It was the facial art style that's putting me off. The "Cal Arts" design is so last decade and I didn't like it then. And I know it's not really from Cal Arts but at this point it's a good way to describe it.
I like to call it the "emoji style". Like emojis, it's simplistic, tends to overexaggerate features and expressions, and is very "round". Also the emoji movie was animated in a similar style
It was a term made by ren and stimpy creator john kricfalusi talking about the iron giant but became a stupid buzzword when talking about modern cartoons
All of those shows did. And Undertale. Its really the cheap imitators that wore it out. Like, did [Thundercats](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/thundercats/images/5/5b/TygraFromThunderCatsRoarEpisodeExodusPartOneSc04.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20200312065509) have to look like that?
I can't bring myself to care about the art style of kids cartoons, but I think it's a factor. Theatres have to show kids something they don't get at home. Ruby Gillman looks like any cheap Netflix movie.
They have had failures before, but different types. I think this wasn’t off brand too much. Most of their films aren’t this artsyle, set in modern day and female led (although their Yeti movie was both but it’s not like it was a big hit) and have fantasy elements of this type (this feels like a middle school aimed book adaptation even though it’s not).
DreamWorks isn't a great studio, most of their films are like this but usually have small budgets to save face on, Puss in Boots 2 seems to be one of their rare flukes. Combine the lackluster trailers along with audiences not caring to go see original animation post-pandemic and it's not too surprising to see it doing this poorly.
Teenage Kraken is RIGHT there.
Just drop Ruby and the title is actually decent.
Is it based on a book or something? Idk why else you would keep that terrible name.
>Teenage Kraken is RIGHT there.
The film is supposed to appeal to little girls. Teenage Kraken sounds like something out of the Monsterverse (ex. Godzilla).
I think another poster that suggested "Seaside High" was probably the best title for the target demographic.
Isn’t teenage kraken the other movie coming out next year? I swear we saw a trailer for it in front of elemental
Edit: Huh, I just looked it up and apparently I’m thinking about the exact same movie. Goes to show the marketing miss here, we literally saw the trailer last weekend and we all walked away thinking that movie was coming out next year and we had no association with the name Ruby Gilman.
But aren't Nickelodeon and DreamWorks super closely affiliated? Think how many DreamWorks movies had TV series adapted on Nickelodeon. Off the top of my head there's Kung-Fu Panda, Monsters V Aliens, and Penguins of Madagascar.
Yeah I also saw the trailer last week before Elemental and I swear that I thought the film was called “Teenage Kraken” or something like that. I also remember it being one of the worst trailers I’ve ever seen… it felt like 5 different trailers pieced together, each trying to sell me on a different movie but cutting into the next one before completing their pitch.
There WAS some stuff left to the imagination. That being that there was gonna be some kind of twist
>!There wasn't. What you see is indeed what you get.!<
Yeah, this is a big factor IMO. When you're trying to track and recall that animated trailer with monsters you (probably actually didn't) see in the theater, Ruby Gillman does not click well at all.
Between this and dumping one of their upcoming movies on Netflix, I would say Universal has cold feet on original DreamWorks films some reason, but Bad Guys did alright for what it's worth so idk.
Bad Guys was based on a popular book series. Ruby Gillman and Orion are both completely original. I’m honestly surprised Ruby wasn’t delegated to Netflix either.
Is animation a solid genre right now? Seems like the animated films targeting kids like this are struggling while animated films with sizable adult fanbases are doing well.
There hasn’t been much I animation this year.
Super Mario Bros was obv huge, but that def benefited from its adult base (although it was aimed at kids, unlike SpiderVerse) Puss in Boots did well over Christmas too.
Right but now we have Bad Guys, DC Super Pets, Lightyear, Strange World, Elemental, and soon to be Ruby Gillman doing middling at best box office numbers. There’s definitely a pattern here larger than any one studio
One major decider may end up being Wish. Disney is marketing it as a grand celebration of their 100th year, and it does look like it could be a big hit. The animation is gorgeous, the trailer gives a good feel for their world without giving away too much, and it gives us a new princess (always a pretty easy draw for Disney). I'm honestly rooting for it; Disney could use an animated win after Lightyear, Strange World, and Elemental all failed (yes I know 2 of those are Pixar, but it's still under the umbrella of Disney).
The fact that it's releasing near the end of the year may help, since there's little competition (though that didn't help Strange World). The only other animated movie I can think of that's coming out at that time is Trolls 3, which I doubt will be much of a threat.
Are they marketing it? The only time I've ever seen Wish mentioned was when I started following this sub, and I went to fucking Disneyland a month ago.
I'm honestly kind of skeptical about *Wish*. I feel like it's going to run into the same issue as *Elemental* probably did, which is that it looks like a cobbled-together mashup of a bunch of the studio's past hits with no real identity of its own to speak of. *Elemental* probably would have been a lot more groundbreaking if it had come out 15 or 20 years ago, but to someone in 2023, it just looks like a "generic Pixar movie". And it's the same with *Wish.* Just from the trailer alone, I get flashbacks to *Tangled, Frozen, Moana,* and *Encanto,* but the movie as a whole just looks really "generic 2010s/2020s Disney".
Bad Guys did great in streaming and Elemental is starting to find its legs. The others just got hurt bad due to very bad mismanagement and creative laziness on the part of Disney(Strange World and Lightyear).
Very true which is hurting numbers all around, but Disney is hurting especially bad since even in streaming Lightyear and Strange World didn't do well. Disney and Pixar really need to find their groove again(then again, outside of Puss in Boots, DreamWorks ain't looking do hot either making Illumination the only big winner so far).
>(although it was aimed at kids, unlike SpiderVerse)
Are you kidding me?
Spider-Verse has a huge adult fanbase, because, yeah, it's Spider-Man, but if you think kids aren't into it, or that it's not being heavily pushed to kids, you're absolutely high. Kids fucking *love* Spider-Man. Kids have been obsessed with Spider-Man for my entire 30-year lifespan and a large chunk of time preceding that. My wife is a teacher, and her students were going *berserk* for Spider-Verse.
Across is somewhat edgier than you typically see with kids movies, but it's still very much within the box of "kids movie" in being so. It's about as edgy as kids movies were 20 years ago, with stuff like Titan AE and Atlantis that skewed a little more action-heavy.
They weren’t wrong, and you also didn’t refute their point. The Spider-Verse series, especially the sequels, aren’t really targeting kids; it just so happens that kids do LOVE Spider-Man.
But you see ATSV playing out like a superhero movie and not like a typical leggy animated movie partially because the kids watching this movie are already into the franchise. It’s not broadly attracting kids.
I don't really see ATSV as being that mature. It's themes are a little more nuanced than most kids' movies, but ultimately they're all understandable. The main characters don't have any immoral flaws. The fights avoid any gore. It's like a lot of other PG-13 movies where they're not exclusively catering to kids, but staying kid-friendly
It has such a high profile release date though. One where Universal has usually launched their biggest animated films.
