Finally, Cannes Dealing! Radius-TWC Nabs Director’s … 
Hammond On Cannes: Wet Fest’s Official Competition … 
‘Vampire Academy’ Adds ‘Modern … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Shark Tank’ Finale Up, … 
Friday Box Office: ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ … 
Cannes: Worldview Options Andrew Dominik’s Marilyn … 
UPFRONTS 2013: The Overachievers 
‘Mike & Molly’ Creator Mark Roberts To … 
Carey Mulligan, Matthias Schoenaerts Set For … 
Hammond On Cannes: Weinstein Brings Out Stars For 2013 … 
Cannes: Fake Gunshots Interrupt Canal Plus Live Broadcast … 
‘The Great Gatsby’ Starts With $5.4M … 
Cannes: Music Box Snags Competition’s ‘Michael … 
UPDATE: Amazon Studios Begins Pilot Pickups; … 
Bruce Rosenblum Bids Classy Goodbye 
RATINGS RAT RACE UPDATE: ‘American Idol’ Hits … 
UPDATE: ‘Iron Man 3′ Box Office Crosses $1B … 
Upfront Market: Will Auto Makers Subsidize TV … 
Cannes: Thief Makes Off With $1M+ In Chopard Jewelry Meant … 
‘Scandal’ Finale On Small Screen And Onstage At … 
‘Modern Family’ Gets Cable Makeover For Launch … 
DreamWorks Animation shares are down 3.1% to $17.49 in jumpy pre-market trading this morning after Rise Of The Guardians‘ $32.6M domestic box office for the five-day Thanksgiving holiday made it, in Janney Capital Markets’ Tony Wible’s words, “one of the most disappointing releases in the company’s history.” If the pre-market stock price holds, then DreamWorks Animation would be down nearly 24% from November 2 when it hit a 52-week high of $22.98 — partly driven by analysts’ optimistic expectations for Guardians. Wible expected to see $55M over Thanksgiving, slightly less than the consensus forecast among analysts for $58M. He now predicts it will generate $134M domestically (down from his earlier forecast for $225M) and $312M internationally (down from $338M). He also cut his earnings-per-share estimates for the company by 71% to 25 cents for 2012, and by 9% to 79 cents for 2013, although he maintained his “buy” recommendation based on DWA’s other initiatives. “Parent review sites noted several dark moments, which may have kept younger viewers away” from Guardians, he says. “However, we still struggle to understand why audiences rejected the film.”
Others also are rejiggering their spreadsheets for DreamWorks. Lazard Capital Markets’ Barton Crockett says this morning that if results in other markets follow the pattern set this weekend, then Guardians could generate a $15M loss instead of a $39M profit — which would lead him to slash his 2013 EPS forecast by nearly 53% to 72 cents. He anticipates a domestic box office of $146M, down from his earlier projection of $176M. Overseas sales likely won’t bail the movie out. In Russia, the film’s biggest international market so far, Crockett says Guardians generated $5.9M in its opening weekend — lower than Puss in Boots’ $14.9M opening in Russia, How to Train Your Dragon’s $7.3M, and Megamind’s $6.9M.
Susquehanna Financial Group’s Vasily Karasyov says that overseas ticket buyers will have to spend at least $235M on Guardians to keep it from ending up in the red — which he says is still possible if the film matches the performance of Disney’s Tangled, which opened the same weekend in 2010. But even if Guardians eeks out a profit, the disappointing performance may scar DreamWorks which wants to produce more than two major releases a year. For investors to see that as a positive, “they need to have confidence in the fact that incremental titles will be profitable, which we think it harder after last weekend,” Karasyov says.
Loading ...
I got a feeling that Rise of the Guardian will do better when the DVD is available for sales. 3rd maybe a little too much for the average family.
Did it not occur to anyone at this company that their movie had a terrible title similar to another animated movie from two years ago that flopped?
I wonder at the surprise audience rejection.
