Muppets Most Wanted Box Office Numbers

[Drtooth]

I can't stand this anymore. I have to step in and give you guys the facts.

• Muppet movies are cheap to make. Look at some of Disney's other franchises. Planes barely made any money, yet two more sequels are on the way. How many Buddies movies have they made by now? Phineas and Ferb? My point is all of these franchises cost barely any money to Disney and the Muppets fall into this category. I think it's safe to say we won't be seeing another Lone ranger sequel, but we will be seeing more Muppet productions. My next guess would be that they're heading to television.

Know what one of my favorite films of last March was? Amazing Burt Wonderstone. it was a movie that was cheap to produce and it didn't do well either. It doesn't matter if the budget is tiny if the returns are tinier. On the level of Lone Ranger's huge box office bombing and bloated budget, a Muppet film is still a wiser investment. If this is all it would ever take in, it would still have lost a lot less money than that one. Again, on that level. If this falls to the bottom like Winnie the Pooh did... ooohhh...Okay, remember when Disney aggressively marketed Pooh over everything else it owned? One bad box office take, and you don't really see them anymore. That's unsettling.

• Disney has way too much invested in the franchise right now. They are in no way just going to dump the whole thing just because one movie did poorly. They realize the Muppets have been around for years and beloved. They saw how much people got excited for the last movie, and that there is demand for it.

Just not this time. For whatever reason. I really hope that investment is seen everywhere else first with this movie second and the film makes it's money and more in DVD sales. But other than that, where's the hope? That MMW doesn't drop beyond 3rd this weekend with like 3 or 4 movies coming out and manages to make at least 15 Mil. That's still a low hope. The film, if we're lucky, will make back it's budget and get a huge hit overseas. It better for the sake of the franchise. Like I said, Pooh hit one flop and suddenly, Pooh's not as ubiquitous anymore. Which is a good thing for those who like Donald and Goofy. The only other hope there is for Disney to dust it off and try another venue for the characters and do another movie in time. I'm overlyoptimistic to even see that.

I'm pretty sure Disney realizes their mistake. Putting it up against Divergent, and a month that already has two family films in it was a dangerous move. Personally, I think the November date works the best to the Muppets, and most Disney movies released at that time generally rake in the most money.

Except last March was strong. That Wizard of Oz movie got even more mixed reviews and managed to make a lot of money before Croods came out. Quite honestly, it is across the board that films aren't doing so hot this month (300 had a sharp drop off, Peabody and Sherman is doing only alright... even Divergent's not getting the 60 Mil opening they were forecasting, but it's still a win). It's just this March, everything seems to be doing badly. On the other hand, Tyler Perry's thing's not even placing in the top 5, Need for Speed disappeared. There's like a couple others I can't even remember. If it's taken into account that no films are doing that good this month, I hope that counts for something.

“Overall it’s a little disappointing,” said Dave Hollis, president of global theatrical distribution at Disney. While noting that tracking had "Most Wanted" opening at more than $20 million, he added that the film is "an asset of the company across many lines of business." He said it "will likely hit $100 million or more worldwide on a budget of $54 million" and has "a lot of business left to do.”

Still doesn't sound promising, especially since the "disappointment" is that it was a measly 3 million under the forecast (Divergent was over 6 Million, and it's called a win). The fact that this is now a high profile bomb as a result of a 3 million disappointment is sheer lunacy. Hollywood accounting. Really?

At least they're taking it in stride.

 

[beaker]

It's outstanding that people can write off MCC and MTI, which were written by Jerry Juhl and just missing Jim and Richard. (although technically Frank didn't do any actual puppeteering in MTI)

I really dislike the "wrong sounding Muppets" Family Guy gag sometimes because it's just something to support that wildly dumb idea that it's totally different. I'm going to be honest: the difference in Whitmire and Henson performing Kermit is extremely subtle to me. If you play clips juxtaposed, the only thing I notice is that Henson's version is just a tad deeper and a bit more laid back. That's it. They don't sound massively different that would make me take pause. I think the only really striking one is Statler, and that's because so many people took a go at him.

Now, if people grew up with it and listening to that makes their ears bleed... okay whatever. But to say that all of it is crap? That just sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me.

But they are not what is killing MMW. The fact is that a lot of people just aren't into Muppets beyond the nostalgia-driven reboot. Jim Hill Media reported the other day that Dave Golez said they may try to revive the Muppet Show on Disney Channel as a nostalgic companion to the upcoming "Girl Meets World"... but I'm not sure what Disney's plans are anymore. I hope they have the sense to bring them back to television.