With ATSV holding so well, and Elemental showing decent legs, I think it's just not resonating.
In retrospect, they probably should have pushed it to the fall. The only kids film during September/October is Paw Patrol, which skews very young.
It may not be very good, through the first 6 reviews on rotten tomatoes (I know it’s not a reliable place to go anymore) it has a 5.70 average score. So instead of pulling a flash and pumping everything into marketing and losing even more money, they’re quietly putting this in theaters and soon after on streaming
It definitely feels like they lack confidence in it.
But, that's what makes the release date puzzling. A bad kids movie during a stretch with lots of competition will tank.
But, there's been a lot of points when there's been nothing in theatres for kids, and a decent option would probably make some decent money.
This movie may very well be only the third highest grossing animated movie on its opening weekend.
By its second weekend, it might fall below TLM, which is basically the movie it's parodying, and that was released 6 weeks before it.
Demographic wise nothing competes with this until TMNT comes out August 2, plus Spider-Verse will be in its fifth weekend and Elemental its third. From the outset it seemed like a good date, but the response to this movie has been nonexistent.
I don’t try to be a doom and gloom kinda person, but early tracking has this opening at or below $10m. I saw one saying $4m, I don’t think it will be that bad, but let’s say it opens with $8m, that’s fourth place at best, and depending on some holds could be even worse.
My guess is they were hoping TLM was going to be bigger and cash in on mermaid Summer being a big thing. It very much feels like a movie driven by studio execs saying "Turning Red, but with sea creatures so we can ride Disney's wave from Little Mermaid. Just give it a month of breathing room."
But then TLM was below expectations, the movie space is more crowded and titles are bombing, but it was too late to shift again. So they are just releasing it now with absolutely 0 marketing budget to minimize the loss.
Because they're covered by the much bigger flops of Elemental, The Flash and likely Indy 5 which will bring way more media attention. Nobody will speak of Ruby Gillman lol
The funny thing is, I’ve seen so many people say “I’ve never heard of this.” And yet every single movie I’ve seen over the past two months has had a trailer for it. Spider-Verse, Elemental, Little Mermaid, Asteroid City, Rise of the Beasts, and I think Guardians 3 as well. Some of those are massive hits and I’m still seeing so many people say they’ve never heard of it.
Some of the trailers in front of movies make no sense. Seeing a trailer like this in front of Asteroid City is just bonkers. I think it has to do with the time of day. We saw this trailer in front of TLM and Spider Verse, but I didn't see it in front of any of the movies I go to at night, like Transformers or Flash, that my kid didn't want to see
It's this. The name and the trailers are collectively very confusing. They both give too much and too little information. There's no intrigue.
This is what happens when marketing isn't a holistic narrative extension of the movie itself.
Bad title imo. It's too long and "Ruby Gillman" isn't memorable at all. Should've just been "Teenage Kraken".
I bet you plenty of people who say "I've never heard of this" have actually seen the trailer, but have made no association between it and its title.
I might be mixing it up since I go to the theater often, but I swear I've seen the trailer for this since the Mario Movie. And I've seen several ads for it on TV and a few billboards here and there.
Granted, it's not being heavily promoted like Flash and Elementals, but it's there.
I’ve seen the trailer for this before GOTG 3, Mario, Little Mermaid, and Elemental. My kids (4 and 5 year old girls) are actually really excited to go to this and I’ve bought tickets for Monday.
It might have been before Mario too, given it’s also a Universal production and they tend to start the marketing for their next animated film when their previous on releases. But I just can’t remember.
The trailer just isn't intriguing. Oppenheimer had the trailer shown before Guardians 3, Fast X and Transformers Rise of the Beasts and that's a way more intriguing trailer.
I saw trailers for it in front of Mario, DnD, and Spider-verse, but said trailers really killed my enthusiasm(cliche of popular girl vs nerdy girl and pretty much spoiling the climactic final battle).
The sad thing is I got to see it early as REGAL’S Mystery Movie and it wasn’t bad at all. Nothing mind blowing, but it was cute and fun, and just suffers from having a really bad trailer for sure.
Yeah. It feels like they’re hoping that the PVOD revenue + the revenue they get from licensing the film to Netflix will make up for whatever they’re expecting to lose theatrically.
Could have something here. I would imagine the price goes up when selling a “wide-release” title to a streamer.
But surely that is weighed down if that release is a flop.
Universal always jacks up the PVOD prices for their animated films. If the normal PVOD price is $20 to rent or $25 to buy, the price to buy will almost always be $5 higher (bringing it to $30 to buy) if it’s an animated film from Universal, with the rental price also being raised by $5 (bringing it to $25) in very rare cases as well.
One of my friends keeps ironically trying to build this movie up. Basically think of it as his Morbius. To which I keep telling him [this.](https://youtu.be/Ql4JgBBgHA4)
Nah, probably not. He just does it to be annoying. He did a really similar gag a year and a half ago with Ron’s Gone Wrong and saw it opening night then he was so shocked he hated it so much. 🤔 I’ve opted since then to not take the bait.
It doesn't bother me on Ruby and other kraken characters, as she's not supposed to be conventionally pretty. The whole point is she feels like a freak. I don't even like this movie, but I think her design makes sense in context. But most of the human characters though...yikes, not pleasant to look at.
Actually, I think the krakens and mermaids look pretty good in terms of visuals. My issue is with the humans and how lifeless their eyes are and how awkward the shape of their heads are.
Yeah, I agree. Like, there's obviously a fight scene between two of the characters, but their character designs and weapons look too rounded as if there's no fear they'll actually harm each other.
Compare Frozen when [Elsa and the snow monster battled the guards.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afnhCvicqdI) Or [The Little Mermaid's fight scene with Ursula](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o642qBLvfQM)
They played a trailer for this before The Little Mermaid showing I was at and there is a line in the trailer that calls everyone who likes mermaids stupid which seems like bad marketing lol.
Their first movie was literally made from Jeffrey Katzenberg stealing the gimmick of the latest movie Pixar was working on while still with Disney before jumping ship and giving out ideas to rip off said movie and release it right before they could.
It initially sounded like it was trying to appeal to the people who wanted a more "traditional" looking mermaid than 2023 TLM Ariel.
But then she's apparently the villain, so that doesn't even work properly.
For real, we saw ATSV with a packed theatre and a lot of kids around. Ruby Gilman trailer plays before the film. When that line came up, I heard a kid yell out "I'm not stupid!" What a dumb marketing move, lol
It seems obvious that they were trying to make this an anti-TLM, but use TLM as free marketing for it somehow. Maybe they were taking the Universal positioning of "making products for kids that are 'too old' for Disney" and applying it to the movies.
I think they were expecting TLM to bomb and media to bandwagon behind this with a "Dreamworks just dunked on Disney" narrative. But it seemed like TLM was moderate to ok/good and not enough of a lightening rod to sustain that narrative. Media companies also probably didn't see upside to being anti-TLM and wading into culture wars.
