Just Realized a Massive Missed Opportunity in Disney's 100 Years Anniversary?

[Winter]

So, just saw the trailer for the live-action remake of How to Train Your Dragon in which made me ask a single question... if they're going just do a shot for shot remake of the original why not just re-release the original?

Yeah, yeah, yeah because money but that just raises further questions. Live-Action remakes are loosing a lot of interest and while odds are good this film will turn a profit there is a huge chance of it bombing or, more likely, not living up to the studios unrealistic high expectations for how well they want it to do. I mean how many films have managed to make back their budget three times over, grossing billions of dollars world wide and was generally well regarded which resulted in the studio going "I expected better of you."?

A re-release is cheaper, guaranteed to make a profit and likely not to loose any money. But thinking all this over made me release something, why didn't Disney do this for their 100th Anniversary?

Not for Wish that was meant to cap off the anniversary but why didn't they re-release all their old films into theaters over the course of 2023? And you don't even have to release all of them, just pick the most popular films, release 3 or 4 a month and use that to buildup to Wish. Alongside all the films made by Disney released that year means you release twice as many films as any other studio AND their all guaranteed to make you a solid profit.

Just look at the first 4 films that would be released that year, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, Pinocchio, Fantasia and Dumbo. Sure this would be released during January but that means no real competition and please will show up just to see their childhood film's on the big screen again.

In the first three months you'd cover most of the Golden Age and Silver Age and this is just the start. And again you can pick and choose. Some might want to see The Black Cauldron in theaters again but you don't have to if you don't want to and no one wants to see Home on the Range or Chicken Little again so you don't need to show those films.

I honestly don't know why Disney didn't do this. This was a win win for them, you release films that are proven to be a success, you get a profit that likely would be in the millions if not the billions by the end of the year. And you give the fans what they want, a celebration of this company and all the memories it's given them and you buildup to the film that's suppose to be capping the anniversary.

Even with Wish under-preforming like it did, it won't matter because you'll still have made a profit. If anything this might insure that Wish is a success because many will go to check out the film just to see what all the fuss is about.

[McAvoy]

Good idea. Bring in the kids to go watch them. I don't know if kids now watch the old movies anymore.

Then again, the problem is how expensive it is bring the family to go see a movie. Could be looking at nearly $100 for a family of four or more.

[Winter]

Well, now all of them will bring in the family. We've all grown up with Disney and most adults will go and watch these films just to relive their childhood. This is a sure fire plan with no real downsides for anyone involved. If some families don't go to see it no big loss because they were cheap to re-release. Don't make billions back in one week, again won't matter because it was cheap to put out again.

Even the risk of them undercutting their own current films would be small because all you have to do is put these films out for a limited time, one or two weeks so there's very little risk of the Original Little Mermaid hindering the success of the remake of the film.

[McAvoy]

Sure.

I am not that familiar with how theaters work but how would this work for movie theaters with limited screens? Like something with a number less than ten? Would they make the same amount of money versus the latest release?

Again it also comes down to cost of going to the theaters these days. It's not cheap. And in the days of having 65" or even bigger screens what is real advantage in seeing in a movie theater now? Think about it, it's free at home more or less. The animation is somewhat crude looking compared to today. Nevermind the sound.

Its the same argument why see a big movie in a theater when you can wait a short few months and then just stream it?

This sort of thing would have worked when the average family TV was like 20-27" CRT with maybe two five inch speakers. The VHS quality was less than that of a theater. And the price of a ticket was far less than it is today.

[Winter]

Sure.

I am not that familiar with how theaters work but how would this work for movie theaters with limited screens? Like something with a number less than ten? Would they make the same amount of money versus the latest release?

Again it also comes down to cost of going to the theaters these days. It's not cheap. And in the days of having 65" or even bigger screens what is real advantage in seeing in a movie theater now? Think about it, it's free at home more or less. The animation is somewhat crude looking compared to today. Nevermind the sound.

Its the same argument why see a big movie in a theater when you can wait a short few months and then just stream it?

This sort of thing would have worked when the average family TV was like 20-27" CRT with maybe two five inch speakers. The VHS quality was less than that of a theater. And the price of a ticket was far less than it is today.

Don't disagreeing with your argument or anything just noting a missed opportunity. There's something great about seeing things on a screen that's the size of a house that no home video can capture. Even people who are super rich who make their own home movie theaters can't match a proper movie theater.

Plus being with other people and hearing them all cheer or gasp together is always fun, even watching reaction videos can't capture that feeling.

I think movie theaters are going to stick around but home entertainment is a lot better then it use to be. The issue, I think, comes more from how much it cost just to get to a theater and how little there is to do after you watch a movie.

