Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

PixelPervert t1_j7k5x7b wrote

Wouldn't Disney owning Marvel also put Marvel's money in Disney's pockets?

961

Toxic_Nandalas t1_j7k6x3o wrote

Htf is the life of pienon that list... i only know the movies cuz of religion class

2

JohnParcer t1_j7k8eyq wrote

Given that LOTR was in 2000 i wonder what rhis looks like with inflation correction

98

NomenNescio13 t1_j7ka219 wrote

Replying to whereismymind86 (#1,742,862)

This actually raises an interesting question, because while Marvel Studios have made the majority of their profits under Disney, Fox is a very recent acquisition. So should that count towards Disney's revenue?

167

tunacow t1_j7kannu wrote

Lucasfilm makes Star Wars, not Disney. (Though Disney owns Lucasfilm.)

17

der_innkeeper t1_j7kc7ri wrote

Universal and WB are owned by ComCast.

Ignore me.

1

nocommenting_ t1_j7kcf41 wrote

Replying to NomenNescio13 (#1,742,968)

Disney “owns” that revenue as much as it “owns” the revenue that Toy Story made (Disney distributed, they didn’t produce), but eyeballing these numbers, the Disney total includes Pixar (Hell, the example picture is a Lucasfilm property…)

61

spidereater t1_j7kcwdx wrote

Replying to PixelPervert (#1,742,767)

I was going to say that it’s interesting that the top 10 studios only vary by a factor of 3. Kind of argues against the idea that there is excessive media consolidation. But Disney owns fox and marvel so really it’s only 8 and the difference is over a factor of 6 and number 2 is less than half of Disney. So really consolidation is massive.

24

MarleyandtheWhalers t1_j7kfny5 wrote

Are the posters featured on each of the bars each production company's highest-grossing movie?

3

Moaoziz t1_j7kghwj wrote

First I thought that Disney made less revenue than I expected. Then I saw that you split it up into Disney and Marvel.

Was there a reason for that? If Marvel is listed separately, then Lucasfilm should be listed separately, too.

263

TommyBaseball t1_j7kiim5 wrote

Replying to Aggressive-Morning11 (#1,743,368)

Not Fox broadcast channels or Fox News. The only US TV channels they picked up were FX and Nat Geo plus the 20th Century movie productions.

"Among other key assets, the acquisition included the 20th Century Fox film and television studios, U.S. cable/satellite channels such as FX, Fox Networks Group, a 73% stake in National Geographic Partners, Indian television broadcaster Star India, and a 30% stake in Hulu. Immediately preceding the acquisition. The remaining, not acquired, assets of 21st Century Fox, the Fox Broadcasting Company, Fox Television Stations, Fox News Channel, Fox Business, Fox Sports 1 and 2, Fox Deportes, and the Big Ten Network as well as the 67%-owned Credible Labs, spun off into the newly formed Fox Corporation. Other 21st Century Fox assets such as the Fox Sports Networks and Sky were divested and sold off to third parties such as Comcast, Sinclair Broadcast Group and Yankee Global Enterprises."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquisition_of_21st_Century_Fox_by_Disney

25

unimportantthing t1_j7kitwa wrote

Replying to answeryboi (#1,743,222)

Even if that’s what’s happening, OP’s graph is still disingenuous then. I mean, the representative picture for Disney is a Lucasfilm movie, a separate studio owned by Disney. It also appears that the Disney bar includes Pixar profits, which is also a separate studio owned by Disney.

So why include some under the parent but not others? What is the criteria? It’s a poor choice of data display.

10

CptnStarkos t1_j7kj0uc wrote

I get thats a Batman movie, a Bond Movie, Star Wars and some sort of Avengers movie.

Would you mind including the names?

There are tons of marvel, SW, Bond movies...

1

AydonusG t1_j7kj4kt wrote

Replying to Moaoziz (#1,743,302)

Disney, Marvel and 21CFox should be one, Warner Bros and New Line should be under Time Warner, Columbia should be under Sony. Then we have legendary and Ratpac, who collaborate on and fund a bunch of WB pictures. This chart is just inaccurate in total

164

realzequel t1_j7kj727 wrote

X-Men from 2000 is included in the Marvel Studios total which 20th Century Fox owned the movie rights too. It's also credited to 20th Century Fox so you have double counting in the totals.

7

darkstar1031 t1_j7kjaxv wrote

Okay, but Disney owns Fox and Marvel. So, this is just absolutely wrong.

