The restart of & # 39; Pirates of the Caribbean & # 39; It's Disney's insurance against Star Wars & # 39; or wonder of fatigue

adminOctober 26, 2018





<div _ngcontent-c14 = "" innerhtml = "

Johnny Depp, Geoffrey Rush and Keira Knightley in "Pirates of the Caribbean: At the End of the World".Walt Disney

Deadline revealed a couple of days ago that

Walt Disney
I was looking to "restart" the pirates of the Caribbean franchise, with the help of dead Pool writers Rhett Reese & nbsp; and Paul Wernick. Yes, there is something discouraging about the authors of a superhero success that changed game that was a great success precisely because it was unique in itself when being hired to restart / reorganize a property that was initially a blow that changed game precisely because it was unique in itself. . It's another sign that, thanks to the public, Hollywood has become less likely to create Matrix to restart Matrix. But I digress.

For the record, the word "reset" could mean any number of options. It could be a direct renewal, keeping only the name of the brand and counting a completely different pirate adventure on the high seas. I could go the Hallowe'en route and bring back the missing heroic characters for a long time, in this case Will Turner from Orlando Bloom (who had a small supporting role in Dead men do not tell stories) and Elizabeth Swan by Keira Knightley (who had a cameo without words in that same fifth installment). Or, to be honest, it could simply be a sixth direct delivery with the word "restart" in development.

Walt Disney is smart enough to realize that the glorious "inherited sequels," the post-recovery quotas that return veterans who return and charge for nostalgia, have been far more successful than direct remakes or restarts. The studio launched the final legacy-sequel, Star Wars: The Force awakens. The only problem is that the last Pirates& nbsp;movie, Dead men do not tell stories, essentially played as a loose remake of Curse of the black pearl with Brenton Thwaites and Kaya Scodelario trying to become the "new" heroic couple of Turner-Swann. With an ending that saw Will and Elizabeth reunited, it was absolutely a torch surrender.

I argued last year that the franchise, and remember, the last movie made $ 794 million worldwide (it was the biggest gross world of a live action movie that does not exceed $ 200 million dollars) could survive without Jack Sparrow by Johnny Depp. That can be part of the plan. But we can speculate on what "restart" means for the pirates of the Caribbean franchise (either in the mold of & nbsp;Amazing Spiderman or from & nbsp;Awakens strength) until the cows return home. More interesting is the question of why Disney tries so hard to keep the franchise alive. The truth is that Walt Disney has not had much luck in replicating his success.

the Pirates The franchise is still a big problem, since the first three sequels raised more than / less than $ 1 billion worldwide and the last just under $ 800 million. But, what is more important, even when Disney began to take over the realm of the box office tents in 2013, & nbsp; I was still stumbling in a vital area.

Disney & nbsp;is flying high thanks to the Marvel movies, Star Wars Movies, Pixar flicks, Disney Animation and live fairy tales. But when it comes to creating local live-action franchises, movies that are not specifically from a third-party entity or based on Disney's previous animated hit, the studio has been hitting almost 0.00 since 2004.

Pirates of the Caribbean: the curse of the black pearl It was the first Walt Disney movie (no Touchtone or Hollywood Pictures) to get a PG-13 rating. Gore Verbinski's film showed that you could take a walk in a theme park, add an unconventional and unattached protagonist (Johnny Depp), replicate the original A new hope Formula (Jack = Han Solo, Will = Luke Skywalker, Elizabeth = Princess Leia) and get the world box office gold. He took advantage of a perfect storm of strong criticism, intriguing trailers, and a summer that was not exactly high up between Memorial Day and the weekend of July 4.

And then Disney spent almost a decade trying to replicate its success. The likes of The Sorcerer's Apprentice & nbsp;($ 215 million worldwide with a budget of $ 150 million), & nbsp;Prince of Persia & nbsp;($ 330 million in a budget of $ 200 million), & nbsp;John Carter& nbsp; ($ 284 million in a budget of $ 250 million)& nbsp;and & nbsp;The solitary ranger & nbsp;($ 260 million in a budget of $ 215 million) blatantly targeting young males, and for a time it seemed that Disney was neglecting its main demographic characteristics of young girls. Even the only questionable exception to the rule, & nbsp;Tron: Legacy & nbsp;($ 400 million in a budget of $ 170 million), it was a sequel and partially capitalized on the cult status of its 1982 predecessor.

At this time, Disney & nbsp;acquired Marvel for $ 4 billion and then Lucasfilm for another $ 4b and used those (stereotyped), child-friendly properties to fill in the gaps. The studio started kicking butt (in its animation and live action departments) when it stopped trying to copy & nbsp;Pirates of the Caribbean & nbsp;and I started trying to copy Tim Burton's movie & nbsp;Alice in Wonderland. That crush of $ 1,025b from the beginning of 2010 essentially started the whole fairytale live. But even after that, The world of tomorrow ($ 209 million in a budget of $ 190 million) and A wrinkle in time ($ 130 million in a budget of $ 103 million) showed the problems of Disney with the creation of "new" live action franchises.

