Here we go again...

Not only does this movie look amazing, but I believe it will beat your expectations. As nay-saying as you are, you should do an article about how unusually high sales still are for Cars-releated merchandise a year after its release.

Jim wrote:

"I know. This isn't the hap-hap-happy story that many JHM readers have been hoping to read about "Ratatouille" and Pixar in particular."

No, Jim, actually this is EXACTLY the type of heavy-handed opinion piece  I expected you to post about Ratatouille a week or two before it opened.   You are so predictable.

Great article Jim...it takes a lot of guts to write about things people don't want to hear...sadly, you know you're gonna get slammed...I'm guessing a 2% fresh on the "Rotten Jim Meter".

I'll be honest, his movie doesn' look That appealing to me.

I'm a big Pixar guy, and an even biggerBrad Bird fan, but everything I've seen just doesn't have that "IT" factor, to me anyway. I honestly don't see it being SUPER-Successful. I'm sure it'll make good money, but I doubt it'll hit gigantic numbers.

"Take a gander at this excerpt from an e-mail that I received late last week from a Disney executive"

By the way,  that e-mail didn't happen to be from Sharon Morrill was it ?  ;-)

This is just a repeat of the CARS thing.

Thanks a lot of Jim, you're doing exactly what everyone was expecting. Tons and tons of negative articles over this movie, but you continue to give so much love to the DreamWorks pictures, which is not a shock from you. Yeah, you SAY you thought the movie was 'cute', but then spell out the doom of this movie.

I certainly expected people to complain about the negativity in this article, and it's already started.  Honestly, the people who complain about it are as predictable as they are complaining that the article is.  Get over it. Jim got an interesting e-mail that he wanted to share with us.  I'm glad he did. Don't shoot the messenger.  Yeah, it's unfortunate that the outlook is pessimistic.  Ratatouille (which I saw last week) was a great film, and its a shame that it may not get the box office it deserves. But what was really upsetting was that Jim felt the need to apologize to his readers who seem to blame him for what he's reporting on.  Excellent article. Let's hope things get brighter for Pixar and Disney animation.

No problem with this "story" - the tale of one unnamed "executive" who hopes the worst for Pixar. Then as you say,"The news gets worse." Only - is this "news"? Some might call it conjecture, heresay, rumor, gossip, or pettiness. Certainly nothing new.

In Walt's day, animators were jealous of Freddy Moore - the praise he received, his favored status - and were only too happy as he lost his fight with the bottle. Ward Kimball had a pretty rough time after Walt referred to him as a "genius" - and were thrilled years later to see him thrown off the lot. Any of the "nine old men" or any animator or imagineer that achieved some level of success - others became jealous and hoped to see them fail.

Listing Lilo and Stitch and Chicken Little, but leaving out Brother Bear(85), Atlantis (84), Home on the Range (50), Treasure Planet (38),,,, tsk tsk

Poor little Bob Zemekis might be offended by a joke so the principal has to call him at home, but frail little Bobby somehow has the strength and courage to produce and direct big budget movies?             please,   spare us

After looking at Cars toy revenues alone, there's an analyst anywhere that would say Pixar was a bad purchase? Oh, there might be, maybe, possibly.         I see

Here's the situation Mr unnamed executive:

Pixar has out-Disneyed the Disney Co on the big screen for quite some time now.

The Oriental Land Co has out-Disneyed the Disney Co in theme parks for quite some time now.

Eisner turned his back on Disney Co's "own unique traditions & operating systems" so he could raid the treasury. We understand there are jealous people working in Hollywood, but hoping that successful people fail, so that executives with "decades of working experience" can maintain their expense accounts - that's just sad.

Did Disney pay too much for Pixar?  Well if they were ONLY getting BO receipts from Pixar films then yes...but really...come on...its a much bigger picture then that.  You could also say Did Disney spend too much on the Pirates sequels?  AWE isn't hitting predictions here domesticly.  But again...bigger picture...(check out AWE worldwide BO..wowzers)....merchadising, theme park attractions, blah blah not to mention sole ownership of the previous Pixar films, John Lasseter's guidance in Feature Animation...you know all this...the list goes beyond Pixar make zillion dollar movies..

Domestic BO is not the end all.....if it were then Disney would have NO WAY spent $300 million on Pirates 3...because there was NO WAY it could turn a profit, domestic only.....(the general rule of thumb is a film needs to make 3 times its costs to be really profitable)

This summer has been full of surprises.....why don't we wait and see what Rat does before we start predicting doom and gloom....

----------------------------------

Tortuga Traders

Imports from the caribbean and beyond...

http://www.cafepress.com/tortuga_traders

this is hilarious, love how Jim is twisting words from articles bash Pixar` again.

If Walt Disney studio animationis feeling like they are being pushed aside while Pixar gets all the attention  instead of wanting backlash they should excited that a company with all hit movies is helping them out.

After all Disney hasn't seen a big hit in years so its obvious whatever management and culture they have had for several years is not working.

There are several articles which Jim does not put links to, that clearly says that no matter what this picture does in box office, Disney should not have to explain themsleves to Wallstreet since the bought more than just one film.  They bought a package of hugely succesful characters and some of the most sought after creative forces in the animation field.  They also manage to get Steve jobs to become a very important hand in Disney's future by being the biggest stockholder in Disney while being in the board.

If the movie does not do high numbers, its not because of the movie or a trend, it is because of one of the most competitive summer seasons in history.

with movies out there like Spiderman 3, Pirates of Carribean, Even almighty, SHrek the third, the simpsons, live or let die hard, knocked up, transformers, fantastic four, oceans thirteen and harry potter all opening up within weeks of eachother  i don't see why any one movie would be guilty of not hitting high numbers and being considered failures.

So far the ones that were going to be considered hits have not broken any signifcant barrier yet are still holding on. Even sure hots like Pirates and Shrek are not doing as expected.

oh and by the way, we are suppose to believe that because of one e-mail of someone which is probably being affected by the changes is suppose to dictate the feelings of everyone in WDAS.

I have heard diferently as well as others i have spoken too.

Quote: "Many of us here feel that Disney's own executives (Who in some cases have decades of working experience) are needlessly being forced to take a backseat to the crew from Emeryville."

Yay! Yay! Whooopeee! (sound effect: tap dancing feet)

If these are the same creative executives who helped undermine Disney 2d animation while helping to cripple the Disney brand in the process, I say "More please".

It doesn't matter if/when/ or how badly "Ratatouille" bombs, the term "creative executive" will STILL be an oxymoron.

"Many of us here feel that Disney's own executives . . . are needlessly being forced to take a backseat to the crew from Emeryville."

Oh no,

How could they do this the geniuses who brought us Home on the Range, Chicken little and Meet the Robinsons?

Or maybe the writer mistook "needlessly" for "necessarily" . . .

Honestly I find it silly that executives are getting miffed that the people who SHOULD be running various aspects of a company are being highlighted over those who read spreadsheets and manage above all else.  Creativity is breathing new life into the Disney company and people should stop and realize that quality will forever be a better business plan then a quick buck.  Disney was a broken machine - that's why it's being overhauled.  Pixar's got a set-up and mentality that WORKS; it makes sense for them to bring the same philosophies over to WDA while still guarding their own identity from a corporation who - quite frankly - could easily devour all it is.

I honestly have no idea how well Ratatouille will do in the end.  I can't judge the publics response to this film at all, and it has be slightly on edge.  The coming week will be very interesting to say the least - and with insane competition from Transformers and Harry Potter (not to mention this week's Die Hard), I fear the lil' rat won't be getting the attention he very much deserves.

Yet even if it doesn't do well - people would be wise to remember that the ideals, philosophies, and mentality that Disney added to their collective when they purchased Pixar are all worth the price of a few films that under-perform.  The cash forked over for that deal shouldn't rely solely on the films coming out this year or next year; Its the films that start developing out of a revamped studio and collective mentality that'll be the true tell of if the cash was well spent.

I think the real issue is the stock market- an inescapable reality of the business and one that's worth fans being aware of.

