flirting in the same way every other animated project has them do.

This one was about the cast as 20somethings sure of themselves and going on a more high stakes adventure with emotional impact and serious consequences.

As far as the domestic audience is concerned, animation is used only for cheap gags and kids stuff. Even outliers like the Beowulf movie from like ten years ago barely break even at best and rely on visual spectacle more than any kind of proficiency.

HTTYD 2 was within projected results, so it's not a total loss, but barring a major international showing it won't break any records. Which is bad because dreamworks is flagging hard and their results have been mediocre for the last couple of years. Their schedule is set so they have a number of dodgy projects coming up and this was supposed to shore things up. Given that they're moving their scheduled films around already they're obviously running scared.

[Avilan the Grey]

This, sadly. The first movie was about young teens treating monsters like dogs and awkwardly flirting in the same way every other animated project has them do.

This one was about the cast as 20somethings sure of themselves and going on a more high stakes adventure with emotional impact and serious consequences.

As far as the domestic audience is concerned, animation is used only for cheap gags and kids stuff and Frozen. Even outliers like the Beowulf movie from like ten years ago barely break even at best and rely on visual spectacle more than any kind of proficiency.

HTTYD 2 was within projected results, so it's not a total loss, but barring a major international showing it won't break any records. Which is bad because dreamworks is flagging hard and their results have been mediocre for the last couple of years. Their schedule is set so they have a number of dodgy projects coming up and this was supposed to shore things up. Given that they're moving their scheduled films around already they're obviously running scared.

FTFY

But the main problem seems to be they are marketing it for the same crowd that liked the first, when at least part of that crowd is too young for the sequel.

[cobaltstarfire]

I wouldn't say it's burning...it did less than was expected of it, it's not losing money, and it's not doing terrible. It's just performing somewhat bellow expectations. It really annoys me that movies are dubbed "failures" whenever they don't blow everyone's socks off but still do moderately well, but I suppose that's why the movie industry mostly just recycles everything these days isn't it.


The theater was packed at the showing I went to (I went to opening day) and it seemed like the kids and adults there all rather enjoyed it. Most of the kids were pre-teens, and there were quiet a few adults and a handful of elderly too. (I live in a college town so maybe there were even more adults than you'd usually expect). Kids seemed pretty excited by the end as they were filing out.

I also went in cold, and also a little bit worried since most sequels don't hold up. I found it to be an extremely enjoyable and fun movie. It's definitely more niche than your typical movie marketed for children though, so I don't know why they had such overblown expectations for its performance.

Edit: Also apparently a lot of parents didn't take their kids because of certain high emotion things that happen in the movie..which is funny because I've seen others whining on tumblr that the movie was too "safe" about that sort of stuff. Although those people on tumblr also seem to be oblivious to the fact that they aren't anywhere near the target age range, or that you can't have too much blood/violence in a pg movie...

[DigoDragon]

It really annoys me that movies are dubbed "failures" whenever they don't blow everyone's socks off but still do moderately well, but I suppose that's why the movie industry mostly just recycles everything these days isn't it.

I can agree. Animated films generally do "moderately well" much more often than "socks off". I read an article last year that crunched earnings by studios and the animated film studios on average earn a bit more than most others due to that consistency of doing decent instead of super good or super poor. I think films in generally get too much pressure put on them to be that blockbuster of the year by professional critics. I prefer to just ask friends with similar interests for their opinion. Not every movie I see needs to rock my world. I just want to be entertained and leave the theatre feeling that my money was well spent for the last 3 hours.

[Friv]

Yeah, I'm a little confused by "ignore the reviews" and "burning at the box office". It opened #2 for the weekend, behind 22 Jump Street, and has dropped to #3 this weekend, behind 22 Jump Street and Transformers 4 (which took a gazillion dollars.) It's already made over two hundred million dollars, and it's only been out in the US for two weeks. 91% of critics gave it positive reviews, according to Rotten Tomatoes, and Metacritic gave it nearly 4/5 stars.

Those are solid numbers.

[BRC]

Probably a side effect of the internet hype machine and the Age of Fandom.
In certain online circles, where people have been digesting every bit of information about this movie since it was announced, you could be led to believe this was the Biggest Movie of the Year. So, when it merely did "Pretty Well", they took that to be "IT IS FAILING!"

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by cobaltstarfire
It really annoys me that movies are dubbed "failures" whenever they don't blow everyone's socks off but still do moderately well....

Amen to this. Artificially inflated expectations, and too-casual use of terms like "failure," can end up distorting the reality of a movie's performance, both financially and in terms of audience satisfaction.

Originally Posted by cobaltstarfire
I found it to be an extremely enjoyable and fun movie.

