this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2026
481 points (96.5% liked)

Today I Learned

30040 readers
1166 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Basically, the only modern studio consistently putting out stop motion animation movies, is Laika Studios. And yet, Laika has only had one financially successful movie, Coraline from 2009, while all their other movies have under performed.

However, Laika is currently led and owned by Travis Knight, son of Phil Knight, the owner of Nike. This has enabled Knight to continually bank roll Laika whenever they under perform, essentially making the entire stop motion animation film industry a nepo baby's pet project.

That being said, this is actually a positive story, and reminiscent of how artists previously would be financially supported by wealthy benefactors.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Elshender@sh.itjust.works 110 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Me when people forget about Wallace and Gromit.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 12 points 4 days ago (5 children)

Would you like a spot of wensleydale old chum?

[–] Flamekebab@piefed.social 7 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Speaking of propping things up - Wensleydale were propped up by Wallace & Gromit.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 4 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Yeah because the truth is it's actually pretty rubbish cheese. I'm allowed to say that, you can't, but I can.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] imeansurewhynot@sh.itjust.works 163 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (18 children)

i heard about this on a podcast. it is great news for stop-motion, and considering how many shitty rich people there are, it's nice to know there's a couple good ones promoting art.

Also their movies are good and all but one of their movies made tens of millions of dollars.

for stop-motion, a very niche art-form, making 10-130 million dollars profit per film is laudable.

went too big with missing link though, which i haven't seen yet.

[–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 33 points 5 days ago (4 children)

I don't know if motion animation is the same as other types of films, but for most of the industry you need box office sales to be double of the film budget for it to be considered profitable. Mainly due to marketing budgets and the huge percentage of profit that theaters get for the first few weeks of a film's release.

[–] imeansurewhynot@sh.itjust.works 24 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

It's pretty different from live action according to creators and producers, it's such a small market and stop motion is so difficult to explain and get off the ground and promote that financial expectations are much more realistic.

You're right that if a live-action movie costs $100 million to make grosses $180 million, the producers are upset, but that's a greedy, ego-driven convention of the modern studio system, they are still making tens of millions of dollars before everything on the back end is added in.

The stop-motion world has a more realistic perspective on production and the artists love every single piece of art they create, so also making $40 million as evidence that their art style can succeed in mainstream culture is the cherry on top of any project that even gets to be fully produced.

[–] ApollosArrow@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It’s more that if a movie costs $100 million to make, it’s usually $100 million in marketing. So it would need to make $200 million to break even. Making $180 million means someone lost $20 million dollars, so I wouldn’t really call it greedy. If the movies are not making the money then they’d need to just start reducing scope or just hope someone will keep bank rolling them.

[–] imeansurewhynot@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (5 children)

That's what studios publicly lament about without going into detail. Between streaming, retail and merchandising alone, they're making their money back.

Marketing campaigns are not bankrupting movie profits.

If a studio makes 180 box office on a 100 million dollar production and they say they've lost 80 mil through marketing, they are pulling your leg.

"ah yeah, first quarter my team only made 23 points, oh well, thats the game."

No, there are three other quarters that the studio isn't talking about because it reduces their future negotiating leverage.

Of course studios want more money, but studios aren't losing money on movies that get close but don't tip the magic number of "double the budget"

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] greenskye@lemmy.zip 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

huge percentage of profit that theaters get for the first few weeks of a film's release.

This is backwards. Theaters actually get very little percentage early on in the release and only get more later. Most early profits go to the film studio/publisher. Or at least this was how it worked ore-Covid. Maybe it's different now.

[–] exasperation@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 5 days ago

And to explain your comment a bit more, the production budget doesn't include the very real costs of marketing, distribution, and any back-end royalties calculated from the gross. Plus generally speaking, the movie is financed by lenders and production companies that will need to be repaid with interest, too.

If you've got a $50 million movie and you spend $10 million on marketing/distribution and promised 10% of the gross to people, and the theaters are keeping 10% of the gross, getting a $75 million box office breaks even ($7.5 million to royalties, $7.5 million to theaters, $10 million to marketing/distribution). And that's assuming nothing lost to interest/financing/inflation.

Side note: generally, theaters don't get much in the first few weeks. It's only when a movie shows longer than 3 weeks that the theater starts getting a bigger and bigger cut of the gross.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 10 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Wow, I usually keep track of their films as I like stop motion, but I wasn't aware Missing Link existed at all, and it came out 7 years ago!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

breaking even with stop motion is laudable. because like we won awards with our films but i think we earned like 5 grand total. we spent way more than that over the years on tacos for the crew alone.