I'd say that quality productions, even if they don't keep topping their predecessors at the BO, are an asset that will ultimately turn a profit. Whereas cheapquels only serve for quick cash and erosion of the company's chief asset: its reputation for quality. "Not being able to tell the difference" works both ways.

Another issue is these projects reworked late in the game- adding millions of dollars and unused animation to the budget. I'm hoping this becomes less frequent in coming years, because it only adds to the pressure of making the money back in the theatrical run.

I got MY 7.4 billion's worth when John axed Sharon!

*PAID IN FULL*

What's left out here is what intrigues me the most:

WHY is "Ratatouille" being projected to earn only in the $150 million range?

If the projection for the opening weekend is riding at around $60 mil, then the picture would actually have to have fairly lousy word-of-mouth to make less than $180 million or so.  If, on the other hand, it has fairly good word of mouth, then "Cars"-sized grosses seem likely.  Based on the audience reaction during the sneak preview I attended, the word-of-mouth is likely to be stellar, and what size grosses THAT might translate to is anybody's guess.

"Ratatouille" is one of the very few movies of the summer thus far that actually delivers the goods.  "Spider-Man 3," "Shrek the Third," "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End," and the brand-spanking-new disaster called "Evan Almighty" have disappointed a lot of people.  The one movie that really hasn't is called "Knocked Up," and it has grown some nice-sized legs that aren't showing too many signs of shrinking.  That's what tends to happen when you make a movie that people really and truly like.

Even last summer, that's what happened with "Cars."  As you might recall, it didn't exactly explode in its opening weekend -- it, too, made "only" $60 million, and yet it went on to gross over $240 million domestic.

So why EXACTLY is "Ratatouille" not being projected to do the same?

My sense here is that somebody has an agenda.  This article is not news reporting, it's rumor-mongering gussied up as news.  There are almost no facts in the whole thing, and the ones that are there -- like the inclusion of "Lilo & Stitch" and "Chicken Little" as evidence that Disney CAN still produce hits on its own (though they were both smaller hits even than "Ratatouille" is being PROJECTED to be) and the marked lack of any mention of the company's numerous recent disappointments -- fail to tell a terribly persuasive story.

Luckily, I don't think it's going to matter much in the long run.  When "Ratatouille" has grossed over $250 million by September, people will look back on this particular report and roll their eyes.  

Or, better yet, they won't remember it at all.

I'm so totally not surprised that Disney animators (or at least one) are feeling like that. Pixar/John & Ed hold this magic status, and they will lose that in time. MARK MY WORDS. Pixar will fail once. And you know, I love Pixar, I love their movies, but I want them to fail once. So that they can get off their golden chairs and get down to earth again.

I hate motion capture, but that kind of "gag" that Pixar used in the end credits is a good representation of what they are. Arrogant. All you people who say, "aren't those insulted animators not responsible for the failure in the past, and shouldn't be insulted because of that". Euh, or is was just bad management? Just like there was bad management concerning "Meet the Robinsons". Lasseter made some last-minute changes?! Oh please, the movie should have been called "Meet the Robinsons in 5 Seconds", it was an animated ADD movie. And it was a movie from before they joined the company, so there was no special need to make it work. If it failed, they could have just said: "oh well, it wasn't initiated by us".

"Ratatouille" will be beautiful, but a next "Nemo" or "Incredibles"? I don't think so. It will probably do better than "A Bug's Life", since promotion has been strong, but a huge success. No. This will not be the failure Pixar needs. I don't want it to be (because I already love that movie), but I think "Wall-E" will be the failure. And that would be sad if that is true, but necessary.

I've seen Ratatouille twice now and it pretty much rocked my face off both times. I have no worries about this movie and its performance.

It's a shame I'll have to wait until September to see what looks like a really charming, quality animated movie. Perhaps the Australian Disney branch thought it would make more sense to release the film in a set of school holidays where it won't be up against Harry Potter. A wise choice, to be sure, but I'd still like to see it now.

To the whingers... (and I know we've been here so many times before) if you don't like hearing news of the business side of Disney, GO TO ANOTHER SITE! Seriously! Don't take it so personally! If you enjoy the movie, brilliant. Go and see it! Buy the DVD! But just because a movie is brilliant, doesn't mean it will set the box office alight. I'm sure no one will be wasting their money going to see it; it's currently sitting on a 100% positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes!

It's all about perspective. What's more important to you? That Disney and Pixar create great films? Or that they perform at the box office? For me, I couldn't give a toss how many people go to see them. I thought Treasure Planet was brilliant fun, but it bombed in a big way. Doesn't make me love it any less. If numbers and figures upset you, DON'T LOOK AT THEM. And leave the rest of us in peace.

I don't like this news, but it is news, and all of your points are valid and I have been wondering the same thing of late.  However, Ratatouille has one very significant  thing going for it: It's an original film that tries to be new and different and show us something we haven't seen yet.  The majority of this summer's underperformers have been franchise films and/or sequels.  And Pixar, instead of going that route, has made a new, fresh, engaging movie that is completely original.  That will help it out a lot, I think.  And I also expect it to have good legs.  So it might not at first seem like a huge film, but it will stick around a while as word of mouth grows and continue to do well throughout the rest of the summer and as long as they can keep it in theaters.  I saw it at the sneak preview as well, and the entire audience LOVED it.  They were really into the film -- which is more than I can say for my screenings of this summer's sequels.  The positive buzz will work in its favor.  And the Pixar name still generates much goodwill, even if it was diluted a little bit by Cars.

I have to wonder, though, why Disney slotted Ratatouille in this particular release timeframe when they knew it would be going directly up against Die Hard, Transformers and etc.  I don't see Harry Potter being too big of an issue because that now skews older (book 5 is extremely dark), and anyway Monsters, Inc. did fine when it competed directly with Sorcerer's Stone in 2001.  But Harry in combination with all of the other megamovies out right now like the ones I just mentioned does worry me a bit.  Still, Disney is partially to blame for not giving it a better (and wider-open) release slot to begin with.

I agree with most of what you've said in here, b ut I'm going to keep the faith and not count the Little Chef out just yet.  Maybe he will surprise us all.

Irvyne << To the whingers... (and I know we've been here so many times before) if you don't like hearing news of the business side of Disney, GO TO ANOTHER SITE! Seriously! >>

I don't generally get involved in such discussions, but I couldn't resist this time around. Because honestly, this isn't business reporting. This is pure speculation based on one (let me repeat that: one, uno, ein, une, één) anonymous source, backed up with the very selective use of data (as is already discussed above).

Let's face it folks... Jim might actually have a point here, but he might just as well haven't a clue what he's talking about. Because our dear old Jim isn't the best reporting roaming the earth. Not even close to that (let's face it, anyone citing "Google Images" as source for used images shouldn't be taken all that seriously). He's just a guy that's good at telling stories, and as far as I'm concerned, he should stick to that.

I don't have a problem with reading about the business side of the Walt Disney Company - in contrary, I do that all the time. But not on JHM. Simply because Jim isn't a serious business reporter and doesn't produce serious business journalism. Nothing wrong with that. But please - stop trying.

I'm rooting for higher than expected box office returns on Ratatouille, better than Cars. It may very well be wishful thinking, but Cars was a disappointing movie, Ratatouille will (from what I hear) not be. That means good word of mouth, returning visitors and an all round positive buzz, like with Finding Nemo. I'm a little worried about Harry Potter opening two weeks later and am not sure how much carry my word of mouth thesis will have in the US, but I'm pretty sure that at least in overseas Ratatouille will have a long and steady run, and will be "doing some serious scaring, putting up some big numbers."

MAKE IT STOP, MAKE IT STOP!

I'm not even going to bother putting up the links to previous stories about how Pixar's about ready to tumble. It's just so redundant at this point.

"To the whingers..."