Exactly so. It was fun, it was gorgeous, there was a good story and some layered emotions to work through. And like DigoDragon says, sometimes it's fine for a movie just to be highly entertaining. There's a world of difference between "not breaking records" and being a "failure," and it's hardly fair to automatically equate the one with the other.

Originally Posted by Friv
Those are solid numbers.

Indeed..and hardly an objective case that the movie is a failure, in any sense.

So what Friv said, all of it, plus a repeat of the bit about the Transformers. Maleficent has been out for a month, so if there's competition it's Transformers.

Originally Posted by Avilan the Grey
I have not seen the movie yet, I loved the first one.

Avilan: if you really liked the first Dragon movie, then I'm pretty sure you'll enjoy this one. I recommend you give it a try.

.

[Math_Mage]

Beautiful animation; plot was a bit of a mixed bag, but I'm not exactly the target audience.

I won't go see it on the strength of Howard Taylor's review. If I were sure it followed the book about as loosely as the first movie, I would watch it, but they kinda burned the "its in the book" defense with the first movie.

That review is generally positive--it just acknowledges that HTTYD2 doesn't live up to the very high expectations the reviewer placed on it. Just sayin'.

[Avilan the Grey]

Regarding failures: $400M DOM is the new $200M DOM. It's that simple, I think.

[Closet_Skeleton]

'Failure' is impossible for laymen to measure. A Film can make 10 times its budget at the box office and bankrupt its creators and Hollywood never releases the kind of detailed data needed to work out if a movie is actually a success

Don't even bother trying to talk about a highly complicated subject of a highly secretive industry. You're going to be wrong and look like an idiot because the only other alternative is that you're somehow correct by sheer chance.

When merchandising and concession stand snacks are the real money spinners anyway the ticket sales are basically a distraction.

[Avilan the Grey]

Point being that Dreamworks apparently filled the world with merchandise for this and it still is projected by the box office sales curve to end under 200 M dollars.
It freaks a lot of people out, for some reason.

(As a side note it's interesting that the Despicable Me movies apparently are the new Shrek: The movies you blame for your own favorite movie's failings AND freely insult anyone who likes them. I had no idea).

[TheEmerged]

I was quite fond of the original, but the latest offering goes into that pile of "Animated Sequels That Didn't Measure Up". I'd say there's been a rash of these lately (reference: Despicible Me 2), but truth be told they call it sequelitis for a reason.

I'm not sure I can finger the reason for this one as easily as I have some of the others. Part of it with me was that it seemed to forget some of its established rules (the whole "hit them while they do their breathe attack" thing), but that alone doesn't seem like enough of an explanation.

As to the "success" question... As long as the movie business is allowed to get away with "Hollywood Accounting", this is going to be an issue. We ran into this with Pacific Rim as well.

[Fragenstein]

Okay, I have a question for those who have seen the movie...

Spoiler: Wha?

Show

The first one had a scene where Stoic gives Hiccup a helmet made from half of his mother's old breastplate. It's of formidable size. From the scenes I've caught, and a quick image search for Valka, it doesn't seem like she actually has that sort of build.

Do they address that issue? Was Hiccup's father just kidding? Is the helmet just forgotten in the sequel?

[cobaltstarfire]

Okay, I have a question for those who have seen the movie...

Spoiler: Wha?

Show

The first one had a scene where Stoic gives Hiccup a helmet made from half of his mother's old breastplate. It's of formidable size. From the scenes I've caught, and a quick image search for Valka, it doesn't seem like she actually has that sort of build.

Do they address that issue? Was Hiccup's father just kidding? Is the helmet just forgotten in the sequel?

Spoiler: Spoilery

Show

No, the issue was never addressed...it bothered me a little bit but not too much. I'm running on the idea that either he was joking, or that the two helmets were forged from the original breast plate after melting it back down into the base metal. There's probably enough metal in one Valka sized breast plate to make two helms anyway.

[Palanan]

I wondered about that too, and as cobaltstarfire says it wasn't mentioned in the second movie. Way too much else going on.

And yes, I had the impression it might have been reforged. Or maybe it was more ceremonial in the first place, since we never see it being worn in the flashbacks.

[Avilan the Grey]

Well since Hickup doesn't look remotely like his father, and not that similar to his mother...

[tomandtish]

'Failure' is impossible for laymen to measure. A Film can make 10 times its budget at the box office and bankrupt its creators and Hollywood never releases the kind of detailed data needed to work out if a movie is actually a success

Don't even bother trying to talk about a highly complicated subject of a highly secretive industry. You're going to be wrong and look like an idiot because the only other alternative is that you're somehow correct by sheer chance.

