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.

  • kameecoding@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Even though this includes the Ant Man film, they put Brie Larson on the thumbnail, they know what they are doing.

  • Artyom@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    This analysis isn’t acknowledging the important fact that The Marvel’s was dogwater in its best moments and pure cringe at all other times.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      52 minutes ago

      I didn’t mind the Marvels. I thought it had problems, and parts were cringy if you’re not into it. But the biggest flaw was the writing. It’s like they had these ideas for set pieces, and then tried to bring it all together as an afterthought. It wasn’t as bad as certain people wanted it to be.

      Quantumania was unfinished. It was like they ran out of money and time and just submitted the minimally viable movie. Paul Rudd is always charming, and the actress playing Cassie/Stature is going to be a net plus to the Young Avengers. I think Michelle Pfeiffer was poorly utilized, and of course Kang became a PR problem. But the writing had some high points. The story was engaging, the stakes were real, and the characters all had arcs. The CG was shit, and the Giant Goof schtick is overplayed. Letting go of the physics is a prerequisite for any Superhero movie.

      They did poorly because Disney was rushing. They wanted to generate energy and enthusiasm by deliberately releasing each new movie before the last one was available on streaming. But instead of creating fomo, they fostered indifference because the product wasn’t good enough. Nothing post-endgame felt like must-watch content. The tie-ins were half-assed, because the studio clearly did not have faith that they would ever get to wrap up each dangling plot thread.

      The Marvels was better than Eternals. Quantumania was better than Wakanda Forever. None of them are great movies, but none are as bad as anti-woke or anti-superhero critics suggest.

    • realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      47 minutes ago

      That’s completely unfair. There was really good stuff in the first act, the writers played into the tension between the three Marvels quite well. Everything after that was boring and by-the-book, but it wasn’t bad.

  • credo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 hours ago

    A) Ant man is such a stupid movie. “He keeps his same inertia even though he’s tiny” <Grown man proceeds to walk on people with no apparent physical effect>

    B) Never trust Hollywood accounting

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      35 minutes ago

      The physics never make sense. Iron Man should be a pink smoothie in a can. Hulk generates mass from nothing and sheds it back to nothing when he changes. Spiderman should be pulling drywall off the studs. Vibranium makes zero sense, either as a shield or as a suit or really any other time. 90% of the fighting Hawkeye and Black Widow do is absurd and would leave their bones shattered.

      Thor is all magic, so that gets a pass, but you can’t throw a hammer and the get dragged behind it, and then change directions midair. Thor is flying because magic, let’s just leave it at that.

      And it’s not just the MCU. Superman can’t catch a plane by the nose. Batman can’t launch a grapple hook while he’s falling and prevent his death.

      Aragorn can’t toss Gimli that far. Luke’s X-Wing doesn’t bank through air in space. The USS Enterprise wouldn’t always be oriented to be upright with everything. James Bond can’t just recover from all those concussions and venereal diseases without brain damage. Indy can’t ride out a nuclear explosion in a fridge.

    • Gamoc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      You’re right, it’s bad because the movie about a man that can shrink to the size of an ant is unrealistic, rather than because it was very badly written.

  • wrig9547@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I’m sorry, did I just read that DISNEY received $125 Million in government incentives to make a comic book movie?

    • protist@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      11 hours ago

      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

      • PineRune@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 hours ago

        “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.

        • protist@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          11 hours ago

          It goes into more detail in the article about how they qualify for that rebate, and no, that’s not how it works.

          • PineRune@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 hours ago

            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.

            • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              8 hours ago

              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.

  • PineRune@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    11 hours ago

    “I lost $100 million dollars making this movie. Coincidentally, I also paid myself $100 million to make this movie.”

  • adarza@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    12 hours ago

    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’.

    • Windex007@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 hours ago

      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.

    • trainsaresexy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 hours ago

      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.

        • pjwestin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          31 minutes ago

          Watchmen is a perfect example of how Zach Snyder doesn’t understand what he’s adapting. The original story is a deconstruction of the superhero, showing how sad and broken these characters would be in real life: right-wing murders, rapists, schluby middle-age guys with ED…Snyder takes those characters and films them like they’re cool and bad-ass. Aesthetically, it’s a beautiful, shot-for-shot adaptation, but at no point did it occur to him that the guy in a trench coat muttering to himself about filth and whores wasn’t supposed to be cool. It didn’t occur to him that a group of people who completely fail to stop the villian weren’t supposed to have action sequences straight out of The Matrix. It didn’t occur to him that a story about what superheroes would look like in the real world should be realistic.

          The part that truly enraged me was a small moment at the very end. In the comic books, after everyone leaves, Dr. Manhattan goes to see Ozymandias one last time before leaving Earth forever. Ozymandias asks him if he was right in the end, and Manhattan tells him, “Nothing ends, Adrian. Nothing ever ends.” Ozymandias asks what he means by this, but Manhattan leaves without answering. In the movie, Snyder replaces Dr. Manhattan with Owlman in this interaction. Ozymandias’ story ends with a character who is essentially God telling him that his entire plan was pointless, and Snyder swaps out God for the story’s everyman character. It’s a perfect distillation Snyder’s inability to understand even the simplest subtext.

      • lobut@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        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

        • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 hours ago

          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.

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        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.

      • Eyck_of_denesle
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Ragnarok is ass, all the others are valid. My opinion 🫡

      • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        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