The Polar Express

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3
Joined: November 11th, 2004, 10:52 pm

Postby BlueHat » November 11th, 2004, 11:01 pm

i think what the creators were trying to score for was an "illustration" look rather than a "realistic" one...I dunno. Maybe I'm totally way off base. But to me the computer animation in the Polar Express looks a lot like the original book's illustrations.

*shrugs*

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 243
Joined: November 1st, 2004, 9:24 pm
Location: New York
Contact:

Postby askmike1 » November 11th, 2004, 11:21 pm

BlueHat wrote:i think what the creators were trying to score for was an "illustration" look rather than a "realistic" one...I dunno. Maybe I'm totally way off base. But to me the computer animation in the Polar Express looks a lot like the original book's illustrations.

*shrugs*

I was thinking the same thing. If that is what they were going for, then boy did they hit the nail on the head. Seeing the train when it is snowing is just like seeing the pictures in the book. Anyway, if I had the choice of having PE have realistic animation or illustration animation, I would definately have gone for illustration.
-Michael
[url=http://www.mainstreetword.com]MSW[/url]

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 72
Joined: October 22nd, 2004, 3:35 pm

Postby macontosh2000 » November 13th, 2004, 9:50 am

I saw this last night (on the regular screen not the IMAX) and i didnt like it. My main problem was that i didnt care for any of the characters in the movie. But on a positive note the animation was great (if you dont count the character animation anyways).

5/10

Oh and what was up with the Hobo ghost on the the roof of the train i just didnt get it.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 2949
Joined: October 24th, 2004, 9:48 pm

The Incredibles Vs. Polar Express -- B.O. NOT even close...

Postby GeorgeC » November 13th, 2004, 1:36 pm

I guess the movie-going public decided they like families of superheroes better than weird-looking choo-choo movies?

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/daily/char ... -12&p=.htm

Check it out at Mojo. The results are not even close.

Friday estimates place The Incredibles at close to $15 million. Polar Express OPENED less than half that amount.

I guess it's not going to be a happy season for Lionel Trains? :?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 2949
Joined: October 24th, 2004, 9:48 pm

Postby GeorgeC » November 13th, 2004, 1:38 pm

The general public has spoken...

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/daily/char ... -12&p=.htm

I posted then numbers under the News forum.

They're not even close!

I guess trains are out as the gift of choice this year? :wink:

Animated Views Admin
Animated Views Admin
Posts: 6618
Joined: October 16th, 2004, 8:51 pm
Contact:

Postby James » November 13th, 2004, 4:03 pm

Did anyone really think The Polar Express would beat The Incredibles? No!

So let's look at the bright side for animation. The Polar Express is still on target for a $15-20 million opening! Thanks not too shabby! And The Polar Express will probably play through Christmas since it's a holiday movie. As we near Thanksgiving and Christmas the film may get a boost as people get in a holiday mood.

Instead of getting competitive, let's celebrate the fact that the #1 and #2 films in the country are animated - and that we may see animation get a #1, #2, and #3 block when SpongeBob opens next friday!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 2949
Joined: October 24th, 2004, 9:48 pm

Postby GeorgeC » November 13th, 2004, 5:11 pm

Actually,

My post wasn't meant to be a competitive one.

There's no question more people saw something in The Incredibles that just just didn't leap out at them from the previews for The Polar Express.

As far as Spongebob the Movie goes, I think that film will make a profit well before either The Incredibles or The Polar Express.

The Incredibles has to make over $200 million just to break even in the US.

Polar Express has to make well over $300 million to break even.

Why? Production and advertising costs for those 2 films are so high!

Spongebob probably cost Viacom under $20 million to make and I can easily see that film making AT LEAST $50 million its first week...

Honest, there are that many Spongebob fans who are single, adults with families, or will take their significant others to watch the film.

And yes, Spongebob is kinda dumb but addicting... and frankly it's more fun than 95% of the other animated series on TV now.

It goes without saying that I'll be watching the Spongebob movie shortly after the 19th... :P

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1419
Joined: October 22nd, 2004, 5:01 pm

Postby Macaluso » November 13th, 2004, 5:28 pm

As will I ^_^

Me and my dad are seeing it. He LOVES it. Just as much as I do.

I can't wait to see Spongebob. IT LOOKS FREAKIN' INSANE

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 243
Joined: November 1st, 2004, 9:24 pm
Location: New York
Contact:

Postby askmike1 » November 14th, 2004, 1:03 pm

I don't mean to be rude or anything, but I have a question. How come if Disney makes a film that does the $15-20million range it is noted as a "bomb" right from the opening weakend (ex. Brother Bear-$19.8, Atlantis-$20.3, Home on the Range$13.8, Treasure Planet-$12.1), yet if another studio makes a film that opens in the same range (like Polar Express) it is considered that the film did "good?"

