Talk:List of highest-grossing animated films/Archive 8

Stop motion
There recently be a attempt to expand the stop motion list for a top 40 to a top 50 but was change back (see revision history why it was change back) my I put forward the idea we set a min gross limit like on the List of highest-grossing openings for films witch limits it frist list to films with a WW opening of $200M even if it means it has like 43 films on that list thoughts? Fanoflionking 10:14, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I seond that! Like I've said in my edit, there are just not enough films with big grosses to justify a long Stop Motion list. It used to be a Top 10 once upon a time but that got changed through the years, I'm not saying to cut it back to that, but establishing a limit is acually a good ideea! Let's say if we decide $10 mil. is the minimum limit, it would stop future conflicts of extending the list from a Top 20 to 25 to 30...But let's wait a few days and see if someone has another suggestion or objection before we go ahead with this ideea. DCF94 (talk) 16:50, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

When we put this limit on can we also peak the list? Fanoflionking 22:57, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I've been meaning to adress that for some time, the sources for the "Peek" columns in the main and computer animated lists are unclear because it sources the highest-grossing domestic animated lists from BOM, yes I did had a hand in creating the column way back when, but I've grown since then :P, what I want to do is still use the box office grosses from BOM but use The Numbers' list as source for the peeks and use the Wayback Machine like they do on List of highest-grossing films with little notes explaining the peeks, but I never got enough time to get around that. But to answere your question, unlike the Main and CP lists which could be done using what I just mentioned earlier, the Stop Motion list (and Traditional for that matter) don't have a clear source to reference the peeks from because they don't have enough films with large and recent box office. DCF94 (talk) 12:05, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

I done some work to the table (see below) if anyone wants to make any changes before I move it please do Fanoflionking 23:41, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Stop motion animation
The following chart is a list of the highest-grossing stop motion films. Films has to surpass $10millon to qualify for this list. 88% of the top 17 were released after 2000. 2012 Is the most represented year on the list with three films.

Laika is the most represented studios with five films on the list. All stop-motion feature films by Aardman, DreamWorks Animation, Laika, and Tim Burton are on the list. All feature films in the Wallace and Gromit and Solan & Ludvig franchises are on the list both of whom are the most represented franchises on the list with 2 films each. The films on this chart have all had a theatrical run (including re-releases) since 1996, and films that have not played since then do not appear on the chart due to ticket price inflation, population size and ticket purchasing trends not being considered.


 * {{legend|#b6fcb6|indicates films playing in theaters around the world in the week commencing .|text=}}

Picture
Should/can we add a picture to the page if so what should the picture be?Fanoflionking 23:05, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Snow White/Aladdin
Three times now, has removed the note from the timeline that explains that Aladdin may have not usurped Snow White as the highest grossing film.

I will first explain why there is a note in the first place. Prior to its 50th anniversary reissue in 1987 Snow White had grossed $98 million in the domestic market, according to Box Office Mojo. Unfortunately Box Office Mojo does not record a worldwide figure but according to news reports at this time Snow White had grossed $330 million in total worldwide, meaning that it had grossed around $230 million overseas. Snow White went on to gross another $88 million domestically from its 1987 and 1993 reissues (according to Box Office Mojo), taking its known total to about $418 million. As you can see from the IMDB release dates, Snow White also had major international releases in 1987 and 1992, but unfortunately we do not know how much it made. However, if its pattern of grossing more overseas than domestic continued then Aladdin would not have overtaken it at the box-office.

Javiero Fernandex states that the note constitutes "original research". However, on that basis the whole timeline constitutes original research. There is no source saying that Aladdin took the record from Snow White. There is no source saying that The Lion King took the record from Aladdin and so on. So the "original research" here is stating that Aladdin actually held the record. We don't know that it did and the sources in the chart do not show that it did. For Aladdin onwards Box Office Mojo is used as a source and shows the gross progressively increasing with each film, but since Box Office Mojo does not actually list a worldwide gross for Snow White then it is simply an assumption by way of WP:SYNTHESIS that Aladdin grossed more. All the note actually does is highlight this anomaly.