9

frostmatthew t1_j7kjk3r wrote

Replying to answeryboi (#1,743,091)

Then why does OP consider Star Wars under Disney instead of LucasFilm? Within Disney LucasFilm is as distinct as Marvel Studios so it doesn't make sense to separate one in the chart but not both.

43

AydonusG t1_j7kjkkw wrote

Replying to CptnStarkos (#1,743,459)

The Dark Knight, Skyfall, The Force Awakens, Avengers (Maybe end game?), Titanic, Avatar, LotR Fellowship of the Ring, Inception, Life of Pi.

But this is talking about the company total, not the movie total

​

Completely skipped Jurassic World

3

KeystoneNotLight t1_j7kkuhn wrote

Is it just me or is the Marvel column taller than the Disney column?

9

WonderNastyMan t1_j7kkwnj wrote

Over what timeframe? Also they're all actually like 3 companies, and soon all to be bought by Disney, aren't they.

24

mavajo t1_j7klg2g wrote

Replying to AydonusG (#1,743,469)

Is it inaccurate, or is it just that given the dynamics it's hard to make a chart that everyone would be happy with, since everyone has their own preferences about how it should be displayed?

I'm sure if OP did it as you suggested, there would be just as many comments critiquing the fact that he merged them and saying they wish they could see them separately. This sub can be a bit hypercritical sometimes.

14

Johanno1 t1_j7klxv5 wrote

Apparently worst date ever.

This ain't beautiful

8

Spectre_195 t1_j7ko4xs wrote

Replying to vwma (#1,743,095)

No you are wrong. Disney Studios and Marvel Studios are legally different production companies. Which is what the title of the graph says its charting. So technically the inaccuracy is Disney should be divided up further in its various independent production companies.

2

your_mind_aches t1_j7ko8xi wrote

This is a terrible representation because it implies IP ownership by putting the characters in there. Sony doesn't own Bond. It also makes it seem like WB had nothing to do with Inception when it distributed the thing. By contrast, Disney didn't produce Star Wars, its subsidiary Lucasfilm did.

4

flakemasterflake t1_j7kqc2z wrote

What year is this supposed to be? This data is not beautiful

4

XolieInc t1_j7kqeoc wrote

Disney owns Marvel which would put them at like 80.1B

1

NowAlexYT t1_j7kqkt8 wrote

Isnt it funny how 4-6 is all just disney?

3

tarkinn t1_j7kqoix wrote

This data is one of the worst I've seen on this sub. Not because of the design but because of the accuracy

8

testreker t1_j7kqrtb wrote

This is a mess.

Randomly split categories that should be combined

If we go with splitting then categories are missing

The bars aren't anywhere near the right height.

46

rex_lauandi t1_j7ks1z9 wrote

Replying to Moaoziz (#1,743,302)

The other thing is that Disney’s play isn’t even the box office. Last year Disney made over $28 b on parks alone. That’s a single year (these data are from multiple years, which is confusing me).

Licensing, products, and parks are the big deal for Disney.

The box office is just a big ad for us to want to consume those other things.

4

SPZ_Ireland t1_j7kt9ti wrote

I understand why it was done but surely seperating Disney and Marvel kinda invalidates the data protrayed here.

2

Disgruntled__Goat t1_j7kte98 wrote

I definitely wouldn’t call this “beautiful”. The pictures on the bars make it look really messy.

3

kevlarbomb t1_j7ku0e2 wrote

Op doesn’t know the difference between distributor, production companies. Also why are random franchises being split out?

2

mavajo t1_j7ku2iw wrote

Replying to ConsequentialistCavy (#1,743,813)

I mean, is it inconsistent, or is it just a judgment call? I imagine dude was trying to thread the needle between a consistent methodology and interesting, digestible data. He could treat every subsidiary individually, but then you could have a highly fragmented list of players. He could have kept it top-level, but then you end up missing out on individual data for key entities. He probably split the difference to make it interesting to his audience while still providing relevant data.

This isn't a scientific study. It's a post on a sub about attractive presentations of data. I think OP succeeded.

−2

DaoFerret t1_j7kuj1p wrote

Replying to CantFindMyWallet (#1,743,762)

They couldn’t buy the FOX broadcast channels because they owned ABC. (Barred from owning two networks)

Murdoch wanted to keep FOX News (it was the part that wasn’t for sale)

They didn’t want/need FOX Sports because they already owned ESPN. (I don’t think they were barred from buying it, and I don’t think it was not for sale, they just weren’t interested?)

(Not disagreeing, just clarifying)

4

Quincy9000 t1_j7kukjc wrote

The marvel bar is higher than the Disney bar.

