Cinema Issues: The Recovery Of The Box Office?

So we were originally going to write a post about the slaughter that has been the summer box office with some films doing really well and everything else flopping. However, we decided to retool that into a conversation on the fact that we are in July 2026 and have already had 3 billion dollar films, with more likely to come meaning that from a box office perspective we have had a much better year than we have had in post-pandemic history. However, within that there is a caveat.

As of right now Michael, The Super Mario Galaxy Movie and Toy Story 4 are all sitting at 1 billion, with the Odyssey, and likely Spider-Man Brand New Day set to join it. Whilst on paper this is great news for the box office it is also painting a picture of instability, as whilst there are more high profile hits there are also a lot more high profile misses.

As the summer season has shown films like Minions 3 have struggled to connect and films like Supergirl and Moana have outright flopped, this is showing that cinema is becoming an all or nothing bloodsport. There are far fewer films that do middling, and the remaining strength of the box office is being channeled into a few specific types of film, directors, or franchises this makes the box office lob sided and reduces chances taken on projects.

This seems to be the new reality people either come out in force and a film makes lots of money or no one goes and it dies on the vine. People may say it has always been this way but that is not true there were often middling cases and a middle ground between hits and flops but increasingly that has withered away.

If you enjoyed this Cinema Issues article , then please head over to Patreon to support the blog. All film reviews are free, with no early access, sponsorships, or content locked behind paywalls. If you value independent coverage of the entertainment industry, your support over there helps to keep it going. Become a member on Patreon below

patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to the Ko-Fi donation page below

http://ko-fi.com/anothermillennialreviewer

Cinema Issues: The Jean Grey Issue Spider-Man Brand New Day

At the time of writing we do not know if Jean Grey is in Spider-Man 4 and if it is Sadie Sink’s mysterious role however a lot of online speculation says that’s the case.

If it is then it is a terrible terrible decision for multiple reasons, let’s get into it.

1- It introduces her first as a villain: Jean Grey of the X-Men outside of her Phoenix possessions is a good guy, however, a lot of the rumours linking Grey to this film say that she is the villain pulling the strings behind the scenes. Why would she be doing this? It would be incredibly against the character and make very little sense.

2- It cheapens the idea of introducing the MCU’s own X-Men at a later date: we know the X-Men are coming however, the drips and drabs strategy we have been getting isn’t working. The idea was to have an X-Men film pretty immediately after Secret Wars when the universe will be reset why would it make sense to have just Jean Grey introduced early here rather than alongside her fellow X-Men there, it wouldn’t.

3- Spider-Man is still not able to hold his own film: under the MCU there seems to be an idea that you can’t just have a Spider-Man film, like Sony did for years. You need Iron Man, you need the multiverse, you need an X-Man. Repeatedly it seems like Peter cannot just have his own adventure and this film is already crowded with the likes of the Hulk and the Punisher showing up for some reason, now they have to put Jean Grey in as well, it’s just stupid. People want grounded, focused stories not cameo fests.

We long hoped that she is Firestar a different mutant character but one that would be a much more organic fit for the film, however, it would not explain the seeming mind control elements of the plot.

If it is Jean Grey it is a poorly thought through desperate move.

patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to the Ko-Fi donation page below

http://ko-fi.com/anothermillennialreviewer

Cinema Issues: The Death of Pixar

We have written before at length in these Cinema Issues posts about how Pixar has chosen ideology over entertainment time and again, and how they have literally had to come out and say they’ll stop. Moreover, we have also said how they have been a one hit wonder emotionally manipulative, sequel machine for a long time.

Today’s article is to talk about the Disney layoffs which are happening across the company but mainly at Pixar. Some people are not understanding how Pixar can be in trouble when Toy Story 5 has just come out and done so well, let us explain.

Pixar has a bad profit to loss ratio in their recent filmmaking. In their ten films since 2020 only three of them have made money with the rest losing the studio money, some of this is the fault of Pixar and the films themselves some of it is the fault of world events or Disney’s wider decisions. However a 3/10 ratio for profitability is not good.

