Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Pixar dumps Disney

Sequelness

Originally posted by Sailfish
Now what I hear is that Eisner pulled a fast one on Steve Jobs, the deal was five movies and Eisner, after the successes of Pixars sequels, said that those sequels "Didn't count"
Click to expand...

Sequels? Plural? Only Toy Story 2was a sequel.

The 5-picture deal was signed AFTER Toy Story 1. So here's how it shakes out:

Bug's Life (#1)
Toy Story 2 (doesn't count)
Monsters, Inc. (#2)
Finding Nemo (#3)
The Incredibles (#4)
Cars (#5)

Anyway, it's true that Disney screwed Apple with the sequel clause. And it's even worse that Disney gets to make more sequels.
 
Re: Sequelness

Originally posted by splashman
Sequels? Plural? Only Toy Story 2was a sequel.

The 5-picture deal was signed AFTER Toy Story 1. So here's how it shakes out:

Bug's Life (#1)
Toy Story 2 (doesn't count)
Monsters, Inc. (#2)
Finding Nemo (#3)
The Incredibles (#4)
Cars (#5)

Anyway, it's true that Disney screwed Apple with the sequel clause. And it's even worse that Disney gets to make more sequels.
Click to expand...


Right you are and thanks for the clarification.

SJ has been screwed before, he knows what to do.

Drop dead Eisner, greedy smuck.
 
Its a good thing!!

200 years from now it will go something like this:

And lo Jobs and Pixar came out of the meeting and hope sprang forth for the blight on animation that is known as Disney was vanquished from the realm of Pixar and to the reporters Jobs was quoted as saying "This is a good thing"
And henceforth the separation of Disney and Pixar was forever know as "A good thing"


Or if you want the present interpertation:


HECK YAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So I guess we can expect more remakes releases of Lion King, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, because without Pixar Disney doesn't have a creative bone in its collective body.
 
This must be a great feeling as a businessman/movie maker/computer geek.

To be able to attract so much talent, direct it so creatively, and to produce a product so clearly superior ...

that you can dump Disney with a smile on your face ...

Impressive.
 
Originally posted by Photorun
Holy cats! This should be page one, it's huge.

Good riddance Disney. I bet they thought they could do whatever they wanted as it's always been their way. I'm miffed but not surprised that Pixar took a stock hit, clueless investors/the street probably think they were the same company.
Click to expand...

Well, fear no more about Pixar taking a stock hit. According to this, their stock rose 4% in the end. AND, Disney's stock dropped. My source: http://www.forbes.com/newswire/2004/01/30/rtr1236085.html

Ha HAAAAAA! I'm not involved in any of this. Yet, somehow, <b>I</b> feel victorious. :D
 
Originally posted by Photorun
[doing his best Nelson from the Simpsons, points at Disney] "Hah hahh"
Click to expand...

Exactly. A friend of mine has already done "the Bender laugh", ala Futurama... Of course, that was quickly followed, in my mind, with a shot of Eisner (drawn Groening style) saying, "We're boned...".
 
Great News!

Disney is the entertainment equivelant of fast food! It is so currupt. Pixar might also be currupt, but in my opinion less so. Unfortunately Disney will not suffer very much from the loss of Pixar, after all, they can always swallow up another company. There are lot's for the picking.
 
Disney "hits"?

Originally posted by Dave the Great
So, they have had plenty of non-Pixar hits. They have had Brother Bear, Lion King, Tarzan, Jungle Book 2, etc.

Plus, they have all those re-releases like Alice in Wonderland, Dumbo, Sleeping Beauty, etc.

So, I really doubt that Disney is going to tank just because of Pixar. Hurt them? Yes. But kill them? No.
Click to expand...

I agree, Disney animation won't be going away any time soon, even without Pixar.

But I can't help wishing Disney animation WOULD go away. Lion King was the only real "hit" in your list of examples. Sure, every parent will take their kids to every Disney release, so each one is bound to make a few bucks. But that doesn't make them hits. Hits need good word-of-mouth and kids clamoring to see them 2 and 3 times in the theater. That's what Pixar gets, and that's what Disney doesn't.

For each Disney flick that's even a modest hit, they churn out five lame politically- and environmentally-correct sequels masquerading as classic kids' movies. I mean, have you seen their release history? Let's see, there's Sleeping Beauty II, Peter Pan II, The Lion King II, Cinderella II, Aladdin II, Little Mermaid II, Jungle Book II, 102 Dalmatians, 101 Dalmatians II (really!), The Rescuers II . . . Ugggh! Gives me the heebie-jeebies just thinking about it.

And what's the next blockbuster to look forward to? Lion King 1 1/2!!!! Woohoo! I smell "instant classic"!!
 
Power play to force Eisner out?

Originally posted by moosegoose
Before everyone goes counting their chickens on the end of the Pixar/Disney relationship, there is a school of thought that is very suspicious of the timing of this whole talks/announcement thing.

Taken in relationship with the ongoing board struggle between Eisner and Roy Disney.