Whenever I've gone to Walt Disney World I've made going to Disney Springs part of the trip and it's always packed, even during the slow months and that also goes for the AMC Theater that's there. I saw The Marvels and Wish when I was there, two films that most certainly under performed and both theaters were packed.

There's a lot to do and see here and I think a big chunk of that is the atmosphere and all the things you can do there. It's basically WDW's 5th theme part at this point and offers up a lot entertainment made even better by the fact that you don't have to pay for a ticket to go to this place, it's open to everyone.

I think redesigning Malls to be more like this would greatly benefit theaters because now you can do so much more. Stop by the local arcade and play a bunch of games, hit up an escape room or play a game of paint ball. There still stores to buy cloths and other things from but for the most part make it more entertaining, like going to a mini theme park or something.

Though this could be a sounds good on paper situation but humans are social animals, we NEED to interact with one another and do things like play games which is even better for our mental health...

Wow I really got off topic with this back to the Disney. Like I said a limited run in theaters should handle that issue, just a week or two and then it's done and in select theaters so smaller theaters aren't negatively impacted.

[McAvoy]

Oh nothing will replicate the experience of a movie theater seeing a pivotal moment that was built up. The most recent big one would have been the last Spider-Man movie seeing the Garfield Spider-Man come through and then seeing Tobey come through. Or the well known one in whee it's actually recorded, the reaction of Captain America picking up the hammer with the first time. Thor saying 'I knew it' and then Captain blasting off some powerful moves. Even the last Deadpool movies had scenes like that where audiences were active in their excitement.

That, you need to be in the movie theaters for. But that sort of engagement works for those who never seen the movie and for the buildup of it to get to there.

Seeing a movie on the big screen works only so much. Like I wouldn't mind watching Star Trek The Motion Picture on the big screen and I am sure many Trek fans wouldn't either. Just wonder how much money they would really actually generate.

[Winter]

Given the high number of remakes and the nostalgia binge we're still on right now and that Disney did make a big deal about celebrating 100 years my guess is this would be one of those instances where it would generate quite a lot of money for them.

If they were to do it right now, it wouldn't work at not as well as it would have back in 2023. Fans of Disney went nuts for this anniversary, with tons of music videos, essays going over how much the company has changed and higher then usual visitors at the theme parks, even during otherwise slow months. Re-releasing most if not all of their classic animated films and maybe even many of their classic live-action films like 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea or Homeward Bound would be guaranteed to turn out a massive profit

The numbers they would rake in from JUST the fans would be enough to justify this idea.

Now though, it's to late. The 100th Anniversary has come and gone and it will be a while before another millstone celebration comes along, obviously.

Now Disney will have a similar opportunity in 2027 which will be the 50th Anniversary for Star Wars and while they already planned a re-release for all Star Wars films that seems to have been put on hold as only The Phantom Menace was released last year and we've seen nothing for Attack of the Clones Re-Release as of yet.

There have been 11 SW films released over the past 50 years (the Skywalker Saga, Rogue One, Solo and The Clone Wars) so it could work. The problem is, this would be a bit more divisive. With Disney it's produced literally hundreds of films over 100 years and most of them are beloved classics with thousands of fans around the world. Star Wars, again, only has about 11 films that have been released theatrically and of those 11 Seven of them are very divisive and one could argue that only really two are seen as truly great.

Could it work? Maybe but it's unlikely here. Not helped by Star Wars complex relationship with re-releases. The Special Editions had a massive amount of success in terms of box office but as you know was mixed among fans for the changes made there. The Prequel Trilogy has yet to get past episode 1 in terms of re-release and I doubt the Disney Sequel Trilogy will do much better.

In the hypothetical scenario where Disney did re-release their old classics in 2023 they would have the benefit of being able to release several films that have massive followings and just skip a handful of movies that would likely not see as much success in a re-release. Home of the Range is one such, it sucks, no one really likes it and you can just skip it and focus on a film people do like. Star Wars, if they do this then the films people are most excited for are going to be in the middle of the year and people just ignore the rest. Why bother with films that people might skip out on?

But then again the idea of this being the 50th anniversary might change that.

It's all about timing and getting the right atmosphere and fans will go check out the films in theaters if they're hyped enough for it and again there's little to be lost here as re-releases are cheap to put out and you risk losing very little.

[Al-1701]

The big problem is Hollywood doesn't respect animation and especially 2D animation. They see it as a lesser form of entertainment (you just have to watch the Oscars and how they treat the best animated category). So, tying up theaters to show a bunch of "dated" films from an "inferior" medium was not on the minds of the Disney execs.

The irony is I believe 2023 was when they were showing Miyazaki films in theaters.