Let’s examine.

First you have the COVID films that lost money due to COVID and the films being sent out to streaming rather than them being bad but still created a deficit at the studio and start to dent the idea of them as hitmakers.

Onward with a budget of 200 million dollars needing to make 500 million to break even yet making 141 (due to the pandemic) lost the studio 359 million dollars.

Soul cost 150 million meaning it needed 375 million to break even but it made 122 million, costing the studio 253 million even with re-releases.

Luca coat 120 meaning it needed 300 million to break even, it made 50 million needing it cost the studio around 250 million

Turning Red cost 175 million meaning it needed 437 million to break even, it made 21 million costing the studio around 417 million dollars

These films were largely written off as most of the films that flopped during COVID where. There was an idea that once cinemas fully reopened things would change. However, Pixar then started to pivot to social activism and sending a message, which would turn out to be a very costly mistake.

Lightyear cost 200 meaning it needed 500 million to break even, it made 226 meaning it cost the studio 274 million dollars

Elemental cost 200 meaning it needs 500 million to break even, despite a strong rally it made 496.4 million dollars meaning it cost the studio 3.6 million.

Inside Out 2 was a smash hit that started to reverse the damage, it cost 200 million to make and made 1.699 billion so it made around 1.199 billion dollars in profit for the studio. This amount of profit more than covers all the past debts of all the films listed above, and leaves the studio around 300 million dollars in the black, however, if this success had then been replicated going forward Disney would likely not have laid off so many people.

Elio cost around 200 to make meaning it needed 500 to break even, It made 154 million meaning it lost the studio around 346 million which in turn eats through the last of Inside Out 2s profit for the studio.

At this point in the entire 2020s the studio had made one profitable film and was back in a precarious financial position again. This led the studio head to stay that the studio was going to stay away from political messaging and try and get back to films for everyone.

The holdovers of the woke era then came with Hoppers costing 150 to make meaning it needed 375 million to break even, it made 389 meaning it made a small profit of 14 million dollars, which in the world of movie making isn’t enough.

Then you had Toy Story 5 which cost around 250 million to make meaning it needed 625 to break even, currently it has made around 960 million and seems posed to go over a billion which will make probably around 400+ million in profit for the studio.

At the time of writing Pixar as a studio is in the black after Toy Story 5 and the small scale success of Hoopers. However Disney doesn’t want a studio that is batting 3/10, Disney doesn’t want a studio that constantly veers between profitably and loss making, Disney doesn’t want a studio that isn’t a sure thing. As such you can see corrective behaviour being taken at Pixar, the original output beyond Gato is being slashed it’s mainly sequels coming in the future, and if they were smart the budgets would come down significantly. The lay offs represent the need to make the studio profitable on a more consistent basis again, the idea of cutting the overhead down so they can lower the budget on these films and have a more consistent hit rate, especially in a landscape with a shrinking theatrical audience.

patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to the Ko-Fi donation page below

http://ko-fi.com/anothermillennialreviewer

Cinema Issues: The Importance Of The Second Weekend For The Odyssey

As Sunday rolled into Monday many people were looking at the numbers of the Odyssey first weekend around 264 and going take that chuds.

However, the first weekend is not proof of anything and everything will be decided in the second and third weekend. Here’s how.

Firstly the film using Hollywood standard 2.5x the production budget needed to break even needs to make around 625 million dollars. Which is about 360-361 million dollars from where they are now.

Now normally Nolan films have a long stretch in cinemas without competition, not this time but we will get there.

Secondly, if you look at the breakdown of the reported 264 a lot of it came from premium formats, this is your IMAX and things like that. Now these tickets were sold way in advance and bring in much more money per ticket sale than a regular ticket. However, most of the people who cared deeply about the format will have seen it by now, meaning they went the first weekend potentially suggesting we could be seeing a front loaded movie. There will be some people who couldn’t get premium seats last weekend who may go in the week or even next weekend and there will be others who go again. The number of premium tickets however will be down in the second weekend both for the natural reason of less people going but also because the few who missed out on opening weekend and those who want to see it again will be a small group. This means the second weekend drop off will be reflective of a front loaded movie. A usual film that holds well will lose about 50% of its business but this has the added factor of being so dependent on premium formats as such it could see into the 60% or higher.