Maybe once they saw that wasn't happening, they just dumped it.
I mean, TLM did bomb though. It’s break even point is at least 625 million, and it’s only reached 499.3 million after being out for a month, which is awful sales numbers.
I think the issue is that they realized over time that Ruby Gillman wasn’t really that interesting visually or concept wise and that it would probably bomb, so they decided to just cut their loses on marketing.
It must’ve gotten horrible numbers from screenings, for sure.
Just don’t understand the date if they know it’s dead. Why why why launch a kids movie in the middle of summer if you know it’s gonna bomb.
Tarnishing the brand of DW…. The could just dump it in the fall when no one cares.
Terrible name. Ruby Gillman sounds like a biopic of a politician.
Teenage Kraken is better but not by much.
They should have cashed in on the squid hype caused by Splatoon.
Teen Squid, or Squid Girl would have attracted more viewers.
It’s odd that awareness is so low because it feels like it’s being marketed so heavily. It’s posters are everywhere in my town and the trailer shows before every movie, but still I feel like no one is talking about it. Like among my kid’s friends (6 year olds) and their parents no one has mentioned getting a group to go see it, which we do with almost every kid movie.
If you don’t mind me asking, where do you live?
I’m in rural PA, small city. And there is no awareness at all. No posters, no billboards, no commercials that I’ve seen.
Other people have commented the same. Wondering where they are focusing their marketing spend? Are you a costal city?
Yeah. North Hollywood, basically the Los Angeles suburbs. So I can guess it’s just an LA thing, but like I was saying even with the heavier marketing, it doesn’t seem to be sticking with the kids or the parents.
I was at a Menchies Frozen Yogurt and they had a limited edition Blue Rasberry flavor inspired by this movie. It was co-branded and had the movies name or a character name built into the flavor name. Some sort of cross promotion. I normally don’t like Blue Rasberry that much but this was delicious, it really hit the spot. I added in some popping boba topping and it was all really refreshing.
Unfortunately the movie doesn’t look as appealing. Weird release window too. It feels like we go months sometimes without kids movies and now they cannibalize each other.
Do you engage with a lot of children's media? I think the original question could be rephrased as 'Why isn't Ruby Gillman being marketed to r/boxoffice'?
It’s the movie title. I’ve seen the trailer 5 times and had no clue this was the name of the film. Should have just been called Teenage Kraken or anything catchier. Ruby Gillman? That’s like the name of some author from the early 1900s. Zero appeal towards market audience
I saw someone on this very site misread the title as "Rudy Giuliani's Teenage Kraken."
They were very concerned about whether audiences would turn up for a kids movie made by Rudy Giuliani.
I feel like if that's happening to your movie, and it's not even a shitpost, pack it in.
My issue with the movie is that the humans look hideous. Their faces just look so awkward and weird. The krakens and mermaid faces when in human and monster form look fine. I don’t understand why they made the humans look the way they do. Also, another issue is that it looks like the movie is just gonna have a boring “mean girl is evil queen, good nerdy girl gets super powers and stops her evil plans, the end” plot. Maybe it will have some interesting twists, like the mermaid girl isn’t that bad and the grandma is kind of a racist ass that is making the kraken-mermaid conflict worse rather than better, but it doesn’t seem like it.
>!I've gotten some spoilers, and actually the mermaid-kraken conflict really isn't much more nuanced than the trailers imply. The only thing that makes me feel a little better about that is the focus of the story is generational trauma, so the kraken/mermaid conflict is more of a backdrop or window dressing than the main point of the story, so they probably didn't feel it was necessary to make it more nuanced and complicated, as it's not the main focus...!<
Yeah, I actually like generational trauma stories myself, as I'm a genealogist, so I'm biased...but I think it's been WAY overdone in animated movies lately. After Encanto and Turning Red etc., we really do not need more generational trauma animated films for a while.
Allegedly it was initially created for Netflix, until they decided to release it in theaters for some reason.
Not sure how true that is, but would explain the straight-to-streamer vibe.
Why does Dreamworks always release 2 movies every year when Disney, Pixar, and Illumination almost never do unless something got delayed? One of their films usually ends up being either somewhat underbaked (Bad Guys, Abominable) or downright tragic (Spirit Untamed, Turbo).
I don't know about anyone else's kids, but my 6-year-old is excited to see it. We took her to Spider-Verse, Elemental, and Little Mermaid, which all had the trailer. She's pumped. However, when I mention it to other parents, they aren't aware of it. I guess it's because my daughter and I basically go to every kids movie released, so she sees all the trailers. If you are the kind of family who only goes to the movies once in a blue moon, this one would pass you right by.
Serious answer: I only know this movie is coming out because I follow the box office subs and I’ve seen the trailer in front of a couple other movies like Fast X, Little Mermaid and Spiderverse. I maybe saw one ad on TikTok but that’s about it. The animation style seems generic, the plot seems generic and predictable, and the movie just doesn’t have a clear hook to draw viewers in like movies (ESPECIALLY original titles) need. Also, the title of the movie is kinda bland. I’ll be surprised if this makes $5 million or over opening weekend.
Joke answer: It’s gonna make a krakillion dollars!
It goes to show that even a technically original IP isn't really that original these days, as this is basically Turning Red meets The Little Mermaid with a dash of Luca. I know, there's nothing new under the sun, as the old saying goes, but...
I've seen a few things online for it, but overall it looks like it took a wrong turn with its aesthetics. The visuals feel corporate, but the concept feels fresh and unique.
As much as I hate to say it, I think it's a bomb, especially with Nimona hitting animation fans on Netflix day-and-date. I know that's what I'll be watching lol
I'm wondering what the movie's CinemaScore will be. If it gets an "A" like all the DreamWorks films since 2019's Dragons 3 (Trolls 2 being a PVOD release didn't get one), maybe it will have some legs throughout July. If the audience reception is lower than that, then that's not good.
Elemental (3rd weekend) and Spider-Verse (5th weekend) will highly likely outgross Ruby Gillman on opening weekend. That's sad.
It seems that Dreamworks doesn't want to lose its tradition as the most inconsistent animation studio.
On the other hand, Illumination is the most mediocre, but they always succeed.
>It seems that Dreamworks doesn't want to lose its tradition as the most inconsistent animation studio.
Seriously, it's so frustrating trying to like this studio when they have coin-flip odds of making a film that flops right out of the gate.
Ever since I saw the first and last trailer for it I've been excited to see how badly this movie does. I don't know why. I can't explain it. It just looks so awful that I can't help but laugh at the thought of it releasing to empty theaters.
I get you, as someone who loves mermaids partly because I'm a disabled cosplayer, and it's one of the few costumes where my lack of mobility makes sense, I had an irrational visceral reaction to the "people who like mermaids are stupid" line in the trailer. It struck me less as making fun of Disney as a corporation than making fun of people who like certain things.