If there are sources out there as Javiero claims categorically stating that Aladdins worldwide gross superseded Snow Whites then I suggest he produces these sources rather edit-warring. Betty Logan (talk) 03:39, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

future animated franchise
Here are the 2019 animted film series and franchises that can make the list next year is there any I miss also we can do top 30 next year 😃😃😃

Future stop motion
Here are 2019 stop motion films is there I miss

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fanoflionking (talk • contribs) 20:11, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Timeline of highest-grossing animated films
Why isn't there a second entry for Shrek 2 - 2009 and Toy Story 3 - 2013? Thanks - wolf 17:13, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Shrek 2 was broke the record in 04 and toy story 3 in 10 neither had a reissue (note reissue only count if film still has the record. Fanoflionking 20:24, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Right, Shrek 2 came out in 2004, it broke the record held by Finding Nemo (2003), and held the record until 2009 (2010?). Then Toy Story came out in 2010, broke the record held by Shrek 2, and held the record until 2013 (2014?), when Frozen came out in 2014 it then broke the record, and still holds the record today.
 * Some movies (Snow White, Lion King & Frozen) have two entries with income figures, one the for the year of release, the second with a year which appears to coincide with the release of the next record breaking film. Are these totals for re-releases?
 * Becasue even with the single entry films (Alladin & Finding Nemo) it appears the table is showing the span of time the record was held, with original income and adjusted income. The article isn't clear as to what these columns represent (unless I missed it). - wolf 01:47, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The year column shows the year the record was broken, and some movies like Snow White, Lion King & Frozen are showed twice because they had re-releases which at the time broke the previous record established by the first run. Snow White had multiple re-releases over the years, but it was hard to track all of them down so we went with the last re-release before Aladdin broke the record in 1993 (*there is a note attached that posts the possibility of the film not actually breaking the record before Lion King was released), Lion King got the record in its initial release and then had a 2002 IMAX re-release, and Frozen finished its original release around 2015 and had a UK re-release in 2017. DCF94 (talk) 17:28, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Perhaps that should be clarified in the description accompanying the table. - wolf  00:50, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Peak motion
Question for stop motion and traditional can we peak I knew some films peak we can not but if we put something like a TBA saying these films can not be peaked at this moment in time. I knew that me not all films will be peak but if we can get some done surly better than none. Fanoflionking 00:07, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Say what? - wolf  00:53, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

For example



and so on I think we should at least give it a try Fanoflionking 10:15, 2 October 2018 (UTC)


 * I've addressed this in a previous discussion, the sources for the peeks we use now on the first two lists aren't really good because they show only the domestic list from BOM. I was suggesting we use The Numbers' animated worldwide list and Wayback Machine to source the peeks for current films and use articles for older ones (like we do on List of highest-grossing films), but I just can't find the time to work on that, but if you can then go for it, and as for the traditional and stop motion, it's hard cause even if you find old articles ranking them, some of them have multiple re-releases and will be hard to establish the peek. But again, if you can find the time, go for it! DCF94 (talk) 12:38, 2 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see now. What DCF94 said... - wolf  02:40, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Ralph Break the Internet #1 incorrect
1[nb 2]	1	Ralph Breaks the Internet	$1,290,000,000	2013	[# 1]

I think this has been changed, as the film certainly didn't come in 2013, and the reference seems to have also been changed. My guess is, it's meant to be frozen? 2A02:C7D:E2EB:7000:D095:D19A:4D6B:82BB (talk) 22:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Inflation
can we use the world ination bank on this page. I arlday do the too grossing compter and stop motion films but it was [|Reverted] Fanoflionking 18:41, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately we can't do that, because unlike the List of highest-grossing films page, we don't have inflation datas for older films, except for Snow White, but for others like Bambi or One Hundred and One Dalmatians which had big unadjusted grosses and probably would be on the top of the list we don't have an adjusted figure from Guinness or other sources, also many of this films had multiple re-releases and we still don't know exactly how much each re-release made, we only know the final total and therefore we can't do any sort of calculations, also also the World Bank Group inflation chart only goes as far back as 1981. Plus we can not just cherry pick just the Computer and Stop Motion list because we can't do the entire main list, if we ever can to a "highest grossing adjusted for inflation" list, we will do an overall Top 10 (computer, traditional, or stop motion), whichever are the highest grossers. DCF94 (talk) 10:17, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Anime
on the Highest-grossing anime films page there are servel films and franchise witch effect this page (aka  there numbers do not match to our number)  i will lay them down below I do not knew where they not there info form Fanoflionking 01:30, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Detective Conan: Zero the Enforcer $106M
 * Princess Mononoke $159M
 * Crayon Shin-chan (film series) $341M
 * One Piece (film series) $408M
 * Dragon ball (film series)$637M
 * Case Closed (film series) $841M
 * Pokémon (film series) $1,036M
 * Doraemon (film series) $1,219M