Going into the second weekend the film sits at 364 million dollars, as a lot of the stragglers after the first weekend went to see the film during the week, meaning they’ll likely be high drop off on the second weekend.

This would mean that the film would end its second weekend around 500 million when you account for the weekday ticket sales as well. This leaves the film with around a 125 deficit to break even. This would then become a central issue as it faces a lock out in the third weekend.

Basically if the Odyssey wants to break even it needs an incredibly strong second weekend.

In the film’s third weekend Spider-Man Brand New Day comes out. This means the premium IMAX screens will stop making any money for the Odyssey and will be handed to Sony for that film. This means that the male demographic is split as well. Both Spider-Man and The Odyssey lean towards men, older men say 25-40 will have an interest in both so there will be direct competition. Whilst the older crowd 60+ may still show up for the prestige epic and the cinephiles might go back for rewatches the core of the audience will be hollowed out.

As such the box office will likely see a significant downturn on the third weekend.

You are then left with two options, that the film sticks around and over a few long period of time maybe into September is able to crawl to that 625 million break even point, or it does not break even at all and the chuds win.

If you were Universal you would be watching that second weekend like a hawk the closer to 500 million you can get the easier it will be to survive post Spider-Man. If the film managed to barely drop at all in the second weekend it could comfortably break even at 625 over the later summer period.

As such for those celebrating it is too soon to call.

patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to the Ko-Fi donation page below

http://ko-fi.com/anothermillennialreviewer

Cinema Issues: A Surprisingly Barren July (26)

If one looks at the release schedule for July you see the early big hitters of Minons and Moana and then the Odyssey takes up the middle of the month, but then there is a gap between the Odyssey and Spiderman Brand New Day that would be unthinkable for prime summer movie season.

One explanation could be that Nolan asked the other studios and cinema to give him two weekends with his latest venture and they let him, which would be dumb, or they want to see him fail in real time.

Another could be that there just isn’t that much to release as the after effects of the strikes and the downsizing in Hollywood are starting to cut the output. The weeks between the Odyssey and Brand New Day would be the perfect time to launch a sleeper hit horror movie but people are staying away.

The summer box office this year has been erratic, with obvious flops like He-Man, The Mandalorian and Grogu and Supergirl all crashing and burning, but also with films like Minions and Monsters opening softly. You can feel Hollywood shaking, they are out of touch and aren’t connecting and don’t know why. Moana and the Odyssey won’t save them and neither will an ever shrinking summer schedule.

patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to the Ko-Fi donation page below

http://ko-fi.com/anothermillennialreviewer

Cinema Issues: The Cowardice Of The Odyssey

As many of you may know the new Christopher Nolan film is mere days away from release, yet unlike other Nolan offerings this one is wrapped up in controversy. Whether that is the vandalisation of greek mythology, casting a woman to play a man’s role (Ellen Page), the race swap of Helen of Troy, or possibly having Lupita N’yongo Karensplain female perspective to Homer thousands of years later. The latter is particularly egregious when you think the Odyssey has some of the most developed female characters in the ancient literature, but surely you don’t expect N’yongo to bother reading it.

The beginnings of the cowardice began when they announced a worldwide press tour for the film, but that it wouldn’t stop in Greece. This is important as the Greek Government has publicly criticised the film for not featuring Greek actors. Moreover, knowing what they have on their hands Universal has taken to turning off comments on any new marketing material they release in order to make sure they only platform positive comments and docile bot accounts. The ratio of the trailers shows a very different story.