Could somebody tell me what a whinger is? Or better yet why this person's argument completely veered away from "Why does Jim seem to ritualistically beat to a pulp anything that has a Pixar logo on it" to the straw man argument of "Why did Treasure Planet under perform?" I know the beating to the pulp issue has some people concerned while the other part I'm just lost about. Seriously.

zeppo983 said:

"[..] Could somebody tell me what a whinger is?"

Cheap, really cheap.

"Ratatouille" is a great movie.  I'm hoping it will do well.

But...

I'm glad you posted that e-mail from that Disney executive- I've always said that Mr. Lasseter & Friends don't care about Disney (and, apparently, the Disney culture).  Sure, they may be fans of Disney, but their baby is Pixar, and they'll try and get Pixar on top, no matter who they step on.

I've really liked all the Pixar films so far, but my two favorites are "Cars" and "Ratatouille".  Maybe I'd like them to continue making these so-called bombs, because they're wonderful.

I *loved* the joke about motion capture at the end of "Ratatouille".  Who cares if Zemekis was upset- Disney shouldn't be making motion capture films with him.  Bring back 2D animation!!!  And don't make motion capture!!!  Maybe when Disney's first motion capture film comes out, I'll eat my words, but, until then, I don't like the idea.

I wish that people (the suits, the shareholders) would stop looking to "Finding Nemo" to compare all movies to.  "Finding Nemo" did freakishly well.  Most movies don't do that well.  Not all movies are bombs!

These days, many families opt not to go to the theater and will wait to rent or buy a film on DVD.  We all know that the "Ratatouille" DVD will sell well.

Did whoever set the "Ratatouille" date know about all the competition coming out?  As people have said, even POTC:AWE isn't doing "as projected"...but it's still doing amazing (I'm a proud American, but the U.S. isn't the only country in the world...).

empoor, I 150% agree with what you said.  The Pixar people have big heads (but I still loved that motion picture gag!), and I do love their movies, too, but they do need to see that they're not the only great animation studio.  Hopefully "The Frog Princess" (or "The Princess and the Frog", or "The Girl and the Amphibian", or whatever) will blow everyone away (and "Bolt" and "Rapunzel"...), and show that Pixar isn't the only company who knows how to make great animated films.  I know that many people were saying that rats aren't lovable and cuddly, but robots (like cars, I guess) are less cuddly.  I loved "Ratatouille" very much, and it deserves a chance.  The robot WALL-E looks cute, but Pixar needs to know that they aren't the gods they think they are.  

Irvyne said:

<<"What's more important to you? That Disney and Pixar create great films? Or that they perform at the box office? For me, I couldn't give a toss how many people go to see them. I thought Treasure Planet was brilliant fun, but it bombed in a big way. Doesn't make me love it any less.">>

I completely agree.  Maybe there are people out there who only like "successful" movies.  If so, I feel bad for them.  I've loved all the Disney animated movies, even the "failures", like "The Black Cauldron" and "Atlantis" and "Treasure Planet".  I don't know what trailers people are seeing for "Ratatouille" that make them not want to see it, but the one I saw made me want to see it very much.  It was a heartwarming story with a message, and it was very funny.

I couldn't care less if the WDFA execs are wounded over Pixar's treatment. Tell them to make a movie that doesn't suck a few times in a row and maybe people will feel bad for them. Until they, they should all be kissing John Lasseter's big ole white butt.

As far as this article as a whole goes ... blah blah blah blah blah. We all read the exact same articles last year about Cars and how it was doomed and Jim even went so far as to boldly predict Cars wouldn't top $200 mil at the box office (or some such nonsensically low number) and how Pixar's star was falling and how Disney overpaid for Pixar ... yadda yadda yadda ...

12 months later and Jim dusted off his Cars pieces, changed a few words around, and re-posted the same story. Very original Jim. And very boring.

I sincerely hope we aren't going to have to spend the next month reading biased anti-Pixar stories again and watching you backpeddle and justify after you're proven to not have a clue what you're talking about. Again.

I find that Jim does a FANTASTIC job when talking about Disney's past and their history. Future looking articles are NOT Jim's strong suit.

I still don't quite get what's going on here. As I understand: Pixar's films have been making less and less, which people at Disney are hoping will allow them to fight back at the creative powers that be, is that right?

However, all this is based on a prediction based on how the past few films have performed in the box office and other factors. So...

I've always felt that number crunching was being done a little too much at Disney these days anway. I really don't know how to feel about this until some numbers actually start coming in once the movie opens up. The movie got 100% on Rotten Tomatoes, so some surprises may hapen.

It's a shame because I am championing Ratatouille on my most recent podcast episode.  To have it sandwiched between two juggernaut action films is pretty much the kiss of death.  Had they released this this past weekend, they would have made bank and more because clearly, Evan Almight didn't do as well as anyone had hoped.  For once, this summer (aside from Knocked up which is clearly NOT for kids) we have a movie that is not a sequel to something, a spin off, a prequel, or based and/adapted off of anything with Ratatouille.  This is truly a wonderful movie.  I am going out of my way to make sure that Ratatouille has an audience for sure this weekend.  

I think Disney really dropped the ball by not moving up the release date one week. It would have destroyed Evan Almighty which is now looking like it is going to be a huge flop. It would have given them an extra week. They really should have figured out that Evan Almighty was going to be a disappointment based on reports months ago about how this film was an awful mess and moved up the release date. But hindsight is 20/20 because they probably thought Surfs Up and Shrek 3 was going to do better than they did too. I really like Jim's site but I am getting tired of these articles. Was Pixar worth the money, yes. It is not just about B.O reciepts esp. domestic B.O. You have dvd sales, tv rights, merchandise and the fact that they now totally own all of the pixar characters. Cars grossed $461 million worldwide, the merchandise sales have come close to $2 billion with another billion or 2 expected. This is just Cars. That doesn't include all the other Pixar properties. So anyone who thinks Disney overpayed for Pixar simply doesn't understand it is not just about the domestic box office.

it makes me laugh when people claim that they want to see a PIXAR movie fail because itll bring those Emeryville folks down a few pegs.

Why exactly would you want that? because you are afraid of their success, or envious of it? do we have to repeatedly tear down those who excel, to bring them down to an acceptable level of mediocrity? The PIXAR people have enjoyed an unbroken string of extremely high quality, highly rewatchable films, with engaging characters and emotionally full storylines. And people out there seem to be clamoring for that to end. So, that they can be brought down to the level of recent Disney efforts? Do we really want more ATLANTIS, TREASURE PLANET, LILO AND STITCH, BROTHER BEAR, HOME ON THE RANGE??? Or even worse, the Disney computer crapulence that was CHICKEN LITTLE, or MEET THE ROBINSONS ?(which in my opinion was completely upstaged by six minutes of Donald and Chip n Dale in one of their lesser cartoons?)

Imagine if this was the early 40s, do you people really think that after SNOW WHITE, PINOCCHIO, FANTASIA, DUMBO and BAMBI  youd all be hoping that MAKE MINE MUSIC becomes the first movie to take Disney down a few pegs? My, how cynical we have all become....

Why is this surprising? Does anyone think that merging these two particular companies was going to be a lovefest? I don't given the personalities involved.

At some point I expect John Lasseter and Disney will part ways and Steve Jobs will start selling off his stock. There is a right way, a wrong way and the "Disney Way" guess which one wins. Too many entrenched attitudes. Major ego issues. PIXAR

is out numbered by the folks already in place.

Oh well think about all the new books that will be written about what should've been done, what went wrong, etc;.

I will be very surprised if Jim's not right on this one.  And I don't say that based on what I read here.  This is an excerpt from Entertainment Weekly's review:

"But can Remy and Linguini triumph over the evil head chef, a sawed-off Napoleonic control freak (Ian Holm)? And what about the brooding, cadaverous, ultimate-snob food critic Anton Ego? He looks like a macabre Tim Burton puppet and is voiced by Peter O'Toole, who lends dramatic oomph to lines like ''If I don't love it, I don't swallow!'' Will he deign to give them a good review?

If it sounds like I'm less than excited about these questions, that's because the movie isn't either...

As a story, however, Ratatouille is fun without very much surprise."