Exactly, making $100 million profit on stop-motion is like feverishly, lovingly crafting a bespoke hot air balloon with a thousand discarded model airplane kits and then realizing you've somehow survived landing on the moon.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] Rusty@lemmy.ca 40 points 5 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NoForwadSlashS@piefed.social 59 points 5 days ago

'Propping up the stop motion film industry' is quite the statement. Aardman Animaton has been releasing feature length stop motion movies since 2000 and all have done very well. Also Laika only worked on Corpse Bride of Tim Burton's multiple very successful stop motion movies.

[–] thespcicifcocean@lemmy.world 17 points 4 days ago

Are you not counting claymation? Because i'm sure that Wallace and grommit would like a word.

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 40 points 5 days ago

I mean at least he's doing something productive with his wealth. That puts him insanely far ahead of most wealth babies.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 31 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Aardman also produces stop-motion, so it is untrue that Laika is alone.

Not such a positive story for Will Vinton, who had a hostile takeover of his studio, and then was fired and replaced by the new owner’s son.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] B0rax@feddit.org 21 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What do you mean „financially successful“? The movie Kubo from 2016 had more revenue than budget. Is that not successful?

It is a damn good movie btw.

[–] titanicx@lemmy.zip 11 points 4 days ago (2 children)
[–] Krelis_@sh.itjust.works 16 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Isn't that standard Hollywood accounting?

E.g. Return of the Jedi never made a profit either, on paper

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] B0rax@feddit.org 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Ah, so basically Marketing is not included in the budget. And theaters take a big cut from the revenue.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FluorideMind@lemmy.world 19 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Sounds like the type of things normal dudes say when asked what they'd do if they won the lottery. Maybe Travis is a normal dude under the nepotism?

[–] Bacano@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I think that's what the last section of the post was referencing

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 32 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Isn't Aardman (shaun the sheep, wallace & gromit) still consistently put out stopmotion? Or are they just cheating the visual style with 3d animation?

[–] CumbrianCucumber@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (3 children)

Yeah, Aardman are very much still stop motion (with a few tiny cheats, the stadium audience in Early Man and the sea in Pirates on an Adventure with Scientists).

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Aardman has had a CG division since the mid-90s. Flushed Away was their first all-CG feature, followed by Arthur Christmas. Pirates! in an Adventure With Scientists was intended to be fully CG but, at the request of Sony, it was changed to stop-motion with extensive CG augmentation.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] blargh513@sh.itjust.works 27 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I liked Kubo and the Two Strings a lot.

However, Mathew McConaughey? He was a very strange choice for voice talent in that film. It did not fit the aesthetic at all, he stuck out like a sore thumb. That southern drawl thing he's got in a movie that has primarily Asian characters? Well all right all right all right.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] prettybunnys@piefed.social 31 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Wes Anderson put out a wildly successful stop motion picture in 2009.

Consistently, sure, but that doesn’t actually mean it’s dead.

[–] LetchLemon@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

Or here me out.... we tax him and his dad. Then use the money to pay stop animation artists so they arent beholden as some rich kids pet project. could even start a few studios instead of one. Early 00's there were a few independant stop motion artists. Only reason they still arent around is due to art grant funding.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Suck_on_my_Presence@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Isle of Dogs is one of my favorite movies

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] svcg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 5 days ago

Aardman Animations: excuse me?

[–] bassad@jlai.lu 8 points 4 days ago

Aren't all artists dependent of some rich guys or rich guy's wifes?

I saw an art exhibition recently, I am not able to buy a 200€ pillow.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago (1 children)

If I had that dude's wealth I would be putting so many artists on my payroll.

[–] SaneMartigan@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] stsquad@lemmy.ml 18 points 5 days ago (6 children)
load more comments (6 replies)

this is actually a positive story, and reminiscent of how artists previously would be financially supported by wealthy benefactors

Idk that sounds profoundly negative to me lmao

[–] Mac@mander.xyz 10 points 5 days ago

In a non-cap society, do stop motion movies still get created by enthusiasts?

I think so.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 12 points 5 days ago

Knox Claymation and Wallace & Grommet beg to differ!

[–] tunetardis@piefed.ca 9 points 5 days ago

There are certainly worse ways to spend your obscene wealth.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

Did he fall far away from that shit family tree, or does he have his dad's politics?

[–] GorGor@startrek.website 8 points 5 days ago

I talked to some folks who worked at Laika a while back at a party. They loved working there. This was some years ago, and my memory is a bit beer soaked, but they seemed happy and proud of what they did.

[–] _NetNomad@fedia.io 3 points 4 days ago

i don't know the full story but iirc that was how the band Supertramp stayed afloat until they were successful, patronage from some rich guy

load more comments
view more: next ›