We had a huge discussion about this for Pacific Rim that begins a little before here. The best information we were able to find on studio share of box office profits was here. And for those who want the real short version:

The studio gets about 50% of domestic box office gross, and about 15% of foreign box office gross. So HtTYD2 is so far looking at (all numbers rounded to nearest mil):

Domestic: $122 mil * .5 = $61 mil
Foreign: $106 mil *.15 = $16 mil

So the studio sees $77 million so far, against a production budget of $145 mil, which does NOT include marketing.

For some movies this would be a very bad thing. They tend to see the bulk of their business early on, then very little after. But animated movies seem to have a more steady stream. Looking at Box Office Mojo, the first movie was having about the same daily revenue stream by this point, and still ended up with:

Domestic: $218 mil * .5 = $109 mil
Foreign: $277 mil * .15 = $42 mil

So a $151 mil return on a $165 mil production budget. Presumably disc sales, broadcast rights, and merchandise made up enough for it to be profitable. I'd say it's too early to tell about HtTYD2.

One thing we also noticed is that what seemed to make a successful movie financially changed a fair amount when the movie was taken from an existing media franchise. In fact, nearly all the examples we found where sequels were made of movies that didn't come close to making back production budget were part of other media work (GI Joe for example).

When merchandising and concession stand snacks are the real money spinners anyway the ticket sales are basically a distraction.

This is true for the theaters themselves. It is not true for the studios.

[Avilan the Grey]

This is true for the theaters themselves. It is not true for the studios.

Well Frozen made first quarter profits 2014 increase 27% for Disney total. Second quarter 42%, all driven by Frozen.

[Closet_Skeleton]

This is true for the theaters themselves. It is not true for the studios.

The snacks is for the theatres, the merchandising is for the studios because they're vertically tied into the licensing in the way that is illegal for cinemas.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Closet_Skeleton
Don't even bother trying to talk about a highly complicated subject of a highly secretive industry.

I'm not sure why the movie industry is any more "secretive" than, say, auto manufacturers or industrial agribusiness.

In Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan successfully traced the long path of an industrial meal from the field where it was grown right to the doors of facilities run by companies like ConAgra. The trail went cold; no journalists allowed. No anyone allowed. Hollywood is a paper colander by comparison.

[BRC]

I'm not sure why the movie industry is any more "secretive" than, say, auto manufacturers or industrial agribusiness.

In Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan successfully traced the long path of an industrial meal from the field where it was grown right to the doors of facilities run by companies like ConAgra. The trail went cold; no journalists allowed. No anyone allowed. Hollywood is a paper colander by comparison.

I think it's deliberately obtuse because of the way various Hollywood contracts work regarding profit sharing. They make a bunch of deals to share profits from the film, then try to hide exactly how profitable it was with various shenanigans.
I'm sure a professional reporter who was willing to put in the time could figure out exactly how much money a Movie made and how much of that was profits.
But that's beyond the ability or interest of average internet denizens. We can look at the officially published Budgets, which may-or-may not reflect reality, and the Box Office Numbers, which don't always tell us how much of that money made it back to the Studios.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by BRC
I'm sure a professional reporter who was willing to put in the time could figure out exactly how much money a Movie made and how much of that was profits.

Surely there's one out there doing this now.

And I'm sure what you're saying is true, as far as contracts and their convenient obfuscation. I just don't agree with a prior poster that the film industry is any more secretive than an auto manufacturer that conceals the knowledge of a parts defect, or tobacco companies that conceal their own awareness of their products' health effects. In that context, the movie industry seems almost benign.

.

[Jayngfet]

We had a huge discussion about this for Pacific Rim that begins a little before here. The best information we were able to find on studio share of box office profits was here. And for those who want the real short version:

Of course even then the studio was judging success in a way you aren't then it all goes out the window.

Legendary outright said Pacific Rim didn't lose or gain them a significant amount, then proceeded to double down on a sequel, animated series, and more comics. Most likley because of the fact that they were able to transfer most of their techniques and a bunch of their tech into making Godzilla, which had a cheaper budget because of this, and Pacific Rim 2, which doesn't need to invent from wholecloth and will also probably run cheaper.

Dreamworks is only getting a slight under-performance by comparison, but has already laid off like a dozen people since it's become obvious that they were expecting it to do much better than it did, and hoping it'd make up for the less promising Home. But once it became obvious it wouldn't they had to shift everything around to try and compensate.

Measuring the numbers is one thing, but you also need to take into account the intent behind those numbers. HTTYD2 isn't in a vaccum, it was clearly intended to be the franchise hit that'd hold them up and keep their two more questionable movies afloat.