No More Luxo :-(

[chase!]

I only took one picture with my iPhone on my latest trip to Disney.

I have checked time and time again on previous trips and he never showed. I guess this time he wanted to say bye.

I can't tell you how big the smile was on my face when I finally saw his performance and I'm so glad I was able to see it.

 

[raven]

I do wonder if they will ever bring back the bouncing ball that was part of the "Lighting" signage next to Luxo. It has been missing for awhile.

The ball and white cord are now hung on the wall at the Florida WDI location.

 

[unkadug]

You know? While it's heresy, I really don't care that Luxo is gone. Blame it on too many trips with Luxo just not showing up. I believe the real lesson of all this is for WDW to get their act together on the creation of MAINTAINABLE AA's. They know how to do this, they've DONE this, go back and start DOING IT AGAIN.

The thing is Disney is outsourcing most AA manufacturing and upkeep...and it's showing.

wait, Luxo was happy about using the name on the short for all these year, or did they not know about that... and soeaking of lamps, my lamp looks an awful like luxo, while it's really just a cheap nockoff from target

the AA could simply have been the pixar mascot without saying it's luxo jr...

The whole thing about the suit was that Disney was basically manufacturing cheap knock offs of Luxo's product as a promotional product using Luxo's name.

Disney should have known better, as they guard their copyrights with a vengeance. Luxo had every right to to be upset.

Since the use of the animatronic is in the same spirit as the original contract, I don't think this is a copyright infringement, I think this is simply a cost cutting measure.


I blame TDO. (go ahead and shoot me)

 

[E P C O T]

Void.

 

[Mansion Butler]

Lamp still not there.

CMs knew nothing about it, so soon forgotten.

Well, at this point in the year, your odds of the CM you talk to being a new CP are pretty high.

 

[Skipper Dan]

I honestly am still just in shock about this. First, I never saw it, and second, it was such a cool, big attempt for Disney, toward something so small. I wish they would at least give an explanation (like I wish they'd do for a lot of things).

 

[JWG]

So, does anyone ACTUALLY know if Luxo is permanently gone from DHS and Pixar Place? We loved him during the last trip we saw him at (Jan '10).

 

[puntagordabob]

bummer.....never caught the show before this was removed...always seemed to have just ended lol .....

 

[DTM93]

^
I'm the same, things always seem to close before I go there! hehe.

Anyway, it is a shame that's it's not running anymore as I actually thought it sounded brilliant and I really wanted to see it but if it's the animatronic that can't work properly then it's not Disney's fault.

 

[Disco Yeti]

So, does anyone ACTUALLY know if Luxo is permanently gone from DHS and Pixar Place? We loved him during the last trip we saw him at (Jan '10).

Yes, from everything I've heard, he's permanently gone. "Luxo Jr." is gone from the nearby lighting sign as well.

I've confirmed with someone in the know that there were major technical issues in Luxo's design.

But hey, I hear there's a giant ride-through Wii game nearby... so that makes it all better, right?

B. Mode
The Disco Yeti

 

[NewfieFan]

Yes, from everything I've heard, he's permanently gone. "Luxo Jr." is gone from the nearby lighting sign as well.

I've confirmed with someone in the know that there were major technical issues in Luxo's design.

But hey, I hear there's a giant ride-through Wii game nearby... so that makes it all better, right?

B. Mode
The Disco Yeti

So, what was wrong with Luxo? He did work at times... I saw him twice in a row and he worked perfectly. What about him was that difficult... and why couldn't they fix/change it???

 

[rct247]

Not only was Luxo Jr. a maintenance fiasco, apparently Disney didn't really have the full rights to create him from what I understand. Since he is based off of an actually product by the Luxo company not associated with Disney. But again, the main reason was the maintenance. Coming out of his little doors he has bumped his head a couple times. I've heard a kid threw a rock at his lightbulb and broke it once. Plus, he wasn't entirely protected from the elements very well. So the amount of money going into Luxo Jr. was not worth it. He wasn't crucial to an attraction or show. Some guests would notice him, others wouldn't, and he didn't even have set show times or advertising to draw people to him. It's like spending thousands of dollars to fix an animated lawn gnome in your yard. Sure it looks cute and entertains people that notice, but at some point, you'd pull the plug as well.