There is a general board meeting in a few weeks, and it would not come as an enormous shock to find Eisner hung out to dry, and all of a sudden the Pixar/Disney deal back on with much more favourable terms for Pixar.
Click to expand...

We can only hope. The trouble is, Eisner has been their for too long, and the whole company has gone rotten. I doubt there's any real talent left. It will be quite a while for them to turn it around, even if they do find the perfect replacement.
 
Anti-Disney? Yep!

Originally posted by Dave the Great
Why is everyone so anti-disney?

I never realized there was so much hatred for Disney.

Is it because Steve Jobs is aligned with Pixar and now Pixar and Disney are on the outs?
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with Jobs, and if you'd been following the buzz, you'd know that many, many people have been disenchanted with Disney for years. The latest mess only gives us another opportunity to express our feelings.

Personally, the "hatred" is directed more at Eisner, for what he's done to what used to be a good company. My feeling towards Disney is more akin to "disgust", for what they've become.
 
Re: Great News!

Originally posted by matthew_goldin
Disney is the entertainment equivelant of fast food! It is so currupt. Pixar might also be currupt, but in my opinion less so. Unfortunately Disney will not suffer very much from the loss of Pixar, after all, they can always swallow up another company. There are lot's for the picking.
Click to expand...

And as soon as they do, all the talent will leave skid marks on their way out, and Disney will be back where they were -- a feckless studio desperately trying to recapture their glory days, but with absolutely no clue about why Walt Disney was successful in the first place.
 
Smiles

Originally posted by ThomasJefferson
This must be a great feeling as a businessman/movie maker/computer geek.

To be able to attract so much talent, direct it so creatively, and to produce a product so clearly superior ...

that you can dump Disney with a smile on your face ...

Impressive.
Click to expand...

I agree. Gotta love it. :)

I only wish Pixar hadn't signed a five-picture deal. Obviously Eisner smelled something he hadn't smelled in his own company for many, many years: talent. And maybe he guessed Pixar would eventually outgrow Disney, so he figured he better screw Pixar while the screwin' was good, so to speak.
 
Disney: The sequel factory

Originally posted by SiliconAddict
So I guess we can expect more remakes releases of Lion King, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, because without Pixar Disney doesn't have a creative bone in its collective body.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, we can expect lame sequels of the Pixar flicks, too, since Disney has the rights to all seven.

Get ready for Toy Story 9, Bug's Life 3 1/2, Monsters Unincorporated, Finding Marlin, The Incredibles Ride Again, and Cars 4: Super Unleaded.
 
What is this thread about?

So this thread has gone from how Pixar will fare financially when it's free from Disney's tentacles to Disney being the enemy of every living breathing thing. The last 11 posts at the time I began to type this had nothing to do with how Pixar will do financially... rather they are statements of disillusionment with Michael Eisner (which I agree with) to irrational anti-Disney smear campaigns.

If you don't like Disney, fine. Don't go to their theme parks. They hold the top 5 most-attended slots, with Universal Florida parks a distant 6th and 7th (the supposed stinker Disney's California Adventure, was number 8, with a 13% increase from the year before). Don't watch their movies either. Their movies earned over $1billion in 2003 WITHOUT counting Finding Nemo. Brother Bear earned almost $90 million by itself just in Movie sales.. how much did the next closest animated picture earn? Katzenberg's SKG "Sinbad" earned a laughable $27million

Now I don't like Eisner any more than Roy Disney. I hate what the company has become in some circles. I would LOVE Jobs or someone (anyone) to replace Eisner.

But to say that Pixar is infinitely or automatically better now without partnering with Disney, or that Disney is incapable of making a comeback without Pixar, is for some a gross misunderstanding and for others nothing more than wishful thinking. And to simply trash Disney without mentioning Pixar at all is IMHO misusing what this thread was supposed to be about.
 
Eisner is an idiot. I believe he had made some nasty comments about Jobs not long ago. Eisner is bringing Disney down. There was some news last month about the last remaining Disney on the board stepping down and asking Eisner to step down. Disney was a leeching off Pixar. Let Pixar go it alone or find another studio. When you watch Nemo or Toy Story or A Bugs Life.... Pixar comes to mind (jumping lamp), NOT Disney. Good job Mike! You'll be gone soon. I saw an article about the possibility of Apple buying Disney??

http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/30/technology/apple/index.htm
 
Re: What is this thread about?

Originally posted by rjfiske
So this thread has gone from how Pixar will fare financially when it's free from Disney's tentacles to Disney being the enemy of every living breathing thing. ... And to simply trash Disney without mentioning Pixar at all is IMHO misusing what this thread was supposed to be about.
Click to expand...

Well, I more than understand your point. But, when you get right down to it, what's the point of discussing this matter on here at all? This is a Mac forum; not Pixar. And Pixar has limited legitimate connection to Apple. This thread has had nothing to do with the one meaningful segue: Renderman for Mac OS. Even the fact that Steve Jobs is CEO of both companies is rather irrelevant, for most Mac-centric topics that we could be discussing.