The fact remains this may have been one of Christopher Nolan’s greatest mistakes as a director and this may well cost him professionally if it doesn’t land well over the 600 million needed break even point

patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to the Ko-Fi donation page below

http://ko-fi.com/anothermillennialreviewer

Cinema Issues: The Demonisation Of The Nuclear Family

When leaving Olivia Wilde’s latest film the Invite a thought occurred, why is it we have so many films showing the death of love or of families but so few these days showing love and happiness.

Could it be the idea that a lot of people in Hollywood are unhappy in their relationships and so reflect that on the big screen perhaps. However, there is also an underlying cynicism that suggests that there is something problematic about straight couples getting together in 2026 and that the nuclear family is a tool for oppression. Hence you see far less of it, to show a woman happy within a nuclear family unit is to suggest that it isn’t the toxic, freedom stealing experience characters such as Sherlock Holmes in Enola Holmes 3 say it is.

You also have the open promotion of alternative lifestyles where people are shown as happier because they aren’t married. This can be seen in the Invite with the promotion of swinging culture, many modern films have suggested having multiple partners or having meaningless hook ups with no commitments is the only way to be happy, looking at you Splitizville. This reflects the cynicism we have been talking about rather than believing in love and commitment and loyalty, these are all seen as tools of oppression, the only way Hollywood thinks they can be free is to pursue their own meaningless self pleasure from meaningless sex where they can throw the person away at the end.

Look at Charlize Theron who in a Call Her Daddy episode said that she is glad she isn’t married as she could have sex with a man half her age. This is just as problematic as Leonardo DiCaprio throwing away girls when they get too old for him in their early twenties.

The cynicism we have talked about is a reflection of the deeply jaded, perverse nature of Hollywood’s ideas on sex but also the rejection of the love story, in its most traditional form as they view it as oppressive

patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to the Ko-Fi donation page below

http://ko-fi.com/anothermillennialreviewer.

Cinema Issues: Trouble In The DCU

So with Supergirl crashing out in almost comical style at the box office, what’s next for DC. In the immediate term what’s next is a Green Lanterns show that is so embarrassed of its source material it won’t even call itself Green Lanterns and Clayface a film no one was asking for. However in terms of what’s next as a broader more heady topic the idea is likely a movie back towards the hardcore fanbase and masculinity. Superman last year had a soft more feminine form of masculinity and Supergirl this year de-centred men as they are toxic okay. Look at how well it worked out for them Superman didn’t reach the heights they wanted it to and Supergirl will cost them money. You can already see this movie towards the hardcore fans, by the fact they have fast tracked the Deathstroke and Bane film.

The fact is as unpopular as it may be Superhero films are aimed for a male audience, the vast bulk of comic readers and people who attend these films are men, as such making Superhero films for women or for softer men when may like more will result in box office failure. James Gunn seems to like championing this kind of soy boy masculinity, look what he did with Peacemaker over time, however, Gunn’s influence is likely shaky, he’s up for a contract renewal in 2027 as co-head of DC and he doesn’t have a lot to recommend him, particularly if Clayface fails.

What is very curious is the brand damaged control. After Supergirl flopped, the toxic fans of the film screamed everyone who didn’t like it was a misogynist and attacked them. However Gunn, Alcock and the rest of team DC stayed quiet which is odd for this kind of thing. Normally victim narratives are spun up. There was the fan hit piece in the New York Times screaming about “misogyny” whilst ignoring the misandry of Ms Alcock, which could be seen as doing damage control for the studio. However, even in Peter Safran’s statement wherein he acknowledges that Supergirl is a flop he doesn’t say a word about the fans. It’s very curious.

A lot is now on Clayface if that too flops then you would imagine the incoming Paramount takeover will not look favourably on Gunn’s DCU and may wipe the slate clean.

patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to the Ko-Fi donation page below

http://ko-fi.com/anothermillennialreviewer

Cinema Issues: Gender, Sexuality and Modern Pixar

For anyone watching Toy Story 5 it becomes clear from the off that there is something insidious under the surface. This is the entire subversion of gender roles. Now this has been explained away by staff as “how little girls play” however this was clearly a deliberate creative choice. Kenna Harris even admitted there were other versions of the play sequences yet they went with the ones they did.

