Disney made an estimated $296.4 million loss at the box office on just two of its Marvel superhero movies in 2023 according to analysis of recently-released financial statements.
They reveal that the cost of making The Marvels and Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania came to a staggering $762.4 million (£609.3 million) before Disney banked $124.9 million (£99.4 million) in government incentives bringing its net spending on the movies down to $637.5 million. They both bombed at the box office.
According to industry analyst Box Office Mojo, the movies grossed a combined $682.2 million with theaters typically retaining 50% of the takings and the remainder going to the studio. This reflects the findings of film industry consultant Stephen Follows who interviewed 1,235 film professionals in 2014 and concluded that, according to studios, theaters keep 49% of the takings on average. It would give Disney just $341.1 million from The Marvels and Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania. No expense was spared on them.
…
Disney does not publicly discuss how much it spends on specific productions and did not respond to a request for comment. Budgets are usually a closely-guarded secret. This is because studios combine the costs of individual pictures in their overall expenses and their filings don’t itemize how much was spent on each one. Films made in the UK are exceptions and both The Marvels and Quantumania fall into this category.
Studios shoot in the UK to benefit from its Audio-Visual Expenditure Credit (AVEC) which gives them a cash reimbursement of up to 25.5% of the money they spend in the country.
To qualify for the reimbursement, at least 10% of the production costs need to relate to activities in the UK. In order to demonstrate this to the UK government, studios tend to set up a separate production company in the country for each movie they make there.
The companies have to file financial statements which shine a spotlight on their budgets. They reveal everything from the headcount and salaries to the level of reimbursement and the total costs. Studios directly receive the revenue from theater tickets, streaming and Blu-ray sales and carry the costs of marketing as the function of the UK companies is purely making the movies.
Awww no, poor thing… Does Disney need a hug?
A third of a billion dollars… so far
“I lost $100 million dollars making this movie. Coincidentally, I also paid myself $100 million to make this movie.”
I’m sorry, did I just read that DISNEY received $125 Million in government incentives to make a comic book movie?
Studios shoot in the UK to benefit from its Audio-Visual Expenditure Credit (AVEC) which gives them a cash reimbursement of up to 25.5% of the money they spend in the country.
It’s not like they were handed a blank check, they spent hundreds of millions more paying people and buying stuff in the UK to get that rebate
“As the CEO, if I pay myself $100 million for making this movie, I will get $25 million of that back from government reimbursement.”
No big budget movie will ever make a profit because they make sure the big wigs get paid the amount the profit would have been. It is intentional.
It goes into more detail in the article about how they qualify for that rebate, and no, that’s not how it works.
Easy. I’m the new CEO of the company we set up there. Employee salary is an expenditure, and being a company in that country, it qualifies for that rebate unless there’s more details I’m missing. I was also grossly over-simplifying in my original comment, I’m sure it’s more complicated than that. I also just attribute Hollywood Accounting (see other commenter’s post) to anything listed as a box office loss.
In the UK things like that get checked when it comes to grants, they will usually only be valid purchases if spent with approved companies.
this only accounts for box office take. when you add in streaming, tv and other broadcast rights, home video, merchandising. they won’t be ‘losing money’ on these two ‘bombs’.
Yeah when the ant man Halloween costume numbers come in at the end of the month I’m sure they’ll be in the black.
Keep it up!
Superhero movies suck massive ass.
You’re getting a lot of downvotes, but I see you, friend.
So tired of capeshit.
Endgame, ragnarok, one iron man, one of spider-mans. Dr. strange. The raimi trilogy. The animated spider-man movies. Nolan’s batman? Matt Reeve’s Batman? Watchmen too probably.
I think there are some good rewatchable action movies in there. Oh an Loki. Loki was good. Harry Potter sort of stuff, but comic books.
I don’t know if you put Watchmen in there.
Ragnarok is ass, all the others are valid. My opinion 🫡
I thought Ragnarok and Endgame were extremely mid tbh. Infinity War was great, but I think Endgame was a huge letdown. Agreed with Dark Knight (I don’t think that highly of Dark Knight Rises), Spider-Verse, and the Raimi trilogy, though, and Dr. Strange is a solid 7/10 for me; definitely doesn’t suck massive ass. I’d add Incredibles to that too. I’ve heard nothing but great things about the latest TMNT movie.
Infinity War, Wandavision, first Ant-Man is solid, Guardians of the Galaxy, Winter Soldier, Unbreakable … does Chronicle count?
I think Shang Chi was good up until the MCU ending up until the third-act it felt like a completely different type of film which is what I was happy about
I loved Shang chi, but hated the third act. I just wanted more of what the rest of the film gave us. I was hoping for a Jackie Chan-esque set piece ending. But instead we got budget infinity war.
The number that are worth watching can be counted on one hand.
I can think of a number of films that are about one character that I need both my hands for. In fact once another one comes out I’ll need a third.
Spider-Man