also i should say i have messege them in the past and got this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_highest-grossing_anime_films Fanoflionking 01:33, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Conan & Mononoke are fine, don't know what you ment there. As for the franchises go, I made an effort to find good sources to attest those figures, you will always find two different sources having slightly different figures for a film, in this case, I used Box Office Mojo (which is a proven reliable source and eiren.org (which is owned by Motion Picture Producers Association of Japan, an old film Union in Japan, thus making it a very reliable source in my opinion) for this page, the nendai-ryuukou.com source used on List of highest-grossing anime films has figures that are far more inflated than the other ones used here (i.e.: with DBZ and Doraemon), and like I've said in the previous discussion, I'm not too familiar with this website, it seems that it's a fairly new website based on the "copyright © 2014" tag from the bottom of the page and not many other info about this site, so untill someone can clarify to me what this website is and how reliable is, I say this page stays as it is. DCF94 (talk) 17:33, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Top 30 franchise
we can now incresed the franchise chart to a top 30 here is 26-30 below


 * {{legend|#b6fcb6|indicates that at least one film in the series is playing in the week commencing .|text=}}

i think we should do a top 30, we got 30 franchise witch tops our $290M mark and by the end of the year we could have upto 35 (dose the main lego and lion king count) it will add more detiarl and give us a greater range. Fanoflionking
 * }
 * We had this discussion before, and I personally think that if we try to expand the list we will have problems with some franchises like Dragon Ball, Crayon Shin-chan or Winnie the Pooh, and who knows what other series I'm omiting that can pop up in the future, with incomplete figures which will make our job harder to legitimize the list, there aren't enough big animated franchise grosses like on the List of highest-grossing films to justify a longer list, hell! we had this very same discussion on the highest-grossing films about weather or not to extend THAT list, some argued to extend, some argued to cut down the list, eventually it was decided to stay as it is. So if that list with multi billion $ grosses is considered difficult to extend, how can we maintain a longer list with small totals but much more incomplete series?...I will post a message on the other page to ask others to pitch in on the discussion, please be patient untill we have a few others give their input and we will decide then what to do. DCF94 (talk) 16:58, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not too familiar with this list, but you have to bear in mind that the longer you make these lists the more missing data you run into, which undermines the list if you don't know if it's accurate or not. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia so we should only be including information we are reasonable sure is factually accurate. If you have problems sourcing the data then it's best not to extend the list IMO. Also, you have to ask whether there is anything to gain by doing so. Is a top 30 really more informative than a top 25 in this case? Will readers who want to know what the top franchises are be better informed by making the list a top 30? If you extended the list then you would be adding franchises that have grossed under $320 million, and every single Pixar movie has grossed more than that so are franchises that have earned less than the lowest-grossing Pixar movie really noteworthy? Betty Logan (talk) 22:15, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

DBZ
In regard to the edit made on the franchise and film list, I'm questioning the sources provided from that page. I'm not too familiar with this website, but the grosses for the early movies appearing on that page seem a little overinflated than the ones from eiren.org page (which is a much reliable source). I did a conversion a while back with some of the numbers provided from eiren.org (some weren't available because they had under 1 billion yen so it's not visible on the page) but even without those films, the total added up to around $260 million and that puts it out of the Top 25 even with the new release of Dragon Ball Super: Broly. If you belive I'm wrong and nendai-ryuukou.com is reliable please present an argument before editing it. DCF94 (talk) 18:35, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

i look back on talk history and foud this i also added in the new film this is the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_highest-grossing_animated_films/Archive_4#dragon_ball_gross  if this worng pelase corcet this grossFanoflionking 19:04, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Those figures came from a unsourced blog post on worldofkj.com, but later on I found the eiren.org page and as I previously mentioned in this archive discussion, the total figures don't amount enough even with the missing grosses. DCF94 (talk) 20:22, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

can you fill in the franchise box with the correcet grosss so we know for future reffence thanks