Remember after a string of recent flops Pete Doctor said that the studio would get back to making films for everyone, it sure doesn’t feel like it.

When looking at Toy Story 5 and asking question why did it do that, you only need look at the creative team. Harris was the co director, she has never directed anything major for Pixar before, she was brought in with veteran Andrew Stanton. She is also a woman who views herself as being non binary, showing that to the core of her identity is disputed ideas around gender. One cannot jump to blaming her immediately as Stanton and the wider team at Pixar would have had to sign off on the charges to the characters.

This feels like a continuation of a studio that has one thing one the mind, remember when they forced in a same sex kiss into Lightyear, or when Pixar staff were upset as had to remove the larger LGBTQ+ themes from Elio. Clearly they want to push gender stuff and LGBTQ themes though their kids films, which is dicey.

To answer the Elephant in the room about what they did in Toy Story 5, we can answer in 3 parts.

Jessie- is now far more masculine and aggressive, during the romance scenes with Buzz she is mostly disinterested and focused on her anti tech crusade, she isn’t shown as having any softness bar once.

Woody- as the former male leader character is humiliated, no one respects him, he has to fight with buzz about who get the number 2 position under Jessie. In his interpersonal relationship with Bo he is shown to also be dominated.

Buzz- arguably the most notable case. Buzz was hyper masculine in previous films as he was a space ranger action hero toy. Now he is bumbling, seemingly unable to do anything without Jessie, he gives another male voiced toy the kiss of life at the start of the film. Then you have the wedding sequence at the end of the film, after the proposal Buzz’s leg twists up as is traditionally feminine, Buzz is given away as is what happens to women, Buzz gets the ring put on him first (again women), and Buzz is dipped for the kiss (again submissive). Then you have the fact he’s wearing a skirt, people scream oh it’s a kilt, it’s funny isn’t it we don’t remember Buzz being Scottish before this film. They knew they would get a backlash to him wearing a skirt so added in this cop out.

Not only is it character vandalism, but also one has to ask why are they doing this. Why are they trying to destroy traditional masculine elements and traditional feminine aspects within a film aimed at kids. What the film presents you with is a world wherein men act like women and women act like men, can you see the message there.

Pixar as a studio has made it’s bones very clear about what it wants to do, and why and if this sort of stuff bothers you, you shouldn’t be watching their films. It shows how deeply out of touch Hollywood is from reality

patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to the Ko-Fi donation page below

http://ko-fi.com/anothermillennialreviewer

Cinema Issues: Cancelling A Show After One Season

Today we are doing something a bit different and doing a bit of a PSA. So if like us you’re getting tired of seeing posts whining about various shows canceled after one season, wherein the poster didn’t understand why it has happened, the idea here is to explain to them once and for all, so they stop being tedious.

1- It is all about ratings, no not critical scores, viewing figures/ratings. It doesn’t matter if there is a right wing backlash to the show they don’t have the power to end it, it doesn’t matter if there is a loyal audience if it is small. How it has always worked is if the show doesn’t hit the ratings target it gets canned.

2- Sometimes shows get second seasons as they are bought up front or developed for two seasons. This then contractually overrules ratings issues. Look at the God Awful Halo TV series for an example of this, it was commissioned for two seasons and so it got a second season despite terrible ratings.

3- The only thing that matters is you watching it, talking about it online and buying merch, these things send the correct corporate signals. Boycotts and petitions after a decision has been made change nothing in most cases.

4- Businesses aren’t charities they don’t give a show 5 seasons to find an audience, not in the hyper competitive world of streaming you aren’t either a hit out of the gate as something like Squid Game was or you aren’t and then cancelled.

5- You aren’t entitled to a second season, when you start a show you aren’t entitled to an ending either. Check yourself.

patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to the Ko-Fi donation page below

http://ko-fi.com/anothermillennialreviewer