This is super controversial, so stick with me -- but I'm not sure if a third movie would be any good. Muppets Take Manhattan to me struck as a literal childrens' film that seemed written as a Sesame Street movie rather than a Muppet movie... and that's why it was made: GMC didn't do as well as TMM in the box office, but did gangbusters on family home video. So they wrote a movie designed towards children. (Muppet Babies, anyone?) I'm nervous that Disney would take this route with a third, so maybe it's good we won't see that.

The 2000's were not a good time for the Jim Henson, Oz and Hunt voiced characters I felt. Statler sounded off (even Waldorf, as you said kept switching hands), Scooter just was completely off. But I rewatch the classic material, and for me modern Piggy, Fozzie and Animal seem so spot on that I don't even realize it's not Oz. I loved the Constantine gag, because it pretty much is making fun of people who get the Muppet names mixed up and sticking it to the whole "wrong sounding" Muppets meme

Aw I'm always the odd one out...Return of the Jedi and Muppets Take Manhattan are my favorite of the SW and Muppet trilogies collectively. Though it also could be because those were some of the first films I saw in theaters. TMM definitely felt a little more grown up, though as a satire on early 80's business new york TMTM didn't feel too children orientated to me. But you have a good point all around.

But it's true...while you can go up to anyone on the street and they'll tell you their favorite muppet(Oh! Oh I love Fonzie from Sesame Street!!!) people who will actually go out and see The Muppets on the big screen...well that's too much I suppose.

Now like all of you I desperately want to see them move back to prime time tv in weekly episodic sketches...I'm just wondering if it would actually be a good ratings or barely last a season in this day and age. I LOVED the 2008 Muppets.com skits and the 2008-current muppetsode online sketches for youtube. But who knows how the public digs them.

Btw what happened to "Cheapest Muppet Movie" idea?

 

[beaker]

I think the "many lines of business" is the key sentence here. This is to say that Disney is in no way finished with the franchise. Maybe not in movies, but is for sure not the end of the Muppets in any way. Like I said, they'd probably be heading to TV soon, and in a couple of years, Disney will roll out another movie after they spend some more time on television and in the parks so they can draw in more fans.

My suggestion: Go to the movie and celebrate it along with fellow Muppet fans. I wouldn't worry about the numbers until it gets picked up overseas and once the Blu-Ray/DVD sales numbers come out. It's stupid to worry about it now anyway, and this is in no means a franchise killer.

Definitely not a surprise to read what's in the article you posted, besides the strong investment: The Muppets truly seem to be a pet project/labor of love for people at Disney. It took years of nagging for Disney to even do anything with the franchise, but when Segal convinced Disney to revive in 2011 I can't imagine them letting it fall back into obscurity.

I strongly get the vibe that these films are, despite being aimed to of course make money, they are fan projects by obsessive Muppet lovers at Disney and for industry people in Hollywood who love the Muppets. Look at the Muppets at the red carpet premieres. Look at them on countless cameos and tv interviews. Hollywood loves the Muppets. The movie could have made literally zilch with no interest at all by the public and it wouldn't have mattered as Muppets are primarily being made by these grown up kids in charge. And I'm more than ok with that.

 

[beaker]

Well I wouldn't ban you for it, heh, but I can't say I agree with you. It's not about living in "the past" or "the present." It's simply about preference. Some fans prefer the aesthetic of the JH projects. That is just as valid as someone preferring the post JH aesthetic. Again, it's about personal taste.

And frankly, a lot of fans were deeply saddened by the passing of Jim Henson. To tell them they must get over it and accept movies he had nothing do it with is a bit insensitive. That's kinda like if a parent dies and a child is scolded for refusing to refer to their step parent as "Dad." A child has the right to keep certain love personal. So do fans.

I agree. I certainly am a huge fan of the mid to late 80's Muppet and Jim Henson related projects. Everyone has a favorite time period, but for people to flat out not wish well upon new movies/projects/tv shows because it's not the 1980s or 1970s I find to be anathema to being a fan. If the Muppets were just pumping out Oz like unwatchable drek or really terrible movies or shows, then I definitely can see that sentiment. But I personally have seen a painstaking labor of love to both uphold the classic feel but transition into the modern era. I mean people not long ago when Disney bought the franchise were worried there'd be CG Muppet specials and multiple voices/performers.