Um. How about the dumbest premise ever? During the previews for this movie at Skyfall people were yelling “straight to DVD” at the screen. This is a typical bullshit premise where people can see that Hollywood thinks we are a bunch of mindless jackasses. While that may or may not be true we still like “good” movies.
Bad title. Bad premise. Bad marketing.
It is too bad that this did not occur to Dreamworks as everyone I have spoken to who saw this film actually thought it was well done.
“During the previews for this movie at Skyfall people were yelling ‘straight to DVD’ at the screen.”
This never happened.
People were laughing in my theater when it premiered this summer, and it was playing before a family movie.
I think the problem is the terrible Title – too close to the cartoon about Owls that also did poorly. It also looked very dark for a kids movie
I previewed the movie for my 3 kids (all under 8). There was no way I was going to take my kids to see a movie where The Easter bunny and Santa are holding large machete like looking objects in front of a little girl. I don’t know what they were thinking, but this is not a family movie. It’s much more suited to teenagers (thematically) and they don’t go to see these types of films. Bad choices.
I think its over protective parents like you who are making this movie not do as good as it should be, and deserves to.
I am a mother of two young girls and I went to see this movie and I would happily let them watch it whenever they want. I don’t encourage violence in my home but the fact that there are parts a little dark and spooky or that Santa has swords or that the Easter Bunny has boomerangs changes nothing about this movie for me. It is a beautifully stunning movie and the story is not like something I’ve seen before. I don’t find it to violent or to scary at all. When I was little, the cartoons that came on TV were more violent then this movie. I really don’t think most kids would be scared of this movie or get the wrong impression or anything like that. Don’t be so over protective, there are worse things out there then Santa scaring away the Boogie Man. This movie is amazing.
I’m not sure why analysts were so high on this film before the open. While the basic premise could’ve worked, the trailers revealed characters that didn’t look or sound appealing, and the dark tone isn’t what people are looking for in an animated film this time of year, especially one featuring Santa Claus. Arthur Christmas, which opened last year I think, looked dumb, but it also seemed cheery and fun. Guardians had none of that going for it.
I know a lot of people worked on this, but who on earth thought this would fly from the beginning? The studio got greedy, fished around for public domain characters that they could afford and dropped them into a write-by-numbers script. Santa Claus, Jack Frost, and the Easter Bunny save the world? How silly can you get? Bad title. Bad movie. BAD IDEA. Hopefully the lesson will be learned.
It was all in the pitch as you listed above. But they screwed up the Sandman he should be tall and willowy not short and stumpy. Here’s how the pitch went and this is why they made the movie.
We can use Santa but we reinvent him into an action hero from Russia. Sort of like an old Cossack. We can get Hugh Jackman to voice the Easter Bunny and he’s a kick-ass kung fu fighter. Think Chris Pine as the handsome Jack Frost who’s always ready for exciting adventures.
That’s all Katzenberg needed to greenlight this movie. Ironically it’s very inventive and creative and the high concept of it is what they liked. They thought they had a big hit with this a franchise-starter.
The film was based on a novel by acclaimed illustrator, writer and as of last year Academy Award winning animation director (for shorts), William Joyce. It is not the PD aspect that was the impetus for making the film, but rather the idea that Joyce’s book was a worthwhile springboard for a movie that is actually more in keeping with Jeffrey’s sensibilities than most of the films DWA makes. Jeffrey is inclined towards ‘dramas with comedy’ as opposed to ‘comedies with drama’. This fit the bill and simultaneously skewed a little older (in tone and design) than the usual animated feature product, while featuring well known characters that typically have a younger skewing appeal.
It was a very calculated decision having nothing to do with public domain, it just didn’t work. That said, it is a truly good movie (and I do not usually like DWA films), that probably will not find the audience it deserves. Guess that means we’re in for Madagascar 5,6,7…
At least they tried.