2

UMPB t1_j7kuo6u wrote

Replying to -caniscanemedit- (#1,744,064)

But there are pictures of different movies in the bars on the chart and that's beautiful and also there are people watching it like a movie and a marquis so its beautiful truly the most beautiful of data

Data data on the wall who's the fairest of them all?

8

CMDR_omnicognate t1_j7kurur wrote

I don't really understand why Disney is split up like this... marvel and 20th century are also Disney now, you could argue its split by franchise but then the image in the Disney bar graph shows star wars, so why is Lucasfilm included in this? does that include Pixar too? their own animation studios? why not just have Disney, and everything they own, then also have marvel or 20th century separately to illustrate how large Disney is and how it's distribution is split amongst different IP's?

1

Wunjo26 t1_j7kvijb wrote

Titanic, Avatar, and Inception are the only original movies on this list. The rest are sequels, franchises, or reboots. Can’t wait for the marvel/superhero shit to die and we can get back to actual original stories without franchising the fuck out of everything

0

lucky232323 t1_j7kvilf wrote

Now.. which ones are owned by Jewish people....

1

S2smtp t1_j7kwo8w wrote

Don't put batman on Warner Brothers as if ANY of the DC movies contributed to that total... Lol

1

MyReddittName t1_j7kx78q wrote

Replying to PixelPervert (#1,742,767)

Conversely, the chart seems to exclude most of Sony Picture aside from its holdings of Columbia Pictures. It should also incorporate totals from Screen Gems and TriStar Pictures

And would Spider-Man: No Way Home be double counted as Sony and Marvel?

1

noonehasthisoneyet t1_j7kxfo7 wrote

Replying to PixelPervert (#1,742,767)

Wb also owns new line. And legendary has distributed its movies through almost all of the bigger names.

I guess the difference is while Disney and wb own some of the others you don’t see the Disney logo for a marvel movie or for avatar so they can be seen as separate production companies but we know they are owned by one.

3

Huge_Yak6380 t1_j7ky3xo wrote

Disney, Marvel and 20th Century are the same company and should be added together as one column

1

FattyESQ t1_j7ky4ao wrote

Warner Bros. and New Line are both subsidiaries of Warner Bros. Discovery, which is owned by Time Warner. So they are two different production companies albeit under the same umbrella.

Universal is owned by NBC.

Columbia is owned by Sony.

Disney is Disney. But it now owns Marvel Studios an 20th Century (and others like Lucas).

Paramount is CBS/Viacom (they were one then they split then they remerged under CBS).

Both Legendary and Ratpac are their own entities.

Part of the complication is that the chart has to count revenue when the companies were split, and sort of arbitrarily combines or separates pre- and post-acquisition numbers.

I would instead love to see a chart of the umbrella companies: Time Warner, Sony, CBS/Viacom, NBC, and Disney. And I'd love to see their movie/production wings compared to the other parts of their businesses.

1

Wont_reply69 t1_j7kys3h wrote

Replying to flakemasterflake (#1,743,940)

Columbia has Bond for the picture but it doesn’t even own Bond and only distributed with MGM producing for the most recent four films. So either OP just really liked that picture of Daniel Craig or they’re confused about the difference between distributing and producing.

2

DaHotFuzz t1_j7l002q wrote

All of those with the exception of one or two are garbage. Saaaad

1

Decumulate t1_j7l15uz wrote

All of these “but they own them” people - each of these studios are separate businesses, regardless of ownership. Ownership doesn’t necessarily imply direct oversight from the parent company. It’s simply the corporate vessel.

1

A-Chris t1_j7l5azc wrote

Soooo… Disney is basically destroying the competition at over $80Billion.

1

TheVentiLebowski t1_j7l605b wrote

Is this every movie each studio has ever made? Some of them have been around for close to a century, while others are relatively new companies. So it's not a good comparison. Unless I'm totally misreading this.

1

comicidiot t1_j7lagyr wrote

Replying to Moaoziz (#1,743,302)

I guess it would come down to the production studio. Is Disney the production studio or Marvel Studios? But even that would be inconsistent with this graphic since Lucasfilm produced Star Wars, not Disney.

1

Inaksa t1_j7liwma wrote

Replying to mavajo (#1,743,599)

True but this is about consistency, if marvel studios or 21st century fox are not counted as part of disney then lucasfilm movies shouldnt count. What is the criteria to split them?

1

Exe0n t1_j7ljosl wrote

Don't think this takes inflation into account.

I don't think the box office for the LOTR franchise 20 years ago compares to what you get nowadays for a marvel movie

1