 

[CensoredAlso]

Again, it's not about "it's not the 1980s or 1970s." It's not at all about time periods. It's about personal taste. Yes, Muppets (2011) was a love letter and that's great, but I don't consider it as having that much of a "classic feel." As we talked about on another thread, family movies used to be able to be more adult and mature (before the nonsense of PG-13). I feel the original Muppet movies reflected that. In contrast, I feel Muppets (2011) reflected the changes where family movies have to be decidedly more tame. The "modern era" has removed that vital adult feeling. And that's just not something I and a lot of other fans are interested in. I don't wish it badly. But neither am I going to champion for more necessarily.

Now whether MMW continues this trend or not, I will judge for myself when I see it.

 

[beaker]

Production costs/investment/marketing total versus final box office/home/streaming/tv agreement takes always seems to be the bottom line...but I've seen so many examples where a film tanked/was heavily maligned and studios STILL did sequels.

Muppet films are considerably cheaper to make. Despite being the most epic Muppet production in decades, it cost I think $50 million? Which for Disney is cheap.

Noah comes out and looks like it cost a bazillion dollars, a secularly made Christian epic. But one of the top films at the box office was the Christian film "God's Not Dead", which cost nothing to make but was one of the top films at the box office last weekend. I think you could have a super cheaply made, Muppet movie one day and if the writing is well done could make quite a lot of money. Especially if the writing is whip smart.

Disney is planning to make a Star Wars film every year: proper sequels, sidequels, spinoffs, Pixar films. We're all going to be sick of Star Wars in a few years. But I could see, like Cars/Planes, side Muppet films. Even indie Muppet films. Heck have Pepe co-star with a human actress for a Manhattan rom-com sendup.

 

[Muppet fan 123]

Know what one of my favorite films of last March was? Amazing Burt Wonderstone. it was a movie that was cheap to produce and it didn't do well either. It doesn't matter if the budget is tiny if the returns are tinier. On the level of Lone Ranger's huge box office bombing and bloated budget, a Muppet film is still a wiser investment. If this is all it would ever take in, it would still have lost a lot less money than that one. Again, on that level. If this falls to the bottom like Winnie the Pooh did... ooohhh...Okay, remember when Disney aggressively marketed Pooh over everything else it owned? One bad box office take, and you don't really see them anymore. That's unsettling.

The Winnie the Pooh thing doesn't really make any sense to me. If you look at the dates, Disney was making tons of Pooh movies back from 2000 to 2005. I guess after they disappeared for a few years they tried to reboot the franchise. Unfortunatley, the reboot movie didn't make the amount of money it should have, and we haven't heard anything. Keep in mind it's only two summers since the last movie, it's possible more Pooh movies will come in the future. It's such a beloved franchise. Also, don't forget that movie opened to Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2.

The same scenario is for Muppets Most Wanted opening to Divergent, except that the last movie did fairly well, so it's clear that people care about the Muppets.

 

[Drtooth]

But it's true...while you can go up to anyone on the street and they'll tell you their favorite muppet(Oh! Oh I love Fonzie from Sesame Street!!!) people who will actually go out and see The Muppets on the big screen...well that's too much I suppose.

Which is my take home from this. "Oh, we love these classic characters... as long as they do nothing, remain inaccessible, and get buried under a bunch of new stuff we hate for being new." Sure, they'll buy a t-shirt they'll wear once and complain that the Muppet Show isn't on TV. Maybe buy a couple of the cheap, poorer quality plush to put on their desks for a week. But ask them to pay to see a movie, they stay on the fence, listen to a bunch of hipster reviews and see something they wind up hating instead anyway. Maybe wait forever for it to hit iTunes and put it on their phone to partially watch. Those aren't fans. Those are people who sort of like something.

Again, it's not about "it's not the 1980s or 1970s." It's not at all about time periods. It's about personal taste. Yes, Muppets (2011) was a love letter and that's great, but I don't consider it as having that much of a "classic feel." As we talked about on another thread, family movies used to be able to be more adult and mature (before the nonsense of PG-13). I feel the original Muppet movies reflected that. In contrast, I feel Muppets (2011) reflected the changes where family movies have to be decidedly more tame. The "modern era" has removed that vital adult feeling. And that's just not something I and a lot of other fans are interested in. I don't wish it badly. But neither am I going to champion for more necessarily.

