#1

The Polar Express

Released 11/10/04

Distributor: Buena Vista

polarexpress

Production Costs:  $170 Million (USD)

U.S. Box Office:  $173 Million  (USD)

Worldwide Box Office:  $297 Million (USD)

This 2004 feature film was based on the children’s book of the same name, by Chris Van Allsburg. The actual book can be read in about 5 minutes, but the film was 90 minutes long. The film enjoyed modest box office success, but the results for the film’s 3D Imax version were incredible. Financially, the 3D version outperformed the 2D version by 14 to 1! There are now plans to release the movie in its Imax format every year during the holiday season, so expect even higher revenue for the film in the future.

#2

Final Fantasy: Spirits Within

Released 7/11/01

Distributor: Sony

finalfantasy

Production Costs:  $137 Million (USD)

U.S. Box Office:  $32 Million  (USD)

Worldwide Box Office:  $85 Million (USD)

Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within was the first film to attempt photo-realistic computer generated human characters. The movie was promoted agressively by its distributor, Sony Pictures.  Despite the promotion, the film went on to become the second biggest flop in animated film history (Treasure Planet is #1), nearly bankrupting its creator, Square Pictures.  Many speculate that the failure was due to the fact that the movie was nothing like the video game it was supposed to be based on, alienating many of the movie’s potential fan base.

/

#3

Dinosaur

Released 5/19/00

Distributor: Buena Vista

dinosaur

Production Costs:  $128 Million (USD)

U.S. Box Office:  $138 Million  (USD)

Worldwide Box Office:  $356 Million (USD)

1

1

1

Dinosaur used live action backgrounds combined with computer animated effects, with spectacular results.  The opening two minutes of the film are particularly impressive. The movie was supposed to have no dialogue at all (just a narrator), but Disney head Michael Eisner insisted on dialogue to make the movie more commercially viable.  It was the highest-budgeted movie of 2000, with a reported cost of $128 million USD (some unnoficial estimates go as high as 200 million).

/

#4

Monsters Inc.

Released 11/2/01

Distributor: Buena Vista

monstersinc

Production Costs:  $115 Million (USD)

U.S. Box Office:  $256 Million  (USD)

Worldwide Box Office:  $525 Million (USD)

Monsters, Inc. was the 4th film in the Pixar lineup.  The film, about monsters who are afraid of children, opened with the highest ticket sales ever at the time, and is the 6th most popular animated film in history.

1

1

/

#5

Treasure Planet

Released 11/27/02

Distributor: Buena Vista

treasureplanet

Production Costs:  $100 Million (USD)

U.S. Box Office:  $38 Million  (USD)

Worldwide Box Office:  $91 Million (USD)

Treasure Planet was a rare miss for Disney/Buena Vista.  A spectacular miss, actually.  It is known as one of the biggest box office bombs ever.  The makers of the film used an innovative animation technique, combining hand drawn 2D animation and 3D computer animation.  It is also  the first film ever to be released simultaneously in regular and IMAX theaters.  Despite these innovations, the film failed to connect with audiences. Some blame the failure on the high competion that year (Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Lord Of The Rings Two Towers, and The Santa Clause 2 were all released around the same time).  The high production costs were blamed on the 2D/3D technique. Many critics say the final results of the technique were not worth the extra costs.  But you gotta give Disney credit for trying.

/

#6

Finding Nemo

Released 5/30/03

Distributor: Buena Vista

findingnemo

Production Costs:  $94 Million (USD)

U.S. Box Office:  $339 Million  (USD)

Worldwide Box Office:  $866 Million (USD)

Finding Nemo is another academy award winning feature film for Pixar studios. The heart-warming Finding Nemo had an opening weekend gross of $70 million, a record at the time, but was soon surpassed in 2004 by Shrek 2. There are many rumours about a sequel, but this has not been confirmed officially.

1

/

#7

The Incredibles

Released 11/5/04

Distributor: Buena Vista

theincredibles

Production Costs:  $92 Million (USD)

U.S. Box Office:  $261 Million  (USD)

Worldwide Box Office:  $631 Million (USD)

The Incredibles won the Academy Award in 2004 for best animated feature film. It is Pixars 6th feature film, and the first to be rated PG, rather than G.  It was also the highest selling DVD of 2005 with 17.4 million copies sold.

1

1

1

#8

Toy Story 2

Released 11/19/99

Distributor: Buena Vista

toystory2

Production Costs:  $90 Million (USD)

U.S. Box Office:  $246 Million  (USD)

Worldwide Box Office:  $486 Million (USD)

Toy Story 2 is the sequel to the successful original Toy Story movie, also produced by Pixar and distributed by Disney.The movie revolves around the adventures of a group of toys that come to life when no humans are around to see them.

The movie holds the distinction of being the best reviewed movie ever on the movie site “Rotten Tomatoes”.  There are 108 reviews listed for the movie, all of them positive.

#9

The Wild

Released 4/14/06

Distributor: Buena Vista

thewild

Production Costs:  $80 Million (USD)

U.S. Box Office:  $37 Million  (USD)

Worldwide Box Office:  $87 Million (USD)

The Wild is from C.O.R.E. Feature Animation, and was distributed by Buena Vista (Disney).  The movie was accused of being a rip off of the movie “Madagascar”, although “The Wild” is reported to have been in production before “Madagascar”.  The film only did fair numbers at the box office.

