rushmore223

I wish I could find the article, I believe it came out about 2 or 3 weeks ago. Someone claimed that Disney was intentionally trying to prevent Spirited Away from having any box office success. I read that Disney was routinely refusing prints of the film to theaters who were requesting them and that there has been absolutely no advertising whatsoever. Word has it that Disney felt that a success of this film could be considered an embarrassment if it were to outperform their own films, like Tuck Everlasting.

I saw this wonderful film, I had to drive 2 hours to see it, but let me tell you it was worth it. Now, Unfortunately, Spirited Away is Fading at the box office. I have to say, I am beginning to believe the claim that Disney KILLED this Amazing film.

Have you wanted to see this movie, but been unable to because no theater around you had it? I think complaints to Disney should be made.

It was bad enough how Mononoke was mis-handled, now this movie is getting the very same treatment.

lesterlong

I have not had any desire to see it. And may I ask how in the world would Disney prevent a film from getting to theatres? Is it a Disney film? Why would Disney not want to release their own film? Why would Disney have it, if its not a Disney film? I do not understand this.

rushmore223

It's not a Disney film, it's a Studio Ghibli film being distributed in the U.S. by Disney.

Jay G.

It's baffling to me how Disney is treating a film they own so badly, since they stand to profit from it doing well, as well as improving their image as a distributor of great animated films, if not originator.

Still, I don't think Disney is deliberately trying to squelsh Spirited Away's success, that would be like Disney deleberately trying to squelsh the PIXAR films. I chalk it up to basic incompetence. Never underestimate human stupidity, especially when studios are involved.

As for theatres being denied prints, I've heard Disney isn't making any more prints, but is shuffling around the ones already made. That resulted in the film in my town being shifted from the arthouse theatre to a more mainstream multiplex. Perhaps some theatres have been refused because there simply are no prints free to send them.

Jay G.

I don't know if this is the article refered to above, but this is one that critisizes Disney's treatment of the film, including speculation that they don't want it to compete with Treasure Planet:

http://www.nydailynews.com/10-24-200...8p-28024c.html

UAIOE

I wanted to see this and it never even showed up anywhere in this stinking town.

Granted this isnt a big city or a town that has loads to offer...but this city has a state college and at least two art house theaters.

I think those two things there would show that a movie like this would do some business here. All those art-house movies that people discuss manage to make thier way here, why not this?


I find it hard to believe that Disney couldnt promote an animated movie thats not simply for kids.

They used to do this before, what happened?

Either this company is too self absorbed in thier so-called "family" image or they have some of the dumbest people in the world doing thier movie ad campaigns.


No matter why this movie didnt wider opening...Disney still screwed up.

I feel a tiny, teeny, little microscopic bit of sorrow for them. If anime fans were pissed at Mononoke, they will be fuming over this one.

greatjedi

If it weren't for this site, I would have never heard of Spirited Away. I was lucky enough to check the movie listings at my local art house the day before it showed. I'm glad I got to see it, but I wish Disney would advertise and distribute this film to a wider audience. Everyone should have a chance to see it.

cerulean

I saw several tv ads the week before Spirited Away opened. I think Disney was trying to open this like other arthouse films - release in a few major markets and hope word of mouth spreads as the film opens wider. Apparently word isn't spreading.

In Chicago, it played at the only THX/DLP screen in the city which had shown just Star Wars and Signs during the previous 4 months. At the screening I went to, there were only 9 other people there. It seemed like even less than that as the theater seats at least 400-500.

Disney must have spent some money getting the film to show on a screen like this as the theater would have made a lot more money if it had booked a presumed hit like Red Dragon, which is the kind of movie that it usually shows.

Now that I think about it, this theater not only doesn't show arthouse movies, it doesn't show Disney animated films either. Not The Lion King, not any Pixar movie, only....Princess Mononoke.

Here's a webpage where you can check if Spirited Away is coming near you. It's a fansite, so it's probably not complete.

http://www.nausicaa.net/miyazaki/sen/theaters.php

marty888

For me, the basic premise of this thread makes NO sense whatsoever.