 * Dragon Ball
 * 1986 film:
 * 1987 film:
 * 1988 film:
 * 1989 film:
 * 1990 march film:
 * 1990 july film:
 * 1991 march film:
 * 1991 july film:
 * 1992 march film:
 * 1992 july film:
 * 1993 march film:
 * 1993 july film:
 * 1994 march film:
 * 1994 july film:
 * 1995 march film:
 * 1995 july film:
 * 1996 film:
 * 2013 film:
 * 2015 film:
 * 2018 re-released film:
 * 2018 film:
 * 2018 film:

Fanoflionking 13:06, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I added all the available figures, but unless Broly does at least as well as the last two, I don't think it will matter even if we find the missing grosses, which are very small anyway because they are under ¥1 billion. DCF94 (talk) 16:15, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

is there any other forgin franchise that colud make the $290M mark during 2019 Fanoflionking 23:53, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Dragon Ball by the looks of things could possibly, if it does, idk, we add it even without the missing figures. Also Boonie Bears will have another film next month which would put the series back on the list, Wallace and Gromit can be back with Farmageddon: A Shaun the Sheep Movie coming up, The Angry Birds Movie 2 is coming out this year, and also The Secret Life of Pets 2 and Frozen 2. DCF94 (talk) 14:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

how the lego movie main series and lion king will they countFanoflionking 22:18, 17 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Regarding Nendai-Ryuukou, they got their numbers from an official Toei source . According to Toei, the first sixteen films up until Dragon Ball Z: Wrath of the Dragon (1995) collectively crossed ¥40 billion combined. In fact, the Japanese Wikipedia page on Dragon Ball states the first sixteen films grossed over ¥40 billion, while citing this same Toei source. As for Eiren, the numbers they give before 2000 are for the distribution income (i.e. rentals), not the total box office gross. On Japanese Wikipedia, there are often two different Japanese box office numbers for numerous films, performance income (total gross) and distribution income (rentals), with the performance income significantly higher than the distribution income. In other words, Eiren is not representative of the total box office gross for films released before 2000, but only their distribution income (which is a part of the total box office gross). Maestro2016 (talk) 19:53, 12 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I have taken the liberty of updating Dragon Ball using the official Toei source which states 40 billion yen for the first 16 films. Feel free to let me what you think. Maestro2016 (talk) 00:39, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I reverted the edits before I read your argument here, my apologies. I still would like to have a direct link to a official website or article for that figure, but nevertheless, it's the closest to a full figure that we have. When you're gonna redo the update, please do also the source links in the model I did above by converting each individual figure from that poster into dollars using the fxtop.com (or whatever conversion website you think is best) for each individual year, so don't convert ¥40 billion yen using today's yen-dollar conversion rates! do it for each year then accumulate them all together. Also add all sixteen films into the franchise table, don't do "first sixteen films" entry. DCF94 (talk) 18:25, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I found the source from the Japanese Dragon Ball Wikipedia page, which states the first sixteen films grossed over 40 billion yen. It's a booklet that was published by Toei and given at special screenings of Dragon Ball: The Path to Power in 1996. On Toei's official website, they stated in 2002 that the first 17 movies sold 49 million tickets, which is roughly equivalent to around 40-50 billion yen since the average ticket price has been more than 1,100 yen since the mid-1980s. The reason why I combined the first sixteen films is because the Toei booklet source doesn't give an individual breakdown of the performance incomes (total gross figures), but only the individual distribution incomes (net rentals). The distribution income usually represents about half of the performance income at the Japanese box office. That's why I combined the first sixteen films to show the full performance income. As for conversions, I usually use Template:To USD for that. Alternatively, the 40 billion yen could be converted at a 1995 exchange rate, since that's the release year of the 16th film Wrath of the Dragon. Maestro2016 (talk) 19:17, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I've made another attempt at updating Dragon Ball, with the suggestions I mentioned above. This time, I used a 1995 exchange rate, the release date of Wrath of the Dragon, to convert the 40 billion yen. While I understand you would've preferred to have the individual grosses of the sixteen films, I don't think that's a good idea because their individual performance incomes are not known, but only their distribution incomes (i.e. about half of their total performance incomes) are known. That's why I feel it's best to combine the first sixteen films as 40 billion yen instead. Maestro2016 (talk) 22:11, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