So not all the reviews have been glowing.  Like Jim, they said that the movie was cute.

They also bring up another point.  Very few people out there in the general public realize that animation is for more than just kids.  The main challenge in this movie, trying to become a champion gourmand, will not excite kids the way a Piston Cup race did.  It's sort of an adult goal.  And the majority of the adult public won't go see this movie just for themselves.

I would love to see this movie succeed.  But if it doesn't, that will be fine, too.  Because I'm sure I will love it.  Even if it's not a record-breaking, world changing opening, I'm sure it won't bomb, either.  

Just to give you an idea where EW stands on Pixar, they gave Cars an A-.

So can we expect this story next year for Wall-E?  And in 2009 for UP?

I've re-read the article, and Jim didn't bash Ratatouille once (just as he didn't bash Cars last summer).  He did report on the rumors of what all the executives behind the scenes are thinking.  It's absolutely correct that this has nothing to do with what the film Raratouille is - but since these guys decide what films are made, it could very well impact what Disney does in the future.

Are there any alumni from Team Disney Anaheim that wouldn't love to see Pixar fail, so film decisions could return to marketing directors and survey teams where they belong?  To reinstate their beloved dreck-to-video Toon Disney Studios with more crap than the market will bear?  Because these things will bring the greatest short term profit - and unlike the Lasseter / Pixar (and arguably, Walt's) mentality, setting long term plans for quality improvement might help the company several years from now, but won't put you in a new Beemer by the end of this quarter.

This years' films are turning out to be one-weekend wonders since there are so many of them.  Why go to a repeat viewing of last weekend's blockbuster when there are one or two more coming out this weekend?

As father of a six-year-old, I think Disney picked a great weekend.  Sure, my son wants to see Transformers, but I'm not so anxious to wake up for the next couple of weeks calming him down after nightmares.  In the PG market, it's been pretty slim pickings; Disney having the preview showing last weekend has generated great word of mouth; hopefully that will generate good box office this weekend and maybe even convince a couple of the Disney execs Jim has heard from that pandering to the lowest common denominator isn't always the best business move.

"WHY is "Ratatouille" being projected to earn only in the $150 million range?"

Simple: look at the competition it's still got to face.  The Simpsons, Harry Potter, and Transformers are all yet to come out, and all three movies (or at least the first two) are going to be popular with kids and will cut into any shelf life Ratatouille might have had otherwise.

On a different note entirely, it'd be fantastic if you guys would stop ripping Jim apart for articles like these.  I'm with RLS Legacy - Jim isn't bashing Ratatouille in any way I can see, and expecting the movie to be a blockbuster in this summer is kind of stupid any way you look at it.  I think a lot of people who follow animation online tend to forget that the rest of the world isn't nearly as obsessive about these things as we are.  Ratatouille may be a good movie, but so was The Iron Giant...and look what happened there.  There's a very real chance that Ratatouille will perform exactly like Jim's article speculated, and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for now.

With that said, I'm going to try and stay out of these fights for the rest of the summer, and beg you all to do the same.  The constant stream of "Jim says Cars underperforms -> users post 50 comments about how much he sucks and how his website has gone downhill" from last summer got old really quickly, so let's try and avoid that tedium this time around.  :¬)

Jim's article was heavy handed, agreed, but I'm afraid his basic premise - that Ratatouille will underperform, is sound. This is a VERY crowded summer, and even though Spiderman 3 peaked already, Pirates is slowing down, and Evan looks like a flop, there's still three huge films coming up (and I predict Transformers will be bigger than ANYONE expects) that will very quickly reduce the number of screens that Ratatouille appears in. If it has legs, that will not be a big impact. If it has the typical 50% reduction the second weekend, it will be huge, as the theatres will reduce the number of showings and screens much more than they would otehrwise. Anyway you cut it, if it gets a good month worth of business, you'll probably only see $140 to $150 mil in reciepts - and with less merchandise opportunities, the Stock Market will see it as an "underperformer."

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Seriously, this sounds like sour grapes from some Disney suit who used to wield power over the artists but is now worried their job is on the line because the Pixar folk are (rightly) telling the suits to get the heck out of the way of the artists and let them do their job.  Get over it.

Maybe the creative folk are a bit jealous that Pixar gets all this praise, but I don't know why any artist in their right mind would wish for the "good ol' days" when Eisner and his henchmen controlled every single creative aspect of each movie.

The suits, again, are more concerned about the dollars being earned NOW to appease the shareholders than the future of the company.  Seems to me that regardless of if the next five Pixar films "flop" at the box office (i.e., according the "industry standards," would be something like $150 million; which isn't really that bad), if Pixar's influence results in the loss of executives like Morrill who have been ravaging the Disney brand all for a quick buck, the future will look brighter both financially and quality-wise.

Only thing I agree with in the article is Brad Bird's adding the dig at stop-motion animation.  True, it is a shortcut, but that comment just seems...  insecure and unnecessary.  Pixar should be above that.

The Zemeckis dig was in bad taste and rather stupid--but funny.  Really, though it had no place in the final film.  It would have been great for an in-company premier.  Why bite the hand you're hoping will feed you?

oh god. not again.

1. Disney did not overpay for pixar. Look at them using the pixar products in the parks. Pixar is raking in money for Disney.

2. Stop contributing to the poor form of predicting what movies are gonna do.

In other news, I received an email from a gentleman in india who needs my bank information so I can be a millionare. Maybe i should post a blog about every rumor-mill email I receive....

Stop trying to stir the pot and give yourself the numbers this site got with the cars fiasco. Its pathetic.

Why is it that everyone only thinks that US box office is the only one that matters (or at least, only reports those numbers)? I'd be shocked if this thing didn't turn out to be huge in Europe.

A little context might be in order here, Jim.  John Lasseter has been rubbing the MBA types the wrong way since he took over at Walt Disney Feature Animation by putting creative decisions back in the hands of creative individuals.  He even told them on his first day, "If you're not an artist or writer, you have no place in WDFA."

That's been making guys like Glen Keane happy:  The Animation Guild 839 business rep Steve Hulett noticed in his June blog that the general mood at WDFA is much brighter than in previous years.

"One employee said to me," wrote Hulett, "that he thought story development was way better than when he first came to the studio (he's been there a few years). I said that, judging from the morale of story crews up on the third floor, I think that's true. The artists don't feel as constricted and hemmed in by executives with their reams of notes the way they did several years back. Now its (sic) peers reviewing peers. Most people in the story department seem to like that a whole lot better.".  

So the Disney executive who sent you that e-mail is likely bitter after being dropped down the totem pole in favour of animators and artists.  Do you think he will be happy to see Ratatouille fail and Lasseter lose some ground at the Mouse House? Ya think?

That said, if Ratatouille bombs, it won't be the first time this year that a critically-acclaimed movie flops at the box office.  Sony's Surf's Up has been getting great notices, but its box office has been less-than-stellar.  While we're at it, several Disney films now regarded as classics (Fantasia, Sleeping Beauty) tanked on their initial releases.

It's so funny that Disney executives are griping about the Pixar influence, when in fact, Pixar has been working around the clock to unfix the damage these suits have caused Disney in the past several years. These suits are quickly learning what it's like to be ignored and undervalued, only this time, the shoe is on the right foot. ;)

It may seem like Pixar is being "high-brow" these days, but you got to look at what most movies today have become. Most studios, including Disney, have become more interested in repeating everything (with sequels, remakes, etc.) and building "franchises" rather than trying to make anything genuinely original or creative.

And they STILL get upset when these films either don't make money, or make a crap-load of money, but "fail to meet expectations". What expectations?! Of mediocrity? Of this accursed "bottom-line" that's pissing the hell out of your average movie-goer already disenchanted by the current movie-going experience?

We should be blessed that we have a studio that knows how to make films that people WANT to watch. A studio that embraces creative thinking. A studio that knows the true value of a dollar.

It's time for these suits to wake up and grow up.

What will they say if Ratatouille does not do well?

Aww, rats!!