Bad marketing. Sure, bus stop posters everywhere – which said nothing about story – but I didn’t see one trailer, one internet banner, nothing. And zero word-of-mouth. The movie didn’t enter the zeitgeist, so it didn’t open.
It certainly didn’t help that this cartoon was aimed only at an audience of very young children.
My four year old wanted nothing to do with it, so I’m not sure how young they were aiming. We went and saw Wreck It Ralph a third time, and Life of Pi this weekend. She loved both.
The movie just disappoints. Period. Lots of advertising that didn’t live up to the hype. The characters aren’t how most people remember them. They’re re-imaginations. Also not really funny and the a action scenes are just too frenetic. There was one sequence where they’re all trying to help the Tooth Fairy gather the children”s teeth and instead of being efficient they’re all trying to compete with each other. Talk about greed. As for the cinemascore, it’s a joke. How can you take that seriously when that twilight crap gets the same score!
What, you don’t remember the Tooth Fairy looking like the Parrots from Rio?
DWA will bounce back just fine with PENGUINS OF MADAGASCAR.
Who are the Guardians and why are they rising? I never heard of this film until a few weeks ago. I’d rather take my kids to see Wreck-It Ralph again than to this Dreamworks garbage. Looks like most other parents did.
I wonder if the scene where the tooth fairy showed a girl her teeth with blood and gums scared children off just like the girl? That scene was shown in the commercials
The stories and traditions behind Santa Claus, Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy are sacred in many families, especially families with younger children. When I was a kid, we set our shoes outside the front door on “Saint Nicholas Day” (early December) and in the morning we’d discover that they’d been filled with candy. That tradition came from my mom’s grandmother who was raised in Holland and it’s been passed from parent to child for generations…
Parents simply don’t want Hollywood to reimagine these beloved characters. They’re having fun on their own reseeding the magic in their childrens’ imaginations and don’t need an intrusion from Hollywood. In the wonder years, parents desperately want their kids to BELIEVE for as long as possible… they dread that inevitable day when their 8 year-old will tell them that “Max from the school bus” said Santa Isn’t Real and it’s just mom and dad doing it.
A silly, clumsy concept like Guardians just brings it all out in the open… and makes the magic seem trivial.
“Daddy, why does Santa have tattoos?” “Well Virginia, the human body is a canvas, and although tattooing as an act of self expression has become a cultural cliche, the filmmakers decided that Santa Claus wasn’t edgy enough so they gave him ink.”
You’re reading way, way too much into this.
My kids wanted to see it, but at most of the key locations it was only playing in 3D and IMAX 3D (and my kids wont see a movie in 3D, I know a lot of other families that prefer not to see 3D as well) where as every other 3D film to date has also offered 2D at the larger venues…looking at the screen count perhaps they overplayed their hand in 3D looking to just generate the higher 3D ticked prices and are now paying for it.
$134 million domestically??..considering the horrible word of mouth and the fact that it pretty much bombed over a 5 day holiday weekend I don’t see this movie coming close to even $100 million. The only good news is that now we won’t have to hear about a sequel.
Stock dive an over-reaction and will see some correction. Financial analysts always knee-jerk into negative conclusions and doomsaying. It’s what they do to appear smart and protect their greedy selves. DWA will be just fine and so will its investors; just a bump in the road. They’ve got lots else going on besides living and dying movie by movie.
Rise of the Guardians won’t bankrupt Dreamworks Animation. Katzenberg has had failures before (Sinbad, Flushed Away, Father of the Pride). This is just one film. Still, it will dent morale at Dreamworks Animation.
Also proves brand names don’t necessairly sell (includes directors, actors, animation studios)
So, what was the point of buying Classic again, seeing that Frosty just aired on CBS?
“…we still struggle to understand why audiences rejected the film.”
As I often said to my colleagues (and generally receiving blank stares, btw…), most of the development execs in Hollywood are dreadfully out of touch with the majority of the movie-going public in the U.S.A.