Today, most of his successes are animated live action fantasies based on Disney IP or MCU and & nbsp;Star Wars & nbsp;films. That is nothing, especially if the objective is merely benefits and market share. But Walt Disney has not had a "new" successful live action franchise since National Treasure& nbsp; ($ 347 million in a $ 100 million budget) in 2004 and possibly & nbsp;The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe & nbsp;($ 745 million in a budget of $ 180 million) in 2005. Fifteen years later Pirates of the Caribbean: the curse of the black pearl, its success is still a great promise, comparatively unfulfilled. Or maybe it's more than a simple formula.

Anyway, if people stop worrying about Star Wars after Star Wars Episode IX closes the book about the Skywalker / Solo saga, or if people stop worrying (so much) about the MCU after Avengers 4 closes the book on the first epic saga, then Disney may need a vibrant pirates of the Caribbean series more than in 2017. Also, there are not many Disney toons that are going to be as big as Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King Y Aladdin Once those are marked off the list. The world is not at its peak for a bit House in sight Redo.

I mean, I love it The great mouse detectiveand I would not mind Disney Trying to do The black cauldron "Right" this time, but most of what remains to be redone will probably be seen in Cinderella ($ 543 million in 2015) as the best possible scenario. And we have seen that these films can simply do "OK" (Christopher Robin, The dragon of pete) if they are not explicitly indicated in the zeitgeist. Also, as Alice through the mirror ($ 299 million in 2016 with a budget of $ 178 million), these real-action fairy tales may not be a continuation. Disney is trying again with Maleficent 2 in 2020, but we'll see.

I'm not arguing that any of those scenarios are likely, but we do not know what will happen to the MCU and the Star Wars Franchise after they essentially end their great stories. We do not know how the live action remakes will be played once Mouse House has burned its best IP. So have Pirates and (ideally) Avatar Kicking the ass is a glorified insurance. Yes Disney & nbsp;can keep the Pirates franchise alive as a glorified pop-up hitter next to the MCU, Avatar and several Lucasfilm movies (Star Wars, Indiana Jones, etc.), so much the better, whether Marvel and Lucasfilm remain titans.

As big as Disney is at this time, especially in terms of market share, its successes come from specific niches, in animation, live action remakes driven by the nostalgia and content of Lucasfilm / MCU. The success of pirates of the Caribbean, which has earned $ 4.5 billion worldwide in five installments, is the exception and not the rule when it comes to Disney's live-action in-house franchises. That does not mean I do not deserve credit for the current successes of Lucasfilm and MCU, but that's different. Fifteen years later Pirates of the Caribbean: the curse of the black pearl earned $ 654 million with a budget of $ 140 million, the franchise is still the Walt Disney diamond in the rough.

">

Johnny Depp, Geoffrey Rush and Keira Knightley in "Pirates of the Caribbean: At the End of the World".Walt Disney

Deadline Revealed a couple of days ago
Walt Disney
I was looking to "restart" the pirates of the Caribbean franchise, with the help of dead Pool The writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick. Yes, there is something discouraging about the authors of a superhero success that changed game that was a great success precisely because it was unique in itself when being hired to restart / reorganize a property that was initially a blow that changed game precisely because it was unique in itself. . It's another sign that, thanks to the public, Hollywood has become less likely to create Matrix to restart Matrix. But I digress.

For the record, the word "reset" could mean any number of options. It could be a direct renewal, keeping only the name of the brand and counting a completely different pirate adventure on the high seas. I could go the Hallowe'en route and bring back the missing heroic characters for a long time, in this case Will Turner from Orlando Bloom (who had a small supporting role in Dead men do not tell stories) and Elizabeth Swan by Keira Knightley (who had a cameo without words in that same fifth installment). Or, to be honest, it could simply be a sixth direct delivery with the word "restart" in development.

Walt Disney is smart enough to realize that the glorious "inherited sequels," the post-recovery quotas that return veterans who return and charge for nostalgia, have been far more successful than direct remakes or restarts. The studio launched the final legacy-sequel, Star Wars: The Force awakens. The only problem is that the last Pirates movie, Dead men do not tell stories, essentially played as a loose remake of Curse of the black pearl with Brenton Thwaites and Kaya Scodelario trying to become the "new" heroic couple of Turner-Swann. With an ending that saw Will and Elizabeth reunited, it was absolutely a torch surrender.

I argued last year that the franchise, and remember, the last movie made $ 794 million worldwide (it was the biggest gross world of a live action movie that does not exceed $ 200 million dollars) could survive without Jack Sparrow by Johnny Depp. That can be part of the plan. But we can speculate on what "restart" means for the pirates of the Caribbean franchise (either in the mold of Amazing Spiderman or of Awakens strength) until the cows return home. More interesting is the question of why Disney tries so hard to keep the franchise alive. The truth is that Walt Disney has not had much luck in replicating his success.

the Pirates The franchise is still a big problem, since the first three sequels raised more than / less than $ 1 billion worldwide and the last just under $ 800 million. But, more importantly, even when Disney began to take over the realm of the box office in 2013, I was still stumbling on a vital area.