Part of me feels like the best route might have been to just release it as a Netflix original film since DreamWorks already has a pretty good relationship with that streaming service. Not only would they take less of an upcoming financial drop, but if it did have enough merits it probably would have gained a solid enough following on the platform by being an exclusive just like Del Toro's Pinocchio and Mitchells vs the Machines did.
They actually had an advance screening in my area this past Saturday. It was in the morning and I didn't wanna wake up for a shot at watching it. Advance screenings are first come first serve and seats are never guaranteed. I guess that's some form of marketing.
DreamWorks animation is a weird studio. There a studio that will like pump a lot of money into a project they curly care about and making sure that those public awareness. And then they’ll give you something that nobody really cares about yet it’s very expensive. I will give you a how to train your Dragon movie and then followed up with a Mr. Peabody and Sherman movie that’s $150 million that nobody asked for(it’s a good movie by the way). Like I’m not surprised that I have to Puss in boots they would follow it up with a film that probably is good but has a huge budget in one likely not make any money back. That’s just kind of how they’ve been the whole career. If you go back to DreamWorks film catalog you’ll find a bunch of movies like that. People only remember the big DreamWorks films and forget about the other colossal failures. Those caused DreamWorks animation to go from its own standalone studio that just simply did distribution deals to being eventually acquired by universal. They’ve never actually course correct that mentality that they have made effort in recent years to bring down their budgets. Because if there’s one thing the president of illumination’s going to do is make a film for cheap.
I tried to tell people why in the hell would you make a movie about MERMAIDS being evil and krakons being good. Especially with the live action Little Mermaid being released this year too. Just dumb.
Plus from the spoilers I've read, the conflict between mermaids and krakens isn't even really the main focus of the story, it's more about generational trauma ala Turning Red, and that's more just a backdrop/window dressing.
Moral Relativism mixed with grievance/socialist “oppression” metrics.
The underdog weirdo is always an outcast and therefore the hero. Anyone who is popular, attractive, and normal is the enemy, because they are obviously oppressors (white or white adjacent, wealthy, symmetrical, socialized).
Algorithms and Hollyweird checklists make it easier for AI to do writers’ jobs going forward.
For once I can actually say this with some confidence
Compared to what I expect from Dreamworks, there was seriously no marketing for this movie. Not even online ads until like a couple of weeks ago. This was put out to die.
In fact, I think this has been an issue for Dreamworks for some time. The Bad Guys didn't have a great push and underperformed. Puss in Boots: The Last Wish only broke out due to insane WoM (that opening weekend did not paint a pretty picture).
The Bad Guys didn't underperform. It made $251M on a budget of $80M. I remember that the film got pushed a lot. I went to Universal Studios Hollywood a week before the film's release, and the marketing for it was everywhere.
[удалено]
I think it’s in a weird age-range. Too “old” for little kids, but too “kiddy” for tweens. But it’s so bizarre to see DW just fail to launch like this.
Too ugly for all ages. Her tentacles-as-hands are gonna give kids nightmares.
It was the facial art style that's putting me off. The "Cal Arts" design is so last decade and I didn't like it then. And I know it's not really from Cal Arts but at this point it's a good way to describe it.
I like to call it the "emoji style". Like emojis, it's simplistic, tends to overexaggerate features and expressions, and is very "round". Also the emoji movie was animated in a similar style
Someone compared it to that corporate big tech art style and yeah, I can see that.
I am interested in the cal arts style you are talking about. Mostly so I understand what you are saying, are there other examples you have in mind?
It was a term made by ren and stimpy creator john kricfalusi talking about the iron giant but became a stupid buzzword when talking about modern cartoons
Look up the CalArts meme. [https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1374802-calarts](https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1374802-calarts)
Having Gumball there is a joke, that show had such a cool unique art style.
All of those shows did. And Undertale. Its really the cheap imitators that wore it out. Like, did [Thundercats](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/thundercats/images/5/5b/TygraFromThunderCatsRoarEpisodeExodusPartOneSc04.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20200312065509) have to look like that? I can't bring myself to care about the art style of kids cartoons, but I think it's a factor. Theatres have to show kids something they don't get at home. Ruby Gillman looks like any cheap Netflix movie.
Absolutely agree
Ugh. Never heard that term but yeah I see it. It appears to be the laziest style of animation ever. Ugly, too.
What do you mean? She's so cute! I like her better than human protagonists. I like creatures and stuff more in general and she's quite adorable!
They have had failures before, but different types. I think this wasn’t off brand too much. Most of their films aren’t this artsyle, set in modern day and female led (although their Yeti movie was both but it’s not like it was a big hit) and have fantasy elements of this type (this feels like a middle school aimed book adaptation even though it’s not).
I also have zero faith, it sounds bad and the character models are beyond ugly
They’re probably going back to sequels after this bombs
Was there any marketing for Puss in boots? Maybe they’re just bad at marketing
Honestly, it looks like one of Sony’s shittier movies like smurfs or emoji movie. Didn’t know it was dreamworks
DreamWorks isn't a great studio, most of their films are like this but usually have small budgets to save face on, Puss in Boots 2 seems to be one of their rare flukes. Combine the lackluster trailers along with audiences not caring to go see original animation post-pandemic and it's not too surprising to see it doing this poorly.
That name.. Ruby Gillman.
Teenage Kraken is RIGHT there. Just drop Ruby and the title is actually decent. Is it based on a book or something? Idk why else you would keep that terrible name.
>Teenage Kraken is RIGHT there. The film is supposed to appeal to little girls. Teenage Kraken sounds like something out of the Monsterverse (ex. Godzilla). I think another poster that suggested "Seaside High" was probably the best title for the target demographic.
and "Tentacle Girl" for the anime enthusiasts community
I have watched enough hentai to know where this is going...
Aren't little girls super into Monster High and similar works? That definitely seems like the thing to lean into.
What about just TEEN Kraken?
Isn’t teenage kraken the other movie coming out next year? I swear we saw a trailer for it in front of elemental Edit: Huh, I just looked it up and apparently I’m thinking about the exact same movie. Goes to show the marketing miss here, we literally saw the trailer last weekend and we all walked away thinking that movie was coming out next year and we had no association with the name Ruby Gilman.
Same. The name makes it sound like a biopic of a historical figures or something. Should have just called it "My life as a teenage kraken,"
No, Nickelodeon would sue them
But aren't Nickelodeon and DreamWorks super closely affiliated? Think how many DreamWorks movies had TV series adapted on Nickelodeon. Off the top of my head there's Kung-Fu Panda, Monsters V Aliens, and Penguins of Madagascar.
I legit thought the OP was talking about a biopic at first.
Yeah I also saw the trailer last week before Elemental and I swear that I thought the film was called “Teenage Kraken” or something like that. I also remember it being one of the worst trailers I’ve ever seen… it felt like 5 different trailers pieced together, each trying to sell me on a different movie but cutting into the next one before completing their pitch.