Reading all this blabber I have to settle on EMPOOR's comments. Pixar is riding high right now and the arrogance is showing through. I have stated before I was uncomfortable with Disney sleeping with Pixar, but not because it wasn't worth the $ but because Pixar is creatively dominating over the classic 2-D magic. I wish the 2 -D animation division could step up to the plate and give us someting better than "Home On the Range" instead of just leaning over to kiss Pixar right on the sphincter. Disney then would truly dominate with Pixar animation and classic 2-D work, but that will only happen if the strongarms of Pixar let the other animators work on that aspect.  

Jim Hill, you are doing your job, but let's just let the movie run and let the figures speak for themselves.  

I can't help but think that animation disclaimer by Bird was half-joking, half-serious...the kind you would needle your very bright kid brother with. After all, Mocap is the technology used by ILM for Davy Jones and crew in the incredibly profitable Pirate movies.  I have confidence in the RAT, even in this oh-so-competitive July coming up.  The movis is funny and brilliant.

This article completely ignores worldwide box office.  While Cars was a bit lower than the other films domestically, the real story was that it was one of Pixar's weakest by far overseas.  The whole "nascar" thing just didn't translate.

While competition for Rat is tough, it's been tough  in the past without any problems.  Harry Potter and Pixar have already proved that two huge movies can open a couple weeks apart and BOTH make giant box office.  Don't forget that a couple of those faced Lord of the Rings, which is one of the biggest of all time.

I see Rat coming in about the same range as Cars, based on the reviews it sounds like it's just simply a better movie (Rat at 100% and mostly raves at rotten tomatoes, Cars finished at 76%).  But overseas, there's no reason Rat shouldn't bounce back and perform like earlier Pixar work overseas, maybe even set new international records for them.

Many big movies have disappointed domestically this summer.  But in most cases, they have done better than ever overseas, more than making up for the lukewarm US reception.  There's no way you can spin a "trend" if Rat is a little lower in the US than Cars but beats it by a couple hundred million overseas (or more).

I don't doubt the $150M "predictions" being leaked out.  I just think they're not really predictions by any stretch of the imagination but just really low numbers intended to set the bar extremely low so they can beat it easily and say what a huge surprise it was that it did so well.

"Disney then would truly dominate with Pixar animation and classic 2-D work, but that will only happen if the strongarms of Pixar let the other animators work on that aspect."

Huh?  I would have thought that the executives who are hoping for Pixar's demise were the ones who weren't letting the Disney animators work the way they should.  Pixar _wants_ the Disney animators to have control.  Disney sleeping with Pixar was the best thing that could happen to the artists.

I have no problem with Jim's reporting, but just like Stratburst said, a little context would help.  You always hear two different versions coming out; I'd guess the suits and the artists don't feel the same way.  I personally don't care if the current executives who have been there for "decades" and can't take the Pixar influence leave.  They need to clean house anyway and get rid of all things Eisner.

Many people say that they are giving creative control back to the animators.. Uhm.. Chris.. Sanders.. His movie.. Creative control?? "The Frog Princess".. Clements.. Musker.. Needless changes.. Creative control??

Uhm, yeah.

Despite my initial low opinion from the early trailers and the whole premise in general...

Ratatouille is absolutely amazing !!! It's truly the first Pixar movie that looks and feels more like a true "Disney" story. Its really one of the best Pixar movies ... dare I say ... one of the best "Disney" movies of the last 30 years.

That being said ... I don't think box office success matters in this case because this film is going to change the world's opinion of Pixar. So what if it doesn't make $$$. This film may be on its way to the Golden Globes / Oscars.

I mean seriously?  Who really thinks that this movie stands any kind of chance against Transformers coming out 3 days later? Lets put it this way ... people are starting to put up tents... and its not for Ratatouille.

Its a bum rap for Pixar / Disney this summer. But really both Transformers and Ratatouille have one thing going for them that most of the other movies did not. Possitive word of mouth ... after release.

Because of the cost involved with going to the movies these days ... many peoiple rely more heavily on "reviews". Ratatouile is a great movie. Period. This will boost sales as time goes on. TransFormers is like another "Star Wars", "Independance Day" or "Titanic". There is no way that this movie will not be the number one movie of the year and most likely in the top five all time worldwide.

So Wall Street better give the Rat a break .... because despite how good this movie is.... its not Transformers, and its not CARS, because there are more Transformers fans, Industrial Light and Magic Fans, action fans, and NASCAR fans in the world, than there are people who enjoy charming, quirky, little comedies about friendship, France, and food.

So what I say.

Everyone at Disney should be thankful for Brad Bird and his second Masterpiece. (The first one being The Incredibles)

I am all for anything that gets Disney from NOT listening to the Wall Street guys when it comes to success. Let's face it that was the underlying problem when Eisner and crew were in power.

Wall Street is all about short term profits. That gave rise to Toon Studios and the easy money of lousy sequels. It also gave rise maintenance budgets being gutted and we all saw what became of DL as a result.

Disney's greatest success comes in creating a legacy. As mentioned above, Fantasia and SB were huge financial bombs of their day. More recently Nightmare Before Christmas was not a huge financial success either but look at the "legs" those characters have!

I think Remy has the chance to be one of those enduring Disney characters even if the domestic BO is less than $200 million!

Ilsoap wrote "Why is it that everyone only thinks that US box office is the only one that matters (or at least, only reports those numbers)?"

I agree...why don't they consider world-wide box office instead of just domestic? I'm curious to know...since, last time I checked...$100,000,000 is $100,000,000 whether it's from the U.S. or elsewhere.

As to my thoughts on the article...I still don't see why people bash Jim for reporting something he heard...people never complain about emails he posts about that are good news, so why if it's bad news does everyone get all huffy?

As for Ratatouille, I thought it was a great movie and can't wait to see it again.

"$100,000,000 is $100,000,000 whether it's from the U.S. or elsewhere."

While I agree that WW numbers are often ignored, studios usually get a considerably lower percentage overseas.  So 100M in the US IS better than 100M overseas for the studio.

But that's still no reason to completely ignore overseas numbers.

About the comment about $100 mil B.O. being rare for WDFA nowadays... in the context of all its films since 2000, it's not unfair to say that breaking $100M is rare for them.  Yes, L&S and CL did better than $100M, and Robinsons might yet, but you're failing to list all the movies in that time that didn't break $100M [according to boxofficemojo.com]: "Fantasia 2000" ($60M), "Emperor's New Groove" ($89M), "Atlantis: The Lost Empire" ($84M), "Treasure Planet" ($38M), "Brother Bear" ($85M), and "Home on the Range" ($50M).  That's 9 movies since 2000, two of which broke $100M, six of which didn't, and one that's on the fence.  Meanwhile, every Pixar movie has beat $100M, and its worst performer, "A Bug's Life", still did better than every WDFA movie since 1999's "Tarzan" ($171M).

Frankly, what worries me about this idea of a downward "trend" is that it's potentially a self-fufilling prophecy, highly reminiscent of how the WDFA golden era declined.  "Lion King" did $312M, and every successor that didn't do that kind of business was considered a failure in some way, even though "Hunchback", "Hercules", and "Mulan" were all good movies.  Maybe "Lion King" (and "Finding Nemo") was just the right movie at the right time... the kind of "lightning in a jar" good fortune that doesn't repeat itself very often, and that you should just be happy to get once. Yet if you insist that such great results must be the new normal, you go crazy trying to duplicate it (viz, all the movies with showtunes that didn't really need showtunes, like "Mulan"), or worse yet, tearing up the blueprints and starting over (e.g., with unsatisfying action or straining-to-be-Shrek CG).

I'm not worried about Ratatouille.  My kids won some Ratatouille plushies in a crane game this weekend and while they're not cute, per se, there's a nice cognitive dissonance in a plushy of a rat.  Actually, I'm worried about Wall-E, and its keep-away teaser trailer that's very obvious in trying to link it to past Pixar successes.

