So Beauty "forfeited" revenue of a paltry $880,000. That is less than a million dollars and it made almost $175 million. Disney will never ever know. And that is just stateside. Total revenue worldwide totaled $352,200,000 and that is just the first weekend.
By the time the movie will end its run, perhaps end of May or sometime in June, it will be one of the most popular movies in the history of the world - of all time - ever. It's expected to gross around $1.2 billion worldwide, perhaps half of that from the US. That is a massive hit. I'm not including revenue after its run, such as DVD sales and VOD. So add additional millions from those sales.
If you have noticed, many people from this site have seen and liked it with one saying she wanted to go again.
Before the movie was released, Disney had guessed the movie would take in from $120 to $150 million its first weekend. It did much better than that, so the boycott was a failure. If the movie had made less than $100 million, then you could say the boycott had some impact, but that is not what happened.
In addition, those 25 and under rated the movie A+, but overall it earned an "A" score. That is important because higher the score, the more money it will earn. Those in the box office analysis business apply a multiplier affect to the scores. A "B" score will bring in less money than an "A" score. The reason is that with an "A" score the viewers will talk about the movie with their friends and recommend them to go and so they do. A "B" score, not so much.
So please don't pretend the "boycott" made a difference. I'm OK with the goal of the boycott, but really don't like when people act like it made a difference when it didn't.
You think I’m not aware of that?! I’m also irritated at how it didn’t seem to make a dent, despite having well over a hundred thousand signatories.
...I must admit, though, from what I heard, apparently despite what Emma Watson said, it’s actually a lot LESS feministic than the original version (in the 1991 version, Maurice actually needed saving by Belle for the most part, even the one time he actually DOES try to save her, never actually being able to do so. Here, Maurice is a lot more proactive, and even tries to stand up to Gaston apparently, not to mention he actually DOES save Belle this time around late in the movie. Also, the 2017 remake makes it very clear that Beast got onto Phillipe by himself, with Belle’s only role being to tell him to get on. In the 1991 version, it’s heavily implied that Belle actually lifted Beast onto the horse by herself.). And apparently, Christianity actually is given a more positive role in this film compared to the 1991 version, since the bookseller from the original film is not only changed to a chaplain for the village named Pere Robert (and I’ll admit, I’m pleasantly surprised that it actually, accurately shows that Christianity actually DOES support women being able to read, since it’s a misconception that the Church doesn’t want women to read back then.), but he actually plays a bit of a larger role such as actually helping Maurice, or attempting to at least (in the original movie, Christianity, IF it was ever mentioned at all, was pretty much demonized via the villagers, and it also implies that Belle is an atheist due to her being treated as superior to the villagers in terms of the narrative.). Granted, the film does still push some feminist elements, such as the scene where Belle’s kicked out of a school since girls aren’t allowed to read (though this element was unfortunately present in the 1991 version, albeit a bit more subdued), but compared to the 1991 version, Belle’s actually a bit more moderate. I don’t know if any of those bits above were Emma Watson’s idea or not, but if they were, I have to give her chops, and maybe acknowledge that she may have some potential in actually trying to help women WITHOUT being a feminazi (I’ve had to deal with feminazis in college). Too bad the gay element ruined that film, it truly had potential to be a LOT better than the 1991 version.