Here’s a hint: Most of the family-going population in the US want their children to have heroes and dreams, but still be a little sheltered from the hard evils of the world for a few years. They don’t want to take their three and four-year-old sons and daughters to a animated family film and have to deal with kids who can’t sleep because they were scared to death at the images they just viewed.
In other words, when Santa Claus bears a closer resemblance to a white-haired Gerard Butler than to the jolly old Kris Kringle that we’re accustomed to, don’t expect middle America to turn out in droves and make you rich.
Yea… what a stupid movie. Who came up with the idea of reimagining classic Christmas characters? It should have tanked, just like Nightmare Before Christmas. Oh… wait.
Besides, who is going to support a movie based on a series of children’s book?
I saw the movie on Sunday, and enjoyed it. I’m not expecting it to make anyone’s Academy Awards list, but neither will 4/5 of the crap that came out this summer.
I will agree that the marketing had to have been a challenge, and the title didn’t help things. I ran into the same issue as one of the previous posters in that my 8 year old daughter won’t see movies in 3D because they’re “too scary”, so it was hard to find a screening. But after the movie, she talked for hours about which Guardian she wanted to be the most, and this morning after looking outside to the ice on the grass in the front lawn, said good morning to Jack Frost. If anything, this movie made my daughter believe in Santa and the rest even more.
They wonder why audiences rejected this movie? My first reaction on seeing the trailer was that it was ridiculous, and I love cartoons. The idea of Holiday characters uniting to protect the children of the world from another terrorist cartoon character is overblown. The voice over for the trailer was so corny. It reeks of ” Hey look at me, I’m an epic movie”. The title of the movie is as generic and lame as you can get. There is nothing about the poster that is slightly interesting or imaginative. You have Santa, a rabbit, and some guy that will be singing show tunes.
At the theater I go to it was only showing in 3d. I would be willing to bet if it was only in 2d it would have done much better.
These Wall Street “analysts” of Hollywood are as clueless as anybody else. Look at the history of them on this film alone…just covering their asses in calculated ways, no more, no less. Whether or not the film can continue as a series with other stories besides Jack Frost’s remains to be seen. Therein lies the problem with the investment : the potential failure of a possible franchise. And how do you keep “younger viewers away” when theoretically they can’t see into the box office? Maybe it kept ADULTS who drive children there away…isn’t that the nub of the problem?
ADULTS and GUARDIANS don’t wanna see it therefore kids don’t or won’t. The Miramax Weinstein would have child psychologists with pull quotes weighing in in the middle of a “C.S.I.”
I maintain that it’s very interesting and well done children’s entertainment, an interesting metaphor about life that defends child-like illusions…but in and for children.
Look at the Grinch. The guy’s a bastard until the very end.
There’s clearly delineated bad and good here. And if parents interacted with their children…the way the ratings are supposedly designed for…instead of being children themselves forcing children to watch more adult fare for their own purposes of being entertained as much as anything else…maybe the box office would be better…which isn’t all that bad considering the movie is going to be most successful with children who have not sworn off Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy just yet…by that definition it will be a smaller audience therefore the box office expectations probably weren’t exactly fair to begin with. If an analyst can’t put together financial expectations on the basis of anything other than wishful thinking as it relates to the ACTUAL subject matter…the comprehensive take on D.W.A. is…”beats the hell out of us! Got any ideas on what the problem is here?”
I did’t see the movie. I didn’t see the previews. I didn’t see the commericals. I DID see the Billboards and that alone was enough to turn me off. I kept thinking these characters look scary and sinister.
DreamWorks animation style is creepy. Why does the Tooth Fairy have scales like a fish? Why does the Easter Buddy look like he has the mange? Why does Santa Clause look like he should be cruising the streets of West Hollywood? Also, their marketing materials were too dark and busy. They need to make them clean and lite and kid-friendly. No busy background to go with their highly detailed characters.