If Disney was concerned about competing with their own in-house products, they would have scheduled release for this at some other time. They have no problem sitting on a movie until they feel the time is right (think Shaolin Soccer).

LBPound

Yeah, I agree with you, marty888. If Disney really wanted to hinder Spirited Away, I think it would have been easier for them to just not distribute the movie.

Jason

Disney bought the rights to these films to keep them away from their animated films. If dreamworks or Universal had picked up Spirited Away, they would have no problem opening it the week before Disney's next animated "masterpiece". This way, Disney can release the film enough to satisfy the licensee and keep it out of the mainstream.

Is Studio Ghibi associated with Toho in any way? If so, the licensee probably has no real interest in their movies being big in the US. The Japanese (especially Toho) seem to not really care. Their products are made primarily for the home audience. In fact, Toho is often hostile towards american audiences, fans, and distributors.

Damfino

Did anybody see a TV ad for "Spirited Away"? I know I didn't but I don't have small kids at home.

The key to getting crowds to a family film is to advertise heavily on kids TV shows so that the kids nag their parents to take them to the movie. (And where was the fast food promotion?)

The worst part of all of this is that Disney will take the position that Japanese animation doesn't sell in the US, so the next good anime will be treated badly as well.

C-Mart

I saw several TV ads for this movie. Disney used the El Capitan Theater in Hollywood (Their own theater) to show it for several weeks... this is where I saw the movie, and it was a digital print, which, to be honest, probably isn't the best choice for a traditionally animated feature (read as not CG.) Anyway, the movie then spread to my two local megaplexes the next week, and it has been in one or the other ever since. I only went to the theater to see it once, because I have the Japanese w/english subtitles DVD, which is MUCH better than the Dub. The actress for Chohiro's voice was way too piercing, and it actually hurt my ears when she would yell or scream. Anyway, I didn't want to turn this into a movie review, so I will stop now. As far as everyone getting to see it, well, these things tend to hit major cities moreso than little towns, etc. My friend in Boston saw it in a theater that was showing the Japanese version. I told him not to bother with the 'Disney' version, and I sent him one of the Japanese DVDs. Just because a town has an 'Arthouse' theater doesn't mean it will get everything like this. The only other theater showing Spirited Away in this area the first week was in Pasadena, so out of all of So. Cal there were only 2 theaters showing this. Actually, in my experience, Spirited Away got a much better release than Mononoke, because Mononoke was only in 1 theater that I knew of, and it was only there for 1 week!

-CM-

Matt925

And the question is: Why not?

The movie got an incredible amount of praise from critics and on opening weekend it averaged $17,301 per theater. If Disney promoted this like Lilo & Stitch and actually made it accessible to everyone, it could have been a huge hit. As it stands now it is a month and a half into its run, and it's playing on less than 150 screens. Doesn't seem like they care much about it, and you have to wonder why.

Captain Harlock

One of the problems Disney has had with Hyaoto Miyazaki is that he as been very upset at the way the Mouse has treated his films. Disney dropped the ball with Princess Mononoke in terms of marketing, but they also wanted to cut 45 minutes from the film to make it more "user friendly" for American audiences. I also read that in certain test screenings and at showings around the country, people were laughing during the more violent scenes and parents had to leave with crying children who were upset when they saw what was obviously an adult oriented story on the screen. Alot of people were upset with Disney for releasing this type of film. It's not entirely Disney's fault, but the perception in America is still "Cartoons aren't supposed to be serious they are supposed to be funny and for children". Perhaps in a generation that will change but for now that's the mantra. And unfortunatley both Spirited Away and Princess Mononoke have had to battle that perception.

Another problem is that people associate the word "Disney" with very light hearted films like Beauty and The Beast, The Little Mermaid, and The Lion King. Again like Mononoke you have a film with no singing animals, with and actual story and with nothing in terms of commercial tie-ins ( i.e. Spirited Away Happy Meals, Spirited Away Soundtracks, etc.). There are people who are serious "Disney-philes" who would be looking for all this collectable merchandise that would accompany a typical Disney film. When it doesn't materialize, that would certainly leave a little tarnish on the Mouse's image.