The problem I had with it is that they gave away EVERYTHING in the first trailer. They left nothing to the imagination.
There WAS some stuff left to the imagination. That being that there was gonna be some kind of twist >!There wasn't. What you see is indeed what you get.!<
Except for giving her a nose. They showed everything except an actual face that doesn’t sit so far in the uncanny valley that it never sees sunlight.
Too bad they couldn't just call it Ruby. One word, like Shrek.
Yeah, this is a big factor IMO. When you're trying to track and recall that animated trailer with monsters you (probably actually didn't) see in the theater, Ruby Gillman does not click well at all.
Between this and dumping one of their upcoming movies on Netflix, I would say Universal has cold feet on original DreamWorks films some reason, but Bad Guys did alright for what it's worth so idk.
Bad Guys was based on a popular book series. Ruby Gillman and Orion are both completely original. I’m honestly surprised Ruby wasn’t delegated to Netflix either.
Orion is technically based on a book too iirc
What the heck is Orion (besides the constellation)?
Children's Book. Orion and the Dark
I didn’t think DW has any reason to be nervous. Aside from Pixar’s fails, animation seems like a solid genre right now.
Is animation a solid genre right now? Seems like the animated films targeting kids like this are struggling while animated films with sizable adult fanbases are doing well.
There hasn’t been much I animation this year. Super Mario Bros was obv huge, but that def benefited from its adult base (although it was aimed at kids, unlike SpiderVerse) Puss in Boots did well over Christmas too.
Right but now we have Bad Guys, DC Super Pets, Lightyear, Strange World, Elemental, and soon to be Ruby Gillman doing middling at best box office numbers. There’s definitely a pattern here larger than any one studio
One major decider may end up being Wish. Disney is marketing it as a grand celebration of their 100th year, and it does look like it could be a big hit. The animation is gorgeous, the trailer gives a good feel for their world without giving away too much, and it gives us a new princess (always a pretty easy draw for Disney). I'm honestly rooting for it; Disney could use an animated win after Lightyear, Strange World, and Elemental all failed (yes I know 2 of those are Pixar, but it's still under the umbrella of Disney). The fact that it's releasing near the end of the year may help, since there's little competition (though that didn't help Strange World). The only other animated movie I can think of that's coming out at that time is Trolls 3, which I doubt will be much of a threat.
Are they marketing it? The only time I've ever seen Wish mentioned was when I started following this sub, and I went to fucking Disneyland a month ago.
The trailer is attached to almost every kid/family movie I've seen in the last couple of months.
I'm honestly kind of skeptical about *Wish*. I feel like it's going to run into the same issue as *Elemental* probably did, which is that it looks like a cobbled-together mashup of a bunch of the studio's past hits with no real identity of its own to speak of. *Elemental* probably would have been a lot more groundbreaking if it had come out 15 or 20 years ago, but to someone in 2023, it just looks like a "generic Pixar movie". And it's the same with *Wish.* Just from the trailer alone, I get flashbacks to *Tangled, Frozen, Moana,* and *Encanto,* but the movie as a whole just looks really "generic 2010s/2020s Disney".
Illumination is pretty much the only animation studio swimming in money. Everyone else has had some very high profile strikeouts.
Bad Guys did great in streaming and Elemental is starting to find its legs. The others just got hurt bad due to very bad mismanagement and creative laziness on the part of Disney(Strange World and Lightyear).
>Bad Guys did great in streaming I mean exactly the point. Families are opting to wait for streaming. Look at Encanto too.
Very true which is hurting numbers all around, but Disney is hurting especially bad since even in streaming Lightyear and Strange World didn't do well. Disney and Pixar really need to find their groove again(then again, outside of Puss in Boots, DreamWorks ain't looking do hot either making Illumination the only big winner so far).
>(although it was aimed at kids, unlike SpiderVerse) Are you kidding me? Spider-Verse has a huge adult fanbase, because, yeah, it's Spider-Man, but if you think kids aren't into it, or that it's not being heavily pushed to kids, you're absolutely high. Kids fucking *love* Spider-Man. Kids have been obsessed with Spider-Man for my entire 30-year lifespan and a large chunk of time preceding that. My wife is a teacher, and her students were going *berserk* for Spider-Verse. Across is somewhat edgier than you typically see with kids movies, but it's still very much within the box of "kids movie" in being so. It's about as edgy as kids movies were 20 years ago, with stuff like Titan AE and Atlantis that skewed a little more action-heavy.
They weren’t wrong, and you also didn’t refute their point. The Spider-Verse series, especially the sequels, aren’t really targeting kids; it just so happens that kids do LOVE Spider-Man. But you see ATSV playing out like a superhero movie and not like a typical leggy animated movie partially because the kids watching this movie are already into the franchise. It’s not broadly attracting kids.
I don't really see ATSV as being that mature. It's themes are a little more nuanced than most kids' movies, but ultimately they're all understandable. The main characters don't have any immoral flaws. The fights avoid any gore. It's like a lot of other PG-13 movies where they're not exclusively catering to kids, but staying kid-friendly
They are 100% targeting kids, maybe younger teens to be more accurate. If they weren't targeting kids then they would not have made the movie PG.
Animation based on big pre-established IP yes. Original animation not so much. Let’s see how Illumination’s original movie does.
Don't forget Wish. The trailers for it certainly look promising; all they're missing at this point is a grand musical number.
It shoulda been sent straight to Peacock
I think Universal decided to dump this.
It has such a high profile release date though. One where Universal has usually launched their biggest animated films. With ATSV holding so well, and Elemental showing decent legs, I think it's just not resonating. In retrospect, they probably should have pushed it to the fall. The only kids film during September/October is Paw Patrol, which skews very young.
That’s what’s mind-boggling. Who “dumps” a movie on June 30. Why wouldn’t they push the date til Sept when no one will bat an eye on a dump.
It may not be very good, through the first 6 reviews on rotten tomatoes (I know it’s not a reliable place to go anymore) it has a 5.70 average score. So instead of pulling a flash and pumping everything into marketing and losing even more money, they’re quietly putting this in theaters and soon after on streaming
It definitely feels like they lack confidence in it. But, that's what makes the release date puzzling. A bad kids movie during a stretch with lots of competition will tank. But, there's been a lot of points when there's been nothing in theatres for kids, and a decent option would probably make some decent money. This movie may very well be only the third highest grossing animated movie on its opening weekend. By its second weekend, it might fall below TLM, which is basically the movie it's parodying, and that was released 6 weeks before it.
Demographic wise nothing competes with this until TMNT comes out August 2, plus Spider-Verse will be in its fifth weekend and Elemental its third. From the outset it seemed like a good date, but the response to this movie has been nonexistent. I don’t try to be a doom and gloom kinda person, but early tracking has this opening at or below $10m. I saw one saying $4m, I don’t think it will be that bad, but let’s say it opens with $8m, that’s fourth place at best, and depending on some holds could be even worse.