40 or 50 minutes
The quote box on this page and the quote box on List_of_most_expensive_animated_films differ in the length considered to be animated. Which is correct? --Izno (talk) 20:04, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It's 40 minutes, per the source. Somebody must of change that without a reason, thanks for pointing that out. DCF94 (talk) 20:08, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

The Lion King (2019)
OK, so I know I've been removing the new Lion King movie from there constantly. And I also know I might have been harsh when removing it. But that's because it's not an animated movie. They didn't market it as animated. The animals are not animated, they're just photorealistic with added CGI mouth movements. I know I'm probably harsh, but that's why this movie shouldn't be added there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben29oak (talk • contribs) 01:20, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

This contradicts the main article The Lion King (2019 film), which defines it as a computer-animated film. Dimadick (talk) 10:58, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "They didn't market it as animated" is the worst reason to consider a movie "live-action" ever. Beaumain (talk) 19:27, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The animals are animated. They were generated by computer, much like Frozen and other movies, except this time using a photorealistic style. Marketing shouldn't be considered; either they are animated or they are not.
 * Just for the sake of discussion, even if we were considering the marketing for this list, what would be expected? Should Disney release trailers saying "Watch this animated movie."? I'm not sure many movies here were explicitly marketed as animated. Suppose we don't find any marketing material explicitly mentioning that The Simpsons Movie is animated, should we remove it from this list? I don't think so. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

The Lion King (2019) - animated movie sources
If it helps, I attempted to find some sources referring to The Lion King as an animated movie. (as opposed to other sources which have been referring to it as a "live action" movie). I apologize if there's any mistake in the list.


 * https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/7/19/20692319/lion-king-new-live-action-animated-debate-2d-3d
 * https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/07/lion-king-remake-disney-photorealism-animation
 * https://www.fatherly.com/news/lion-king-instagram-photoshop-cgi-cartoon-animated/
 * https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2477913/the-lion-king-just-dethroned-frozen-as-highest-grossing-animated-movie-ever
 * https://mashable.com/article/lion-king-box-office-all-time-animated/
 * https://www.cnet.com/news/the-lion-king-overtakes-frozen-as-disneys-biggest-animated-movie-ever/
 * https://www.indiewire.com/2019/07/the-lion-king-review-2019-1202157153/
 * https://datebook.sfchronicle.com/movies-tv/review-the-lion-king-looks-so-realistic-it-makes-the-music-sound-fake
 * https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/entertainment/disney-reveals-photo-realistic-character-animations-for-lion-king-remake-927919.html
 * https://www.dw.com/en/strikingly-realistic-disneys-the-lion-king/a-49568153
 * https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/the-lion-king-jon-favreau-reveals-live-action-shot-not-cgi-134702198.html
 * https://www.ign.com/articles/2018/11/29/the-lion-king-photorealism-and-an-existential-question-about-the-state-of-animation
 * https://qz.com/quartzy/1474573/the-lion-king-2019-trailer-animation-is-worse-than-the-original/
 * https://www.thewrap.com/the-lion-king-film-review-2019-jon-favreau/
 * https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/movies/the-lion-king-remake-gets-deepfake-makeover/news-story/608c9bd8892f8f23f6a7e85d35a165f4
 * https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2019/07/19/how-do-lion-king-movies-compare-closer-look-key-elements/?noredirect=on
 * https://nypost.com/2019/07/11/the-lion-king-review-disneys-new-cgi-animation-is-astonishing/
 * https://www.gamesradar.com/lion-king-2019-remake-special-effects-virtual-reality/

--Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:57, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

TV
I know it nothing to do with this page but dose anyone want to help with List of animated shows by episode count Fanoflionking 10:28, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure. Useight (talk) 20:40, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

On the Lion King...
If the line for what counts as an "Animated Film" goes into 'Live-Action films that have a lot of CGI', how can we leave other live-action, yet heavy CGI films off this list?