AHEM- some. Some classic family films were mature and daring, and every single film made since then has to be unfairly compaired to the surprisingly small amount of good ones (i.e. E.T.). Yeah, we're never going to see the likes of that movie again. Why bother waiting for one and deciding to hate everything beforehand? There is SUCH a huge nostalgia filter that remembers the good films. And ones that paint terrible, cynical cash grabs like We're Back, Garbage Pail Kids, The Tom and Jerry Movie, and Mac and Me as good. Really... Mac and Me. A 90 minute commercial with ugly characters that everyone hates. Yeah, there are crappy kiddy flicks now like Yogi Bear, Marmaduke, and Alpha and Omega. They'll be forgotten the way Thumbellina was and we'll only remember Up and How To Train Your Dragon. That's why we have classic 1950's movies that are called classics and credits to their medium and stuff that MST3K makes fun of... but frankly, more of the latter than former.

If it's this whole Geewunner/presentphobic attitude keeping this movie down, it's their own darn fault for not seeing more classic stuff being released. At least see the thing to complain about it. If it was an Underdog type in name only childhood rape, that's forgivable. Slightly disappointing because someone who used to be involved is long gone isn't. It's 10 bucks, it's 2 hours... not supporting the franchise is a fair weather fan move that only hurts them in the long run. I've seen it before, I'll see it again.

The Winnie the Pooh thing doesn't really make any sense to me. If you look at the dates, Disney was making tons of Pooh movies back from 2000 to 2005. I guess after they disappeared for a few years they tried to reboot the franchise. Unfortunatley, the reboot movie didn't make the amount of money it should have, and we haven't heard anything. Keep in mind it's only two summers since the last movie, it's possible more Pooh movies will come in the future. It's such a beloved franchise. Also, don't forget that movie opened to Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2.

The same scenario is for Muppets Most Wanted opening to Divergent, except that the last movie did fairly well, so it's clear that people care about the Muppets.

Pooh effectively was Disney's cash cow since the 90's. Mickey, Donald, and Goofy took a back seat to Pooh and Tigger. Got to the point where even trying to find Mickey at a Disney Store was the most impossible of tasks. There is no better metaphor for how much they just shoved Pooh in our faces (and yeah... I just heard that... sounds wrong, but apt). A couple movies and TV series that did pretty well, it left the franchise with a crappy CGI preschool show where Tigger and Pooh were in name only. Then they come along, realize how much of a preschool franchise the character became, made a reboot movie to bring it in line with the classic books... it did poorly and I haven't seen a Pooh doll since. Yeah, it opened opposite Harry Potter, but as an alternative to a movie for older kids with scary sequences in it. Divergent opened to hormonal teenage girls that write crappy fan fics and force random characters into pairings on deviant art.

 

[CensoredAlso]

There is SUCH a huge nostalgia filter that remembers the good films.

I know that bothers you, but I've never agreed with that. Of course people know that not all family films of the past were great. But it is perfectly valid to say the industry made significant changes that changed the makeup of films in general. And franchises can't demand that all fans learn to love it, especially when it wasn't really for artistic reasons.

If it's this whole Geewunner/presentphobic attitude keeping this movie down, it's their own darn fault for not seeing more classic stuff being released.

That feels like saying "If you want your precious Star Wars to stay alive, you WILL love the Phantom Menace!" Lol.

And btw, it's preferable to be a Geewunner to a Bayformer.

 

[Drtooth]

And btw, it's preferable to be a Geewunner to a Bayformer.

But they at least go to the movies to whine about them. Not the case here.

And the Star Wars argument is weak for 2 reasons.

1) Star Wars is a franchise that could live on the merits of it's old films alone. And as much as everyone oh so hates the prequels, none of those movies bombed. Those who hated the first one after seeing it at least saw the other 2 in hopes they'd get better. Or at least to whine about them. The Muppets is a very fragile franchise by comparison. It's one of those franchises that has to be forever linked to the movies to be a measure of success. It's unfair, sure... but that's how things like that go.

2) People at least went to see the prequels to decide if they hate them. Not hating them outright. In this case, a couple sourpusses said the movie didn't measure up to the last one and therefore it's horrible. There is nothing about the last 2 movies that screamed "cynical cash grab" or "desecration to the memory of Jim Henson." So why are there fans that are treating it like it is? Some of us sat through some righteous garbage (The Jessica Simpson Whatever the other guy's name was show/Muppet Wizard of Oz) out of support... and because that was the level of Muppet presence a decade ago. The odd TV special and TV movie.

I'd agree to all of that if this was a terrible movie. It's not. Far from it. It's frankly a better film all around than the last one, and leaps and bounds better than the last 7 major projects combined. Why not give it a lousy 10 bucks and 2 lousy hours of time? It's not some bad CGI in name only franchise helmed by some guy desperate to break out into his own garbage kid flick... it's helmed by fans who, just like us, were unimpressed by classic retellings and films where the star of the film was the gimmick.