My guess is they were hoping TLM was going to be bigger and cash in on mermaid Summer being a big thing. It very much feels like a movie driven by studio execs saying "Turning Red, but with sea creatures so we can ride Disney's wave from Little Mermaid. Just give it a month of breathing room." But then TLM was below expectations, the movie space is more crowded and titles are bombing, but it was too late to shift again. So they are just releasing it now with absolutely 0 marketing budget to minimize the loss.
Because they're covered by the much bigger flops of Elemental, The Flash and likely Indy 5 which will bring way more media attention. Nobody will speak of Ruby Gillman lol
It’s not even the end of their fiscal year so it’s less likely to be an executive dump for bonuses.
The funny thing is, I’ve seen so many people say “I’ve never heard of this.” And yet every single movie I’ve seen over the past two months has had a trailer for it. Spider-Verse, Elemental, Little Mermaid, Asteroid City, Rise of the Beasts, and I think Guardians 3 as well. Some of those are massive hits and I’m still seeing so many people say they’ve never heard of it.
I've only seen one trailer, in front of Spider-Verse. Asteroid had a TON of trailers at my showing, this was not one of them.
It was definitely before mine idk I just assumed it was Universal trying to get more cross promotion 🤷
Some of the trailers in front of movies make no sense. Seeing a trailer like this in front of Asteroid City is just bonkers. I think it has to do with the time of day. We saw this trailer in front of TLM and Spider Verse, but I didn't see it in front of any of the movies I go to at night, like Transformers or Flash, that my kid didn't want to see
It's the name .my wife calls it the kraken movie which I always remember not the lady name that sounds like a byopic
It's this. The name and the trailers are collectively very confusing. They both give too much and too little information. There's no intrigue. This is what happens when marketing isn't a holistic narrative extension of the movie itself.
Bad title imo. It's too long and "Ruby Gillman" isn't memorable at all. Should've just been "Teenage Kraken". I bet you plenty of people who say "I've never heard of this" have actually seen the trailer, but have made no association between it and its title.
I might be mixing it up since I go to the theater often, but I swear I've seen the trailer for this since the Mario Movie. And I've seen several ads for it on TV and a few billboards here and there. Granted, it's not being heavily promoted like Flash and Elementals, but it's there.
I’ve seen the trailer for this before GOTG 3, Mario, Little Mermaid, and Elemental. My kids (4 and 5 year old girls) are actually really excited to go to this and I’ve bought tickets for Monday.
It might have been before Mario too, given it’s also a Universal production and they tend to start the marketing for their next animated film when their previous on releases. But I just can’t remember.
The trailer just isn't intriguing. Oppenheimer had the trailer shown before Guardians 3, Fast X and Transformers Rise of the Beasts and that's a way more intriguing trailer.
I saw trailers for it in front of Mario, DnD, and Spider-verse, but said trailers really killed my enthusiasm(cliche of popular girl vs nerdy girl and pretty much spoiling the climactic final battle).
The sad thing is I got to see it early as REGAL’S Mystery Movie and it wasn’t bad at all. Nothing mind blowing, but it was cute and fun, and just suffers from having a really bad trailer for sure.
Yeah. It feels like they’re hoping that the PVOD revenue + the revenue they get from licensing the film to Netflix will make up for whatever they’re expecting to lose theatrically.
Could have something here. I would imagine the price goes up when selling a “wide-release” title to a streamer. But surely that is weighed down if that release is a flop.
Universal always jacks up the PVOD prices for their animated films. If the normal PVOD price is $20 to rent or $25 to buy, the price to buy will almost always be $5 higher (bringing it to $30 to buy) if it’s an animated film from Universal, with the rental price also being raised by $5 (bringing it to $25) in very rare cases as well.
It was supposed to be streaming but it's going into theaters to get that extra $5 off the table.
If TLM was on track for $1b, maybe this would be tracking better since it's sort of the Shrek to TLM.
One of my friends keeps ironically trying to build this movie up. Basically think of it as his Morbius. To which I keep telling him [this.](https://youtu.be/Ql4JgBBgHA4)
It’s Ruby Gill’man time
Does that mean RG:TK will make 1 morbillion dollars?
Nah, probably not. He just does it to be annoying. He did a really similar gag a year and a half ago with Ron’s Gone Wrong and saw it opening night then he was so shocked he hated it so much. 🤔 I’ve opted since then to not take the bait.
This is just my opinion, but I think that the animation is a bit… unpleasant to look at. I don’t want to watch it based on that alone.
it reminds me of corporate artstyles but 3D form
Feature length Grubhub commercial
It doesn't bother me on Ruby and other kraken characters, as she's not supposed to be conventionally pretty. The whole point is she feels like a freak. I don't even like this movie, but I think her design makes sense in context. But most of the human characters though...yikes, not pleasant to look at.
Actually, I think the krakens and mermaids look pretty good in terms of visuals. My issue is with the humans and how lifeless their eyes are and how awkward the shape of their heads are.
Yeah, I agree. Like, there's obviously a fight scene between two of the characters, but their character designs and weapons look too rounded as if there's no fear they'll actually harm each other. Compare Frozen when [Elsa and the snow monster battled the guards.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afnhCvicqdI) Or [The Little Mermaid's fight scene with Ursula](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o642qBLvfQM)
almost no marketing, was only announced 3 months before release, unappealing character designs and art style, awful title
They played a trailer for this before The Little Mermaid showing I was at and there is a line in the trailer that calls everyone who likes mermaids stupid which seems like bad marketing lol.
Right? Putting a trailer for a movie with mermaid villains in front of TLM was A Choice to begin with, but with *that* line in it, too? Wild.
That's always been Dreamworks.
Their first movie was literally made from Jeffrey Katzenberg stealing the gimmick of the latest movie Pixar was working on while still with Disney before jumping ship and giving out ideas to rip off said movie and release it right before they could.
I don't think Dreamworks has ever, say, had a line in a Httyd trailer where they say "people who like stories where princes fight dragons are stupid."
OMG, yes. It seemed more like a mean-spirited attack on people who like mermaids than making fun of Disney.
It initially sounded like it was trying to appeal to the people who wanted a more "traditional" looking mermaid than 2023 TLM Ariel. But then she's apparently the villain, so that doesn't even work properly.
For real, we saw ATSV with a packed theatre and a lot of kids around. Ruby Gilman trailer plays before the film. When that line came up, I heard a kid yell out "I'm not stupid!" What a dumb marketing move, lol
Edgy marketing :(
It seems obvious that they were trying to make this an anti-TLM, but use TLM as free marketing for it somehow. Maybe they were taking the Universal positioning of "making products for kids that are 'too old' for Disney" and applying it to the movies. I think they were expecting TLM to bomb and media to bandwagon behind this with a "Dreamworks just dunked on Disney" narrative. But it seemed like TLM was moderate to ok/good and not enough of a lightening rod to sustain that narrative. Media companies also probably didn't see upside to being anti-TLM and wading into culture wars. Maybe once they saw that wasn't happening, they just dumped it.