Avatar, Avengers, Infinity War, Endgame, Transformers, Jurassic World, the Jungle Book, and the Phantom Menace all heavily feature CGI animations.

It just doesn't make sense when Disney marketed the Lion King as a Live Action Remake. Stevenjo28 (talk) 16:55, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It's my understanding that the new Lion King is completely animated. That's not the same as something like Avatar that mixed animation with live-action and motion capture. Betty Logan (talk) 17:30, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I believe I agree with Betty Logan. For instance, Infinity War is a (mostly) live action movie with a few animated characters such as Thanos and Rocket. If Marvel released a new movie consisting of only Thanos and Rocket interacting without any other characters, it would be an animated movie. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:48, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

I barely count it. Disney is so desperate to have The Lion King judged like a live-action movie. They marketed it as such, and I'm pretty sure even the director said it's not really animated because of the way people look at it. Now, if you want to be technical, The Lion King is more like a hybrid film. It only contains animation in the technical sense. Nobody, not one person, thinks of "2019 Lion King" when you say "animated film". And it obviously didn't have to struggle as much as all the other animated movies on this list (The Lion King didn't have to struggle to the top like Frozen did; Frozen had to fight through the stereotype of animation/princesses etc, and The Lion King didn't. The Lion King is literally riding on the nostalgia craze and the fact that live-action movies automatically do better). HOWEVER, with that said, Frozen was never the "highest-grossing animated film" either. Inflation exists and nobody seems to care about it. It was inevitable that Frozen would be "dethroned" because we count dollars rather than tickets sold, for some reason. I guess it's more exciting to see records be broken every year than to examine the box office properly. (For the people who do care, let me just point out that Frozen 2 is probably going to get its revenge in 3.5 months). DReifGalaxyM31 (talk) 18:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid you don't speak for everyone. I definitely think of The Lion King (2019) as an animated movie. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The thing about the box office gross calculations still rings true. That's looking at dollars instead of number of tickets sold. What are those numbers? DReifGalaxyM31 (talk) 19:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind revising all the values to account for inflation. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I think The Lion King should have an asterisk or something by it on that list. Obviously we're in "agree to disagree" territory here, but I don’t think it should be grouped together with the other films on the list. As far as I've seen, it was never marketed as an animated film and would have undeniably been live-action had the film had even one human actor (like The Jungle Book). The fact that it was made fully animated was more of an affect than a cause. There wasn’t any other way Disney could effectively create The Lion King besides animation, but since they already made a 2D animated version and wanted to make the remake like the other live-action ones, they settled for photorealism but never referred to it as animation, at least from what I’ve seen of their press materials (and I do know I've missed out on some of them). So in other words, it’s like they didn’t want it to be “animated” but they had no other way to make such a movie, so they did their best not to call it an animated film, so it could be set apart from the original, unlike all the other films on the list which were thoroughly marketed and represented as animated films. Its circumstances as an “animated” film are so different from the others on the list that it either shouldn’t be grouped with them or again, it should have some kind of asterisk next to it. (And again, I'm still hoping Frozen 2 will be able to surpass it. There’s no doubt in my mind that Frozen 2 crosses the $1 billion mark (its trailer has managed to amass in two months more views than the Frozen trailer amassed in six years), but getting the extra hundreds of millions to beat Lion King might be a stretch. But we’ll see...) DReifGalaxyM31 (talk) 02:03, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The article The Jungle Book (2016 film) says the film is "a live-action/CGI film". It's also a member of Category:Films with live action and animation.
 * It's not an entirely live action film; it's just a partially live action fim. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:28, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

I opened a discussion about The Lion King and The Jungle Book at Talk:List of Walt Disney Pictures films. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:09, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

