Is Disney Killing Pixar and Marvel?

×
John CarterAfter two lackluster weeks at the multiplex, Disney (DIS) realizes that it won't be making money on John Carter. The family entertainment giant is taking a $200 million writedown on the big-budgeted flop, resulting in Disney's studio subsidiary posting an operating loss between $80 million and $120 million for the current quarter, which ends this month.

It was a foregone conclusion that Disney would be taking a hit on the sci-fi movie, but even jaded analysts didn't think it would be this high. In other words, the lofty $350 million amount that has been estimated to be the film's production and marketing budget may actually be too low.

Ouch!

Poisoning Pixar

The charge stings, but Disney's been here before. It also took a hit last year when Mars Needs Moms bombed. However, this is a sensitive release.

Andrew Stanton -- the award-winning Pixar director behind Finding Nemo and Wall-E -- was the one behind John Carter, and now skeptics will begin to wonder if his success in theatrical animation means little when it comes to live action.
However, don't be surprised if cynics begin wondering if Disney is simply snuffing the creativity out of the great minds it acquired in its Pixar and Marvel purchases.

Andrew Stanton

It seems like an outlandish notion, but things appear to have been going downhill since Disney spent billions to acquire the two celebrated content creators. Let's take Pixar's Cars 2 out for a test drive. After years of Pixar blowing film critics away, ratings aggregator Rotten Tomatoes shows that just 38% of reviewers liked the film.

Marvel to Behold

Marvel's state is harder to discern since third-party studios and outside directors are the ones dictating the fate of its comic book properties, though it may not be a coincidence that the most poorly reviewed installments in the Iron Man and Spider-Man franchises were their most recent sequels.

Disney is counting on Pixar's Brave and Marvel's The Avengers to save the year. If one or both wind up generating disappointing box office receipts, it will lead to even more critiques of the Disney culture and the influence that it has had on Pixar and Marvel.

Disney can always point to general weakness at the box office. Movie attendance hit a 16-year low last year. However, that trend should have also kept the company from letting the film's budget spiral out of control.

Perhaps Disney was too busy thinking about the merchandising and theme park possibilities than the execution. Instead of building high-tech Avatar-themed attractions the way it will at one of its Florida theme parks, it could've made John Carter the marketable property to enhance its Animal Kingdom park.

It's not to be. Now let's see what Disney can do about keeping Pixar and Marvel from faltering in the future.

Longtime Motley Fool contributor Rick Munarriz does not own shares in any of the stocks in this article, except for Disney. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended buying shares of Disney.



NEXT:

Increase your money and finance knowledge from home

Introduction to Retirement Funds

Target date funds help you maintain a long term portfolio.

View Course »

What is Inflation?

Why do prices go up?

View Course »

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

44 Comments

Filter by:
Wayne Bradshaw

The Louis Vuitton Handbags are sold with higher price in china that other countries, because china has the very high inprot taxes of handbags,so many chinese always want to buy a Cheap Louis Vuitton Handbags and they will go aboard and buy cheap items from Louis Vuitton Outlet Store ,buy the others who can't go aborad will find a Louis Vuitton Handags On Sale out.

May 05 2012 at 11:59 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
amyinouray

Of course they are going to lose money! Its called a tax break!!!

March 22 2012 at 6:56 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Pinot Man

THIS MOVIE TRUE NAMEIS JOHN CARTER OF MARS! AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN MARKETED AS SUCH! DISNEY YOU SCREWED UP AND LET MANY OF EDGAR RICE BNURROUGHS DOWN. I READ THESE BOOKS A S KID, NOW 74 AND WAS THRILLED THAT THIS MOVIE WAS MADE. LOST ALOT OF THE THRILL WHEN THEY LEFT OUT PART OF THE NAME!!
YOU SUCK THE BIG ONE DISNEY!!!!!

March 22 2012 at 6:37 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
gsmith2223

The special effects get better but the subjects are tired and stale.

March 22 2012 at 4:25 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
claymorh1

OK... a simple question: Where is the line between "Live Action" and "Animation," when 95% of what you see is computer generated either way? In another ten years, I suspect, they won't need actors, so what's the fuss??

March 22 2012 at 4:25 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
gsmith2223

Disney lost its "magic" a long time ago.

March 22 2012 at 4:24 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
val

I refuse to go to 3D movies. Can't stand em and can't see them. So thats why I didn't go it wasn't offered here except in 3D.

March 22 2012 at 3:36 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
ProfHeff

John Carter will make back its money in the DVD and Blu-Ray releases. Disney doesn't have anything to worry about!

March 22 2012 at 3:28 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
swedej

Disney apparently decided that this movie was a write off from the beginning. Why didn't they let the potential audience know that it was from an Edgar Rice Burroughs novel or series? There are a lot of us oldies who remember those books fondly and had been waiting for a movie to finally disappear. I was perfectly satisfied with the film and will probably see it again and buy it on DVD when it comes out.

March 22 2012 at 3:20 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to swedej's comment
claymorh1

Swede: I saw that. The promotion sucked and ignored the Burroughs' background. The title might have been better as John Carter of Mars. (My wife, when I brought this up said,..."John Carter...of ER?" ).

March 22 2012 at 4:20 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
jim

Last I checked Sony STILL owns the rights to the Spider-man movies. It has nothing at all to do with Disney. As for Iron Man 2, it was my understanding that that film was shot and in the can ready to be released BEFORE Disney bought Marvel. The reasoning in this article just doesn't hold water as the saying goes! Still not SURE how I feel about Disney owning Marvel though. Hopefully Marvel can coexist on its' own merits without TOO MUCH interferance from Disney!

March 22 2012 at 2:49 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply