By now, you've probably heard that -- over this past weekend -- "Ratatouille" finally officially achieved really-for-real blockbuster status. Earning over $200 million during its initial domestic run.
Mind you, it did take this new Brad Bird film quite a while to reach that milestone. As you can see by the chart below ...
... Of the six Pixar films that earned at least $200 million over their initial domestic runs, "Ratatouille" took the longest. In fact, I've been told by several Disney insiders that the studio was so concerned that this animated feature might not achieve blockbuster status before the Labor Day Weekend was over that the Mouse actually increased the number of theaters that "Ratatouille" was being shown in. Bumping up the number of screens that this Pixar picture was being screened on this past Friday from 956 to 1068.
"Ah, but what does that matter how long it took, Jim?," you say. " 'Ratatouille' has finally officially achieved blockbuster status. Isn't that something worth celebrating?"
Well, the Walt Disney Company would certainly like you to think so. Which is why -- over the next few days -- you're going to see the usual self-congratulatory full-page ads in the trades. Not to mention those press releases that talk about how happy the studio supposedly is with the way that "Ratatouille" has performed to date.
Copyright 2007 Pixar Animation Studios / Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Of course, were you to ask the people who work in Mickey's marketing department about what Mouse House senior management really thinks about this particular Pixar production's box office performance, you'd hear a very different story. One that involves a lot of finger-pointing as well as people attempting to shift blame to other departments at the studio.
"But why would people want to assign blame when it comes to 'Ratatouille' 's domestic box office performance?," you ask. Well, you have to understand that -- up until this last Brad Bird film -- Pixar productions have always finished in the Top 5 during their initial domestic runs.
Don't believe me? Okay. Let's go to the charts. "Toy Story" was the No. 1 film domestically back in 1995 ...
"A Bug's Life" came in fourth in 1998's domestic box office derby ...
"Toy Story 2" came in third back in 1999 ...
"Monsters, Inc." finished fourth back in 2001 ...
"Finding Nemo" was No. 2 back in 2003 ...
"The Incredibles" came in fifth back in 2004 ...
While "Cars" grabbed the 3 spot in last year's domestic box office derby.
Whereas "Ratatouille" ... Well, as of yesterday, this Pixar production found itself dropping down to No. 8 ...
... having just been knocked out of the No. 7 berth by "The Bourne Ultimatum."
And given the domestic market is now pretty much tapped out for this particular Pixar production (Just last week, "Ratatouille" was struggling to pull in $120,000 - $130,000 for its stateside weekday performances. And given that most of the kids in the U.S. are headed back to school today, you can now expect this movie's numbers to fall straight through the floor) and given that there are still 17 movie-going weeks left in 2007 ... It is quite possible that -- between now and New Year's Eve -- three more movies that can gross over $200 million domestically will come along. With one of those films most likely being Walt Disney Pictures' "Enchanted."
The way I hear it, the folks up in Emeryville are not happy about this prospect. Not just because "Ratatouille" has already been knocked out of the Top 5. But because -- for the first time ever -- there is the very distinct possibility that this animation studio's latest release will not be in the domestic Top 10 as 2007 draws to a close.
This is why there's now a new party line when it comes to discussing "Ratatouille" 's box office performance. Nowadays, Pixar die-hards don't really like to talk about how this Brad Bird film did during its domestic run. They'd much rather prefer to discuss how well this animation studio's latest release is doing overseas.
Of course, the only problem with doing that is that it then opens the window to comparing "Ratatouille" 's grosses to those for "The Simpsons Movie." And while it no longer seems likely that this 20th Century Fox release will be able to eclipse that Pixar picture's domestic earnings, "The Simpsons Movie" is still kicking "Ratatouille" 's butt overseas (i.e. Having earned $291.0 million versus $172.3 million to date).
Then when you factor in that "The Simpsons Movie" allegedly only cost $75 million to produce ... Well, that means that this Fox film will be in the black a whole lot sooner than "Ratatouille" will. Which -- given that this Brad Bird film (due to all of its production problems) reportedly cost $150 million to complete -- is something of a sore point with the suits back in Burbank.
Copyright 2007 20th Century Fox. All Rights Reserved
And speaking of people being sore ... Let's get back to all that finger-pointing that's been going on in Burbank. All because the folks up in Emeryville are reportedly blaming the Mouse House's marketing team for "Ratatouille" 's under-performance at the box office.
As the story goes, the people at Pixar are now supposedly saying that this Brad Bird film didn't do as well as it could have domestically because Disney dropped the ball. They insist that Mickey's marketing staff didn't put together a really effective promotional campaign for this particular Pixar production.
As you might imagine, claims like this make the folks who actually work in Disney's marketing department completely crazy. As one studio insider that I recently spoke with put it:
Copyright 2007 Pixar Animation Studios / Imagination Farms. All Rights Reserved
We put together the best possible campaign that we could for 'Ratatouille.' Sure, this movie got great reviews. But this was a very difficult picture to sell during an incredibly competitive summer. To be honest, we're lucky that this movie did as well as it did. Pixar is now claiming that we didn't put together a good enough trailer for 'Ratatouille.' They say that this is the main reason that their newest movie didn't do as well domestically as 'Cars' did. Which is why they're now being complete b*stards about the 'WALL-E' trailer. Insisting that only they know the proper way to promote their next picture. Our counter-argument is that if we didn't put together the campaign that we did for 'Ratatouille,' putting that 9-minute excerpt out there on the Web, holding those sneak previews two weeks out, that there's no other way that we could have built better word-of-mouth for this movie. If we hadn't done that level of promotion, spent that money the way we did, they'd have been lucky if this film had done 2/3rds or 3/4ths of the business that it eventually did stateside. Copyright 2008 Pixar Animation Studios / Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved But because Pixar never, ever makes mistakes, we're now the ones who have to take the blame. But that's okay. Let them call the shots on "WALL-E" 's marketing campaign. Next year, they'll be the one who'll be taking the fall when that Andrew Stanton film doesn't measure up to expectations. Because if you thought that it was tough to sell a movie where a rat runs loose in a kitchen, wait 'til you try & come up with an effective marketing campaign for a movie that stars robots who don't talk. Which is set on a version of Planet Earth that's just this abandoned trash heap that's floating in space. Try selling that as a fun summer film for the whole family to see.
We put together the best possible campaign that we could for 'Ratatouille.' Sure, this movie got great reviews. But this was a very difficult picture to sell during an incredibly competitive summer. To be honest, we're lucky that this movie did as well as it did.
Pixar is now claiming that we didn't put together a good enough trailer for 'Ratatouille.' They say that this is the main reason that their newest movie didn't do as well domestically as 'Cars' did. Which is why they're now being complete b*stards about the 'WALL-E' trailer. Insisting that only they know the proper way to promote their next picture.
Our counter-argument is that if we didn't put together the campaign that we did for 'Ratatouille,' putting that 9-minute excerpt out there on the Web, holding those sneak previews two weeks out, that there's no other way that we could have built better word-of-mouth for this movie. If we hadn't done that level of promotion, spent that money the way we did, they'd have been lucky if this film had done 2/3rds or 3/4ths of the business that it eventually did stateside.
Copyright 2008 Pixar Animation Studios / Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved
But because Pixar never, ever makes mistakes, we're now the ones who have to take the blame. But that's okay. Let them call the shots on "WALL-E" 's marketing campaign. Next year, they'll be the one who'll be taking the fall when that Andrew Stanton film doesn't measure up to expectations.
Because if you thought that it was tough to sell a movie where a rat runs loose in a kitchen, wait 'til you try & come up with an effective marketing campaign for a movie that stars robots who don't talk. Which is set on a version of Planet Earth that's just this abandoned trash heap that's floating in space. Try selling that as a fun summer film for the whole family to see.
I know, I know. This is probably far too downbeat a story for all you dyed-in-the-wool Disney & Pixar fans out there. Who just want to celebrate the fact that "Ratatouille" finally achieved really-for-real blockbuster status during its initial domestic run.
Well, based on what the folks in Disney's marketing department have been telling me ... This time around, it's only the fans who are celebrating. Meanwhile down in Burbank and up in Emeryville, people are still trying to figure out what went wrong with "Ratatouille." They want to find why a film that received such glow-in-the-dark reviews failed to connect with a far larger audience. So that these possibly-promotion-related problems can then cleared up by the time "WALL-E" rolls into theaters during the Summer of 2008.
What do you folks think? Is there something that the Mouse's marketing department could have done differently with "Ratatouille" ? How can Disney improve the promotion that it does for Pixar's animated features?
Your thoughts?
Honestly, Jim, enough is enough. Aside from 300, all of the top grossing films this year are established franchises. That Ratatouille managed to pull in $200 million domestically in this competitive season is still pretty damn impressive, especially considering the amount of naysayers who were proclaiming that it would barely break $100 million before it opened.
And you know what? This is one of the best reviewed movies of the year, if not the best reviewed. At this point, it is a virtual lock for the Best Animated Feature Oscar. It will certainly sell a lot of DVDs. This is a movie that will stand the test of time, not just fade away like umpteen other CGI features the studios keep pumping out. I am glad to see Pixar trying to put a little originality into their films and take some risks...not just put out films with burping and farting animals like every other studio seems to do.
Fully expected JHM to rain on this parade.
But wow. I'm in complete shock - because I actually don't disagree with everything Jim says in this, his predictable Pixar bashing column.
Yes, the marketing wasn't great, but it was not that bad. I agree, Pixar should be thankful this film made $200M this summer. Too much competition, it wasn't a sequel, and it's about rats. $200M is great.
My guess is that the artists don't care one way or another. And if it's true about Pixar pointing fingers at Disney's marketing, my guess is it would Pixar's suits doing that. I seriously don't see Brad Bird and John Lasseter pounding their fists on the table saying, "it took us 65 days to get to $200M??!!? What went wrong??!?!"
This totally sounds like something only the accountants would worry about.
Jim, I've been a big fan of yours for years and love your site, but I have to ask you, when did you and Al Lutz change bodies? Seriously, and I've said this before, I work on Wall Street, and Ratatouille landed almost EXACTLY where analysts expected and given the money the film will bring in through theaters, DVD sales, theme park tie-ins, etc., they're reasonably happy with the way things turned out.
To be sure this wasn't a glowing and unadulerated success for Disney/Pixar and there are legitmate gripes one can make about the film's performance. But come on! What you've written reads like it came from a politician. You cherry pick out the negative aspects of the story (sometimes inaccurately and often telling half the story, as was pointed out repeatedly above) and ignore the positive. Your endless negative comparisons to the Simpsons being a prime example.
The Jim of old would have written stories about how Ratatouille came into being, how the idea was born and developed and how Disney, as we speak, is developing rides for the Studios and DCA. Instead we were told the film was "cute", how Brad Bird had to try to save this turkey and then distance himself from hit and what a flop it is.
Jim, please Pixar bash when warrnated. Your loyal readers expect no less. But provide a balanced picture of the situation.
I do agree that Ratatouille, while still being a blockbuster at 200 million, is still a disappointment. However, this is the first time I personally see that Pixar hate everyone talks about. Yes, Ratatouille didn't live up to the previous pixar film's box offices but what movie this summer did? All three of the big threequels didn't live up to their predecessors, in fact they were all 100 million from the highest grossing film in their respective series's. Harry Potter should just match the gross of the previous installment, still way behind the highest grossing. The Simpsons Movie's legs are shorter than Harry Ploppers. Rush Hour 3 will end it's domestic run in line with the first one but still well behind the second. Bourne did amazing. Evan Almighty was a mighty flop. Die Hard 4.0 is the lowest grossing film in the series. The only huge movie that wasn't a disappointment was Transformers and it didn't have anything to live up to.
Not to mention your little bit on the Top 5. For starters no Pixar movie, with the exception of Finding Nemo, would be in the top 5 this year. Don't talk about inflation because bootlegs and the raising quality of home theaters is a handicap the others didn't have.
Jim's point is what it always is "Disney paid too much for Pixar". But as others pointed out, Disney hasn't had a hit on the level of this film in a long time. Basically, what Jim is showing us is that a considerable chunk of Disney executives are pissed off that Disney bought Pixar at all. Why? Because the Pixar team IS better at what they do than the Disney people are. And not just in terms of animated fair. These are the same people that brought us DCA, and allowed DL and WDW to deteriorate in the name of maximizing profit. If I were Bob Eiger, I would hunt down every person that leaks to Jim and fire them. These sources indicate a very poinsoned culture at Disney right now, and if it isn't addressed, things are going to get very ugly for our favorite company.
Jim:
Thanks for the insights on how Hollywood thinks (or fails to, as several bloggers have pointed out). I enjoyed the opening metric presenting 'Cars' tied as Pixar's third-most-successful movie as much as Beezelbub is enjoying his snow cone right now.
I think it's time to remember that this movie was basically in the dumpster before it was transferred to Brad Bird's direction. I think $200M looks pretty good compared to $0M, and the production costs up to that point would have been a complete loss. Measured from the point where Brad Bird took control, it was a smashing success in every way.
Pixar has well earned the right to sometimes turn out first-rate movies that do not break box-office records. As for the suits (should they actually exist) that insist that EVERY Pixar movie must be an overwhelming financial bonanza , they must be blissfully unaware that every other production company has real dogs of movies that don't even come close to covering production costs. I'm pretty sure Pixar has never lost money on a movie. Any accountant who can't love that needs to change careers.
The marketing problem? No Happy Meal toys.
I, for one, would have loved to see Rats in a box of McDonalds food.
(*Yawn*).
From the article:
We put together the best possible campaign that we could for 'Ratatouille.' Sure, this movie got great reviews. But this was a very difficult picture to ***sell during an incredibly competitive summer***. To be honest, we're lucky that this movie did as well as it did.
There's the answer for everything that ails you (and anyone wondering why Rat was not in the top 5).
lurch said:
Jim's point is what it always is: "Disney paid too much for Pixar". But as others pointed out, Disney hasn't had a hit on the level of this film in a long time. Basically, what Jim is showing us is that a considerable chunk of Disney executives are pissed off that Disney bought Pixar at all. Why? Because the Pixar team IS better at what they do than the Disney people are. And not just in terms of animated fair. These
are the same people that brought us DCA, and allowed DL and WDW to deteriorate in the name of maximizing profit. If I were Bob Eiger, I would hunt down every person that leaks to Jim and fire them. These sources indicate a very poisoned culture at Disney right now, and if it isn't addressed, things are going to get very ugly for our favorite company.
........................................................................................................................
Bravo Lurch!
I think that the execs at Disney who like to point fingers at Pixar are the ones who cheapen the company and work their hardest to crumble away the Disney credibility that John Lasseter has reigned in and built up for the company with his quality level and experience. Disney bought Pixar for a reason and I think the best benefit besides having access to all sorts of Pixar Characters, was some restored quality and credibility.
These execs working "for" Disney (more like against Disney) think that because they work for Mouse that they immediately earn the experience that genius's in the past created for them to have. These execs are spit...not even a tiny spec in the eyes of anyone who knows whose characters they deal with-- whose classic and timeless stories they generate mindless sequel after sequel after sequel with--and continually drag an honorable name through the mud alongside them for a quick dollar. These people make me SICK! This sort of thing really makes me agree with Lurch here and say "FIRE THEM NOW!!!" if you agree, then let it be known that you want quality verses quantity...you want excellence and not status quo that we need a John Lasseter to bring back the shine to this tarnished name... I really urge any Disney execs reading this...because I know you and Jim are( probably together)... to GO FIRE YOURSELVES! If anyone agrees with me please let us Disney and Jim know!
Instidude your post just made my day! That just cracked me up!
As far as Disney/Pixar complaining about each other, that just makes me sad. I mean, sometimes movies don't sell well. This was an extremely competitve summer. The suits need to get over it and stop pointing fingers. I read something interesting on www.doombuggies.com. It was an interview with Rolly Crump. In it he states that part of the reason why he eventually left Disney was the politics.
In the case at hand the politics involves business wanting an instant return on the investment. It's what one might call the "McDonalds generation." You know what I mean: "I want it and I want it now!" attitude that we have been taught. Unfortunaltely that's not the way the real world always works.
I don't think that Disney could have done a better job promoting Ratatoullie. It was just a very competitive summer and that's life. Now stop complaining and get back to work on upcoming releases. And please play nicely with each other. And remember to have fun doing what you do. You folks are Disney and or Pixar! you should be having fun doing what you do.
When someone can explain to me why a studio who is releasing a movie about the love of fine cooking can't manage to get an ad on the Food Network (a network they already do business with multiple times a years)....well, when someone can explain that to me, then I'll consider the possibility that Disney's marketing department isn't virtually worthless.
These articles just get more and more idiotic.
Somehow it's a big deal that it didn't make top five in a year that had sequels to four of the biggest franchises of all time? A year that has had FOUR films break 300M, a first I believe. Especially when if you look at the other pixar numbers - if any of the other pixar films had been released this year and made what they made, they wouldn't have made the top five either!
I'll also point out (again) that Ratatouille has beaten every other CGI release from another studio but the Shrek films. That's somehow a failure?
And the overseas comparison to Simpsons is bogus as well. Ratatouille hasn't been released in a number of the biggest BO countries of the world like the UK, germany, and Australia. The only major market Ratatouille has opened in where the Simpsons has not is Japan.
If you only compare countries where both have opened, both movies have made almost exactly the same overseas (actually, looking again, Ratty seems to have a small lead, although my additions weren't exact). Simpsons has generally done better in latin america, and Ratatouille has generally done better in europe.
Simpsons will do well in Japan. But Ratatouille will do extremely well in germany, italy, and the UK. Not to mention that Simpsons has performed in a similar pattern to here, big openings and big drops. Ratatouille has had better legs, meaning as time goes on it will keep making money while Simpsons fizzles out.
Just compare the two overseas, see how many countries Ratatouille is ahead in, and in many cases it leads even though it was released later there.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=ratatouille.htm
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=simpsons.htm
Simpsons is a movie based on one of the longest running prime time shows ever. Of course it is going to do extremely well. Shouldn't it be able to beat a new property with no previous reputation? So what went wrong with Simpsons?
And I just don't buy the "everyone is trying to figure out what went wrong" crap. If before the movie was released, everyone was saying it would be lucky to make 150 domestic, shouldn't they be asking what went RIGHT?
This ongoing tirade seems like a kid who gets all A plusses in school, and when he finally gets an A, dad beats him.
Honestly, I think the problem with Ratatouille is it just didn't fit in any niche very well. I mean really ... it's a movie about a rat that cooks. How do you sell that???
Was it a good movie? Yeah, it was good. Was it my absolute LEAST favorite Pixar movie to date? Yes, by FAR. That's why it didn't do that well at the box office ... it was weird.
Actually, Jim is starting to convert me a little with some of his "Disney overpaid for Pixar" talk ... I mean this movie was weird, Wall-E sounds even weirder ... and although I don't remember what their next film after that is supposed to be, I do remember looking at it and thinking (ready for it?), "That looks weird."
I'm not entirely sure the Pixar guys aren't moving too far away from the mainstream with their films. I mean cooking rats and fat humans floating on couches while robots clean up the Earth? That's out there, man. Are kids really gonna wanna see this stuff?
"Could it maybe be because Ratatouille just wasnt that good?"
While you're entitled to your opinion, the critics disagreed, making it one of the best reviewed films of the year. It's a no brainer pick for the animation oscar as well.
"cherry-picking other underperforming/bad, flicks?"
OK, so cherry pick some that did better than Ratatouille. I'll make it simple for you...Ratatouille made more money than every animated disney movie but Lion King and Aladdin.
"Ratatouille didn't live up to the previous pixar film's box offices..."
Correction: it didn't live up to previous DOMESTIC box office. Worldwide, it still has a good shot at beating Cars. And the latest Potter movie did well, not a disappointment at all. It will soon be #2 for the series and is already within 10% of the highest domestically. It's already #2 worldwide and still has a chance of beating the first one.