>>> Many people say that they are giving creative control back to the animators.. Uhm.. Chris.. Sanders.. His movie.. Creative control?? "The Frog Princess".. Clements.. Musker.. Needless changes.. Creative control??

Uhm, yeah.  <<<

By "creative control," I mean "director-driven."  This will not necessarily mean no changes will ever have to be made to films.  But at least now, the changes that directors will be forced to make will be due to problems with the story rather than "not enough fart jokes to make the kids squeal."  

As I said in a previous thread - this isn't merely a "Pixar pushes away Disney animators" thing.  Ratatouille was Jan Pinkawa's project and there were problems there so they had Bird finish it up for him.  This is more like a teacher being difficult not because they want you to suffer, but because they believe you can do better and excel in what you do.  I agree that the Pixar heads should probably have done all they could do to keep talent like Chris Sanders, but things like that will happen.  

Glen Keane supposedly had to rewrite Rapunzel after Lasseter and co. came in, but I have read that Keane is one of their biggest supporters and is ecstatic that the animators now no longer have to answer to corporate.  These are the stories that make me feel comfortable about the Disney-Pixar partnership.

See, I intend to go see Transformers too, but I'll go just as often to see RAT. I don't get all this tracking and stuff, but studios should give audiences a break and credit for being more intelligent than they think we are.  It doesn't bother me that RAT is set in Paris (the Rat characters speak in American English, for goodness sake) and food/cooking is universal.  It didn't even occur to me that anyone would object to the setting either - Paris looks impossibly romantic in this film.

Quote from Brad Bird:

"...Walt Disney once said that he doesn't make films to make money, he makes money to make films. That's very much Pixar's philosophy..."

That is what it's all about.  The executives hoping that Ratatouille bombs at the box office are COMPLETELY missing the point.  

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=21218

Not that this hasn't already been stated, but Ratatouille is going to be a film that will grow more and more cherished over time.  Not every movie has to win the the first lap straight out of the gate; sometimes it's better to get your footing and win the race in the end.  See, while I sincerely hope Rat makes big money during it's domestic run (I saw the sneak preview, and it's more than "cute" - it deserves big money), I'll bet that it does incredibly well on DVD.  Sure, it's not super-exploding-face-paced action.  But it is a movie you'd want to own.  It just has that right appeal, that memorable mix of artistry, character, and a very good story that puts Rat out in front in the long run.  To me that's what's important: making movies that stand the test of time, rather than simply conform to what will make a successful opening weekend.

Let's not forget, Pinocchio, Bambi, Fantasia all failed to meet expectations when they opened...

Stockholders and execs only concerned with annually rising profits and decreasing expenses don't produce quality, and don't value consistent performances as they should.

What is Ratatouille's budget? I can't imagine it's anywhere near the likes of POTC or Transformers or even Harry Potter, which gives it a shot of being the most profitable film this summer.

I don't think a budget has been announced for Ratatouille yet, but Cars cost $120M.  With Harry Potter reportedly at a fairly modest (for that kind of movie) $150M, there probably isn't much difference in budget between the two.

Perhaps we should compare every Disney annimated film made to the returns of the Lion King. Then we can talk about how overpriced Disney stock is and how their executives need to be taken down a peg.

Hey Jim,

Long-time reader, first-time poster.  Was wondering if you had any comments on this Variety piece:  http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117967178.html?categoryid=2259&cs=1&query=pixar+cars

Talks about how <i>Cars</i> is raking in the merchandising dough, despite its "disappointing" BO.

There's more to the Pixar purchase than just the worldwide grosses.

What a joke. These clowns are rejoicing over the possibility that Ratatouille might make under $200 million when Meet the Robinsons hasn't even broken $100 million. Even if Ratatouille *does* underperform, it'll still make more money than a Disney picture that *overperforms*.

I can only imagine how disgusted Walt would be, seeing his former studio envying the success of another. He'd probably defect to Pixar after seeing Chicken Little.

OK...this is my very first post here. I've been lurking for a awhile and have something I want to get off my chest. I really do think that Pixar is overrated. Yes,they make good films but they are hardly on par with what the Disney Studios produced back in the glory days. Heck,I enjoy animated films like Roger Rabbit,Lilo and Stitch(even the direct to DVD Stitch stuff) and Meet the Robinsons more than I do anything Pixar has made....with the exception of The Incredibles. There are A LOT of animation fans who dont think Pixar is the second-coming and the box office seems to back this up. Moderation seems to be the key,and between the merchandise and the changes to the parks PIXAR is flooding the market with their products/characters. I really wish more time and attention were being paid to the classic characters and traditional animation. But thats just my 2 cents....

I am extremely bored with people at Disney (and every other studio) attempting to forecast how well a picture does. I think this is just a sign of how our culture has become: I WANT IT AND I WANT IT NOW! In other words, wanting instant gratification and throwing a tantrum when it doesn't happen, or if it doesn't happen during the amount of time that we want it too happen. As far as how sucsessful a picture is predicted to be, lets not forget the initial huge financial losses Pinnochio, Bambi, Sleeping Beauty etc. were. Of course there were unforseen things that affected Pinochio and Bambi. (WW2 began in Europe)

I truly hope all of this years films are big hits but if that doesn't become evident immeadiately, don't worry to much. They'll more that make a profit over time.

As far as wanting things immeadiately, there are more important things. Example: I have a child with Autism. I WANT A CURE FOR AUTISM RIGHT NOW! Well guess what, it'll come in time, but not at the speed I want it too.

Well, record opening weekend numbers are only good for that weekend, period.  Look at how far the second weekend numbers have dropped for all the big sequels thus far (something around 65% drops for Spidey, Shrek and POTC3, FF4, etc.).  I'd rather see RAT get steady numbers week by week and grow from there.  That's how Finding Nemo did it.

I just surfed into some funny stuff on Pixar at www.disneylies.com. Scroll down on the home page and click Subs link for some hilarious spoof photos

Interesting how IMDB/Studio Briefing managed to further spin Jim's already spinning piece in an even more anti-Pixar direction:

"Pixar Takeover Leaves Disney Animators Demoralized, Says Report" (re: Jim Hill's report)

http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/2007-06-25#film5

Oh, really ?  Disney animators are demoralized by the Pixar influence at Disney Animation ?  Sez who ?   Jim's anonymouse scribe is said to be a "Disney excecutive" .    Now I can easily believe that many of the middle-management  hacks who have been running Disney Animation into the ground over the last 10 years are threatened by the new leadership of  Catmull and Lasseter ,  but all the animators I know are thrilled to have Ed and John at the helm .

Some Disney Dweebs are soooo tender.  Report anything in the slightest bit negative... and use quotes doing it... and Jim gets pillored for being "anti-Disney".

The simple fact is Jim is accuratly reporting what the non-animation experts on Wall Street are saying.  If these negatve folks read any business reporting about any other industry in America they'd see the same thing; Wall Street experts buying up shares of a company's stock then expecting.... no DEMANDING increasing amounts of success, completely unrealistic amounts of success, to justify their purchases and impatience.

No animation company could ever live up to Wall street's demands that every new film meet or surpass Nemo or the Lion King.  It's unrealistic.  Eisner adopted that same mindset and in cowtowing to Wall Street instead of his audiance ruined an entire company.  He didn't trust his emplyees.  He only cared about the Wall Street community's opinions and goals.  Don't be mad at Jim who only accurately reports all this.  Be mad at our financial community.  They ruined GM, Ford and Chrysler.  They ruined RCA and Zenith.  They're only interested in quick profits.

Here's the thing...regardless of if some Wall Street investors are going to see this as bad news or if this is just Jim being overly negative (again), it just doesn't matter, because its STUPID. If you are an investor without long term vision, who gives a crap? Because, what it all boils down to, no matter what Jim tries to allege above, is the Disney animation without Pixar was in the toilet. Period. End of sentence. Yes, Chicken Little and Lilo and Stitch made around $150 million domestic BO...so, that's 2 movies in the past 5 years? And those are both totals less than what Ratatouille is "projected" to make, BTW. (I like how Jim manages to deride Ratatouille in one breath because its "only" going to make $160-180 million domestically, yet points to those other 2 movies that made even less as being shining examples from WDFA in another.) I'm sure Disney execs and Wall House investors will be extremely upset when Ratatouille wins an Oscar (or 2 or more) next winter...