Disney may not be "intentionally" hindering Spirited Away but in a sense they are not helping it either. Again as in the case of Princess Mononoke you have a bunch of marketing executive who probably have been thrown a curve. "An animated movie thats based on Japanese characters, with no soundtrack, no commercial tie-in's, and with no singing animals? How the hell do we market that? Well let's not knock ourselves out with this problem." Perhaps their marginal release is a way of fulfilling their agreement with Studio Ghilbi. Much like when a record company puts out a greatest hits album to hold up their end of a record deal with a certain singer. If the remaining films that Studio Ghilbi has an agreement to distribute go unreleased, that would very easily be grounds for a breach of contract lawsuit.

What ever the reasons are Disney is letting a great peice of animation fall through the cracks. I managed to see it a few weeks ago. Unfortunatley the distributor sent the wrong print. It was completely in Japanese with no subtitles. The animation was superb but I however had no idea what in the world was going on. It's still playing at my local art theater here. I just hope they have the English version now.

Jay G.

Actually, Spirited Away was entirely created digitally.
http://www.avid.com/profiles/020906_...i_symphony.asp

"Traditional" cel animation has largely become a thing of the past. Disney's films have been digitally colored since Recuers Down under, and many of them have had mixes of cell drawn and CGI animation. Thats why Disney was able to enhance Beauty and the Best for IMAX and make a flawless DVD transfer, because they used the original digital file.

Quote:

Actually, in my experience, Spirited Away got a much better release than Mononoke, because Mononoke was only in 1 theater that I knew of, and it was only there for 1 week!

Let's look at the numbers:
http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2002/SPRTA.html
http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/1999/MONON.html

Spirited Away has been shown in a max of 151 theatres, while Mononoke got a max of 120. So Spirited Away got a wider release, but not by much. However, Spirited Away got into more theatres faster, while keeping a stronger pre-theatre average than Mononoke, so it has already done much better than Mononoke.

Of course, one look at the worldwide gross, and you realize the US receipts, being one of the largest audiences in the world, are a pathetic drop in the bucket.

SuperJim88

Studio Ghibli'S flims are design for mostly adults!! In Japan, the cartoon industry are target at both childrens and adults as well. It is completely treated differently than Disney's cartoon, which mostly are target toward kids. And that's part of the reason why spirited away was such a good movie or any of Studio Ghibli movie for that matter. The stories all has deeper meaning than just simply "a little mermaid want to be human."

You all should go see it for yourself and feel the emotion and deeper meaning within!!

seisui

I don't know about Toho but the major reason that Miyazaki made this deal with Disney was b/c Disney has the means to bring Ghibli films to the big screen. I forgot where I read this but basically Miyazaki said "his films were made to be enjoyed on the big screen". He actually doesn't care too much about the DVD releases.

Incidentally, the Cowboy Bebop movie will be coming to theaters in January. Let's just sit back and campare how Tri-Star handles anime in theaters as oppose to Disney.

Cowboy Bebop: The Movie

C-Mart

Well, let me change my statement and say that maybe the El Capitan projector maybe isn't up to par then, because I noticed a lot of pixelization in the film. I don't see that in the Pixar movies or in Ep. II, so I figured it was a product of digitizing a print.

Better to rephrase and say that they don't have a soundtrack that is maretable to kids. There is a score, and I plan on getting it when I can find it again, but most kids won't go for a score-only soundtrack.

I do agree that most parents see Disney's name on a movie, and they think that it is great for kids. The cuts that they chose for the commercial for Spirited Away didn't show any of the scarier parts, and when I was in the theater... the only 25 year old that was there without a kid, I did notice a lot of kids clutching their parent's arms and proclaiming, "Daddy, I'm scared!" To be honest, I really don't care how Disney marketed it. True, I would love to see Anime become mainstream here, but we just have to realize that it won't happen. In this case I already have a DVD with a great 2.35:1 anamorphic transfer and a japanese language track in DTS. If Disney flakes on the Spirited Away DVD like they almost did on Mononoke, I don't really care.