Another thing is that Disney's Dinosaur made $137 million and is widely considered a "bomb" (at least by CG standards). Polar Express is likely to make the same (if not less) but will not be considered a bomb? Can someone explain this to me?

Anyway, Polar Express made an estimated $23 million. IMO, Polar Express looks like a great film that stays very true to the book. Also, The Incredibles made more in it's second weekend then 'Nemo' did, but it is currently up to the same amount (since Nemo did so much better on weekdays).
-Michael
[url=http://www.mainstreetword.com]MSW[/url]

Animated Views Admin
Animated Views Admin
Posts: 6618
Joined: October 16th, 2004, 8:51 pm
Contact:

Postby James » November 14th, 2004, 1:13 pm

It looks like PE will have a 5 day opening of $31 million.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 87
Joined: November 3rd, 2004, 3:53 am

Postby Jens » November 14th, 2004, 1:34 pm

askmike1 wrote:Another thing is that Disney's Dinosaur made $137 million and is widely considered a "bomb" (at least by CG standards). Polar Express is likely to make the same (if not less) but will not be considered a bomb? Can someone explain this to me?


Dinosaur had a budget of $200 million and Polar Express has one of $150 million... Go figure ;)
The Disney Database - All the Disney Magic in 1 site!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 415
Joined: October 22nd, 2004, 4:01 pm

Postby PatrickvD » November 14th, 2004, 5:54 pm

I think Polar Express is bigger bomb than Dinosaur, here's why:

DINOSAUR

Domestic: $137,748,063 38.9%
+ Overseas: $216,500,000 61.1%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

= Worldwide: $354,248,063

According to Box Office Mojo, Dinosaur had a budget of $127.5 million (although I definitely recall $200 million as the actual budget, so I'm not sure on this) and estimated marketing costs of $28.3 million. As you can see, Dinosaur made an additional $216 million from the international market, there's no way The Polar Express (wich faces direct competition from The Incredibles everywhere) is going to make more than $350 million worldwide, the way Dinosaur did. But that's just my take on this... for all we know, Polar Express could surprise a few overseas markets, but if the U.S. Box Office is any indication, it will not be a big hit.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 2949
Joined: October 24th, 2004, 9:48 pm

Postby GeorgeC » November 16th, 2004, 12:03 am

Actually,

My Disney source (an ex-clean-up artist at Disney Orlando) says that production costs for Dinosaur were closer to a HALF-BILLION dollars.

Yep, I said HALF-BILLION.

Dinosaur was in development hell at Disney for over a decade since some time in the 1980s and Disney spent a lot of money on it. They had to pay revolving teams of writers to rewrite the movie script over and over again. They also couldn't decide for a long time HOW to animate that film -- hand drawing, stop motion, and, finally, CGI. They bought an outside computer animation company (that became The Secret Lab) which they closed after the film failed.

Disney is probably hiding the truth about the Dinosaur production costs so that its failure isn't as publicly embarassing to the executives as it really is in private.

It also doesn't sound good to Disney stock holders to hear that a half-billion dollars was spent on a movie that amounted to nothing in the end.

This wouldn't be the first time that a major movie production company lied about and hid the facts of production costs to save face and bolster stock prices.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1934
Joined: October 22nd, 2004, 2:30 pm

Postby Christian » November 16th, 2004, 1:05 am

Maybe it will never become a big box office hit but I have a feeling that people will be more open to seeing it as we actually get closer to Christmas.

User avatar
Animated Views Admin
Animated Views Admin
Posts: 18131
Joined: October 22nd, 2004, 2:27 pm
Location: London, UK

Postby Ben » November 18th, 2004, 6:41 am

In the late 1980s, Dinosaur was going to be a stop-motion animated film, produced by Phil Tippet and directed by Paul Verhoeven (Hollow Man, RoboCop).

It was going to be all "silent" (no speaking dinos) and be an apocalyptic story about the end of the dinos and the "handing" of life on the planet to what would become "man".

Pretty cool and intense! Tests were made and I beileve a few minutes of animation was done. This was all announced at Cannes in 1989.

Then it went into development, Jurassic Park killed stop-motion dinos, and the project got re-worked from the ground up. Verhoeven walked, Disney set about doing it Jurassic Park-style, and eventually made the watered down movie that was released.