How do we resolve this "Lion King" issue?
Like do we take a vote and the majority wins to determine whether "Lion King" is a truly "animated" film? How else could we arrive at some consensus? If not, should we just continuously edit and re-edit the list with one side taking out the Lion King and the other putting it back until one side gets tired? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevenjo28 (talk • contribs) 03:37, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The Lion King (2019) is an animated movie. The lions are computer-generated, much like Frozen and other movies, except this time using a photorealistic style. This film is the result of the work of animators. It would be a live action movie if Disney filmed real lions. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 05:40, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Support: There is no human actors involved in this film other than the voice actors, therefore, the Lion King remake is an animated feature and should be added in this list. -Gouleg (Talk • Contribs) 13:30, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It's a not a debate. The film is verifiably and wholly produced via animated methods (as opposed to live-action filming or motion capture). If a film is wholly produced by animated techniques it belongs on this list, regardless of how it was marketed. Betty Logan (talk) 15:05, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

I opened a discussion about The Lion King and The Jungle Book at Talk:List of Walt Disney Pictures films. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:10, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Doesn't necessarily change anything, but I'd like to submit as a source the report when the movie became a billion-dollar success. Disney called it "a live-action film" here, putting it in the same pot as Aladdin. DReifGalaxyM31 (talk) 19:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Frozen
Boxofficemojo actually update final gross, sometime in 2016. Whole statement in wiki article is incorrect.

August 2014:

Total Lifetime Grosses Domestic:	 $400,738,009	  31.4% + Foreign:	 $873,481,000	  68.6% = Worldwide:	 $1,274,219,009

Current date:

Total Lifetime Grosses Domestic:	 $400,738,009	  31.4% + Foreign:	 $875,742,326	  68.6% = Worldwide:	 $1,276,480,335

90.189.133.91 (talk) 05:53, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Box Office Mojo does not provide a date for its international gross, so it is not possible to state which grosses this figure includes. As a result the box-office is calculated from the individual grosses accumulated after Box Office Mojo's last dated figure in August 2014, and all the figures used in the calculation are sourced at List of highest-grossing animated films. Betty Logan (talk) 15:50, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * So, why Mojo is used as source on every other film in article? Why only Frozen have this type of calculation? For example, "Shrek the Third" doesn’t have a date for its gross. "The Incredibles", "Big Hero 6", "Ratatouille", etc. I don't understand why Frozen is such an exception.212.164.65.172 (talk) 20:01, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Frozen is an exception because it continued grossing significant amounts of money after BOM stopped updating the main total. There was extensive discussion above the anomalies in BOM's total: Talk:List_of_highest-grossing_films/Archive_9. Betty Logan (talk) 21:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It's typical situation on BOM. You people started to panic too soon. BOM stopped updating total gross after half-year or less (as example, "Avengers Endgame" international gross already is not updating). And then, when Disney give them final gross later, they update it. There is not a single one source who can proof wiki calculation for Frozen. Not even close to them. This is clearly misinformation. Or you should try to do this for everything else. At least it would be consistently. 212.164.65.172 (talk) 17:54, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It is certainly not typical. We have a team of dedicated volunteers who regularly keep these articles up to date. In most other cases films don't carry on grossing millions of dollars after Box Office Mojo stop tracking. This is demonstrably not the case with Frozen as the discussions I linked to show. If you study the sources you can see that it grossed approximately another $15 million after August 2014, the bulk of this from Japan, UK and Germany. Box Office Mojo has not factored these amounts into the final tally which is clearly a problem. Hopefully Box Office Mojo will eventually correct their figures or Disney will issue a finalised number, but we can prove that Box Office Mojo's final figure under-estimates the true total. This is all verifiable and documented in the sources. We don't unquestionably accept data when we can prove it is incorrect. Betty Logan (talk) 18:16, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, i did my best. I'm still think this is not right decision. Imagine if Frozen 2 gross 1.285 billion and Disney with whole media will claim sequel as bigger film than original. And only Wiki is going to act like "Disney is lying!". This could be pretty weird situation. 212.164.65.172 (talk) 14:54, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Disney knows how much the film made and hopefully it will clarify the box-office at some point. In 2016 Box Office Mojo had the wrong figure down for The Lion King and Disney issued an erratum. The mistake here is treating Box Office Mojo as infallible. It is capable of making mistakes, it frequently does, and in this case we can prove it did. If we know it is wrong we shouldn't propagate incorrect data. Betty Logan (talk) 15:14, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, i'm not talking just about Box Office Mojo. Every other sources have it's box-office gross at around the same amount of money. Numbers.com, comScore (per 2018), Forbes. Again, nobody except Wiki has Frozen gross on that number (1.290 bln). I guess i should just wait for november. Maybe some other media or Disney itself could convince you. 212.164.64.30 (talk) 06:52, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