Disney is flying high thanks to the Marvel movies, Star Wars Movies, Pixar flicks, Disney Animation and live fairy tales. But when it comes to creating local live-action franchises, movies that are not specifically from a third-party entity or based on Disney's previous animated hit, the studio has been hitting almost 0.00 since 2004.

Pirates of the Caribbean: the curse of the black pearl It was the first Walt Disney movie (no Touchtone or Hollywood Pictures) to get a PG-13 rating. Gore Verbinski's film showed that you could take a walk in a theme park, add an unconventional and unattached protagonist (Johnny Depp), replicate the original A new hope Formula (Jack = Han Solo, Will = Luke Skywalker, Elizabeth = Princess Leia) and get the world box office gold. He took advantage of a perfect storm of strong criticism, intriguing trailers, and a summer that was not exactly high up between Memorial Day and the weekend of July 4.

And then Disney spent almost a decade trying to replicate its success. The likes of The sorcerer's apprentice ($ 215 million worldwide with a budget of $ 150 million), Prince of Persia ($ 330 million in a budget of $ 200 million), John Carter ($ 284 million in a budget of $ 250 million) Y The Lone Ranger ($ 260 million in a budget of $ 215 million) blatantly targeting young males, and for a time it seemed that Disney was neglecting its main demographic characteristics of young girls. Even the only arguable exception to the rule, Tron: Legacy ($ 400 million in a budget of $ 170 million), it was a sequel and partially capitalized on the cult status of its 1982 predecessor.

At this time, Disney acquired Marvel for $ 4 billion and then Lucasfilm for another $ 4b and used those (stereotyped), child-friendly properties to fill in the gaps. The studio started to kick to the brim (in its animation and live action departments) when it stopped trying to copy. pirates of the Caribbean and I started trying to copy that of Tim Burton Alice in Wonderland. That crush of $ 1,025b from the beginning of 2010 essentially started the whole fairytale live. But even after that, The world of tomorrow ($ 209 million in a budget of $ 190 million) and A wrinkle in time ($ 130 million in a budget of $ 103 million) showed the problems of Disney with the creation of "new" live action franchises.

Today, most of their successes are animated live action fantasies based on previous Disney IP or MCUs and Star Wars films. That is nothing, especially if the objective is merely benefits and market share. But Walt Disney has not had a "new" successful live action franchise since National Treasure ($ 347 million in a $ 100 million budget) in 2004 and possibly The chronicles of Narnia: The lion, the witch and the wardrobe. ($ 745 million in a budget of $ 180 million) in 2005. Fifteen years later Pirates of the Caribbean: the curse of the black pearl, its success is still a great promise, comparatively unfulfilled. Or maybe it's more than a simple formula.

Anyway, if people stop worrying about Star Wars after Star Wars Episode IX closes the book about the Skywalker / Solo saga, or if people stop worrying (so much) about the MCU after Avengers 4 closes the book on the first epic saga, then Disney may need a vibrant pirates of the Caribbean series more than in 2017. Also, there are not many Disney toons that are going to be as big as Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King Y Aladdin Once those are marked off the list. The world is not at its peak for a bit House in sight Redo.

I mean, I love it The great mouse detectiveand I would not mind Disney Trying to do The black cauldron "Right" this time, but most of what remains to be redone will probably be seen in Cinderella ($ 543 million in 2015) as the best possible scenario. And we have seen that these films can simply do "OK" (Christopher Robin, The dragon of pete) if they are not explicitly indicated in the zeitgeist. Also, as Alice through the mirror ($ 299 million in 2016 with a budget of $ 178 million), these real-action fairy tales may not be a continuation. Disney is trying again with Maleficent 2 in 2020, but we'll see.

I'm not arguing that any of those scenarios are likely, but we do not know what will happen to the MCU and the Star Wars Franchise after they essentially end their great stories. We do not know how the live action remakes will be played once Mouse House has burned its best IP. So have Pirates and (ideally) Avatar Kicking the ass is a glorified insurance. Yes Disney can keep the Pirates franchise alive as a glorified pop-up hitter next to the MCU, Avatar and several Lucasfilm movies (Star Wars, Indiana Jones, etc.), so much the better, whether Marvel and Lucasfilm remain titans.

As big as Disney is at this time, especially in terms of market share, its successes come from specific niches, in animation, live action remakes driven by the nostalgia and content of Lucasfilm / MCU. The success of pirates of the Caribbean, which has earned $ 4.5 billion worldwide in five installments, is the exception and not the rule when it comes to Disney's live-action in-house franchises. That does not mean I do not deserve credit for the current successes of Lucasfilm and MCU, but that's different. Fifteen years later Pirates of the Caribbean: the curse of the black pearl earned $ 654 million with a budget of $ 140 million, the franchise is still the Walt Disney diamond in the rough.



Source link

Categories