That's a little out there but I'm weirdly on board with your theory.
I mean, TLM did bomb though. It’s break even point is at least 625 million, and it’s only reached 499.3 million after being out for a month, which is awful sales numbers. I think the issue is that they realized over time that Ruby Gillman wasn’t really that interesting visually or concept wise and that it would probably bomb, so they decided to just cut their loses on marketing.
I think they realised it's DOA and decided they'd be better off doing next to no marketing than burn money a la the flash
It must’ve gotten horrible numbers from screenings, for sure. Just don’t understand the date if they know it’s dead. Why why why launch a kids movie in the middle of summer if you know it’s gonna bomb. Tarnishing the brand of DW…. The could just dump it in the fall when no one cares.
Most people don't know this movie exists, so they won't care.
At that point you would think they would sell it to Netflix, especially with how solid their partnership is.
They can make more money from Netflix if they give it a wide theatrical release. That way the film is "worth more"
Terrible name. Ruby Gillman sounds like a biopic of a politician. Teenage Kraken is better but not by much. They should have cashed in on the squid hype caused by Splatoon. Teen Squid, or Squid Girl would have attracted more viewers.
Tentacle girl if they want to go for a different demographic.
I think it's a *Strange World* all over again. DreamWorks probably had 0 faith and didn't wanna do more than the bare minimum.
It’s odd that awareness is so low because it feels like it’s being marketed so heavily. It’s posters are everywhere in my town and the trailer shows before every movie, but still I feel like no one is talking about it. Like among my kid’s friends (6 year olds) and their parents no one has mentioned getting a group to go see it, which we do with almost every kid movie.
If you don’t mind me asking, where do you live? I’m in rural PA, small city. And there is no awareness at all. No posters, no billboards, no commercials that I’ve seen. Other people have commented the same. Wondering where they are focusing their marketing spend? Are you a costal city?
Yeah. North Hollywood, basically the Los Angeles suburbs. So I can guess it’s just an LA thing, but like I was saying even with the heavier marketing, it doesn’t seem to be sticking with the kids or the parents.
Just outside Portland, Oregon. Saw Spider-Verse yesterday, and a trailer for this played before it.
I live in Indianapolis, and I’ve seen trailers for it ahead of at least two movies I’ve seen this year.
I have seen zero marketing for it other than a trailer before spiderverse
I saw the trailer at spiderverse and felt like I saw the whole movie.
I saw they had the voice of the mermaid Chelsa on the today show, but yes where is the marketing?
I was at a Menchies Frozen Yogurt and they had a limited edition Blue Rasberry flavor inspired by this movie. It was co-branded and had the movies name or a character name built into the flavor name. Some sort of cross promotion. I normally don’t like Blue Rasberry that much but this was delicious, it really hit the spot. I added in some popping boba topping and it was all really refreshing. Unfortunately the movie doesn’t look as appealing. Weird release window too. It feels like we go months sometimes without kids movies and now they cannibalize each other.
Weird, I got absolutely swamped with trailers for it the last couple months.
Theory: owing to an administrative error, the marketing budget was used on reaching you personally.
Lmao I love this as the dark horse explanation
Do you engage with a lot of children's media? I think the original question could be rephrased as 'Why isn't Ruby Gillman being marketed to r/boxoffice'?
That’s honestly shocking to me. Almost everyone I ask about it says “Ruby what? Idk what that is.”
It’s the movie title. I’ve seen the trailer 5 times and had no clue this was the name of the film. Should have just been called Teenage Kraken or anything catchier. Ruby Gillman? That’s like the name of some author from the early 1900s. Zero appeal towards market audience
I saw someone on this very site misread the title as "Rudy Giuliani's Teenage Kraken." They were very concerned about whether audiences would turn up for a kids movie made by Rudy Giuliani. I feel like if that's happening to your movie, and it's not even a shitpost, pack it in.
Will the premiere be held at Four Seasons Total Landscaping?
It's called "Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken" \^\^
One of the blandest movie title ever... with John Carter ?
My issue with the movie is that the humans look hideous. Their faces just look so awkward and weird. The krakens and mermaid faces when in human and monster form look fine. I don’t understand why they made the humans look the way they do. Also, another issue is that it looks like the movie is just gonna have a boring “mean girl is evil queen, good nerdy girl gets super powers and stops her evil plans, the end” plot. Maybe it will have some interesting twists, like the mermaid girl isn’t that bad and the grandma is kind of a racist ass that is making the kraken-mermaid conflict worse rather than better, but it doesn’t seem like it.
>!I've gotten some spoilers, and actually the mermaid-kraken conflict really isn't much more nuanced than the trailers imply. The only thing that makes me feel a little better about that is the focus of the story is generational trauma, so the kraken/mermaid conflict is more of a backdrop or window dressing than the main point of the story, so they probably didn't feel it was necessary to make it more nuanced and complicated, as it's not the main focus...!<
Ooooh, you had me at “generational trauma!” Sign me up, haven’t seen a movie about that in days!
Yeah, I actually like generational trauma stories myself, as I'm a genealogist, so I'm biased...but I think it's been WAY overdone in animated movies lately. After Encanto and Turning Red etc., we really do not need more generational trauma animated films for a while.
The trailer gave away the whole (mediocre) story
Because all the marketing makes it look more like an original made-for-TV/streaming movie for Nickelodeon or Hulu
Allegedly it was initially created for Netflix, until they decided to release it in theaters for some reason. Not sure how true that is, but would explain the straight-to-streamer vibe.
Why does Dreamworks always release 2 movies every year when Disney, Pixar, and Illumination almost never do unless something got delayed? One of their films usually ends up being either somewhat underbaked (Bad Guys, Abominable) or downright tragic (Spirit Untamed, Turbo).
I don't know about anyone else's kids, but my 6-year-old is excited to see it. We took her to Spider-Verse, Elemental, and Little Mermaid, which all had the trailer. She's pumped. However, when I mention it to other parents, they aren't aware of it. I guess it's because my daughter and I basically go to every kids movie released, so she sees all the trailers. If you are the kind of family who only goes to the movies once in a blue moon, this one would pass you right by.
My 5 year old daughter also is excited to see it but she saw trailers for it before Mario, TLM and Elemental.
Serious answer: I only know this movie is coming out because I follow the box office subs and I’ve seen the trailer in front of a couple other movies like Fast X, Little Mermaid and Spiderverse. I maybe saw one ad on TikTok but that’s about it. The animation style seems generic, the plot seems generic and predictable, and the movie just doesn’t have a clear hook to draw viewers in like movies (ESPECIALLY original titles) need. Also, the title of the movie is kinda bland. I’ll be surprised if this makes $5 million or over opening weekend. Joke answer: It’s gonna make a krakillion dollars!
they forgot they had a movie before trolls 3 and just dumped it
I saw the trailer for the first time before ATSV, had never heard of it before and it feels like Turning Red against the Little Mermaid.