Well, this is the question... I am not sure how it works... do the theaters have to pay for the prints? or do the studios pay the theater to show the movie? If it is the former, then realize that it is Disney distributing this film. Most films shown in the arthouse theaters have very little backing and the artists/distributors want it shown as much as possible. If it is the other way around, then it is quite possible that what some of the others have said... that Disney only hasa a limited number of prints, and they aren't making any more, which means that the more rural theaters won't get it, plain and simple.

-CM-

Terrell

That is stupid. Disney is not concerned with that. If anything, Disney wouldn't have spent the money to distribute Spirited Away just to sh*tcan it. Besides, at the American box offices there's not nearly as much demand for an adult, anime film. Disney could have released this film in every theater in the U.S., and it still would only make a fraction of what Treasure Planet will. American audiences just don't care much for anime or adult animation.

dave955

It wouldn't? Consider this excerpt from Rosenbaum's Movie Wars, about Miramax:

I think it is difficult to reconcile these facts with the assertion that a studio won't spend money on distribution rights only to intentionally sink it at the box office.

UAIOE

If (IF) Disney is worried about being outdone by another studio why do they work with Pixar? Pixar isnt Disney and it doesnt have a boatload of Disney animators...so its not technically Disney.

So then what is the difference between Pixar and Studio Ghibli?

Disney will go out of thier way to hype a Pixar movie but will do nothing to help a Studio Ghibli movie?

rushmore223

One BIG difference between PIXAR and Studio Ghibli is that PIXAR has a contract with Disney to develop and [produce for Disney, Studio Ghibli is a seperate entity which produces its own films and releases them in Japan. As far as worldwide releases go, a small studio like Ghibli will look towards a bigger studio to handle foreign releases.


here is an excerpt from Pixars site;

In May 1991, Pixar entered into the Feature Film Agreement with Walt Disney Pictures for the development and production of up to three computer animated feature films to be marketed and distributed by Disney. It was pursuant to the Feature Film Agreement that Toy Story was developed, produced, and distributed. In February 1997, Pixar entered into the Co-Production Agreement (which superseded the Feature Film Agreement) with Disney pursuant to which we, on an exclusive basis, agreed to produce five original computer-animated feature-length theatrical motion pictures for distribution by Disney. Pixar and Disney agreed to co-finance the production costs of the Picture, co-own the Picture, co-brand the Pictures, and share equally in the profits of each Picture and any related merchandise as well as other ancillary products, after recovery of all marketing and distribution costs, a distribution fee paid to Disney, and other fees and costs, such as participations to talent and the like. The first two original Pictures under the Co-Production Agreement were A Bug’s Life and Monsters, Inc., which were released in November 1998 and November 2001, respectively. Toy Story 2, the theatrical sequel to Toy Story, was released in November 1999, and is also governed by the Co-Production Agreement although it does not count towards the five original Pictures. We are currently in various stages of production on the remaining three Pictures under the Co-Production Agreement.

a little wordy, but I think the difference is very clear. Disney and Pixar are partners in a sense from start to finish, whereas Disney and Ghibli are merely in it together at the tail end. Disney has comparatively little to gain from a successful Spirited Away, they are merely a contract player. they get the job done, essentially.

Jay G.

Disney has everything to gain from Spirited Away being successful. Why Disney has only a 50% stake in Pixar's films, Disney gets 100% of the profits for Spirited Away in the US.

rushmore223

I'm not arguing the point Jay G, I just want to know where you get your info pertaining to Disney getting 100% of the profits. Seems a bit off to me. Also, I was not only talking about Box Office when I mentioned it has comparatively little to gain. I am also speaking of toy lines, video, product tie-ins. My point is that Spirited Away has the possibility of being a modest success, we are not talking $100 million here or anything, but certainly far more than it is currently doing. Disney doesnt want to "risk" spending money on it's release, i.e. more prints, advertising in most markets, when they don't believe the film has the kind of profit potential that gets them excited. where as Treasure Planet or Lilo and Stitch or Monsters Inc. can be milked over and over again in different ways to make huge profits. Doubt what I am saying? Go take a look at your local Disney Store.