So refreshing to have a movie that is not a sequel.  It may not be Nemo but I'll be surprised if it doesn't break $200 million.

Is it going to be like this every time Pixar makes a movie? Is this same post going to be about Wall-e next year? About how disapointed the money hungry people are, how they feel Disney paid "too much" for  a studio who just loves doing what they do...isnt that what it's about? isnt it about making the best movie you can make? There's nothing anyone can do, ALL of these films are forever carved in animation history that alone is worth the 7.4 billion.....I say Pixar is as good as it gets and they will continue to grow theyre legacy for many many many years to come

I think putting "Ratatouille" in an opening weekend where it's doomed to pull in less money than previous Pix-flicks is AMAZINGLY BRILLIANT.

If "Ratatouille" is as great a movie as all the critics are saying, and it pulls in less money than expected, what a giant weight to be lifted off Pixar's shoulders! Can you imagine the pressure those guys are feeling having success after success and being expected to top each movie with the next?

At least this way, people will say the movie that broke the streak was still brilliant. And they can all relax a little bit. Since everyone knows they're the most successful studio in existence anyway.

>>> Interesting how IMDB/Studio Briefing managed to further spin Jim's already spinning piece in an even more anti-Pixar direction:

"Pixar Takeover Leaves Disney Animators Demoralized, Says Report" (re: Jim Hill's report) <<<

Yeah, I saw that too, on a different website.  Jim, I never got the impression that it was the animators who were disgruntled.  If this is inaccurate, I hope you could post a clarification or something for the media who have completely misinterpreted this.

If it's me who is misunderstanding your report, then never mind.

Also:

"Many of us here feel that Disney's own executives (Who in some cases have decades of working experience) are needlessly being forced to take a backseat to the crew from Emeryville. "

Excuse me, but most of those working at Pixar have decades of working experience too, some longer than the suits. I suppose years of pissing people off with the "bottom line" is a better qualifier for experience than making films that people will actually enjoy?

"Meanwhile, Disney Studio's own unique traditions & operating systems are being plowed under."

What "unique traditions and operating systems"? The "poisonous corporate atmosphere" that Jim's been posting about for years? Oh, boo hoo, Disney. What a shame you're being forced to rise above mediocrity.

Methinks that this sentiment is courtesy of some of the useless Disney middle-management whom Lasseter is clearing out. Good riddance.

Thanks for mentioning Freddy Moore.  I had never heard his story and did a Google search, and though the first site painted some extraordinarily bizarre stories the second said that these were actually fairy tales created and passed around by the jealous men hinted at here.

Quite a poisonous atmosphere at Disney, indeed.

We who write articles and post here have one feeling in common. We like or love the Walt Disney Co. enough to write about it. I just am not a fan of Pixar dominating the animation front, but PIXAR is creating better product than the "traditional animation division". I wish for a better cohesiveness within the company to make it bigger and better. I would rather see Iger and Roy Disney in control...I think.  Mr. Disney's company is still alive just adapting to the times.

It's all very simple.  jim hill doesn't know what he's talking about, and can't back up a single  one of the rumours he's spreading through poorly written innuendo.  I would like to feel sorry for him, but his lies and misinformation hurt a lot of people.  Ultimately, however, it will hurt him.  What goes around comes around.

Naw, I don't think Jim's spreading lies.  I believe he did get an e-mail from a Disney executive.  I just think Jim's connected to the wrong people.

Hey Jim! Great article! I agree that Disney likes to talk smack about projects that they feel they might get slammed on, but the truth is Disney has little faith in what they have on their plate. I believe that the projections that were given may be somewhat correct in the first few weeks, but I'm calling this movie a late bloomer. It will have a nice opening weekend, and then have a slow decline with the new movies coming out the following weeks. I really think by the 4th-5th week it will be going back up again. I really think it will meet its projected gross by the fourth week however.  I think Disney is setting the bar really low on this one to not look bad, but again they under estimate Remy. Once people start seeing this film they'll know Pixar has done it again.

I recently was listening to the radio and director/actor Kevin Smith (Dogma, Clerks) was asked what are the movies to watch this summer and he mentioned Ratatouille as his first choice. Everyone in the radio station was surprised to hear this.  He said several great things about it. He even said it was one of the best Pixar movies he’s seen and put it up there with toy story. Compared to Toy Story?  I think Disney should "chillax!"  

Anyways my point is that this film looks like it may grow to be the "filet mignon" of Pixar films, Disney just has to finish their appetizers first!

//Everyone at Disney should be thankful for Brad Bird and his second Masterpiece. (The first one being The Incredibles)//

Technically, wouldn't it be his third masterpiece?  Because really, Iron Giant is an absolutely fantastic flick.

>>>Naw, I don't think Jim's spreading lies.  I believe he did get an e-mail from a Disney executive.  I just think Jim's connected to the wrong people.<<<

Definitely.  

And the general media, lately, even when quoting him, is catching that his accuracy record is sporadic at best.

I have loved everything that Pixar produced.  A Bugs Life and Cars being my least favorites, still outstanding movies, just not my cup of tea.  I was a bit skeptical about Ratatouille.  I was able to attend a preview screening last week and was blown away.  This movie is like Finding Nemo for me.  I went into Finding Nemo thinking “how could a movie about fish really be that compelling”.  Ratatouille is built around such a bizarre premise, rats cooking, my expectations were low.  I was pleasantly surprised I left loving every minute of it.  When ABC showed 9 minutes of the movie Saturday night, I sat glued to the set, watching this scene again and loving every minute of it. I can’t say I’d wanna sit through 9 minutes of any of the other summer blockbusters again.  This movie is outstanding and will drive multiple viewings. I personally can’t wait to see it again.  Watching Remy cook is a lot of fun.

Kbene said:

"Some Disney Dweebs are soooo tender.  Report anything in the slightest bit negative... and use quotes doing it... and Jim gets pillored for being "anti-Disney".

Dude, I think you're WAY off with this. I think it's the EXACT opposite, actually! There are some people on these boards who are Disney Dweebs and are so pro-Disney that they feel negatively towards Pixar because they've been kicking Disney's ass for the last decade. They're the ones who stick up for Jim, because they like the fact that he's dissing Pixar (maybe Jim is one of those dweebs?).

I didn't see one person here giving Jim grief for being anti-Disney. I think he's anti-PIXAR, yes, but not anti-Disney. What I don't understand is why he CONSTANTLY has to try to knock Pixar down a notch. They flat out OWN animation ... why would you NOT want them in Disney's corner??

If the worst thing Jim can say is that some "suit" (to borrow a term from Billy Walsh) is angry that Lasseter has muscled in on his turf, then I'm struggling to figure out why Jim opts to paint this as a negative instead of a positive. 355 days out of the year we read stories from Jim that CLEARLY show he's in the artist's corner when it comes to the old money vs. creativity argument. How come that flips 180º when it comes to Pixar??

I think THAT'S what gets people angry with Jim is the fact that his bias against Pixar is so painfully obvious, yet he insults everyone's intelligence by pretending that it's not a bias but rather some kind of artisitic integrity that requires him to print "the truth."

It's total bullshit.

Have you seen the reviews for this so far?  Still 100% on rotten tomatoes, and from the blurbs I only see one that looks kind of lukewarm, the rest appear to be raves.  Virtually every quote is the kind of thing they put in the ads.

If this keeps up, this could end up being the best reviewed movie so far this year.

And if that's the case, opening weekend and competition mean nothing.  With movies like this (look at Nemo) the big money doesn't come from opening weekend.  It comes from people showing up week after week after week after week.  And from strong attendance on weekdays.  Who cares what is opening a few days or even a week or two later?  If word of mouth from audiences is as good as the response from critics, this will still be going strong until school starts up again.