I think maybe I am not doing a good job of explaining the problem to you, because I am debating with you rather than proving our numbers. So I am going to give you a very clear example of why the BOM total is wrong. This is just the clearest example we have but there are other cases. Exactly the same happened in Japan at the end of 2014, and the same again with Germany in 2015. Literally all our total does is add in these extra earnings logged on BOM that it has not factored into the overall total. I hope this is clearer now. I don't know why Frozen is anomalous and why BOM stopped updating its main total but we can prove it did. Betty Logan (talk) 18:19, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Box Office Mojo's figure has not changed at all since November 2015. BOM had the foreign gross listed as $875,742,326, which is exactly the same as the gross as of July 2019 (which still stands at the time of writing).
 * Frozen was re-released in the UK at the end of 2017:.
 * As of December 2014 Frozen had earned £41.2 GPB (equivalent to $64.7 million) at an exchange rate of $1 : 0.636 GPB.
 * Following its re-release in December 2017 Frozen took its total to £43.0 GPB (equivalent to $57.9 million) at an exchange rate of $1 : 0.742 GPB.
 * You will notice that UK gross drops from $64.7 million in December 2014 to $57.9 million in December 2017. However this is due to a drop in the value of the pound, and we can demonstrably prove using BOM's own figures that Frozen earned another £1.8 million, equivalent to a further $2.3 million.
 * The worldwide total for BOM does not change at all during its UK re-release. BOM logs the UK release but does not incorporate the extra $2.3 million into the overall total.
 * , have you tried contacting Box Office Mojo about it? I contacted them about A Quiet Place being labeled as supernatural horror (which was making it part of their list of highest-grossing supernatural horror films), and they ultimately fixed that. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 20:41, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Erik, I will look into emailing them at some point. I did email them about Gone with the Wind's gross once (they have all the reissues up to the 1970s listed under the 1939 release) and didn't get a response. I agree this situation is not ideal. Wikipedia's figure can be found in secondary sources but they were all published after Wikipedia corrected the figure so we can't be sure they didn't get it from us. The easiest way to resolve this would be for BOM to simply review its figure. Betty Logan (talk) 20:02, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Lion King (2019)
The Lion King (2019) is still playing internationally (see UK and Brazil for example) as of last week Dec 13-15. So, it should still be highlighted here. It is highlighted on the Highest Grossing Films page. Telewski (talk) 01:15, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Lion king
Sorry to bring this up again but the new lion king will not be compete for the best animated feature https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/the-lion-king-remake-will-not-compete-for-best-animated-feature-at-the-oscars-101025798.html Dose the effects it place on the list? Fanoflionking 15:14, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * No, I don't believe it would have an effect. Useight (talk) 15:33, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Just because Disney doesn't feel like submitting it doesn't make it not an animated film. Wonder Park was also not submitted. Does that make it not animated? Sbb618 (talk) 18:23, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * But it wouldn't be eligible under Academy rules even if Disney tried to submit it. "If the picture is created in a cinematic style that could be mistaken for live action, the filmmaker(s) must also submit information supporting how and why the picture is substantially a work of animation rather than live action." The Academy clearly doesn't consider a film like The Lion King animated so not sure why the Golden Globes are given a special mention as proof when the leading awards giving body rejects the idea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.32.41.218 (talk) 18:58, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

New article
i working on a new article if anyone wants to come help find it at Draft:List of animated films by Box office admissions Fanoflionking 22:07, 18 April 2020 (UTC)