1

1

#10

Shark Tale

Released 10/1/04
Distributor:Dreamworks

sharktale

Production Costs:  $75 Million (USD)

U.S. Box Office:  $161 Million  (USD)

Worldwide Box Office:  $363 Million (USD)

Shark Tale managed to make a hefty profit for Dreamworks, even though it was widely panned by critics (On Rotten Tomatoes, only 35% of 160 critics gave it a positive review)  The film had its controversies, mostly dealing with the ethnic stereotypes portrayed by some of the movie’s characters. Examples:
Italian Americans complained about the stereotypical mobster references;
Some African Americans were offended by the stereotypical behavior of Will Smith’s character.

1

1

Single ticket $20000

MOSCOW (Reuters) – Once considered the preserve of scruffy backpackers, hardy adventurers, and vodka swigging businessmen, a new train on Russia’s Trans-Siberian route aims to lure wealthy tourists with luxury.

British Prince Michael of Kent on Thursday at a Moscow station unveiled the Golden Eagle which offers passengers ensuite bathrooms, underfloor heating and plasma screen TVs in every cabin along the 9,300 kilometre (5,778 miles) Moscow to Vladivostok route, one of the longest train trips in the world.

“Russia and trains are two great passions of mine and I’m looking forward to travelling on the Golden Eagle,” said Prince Michael, a Russian speaker and related through his grandmother to Tsar Nicholas II, in a speech.

The Trans-Siberian railway, built between 1891 and 1916, travels from Moscow through vast pine forests, over the Ural mountains and across the Siberian tundra to the Pacific Ocean.

A single ticket on the Golden Eagle will cost up to 9,595 pounds ($20000) for the 13- to 15-day journey.

A ticket on a normal Russian train costs around 10,000 roubles ($350) for the seven-day non-stop trip. The Golden Eagle, operated by firm GW Travel, will take double the time from Moscow to Vladivostock by stopping for excursions.

BEETROOT SOUP AND NO SHOWER

The Trans-Siberian rail traveller previously had to cope with random compartment companions, a restaurant menu that stretched from beetroot soup to dried fish and no shower.

Not problems the Golden Eagle traveller will have to worry about, GW Travel boss, Tim Littler, said.

“This is a luxury hotel on wheels,” he said. “We are selling a luxury window on Russia.”

GW Travel already operates high-end rail journeys in the former Soviet Union and other parts of the world. Most of its clients are from the United States and Europe and the average age is 66, Littler said.

Gregory Tepper, a tour operator from the United States, stood in the crowd listening to the speeches and looking at the gold and blue train.

“There is a real romance about the Trans-Siberian,” he said. “But it is still a long time on a train.”

On bridges and walkways above the platform, dozens of slightly bewildered commuters leant on rails watching the ceremony, listening to the brass band and admiring the train.

Most had not taken the Trans-Siberian and did not intend to.

“Why go by train when you can fly?” Igor Yevgenavich, 52, said. “Just think how much vodka you would drink in that time on the train? Much cheaper and safer to fly.”

 $20 million

MR. DENNIS TITO waited for long and paid quite a sum. Yet, the dream he latched on to stubbornly for over four decades and the astronomical $20 million he deposited into an escrow account have opened the road to space, howsoever slim and distant, for the paying tourist. Man’s spirit for adventure has never ceased and Mr. Tito’s expensive travel is one such instance. However, it would take a considerable time for this one man’s adventure to become an affordable outing. Translating Mr. Tito’s space trip into a common occurrence could be a long way away given the expenses involved for such flights and the need for a consensus on the training criteria and the basic standards for permitting non-professionals to the International Space Station (ISS) which have to be evolved. An initial and crucial test would be the ability of the 60-year-old to cope with the pressures of living in space during his six-day travel. The well-intentioned decision by the ISS Partnership that none of its 16 members would propose similar flights until detailed crew criteria have been finalised and adopted effectively puts on hold some other expressions of intent to travel to space. More immediately, however, the travel by Mr. Tito has brought out the conceptual and practical difficulties in opening up space travel to the non-professional. The Tito flight reflects the spat in space between the two competitive pioneers in cosmic exploration, the U.S. and Russia.

That the loss of the Mir space station in March has vastly restricted Russian exploits in space is evident in the objections raised by the U.S. to Mr. Tito’s flight to the ISS. The reluctance of the U.S. to give permission for the former NASA engineer-turned-banker’s trip to the ISS following the deorbital of the Mir and the Russians’ assertion that they would fly their space tourist, bring to the fore the conflict between funding and expertise in manning and operating the 16-nation ISS project. The project, which was planned as a stellar example of international cooperation, with the U.S. as the major stake holder (45 per cent) followed by Russia (30 per cent) with the remaining split between Japan, Canada and members of the European Space Agency, should not be allowed to sour on account of such issues. Expectations of a further decline in the share of Russia, which has already ceded a quarter of its resources to the U.S. in exchange for help in financing the construction of the Russian modules, is but a pointer to the difficulties ahead.

The space travel of Mr. Tito in a way encapsulates the difficulties ahead in international space cooperation. The U.S. protest that as a paid tourist Mr. Tito was inadequately prepared for the flight should not be ignored. Given the Russian competence in handling space stations and in space endurance, it would take international cooperation several steps further if the U.S. and Russia do not revert to a space race. Mr. Tito’s flight would have been much more pleasant if all concerns had been comprehensively addressed. It is important that the ISS does not become a symbol of power-play as it did in the build up to Mr. Tito’s lift-off. There have been several instances of U.S.- Russian cooperation in space exploration, most notably the 1975 docking of the Soviet Soyuz and the U.S. Apollo mission. It is important for the future of space exploration that the differences of opinion that have clouded the present trip are prevented in the future. It is also imperative that man’s spirit of adventure is kept alive. The optimism expressed recently by Mr. Edwin Aldrin, the second man to set foot on the moon, that sending a common man into space would be achieved in 15 years can bear fruit only with increased international cooperation and technological advancement.