We can analyze schedules and strategies all we want.  But we can't forget that the biggest factor is how good the movie is.  The Pixar name still brings in plenty of people to see how it is.  But the big bucks come when people tell all their friends and come back repeatedly.  Cars simply got a mixed reaction from audiences, and word from some was that it was Pixar's weakest so far.  Based on the few reviews we've seen, it sure looks like Ratatouille will completely turn that around.

It's all about story to me.  If RATATOUILLE is a great story with, what already appears to be, beautiful visuals then I am pleased.  Whether it makes a trillion dollars isn't much of a concern.  If Disney animation was still making quality features, there wouldn't be this debate.  Nor would there have been a need to buy PIXAR.  But that just isn't the case.  It was broke so they are fixing it.  They had their chance and they blew it.  

I'll take artistic acheivment and small Box Office over SHREK THE THIRD anytime.

Good god I don't know why i'm even participating. I guess- it's just.. people's standards are so low already YEAH go ahead and post this thing jim hill media.com but, first, think about how it really makes you look like a pandering twit. I've really got to find a hobby.

I love you internet.

Without you, I would have no chance to watch two groups of people with too much time on their hands argue about something that means so little.  

PLUS, I get to comment on it too!

I love you internet!

*yawn*

Oh, I'm sorry.  I must have slept for a year.  Didn't I just read this article about the soon-to-be-released Pixar film that is going to underperform and prove that the Pixar acquisition wasn't worth it?

Oh, and Jim?  If there is a downward trend for Pixar movies, it began with "The Incredibles", not "Cars".  It's just the general saturation of the marketplace driving everything down.  As with "Cars", the ancilliary materials will more than make up for a less than ridiculous box office. (Read any of those articles about how the "Cars" merhcandising is still turning a nice profit for Disney a year later?  Who says box office is the only important thing?)

And it's going to be a great film, anyway.  One that they can sell for years to come.  Unlike the "Shrek" films that require constant price cuts and promotional ties in order to keep moving product.

Sorry Jim ... the bean-counters and Marcus Brutus-type of ax-grinding executives will be proven wrong. "Ratatouille" will end the summer as a commercial as well as critical hit. It certainly deserves to crush the receipts of "Shrek the Third."

SO PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE ... stop the bashing and your focus on box office projections. In the end what matters is the personal connection an individual has to the ART. Commerce is important only in that it assures more ART can be made. "Ratatouille" certainly will return a good profit and won't be ANY type of a drain on Disney's coffers, so enough already. Do you have to stir up the hornets' nest? Didn't you learn anything from the bashing of "CARS" last year?

As far as "Ratatouille," I saw the film at the national sneak, have read wildly enthusiastic reviews and believe passionately that this is the type of film many people will be talking up. I can't wait to see it again ... to try to pick up things I missed because I was laughing so hard.

Who cares if it slips down to number 3 or 4 in the weekly box office race in its second or third week? What matters is the final tally (both North America and worldwide) . Besides, I believe "Ratatouille" has a good shot at remaining in the top 10 through Labor Day and that it will not see the drastic week-to-week decline that has sunk many of summer's "blockbusters."

HERE's what I'm telling my friends:

"Ratatouille" is a wonderful, engaging, magical delight. Children under 6 probably won't enjoy it as much as adults ... but that's OK with me.

The physical comedy of "Ratatouille" reminded of the best bits in Steve Martin's "All of Me," as well as the classically milked scenes funny as anything done by Harold Lloyd, Buster Keaton, Max Sennet, and Laurel and Hardy.

Brad Bird and his story team also throw the audience a few curves -- and, I admit, those complete 180s were delightful surprises that made perfect sense in the larger context of character and believability. I'm sure that the story could have traversed a more anticipated and expected route and still have been successful ... but the film soars even higher because it dares break those conventions.

"Ratatouille" is a love letter to the passion all artists carry in their hearts -- whether those artists are chefs, animators, writers, musicians, crafts people or simply fans of those talented geniuses who brighten our lives, who inspire and entertain us.

See "Ratatouille" as soon as you can -- and drag all your friends, whether or not they're obsessed by animation, great movies or food. "Ratatouille" is hands down the best animated film so far this year.

Not too put to fine a point on it, who gives a bloody rat's ass what certain investment bankers and/or disgruntled executives think about the project domestic gross? Let alone the actual domestic gross? Haven't they noticed that theatrical releases in general are not doing particularly well? I will see less than five movies in the theatre this year -- I haven't seen any yet, not even Pirates III! But I AM going to see this movie.

Let's forget about the cookie-cutter nature of this article. Jim has to put something out there for us readers, and they can't all be masterpieces. But I am sick of this culture of more, more, more supposedly coming from the Wall Street dweebs. If you made us 10% last year, it has to be 12% this year, and 15% next year. Making money is never enough. It has to be MORE money, or we'll take our investments elsewhere. Well paleeese do! WDI will be better off without you. And JHM would be better off not helping to spread this point of view.

Oh.. funny how people who, when debating "Meet the Robinsons", said that the lukewarm reviews from critics about that movie didn't matter. "What do critics know?!".. And now, all of asudden, when it is about "Ratatouille" and the reviews are not lukewarm, but made out of gold, it suddenly is the opposite. Critical status does matter. Funny.

I say this in every topic - why do you people read the business articles?

You clearly have no sense of the business nor any caring. So ignore the articles. They are not geared towards you. If you hate the way the industry reacts then pay no attention.

Just understand that the industry reaction weighs very heavily on the films you'll be able to see in the future.

So either ignore Jim's articles, or understand that they are not his opinion, just him reporting the opinion and expected reactions of others. You can whine all you want to him, it won't change the fact that Pixar movies are expected to reach a certain highwater mark, and that the pricetag paid for Pixar will be around the Disney-Pixar neck like an albatross for decades.

Either understand it and accept how it impacts you, or ignore it.

Just stop whining endlessly about it. You're consumers, not businessmen, we get it. Your expectations are different. But you have nothing more invested than your $11 ticket. Other people have millions of dollars invested. Understand that they do not want a good movie, they want a profitable one. Preferrably a good, profitable one, but if good movies aren't making profits and bad movies are then guess where the money will go? Wall Street isn't philanthropists supporting the arts, it's people looking to make money.

Accept this. Understand this. And do your best to make certain it's the good films that make the money. Stop seeing terrible films like Shrek and A Shark's Tale. Encourage people to see the good ones.

Spend your energy manipulating the system, not whining about it, because you'll never change it.

So...getting rid of Sharon Morrill was a bad thing?

The infighting between Pixar and DFA is old news... its been going on since the day the acquisition was a glimmer in Iger's and Job's eyes.  Anybody who has been through a merger/acquisition knows how that goes.

The box office projection is interesting, but really, if they could accurately project box office numbers in advance we wouldn't have many box office failures.  Most likely, the low projection is just another form of hopeful thinking on the part of those with the most to lose if Ratatouille hits big.

Amid all the Live Free or Die Hard hoopla, it's been easy to forget there's another potential box-office monster opening this week: Ratatouille , the newest film from Pixar, the geniuses who have delivered a nearly uninterrupted string of artistic and

"It's so transparent and childish it's ludicrous."

I suppose, then, Wall Street also has an anti-Pixar bug up its ass, considering all they can talk about, when discussing Disney, is whether Pixar was worth the price.

Face it, this IS the biggest thing going on with Disney, and will be for some time.

And I wasn't patronizing, I was blunt. I'd think someone in a leadership position would be able to distinguish between the two (see, now THAT was patronizing!)

MosquitoControl said:

"And I wasn't patronizing, I was blunt."

I definitely agree ... you're blunt ...

And I'll leave you to ponder what that means for the next two or three weeks. As a Rangers fan, I suspect it may take you longer, but I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt.

WDFA is complaining that it's being pressured to change? Please. Considering its track record for the past number of years, it's clear that things NEED to change.

Rat will do boffo at the boxoffice. Nobody will be disappointed except maybe WDFA-ers who are experiencing sour grapes.