 

[Rob562]

Not only was Luxo Jr. a maintenance fiasco, apparently Disney didn't really have the full rights to create him from what I understand. Since he is based off of an actually product by the Luxo company not associated with Disney. But again, the main reason was the maintenance. Coming out of his little doors he has bumped his head a couple times. I've heard a kid threw a rock at his lightbulb and broke it once. Plus, he wasn't entirely protected from the elements very well. So the amount of money going into Luxo Jr. was not worth it. He wasn't crucial to an attraction or show. Some guests would notice him, others wouldn't, and he didn't even have set show times or advertising to draw people to him. It's like spending thousands of dollars to fix an animated lawn gnome in your yard. Sure it looks cute and entertains people that notice, but at some point, you'd pull the plug as well.

He was also a prototype animatronic, using electric actuators instead of hydraulic/pneumatic actuators like most other AAs in the parks.

-Rob

 

[MKCP 1985]

He's hanging out with Lucky the dinosaur and Wall-E in the land of "didn't work out" Disney park animatronics these days?

Too bad . . . it could have been a really cool addition to Pixar Place. :shrug:

 

[Skipper Dan]

Don't forget Remy! I'm sure he'll be headin' there sometime soon!

 

[TP2000]

Is it just me, or does it appear that Disney's legal group was rather sloppy by allowing a corporate symbol of one of their major divisions to be based on a copyrighted product from another company?

In a perfect world, the Norwegian company would consider the use of their Luxo lamp by Pixar great publicity, and they would allow Disney to use the lamp character free of charge, or maybe with a symbolic one dollar release contract.

But I kind of don't blame the Luxo company in Norway for being protective of their main, iconic product. It's surprisingly sloppy that Disney allowed the use of this copyrighted product by their Pixar division, even years after Disney bought out Pixar. http://www.luxo.com/product/l-1--443.aspx

Someone in the Disney Legal department didn't do their homework, apparently. :lol:

 

[zooey]

Not only was Luxo Jr. a maintenance fiasco, apparently Disney didn't really have the full rights to create him from what I understand. Since he is based off of an actually product by the Luxo company not associated with Disney. But again, the main reason was the maintenance. Coming out of his little doors he has bumped his head a couple times. I've heard a kid threw a rock at his lightbulb and broke it once. Plus, he wasn't entirely protected from the elements very well. So the amount of money going into Luxo Jr. was not worth it. He wasn't crucial to an attraction or show. Some guests would notice him, others wouldn't, and he didn't even have set show times or advertising to draw people to him. It's like spending thousands of dollars to fix an animated lawn gnome in your yard. Sure it looks cute and entertains people that notice, but at some point, you'd pull the plug as well.

Maintenance and legal issues aside, he was amazing and certainly would have picked up popularity by word of mouth, if given the time. "Hidden treasures" are just as important to any Disney experience as the attractions.

 

[janoimagine]

Is it just me, or does it appear that Disney's legal group was rather sloppy by allowing a corporate symbol of one of their major divisions to be based on a copyrighted product from another company?

In a perfect world, the Norwegian company would consider the use of their Luxo lamp by Pixar great publicity, and they would allow Disney to use the lamp character free of charge, or maybe with a symbolic one dollar release contract.

But I kind of don't blame the Luxo company in Norway for being protective of their main, iconic product. It's surprisingly sloppy that Disney allowed the use of this copyrighted product by their Pixar division, even years after Disney bought out Pixar. http://www.luxo.com/product/l-1--443.aspx

Someone in the Disney Legal department didn't do their homework, apparently. :lol:

I believe the legal issue had been settled and an agreement was reached to use the Luxo name, otherwise I don't think they would still be selling the Limited Edition Blu Ray of UP with the Luxo lamp on the Disney site. Luxo's whole issue with Disney stemmed from an inferior product being placed in the box set with the Luxo name on it, it was something they felt did not live up to there standards of quality.

From what I understand, the show was abandoned because the figure itself had to many problems and was constantly needing repair.

 

[Disco Yeti]

He's hanging out with Lucky the dinosaur and Wall-E in the land of "didn't work out" Disney park animatronics these days?

We play bridge on Fridays.

 

[TP2000]

From what I understand, the show was abandoned because the figure itself had to many problems and was constantly needing repair.

Ah, thank you for clarifying that for me. That makes a bit more sense.

Still, I can't fault Luxo for wanting to protect their name and reputation. I have Scandinavian family, and that culture really values their fine design work and craftsmanship, so no wonder they didn't want plastic knock-offs floating around out there like cheap toys from a cereal box.