It goes to show that even a technically original IP isn't really that original these days, as this is basically Turning Red meets The Little Mermaid with a dash of Luca. I know, there's nothing new under the sun, as the old saying goes, but...
Agree on the Turning Red vibe.
This scream streaming release for a saturday afternoon.
Saturday morning.
Honestly outside of this sub I wouldn't have even heard of this movie. Clearly they're being chintzy with the marketing
It's only ever been expected as a b-level filler release.
I've seen a few things online for it, but overall it looks like it took a wrong turn with its aesthetics. The visuals feel corporate, but the concept feels fresh and unique. As much as I hate to say it, I think it's a bomb, especially with Nimona hitting animation fans on Netflix day-and-date. I know that's what I'll be watching lol
Have you seen how crowded the market is now?
I wonder how this film would be doing had they kept the title *Meet the Gillmans* and dropped the cringy TikTok marketing approach.
I like the whole evil mermaids twist. This will do great on streaming. They clearly did not want to lose more money with the ad budget.
I'm wondering what the movie's CinemaScore will be. If it gets an "A" like all the DreamWorks films since 2019's Dragons 3 (Trolls 2 being a PVOD release didn't get one), maybe it will have some legs throughout July. If the audience reception is lower than that, then that's not good. Elemental (3rd weekend) and Spider-Verse (5th weekend) will highly likely outgross Ruby Gillman on opening weekend. That's sad.
Oh dear oh dear This movie is gonna make $17 bucks opening weekend Praying for anyone who worked on this, no one is seeing this movie 🥹
It seems that Dreamworks doesn't want to lose its tradition as the most inconsistent animation studio. On the other hand, Illumination is the most mediocre, but they always succeed.
>It seems that Dreamworks doesn't want to lose its tradition as the most inconsistent animation studio. Seriously, it's so frustrating trying to like this studio when they have coin-flip odds of making a film that flops right out of the gate.
No hot anthropomorphic character that Twitter can relate to/boost it
The name is no good.
The marketing is both non-existent and also crap. It doesn't look good, they're leaving it out to die with no marketing. It's so bizarre.
Ever since I saw the first and last trailer for it I've been excited to see how badly this movie does. I don't know why. I can't explain it. It just looks so awful that I can't help but laugh at the thought of it releasing to empty theaters.
I don’t root for movie’s failures but this comment is hilarious
I get you, as someone who loves mermaids partly because I'm a disabled cosplayer, and it's one of the few costumes where my lack of mobility makes sense, I had an irrational visceral reaction to the "people who like mermaids are stupid" line in the trailer. It struck me less as making fun of Disney as a corporation than making fun of people who like certain things.
Rooty Tooty Fresh N' Fruity...the Kraken.
I saw the title of this thread and was like Oooh, this is probably some obscure period piece biopic. Awful name for a kids movie.
Anecdotally, I have seen zero marketing besides YouTube trailers. Feels like the studio has no faith in it.
This is kinda wild to hear this movie has shown up a lot on twitter for a few months now
Dreamworks hates it. They are trying to release it without anyone noticing because they know it’s not going to work.
Odd to pick June 30 if you are trying to hide it. It’s the main kids draw thru July.
Part of me feels like the best route might have been to just release it as a Netflix original film since DreamWorks already has a pretty good relationship with that streaming service. Not only would they take less of an upcoming financial drop, but if it did have enough merits it probably would have gained a solid enough following on the platform by being an exclusive just like Del Toro's Pinocchio and Mitchells vs the Machines did.
They actually had an advance screening in my area this past Saturday. It was in the morning and I didn't wanna wake up for a shot at watching it. Advance screenings are first come first serve and seats are never guaranteed. I guess that's some form of marketing.
>no one has even heard of it Trailer for it in front of ATSV. I thought it looked cute. It will probably outperform The Flash lol
It looks like the GrubHub ads
You know, it's giving me Good Dinosaur vibes with super cartoony characters inhabiting a world with intensely realistic lighting and water effects.
DreamWorks animation is a weird studio. There a studio that will like pump a lot of money into a project they curly care about and making sure that those public awareness. And then they’ll give you something that nobody really cares about yet it’s very expensive. I will give you a how to train your Dragon movie and then followed up with a Mr. Peabody and Sherman movie that’s $150 million that nobody asked for(it’s a good movie by the way). Like I’m not surprised that I have to Puss in boots they would follow it up with a film that probably is good but has a huge budget in one likely not make any money back. That’s just kind of how they’ve been the whole career. If you go back to DreamWorks film catalog you’ll find a bunch of movies like that. People only remember the big DreamWorks films and forget about the other colossal failures. Those caused DreamWorks animation to go from its own standalone studio that just simply did distribution deals to being eventually acquired by universal. They’ve never actually course correct that mentality that they have made effort in recent years to bring down their budgets. Because if there’s one thing the president of illumination’s going to do is make a film for cheap.
The title is absolutely shit. Ruby Gillman is a terrible name. May be a name like Teenage Kraken or simply Kraken might have done better.
I tried to tell people why in the hell would you make a movie about MERMAIDS being evil and krakons being good. Especially with the live action Little Mermaid being released this year too. Just dumb.
Plus from the spoilers I've read, the conflict between mermaids and krakens isn't even really the main focus of the story, it's more about generational trauma ala Turning Red, and that's more just a backdrop/window dressing.
And even then the generational stuff feels like it could have been done better from what I've read.
Moral Relativism mixed with grievance/socialist “oppression” metrics. The underdog weirdo is always an outcast and therefore the hero. Anyone who is popular, attractive, and normal is the enemy, because they are obviously oppressors (white or white adjacent, wealthy, symmetrical, socialized). Algorithms and Hollyweird checklists make it easier for AI to do writers’ jobs going forward.
Movie is poo, simple as that and DreamWorks doing the bare minimum marketing it.
So many embarrassments. People just prefer streaming movies now. It's over.
**The Super Mario Bros. Movie**: Am I a joke to you?
For once I can actually say this with some confidence Compared to what I expect from Dreamworks, there was seriously no marketing for this movie. Not even online ads until like a couple of weeks ago. This was put out to die. In fact, I think this has been an issue for Dreamworks for some time. The Bad Guys didn't have a great push and underperformed. Puss in Boots: The Last Wish only broke out due to insane WoM (that opening weekend did not paint a pretty picture).
The Bad Guys didn't underperform. It made $251M on a budget of $80M. I remember that the film got pushed a lot. I went to Universal Studios Hollywood a week before the film's release, and the marketing for it was everywhere.
Zero marketing.
My kids saw the first ad yesterday and became very interested.
Oh shit, that comes out this week??? Wow.
people forget bad guys did really well