With that in mind, I would say don't worry so much about it. We've been off-topic from the start. And there's nothing that could force this thread to come back on track, anytime soon.
 
Re: Re: What is this thread about?

Originally posted by artisan002
Well, I more than understand your point. But, when you get right down to it, what's the point of discussing this matter on here at all? This is a Mac forum; not Pixar. And Pixar has limited legitimate connection to Apple. This thread has had nothing to do with the one meaningful segue: Renderman for Mac OS. Even the fact that Steve Jobs is CEO of both companies is rather irrelevant, for most Mac-centric topics that we could be discussing.

With that in mind, I would say don't worry so much about it. We've been off-topic from the start. And there's nothing that could force this thread to come back on track, anytime soon.
Click to expand...

A fair assessment to be sure. Well put.

- rjf
 
Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
hat, and Pixar is looking to start up a 2D animation group....is it coincidence?

D :D
Click to expand...
Last month, a friend who works at Pixar told me that the 2-D rumor's false, and that Pixar's going to stick to what it does best, 3-D animation.

As everyone's said, I think Disney needed Pixar more than Pixar needed Disney. Their brand is the more dominant one anyway when it comes to their films. They're always covered as new Pixar films, not as new Disney films. And there are other studios (e.g. Warners) that have comparable distribution and marketing capabilities. Pixar doesn't need Disney.
 
not good

This is bad news for Pixar. Anyone with a gram of business-sense can see that. If this was the news that pixar had gone into business with Disney it would be 200 positive entries in this forum (just like with the Pepsi and Apple deal - now look at the quality of the commercial and see how you feel about that).
 
Re: not good

Originally posted by gola
This is bad news for Pixar. Anyone with a gram of business-sense can see that. If this was the news that pixar had gone into business with Disney it would be 200 positive entries in this forum (just like with the Pepsi and Apple deal - now look at the quality of the commercial and see how you feel about that).
Click to expand...

I'm far from knowledgable about Disney-Pixar history and I think many who post are too. Seems to me we have Disney as the evil Microsoft because a deal with Pixar, the understudy for Apple fell apart.

I don't think there's any other company that can distribute movies, advertise in other owned assets, do toy deals with McDonalds and Burger King etc.

Not trying to start a fight here, but the more time I spend here (and I love the site), the more I see this Apple can do no wrong, anything against them is a jihad.
 
Re: not good

Originally posted by gola
This is bad news for Pixar. Anyone with a gram of business-sense can see that. If this was the news that pixar had gone into business with Disney it would be 200 positive entries in this forum (just like with the Pepsi and Apple deal - now look at the quality of the commercial and see how you feel about that).
Click to expand...

Pixar was/is contracted to deliver 5 movies to disney. Under the terms of the contract, Pixar must share a large percentage of the box office take, loses the rights to the movie, and gives disney the right to make sequels with or without pixar. I have far more than a gram of business sense, and that is a poor deal for pixar. Pixar's films have bought in a total of 2.5billion in box office revenues alone, and Disney has made untold amounts of money on toys and dvds/tapes. The tapes and dvd sales have topped 150million copies. Pixar has been on the losing end of this deal.

Pixar only went into business with disney because they were not large neough and did not have the capital to produce and distribute the movies. Pixar now has that capital and can find another distributor. Sure the new distributor might not be quite as good as disney, but it is doubtful that revenues will be hurt much by the change.

Everyone would be saying it was positive if pixar went into business with disney, but only if it was under good terms. If you cannot figure out that Pixar was in a bad contract and was not achieving the best revenues they could off of their creations, then it is you who doesn't have a gram of business sense.
 
dislike of Disney

There are quite a few people who dislike Disney because of their various attempts to get legislation passed that would make the DMCA look reasonable.

For me, it is not a Pixar / Jobs thing, it is "I hope new management shows up that deals with new technology in a non-outlaw way".

Witness Divx (DVD competitor not encoder) and "disposable" DVDs as examples of Disney goodness. :(
 
the future

i hate the sequel thing that disney as much as any of you. it is for easy profit, and Roy's position is against Mr. Eisner's concentration on profit and not money.

but let us recall that, ironically, Roy's own father (Roy sr. ) played a similar role to Mr. E, financially speaking. Walt saw only the finish line, only the creation, and it was Roy that would try to pinch the pennies and would be concerned with the profit. it took both to make disney what it is (although it isn't Roy Disney World).

Eisner is the kind of man to save disney, because he did in 1984 when the co. was in similar peril. I'm not saying i want him staying, i havnt decided. I believe he is able to make the turnaround he did when he came in from Paramount. If he isnt, then he should go.

regardless of whether he or someone new makes the turn around, the current events can only point disney in one direction. They will return to quality. Disney is about bringing dreams to life. first by putting them on screen, then in the parks. Pixar is a quality movie maker, they havn't made a dud. When this roy/eisner/pixar news ends it will be with quality animation, tv, and themed rides, and the money will come because of that.

P.S. and lets not compare them to MS, please! ms copied from the begining. disney was about innovation. snow white is from '37 and is still selling copies. just because its big, doesnt mean its bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back