Eisner and Miramax

[HennieBogan1966]

Was just reading an article on the homepage for Netzero regarding the relationship between Michael Eisner and the brothers who run Miramax. (rephrase: I know Disney bought out their company, but the brothers run it under contract with Disney.) Anyway, it appears this relationship is now headed for the rocks too. According to reports, Michael Eisner wants the company to product low-budget, independent films, instead of high budget action films, which the brothers want to do. Another part of the clash is over the Michael Moorer film, which Eisner did not want distributed through Miramax. The brothers went behind his/Disneys' back and financed the US release of the film.

Where to begin. First of all, as is so frequently pointed out to me during any and all discussions Disney, this site is not a political site. However, as it relates to this thread, and in particular, the release of this film, thru Miramax, is in fact a political statement by Miramax, which is owned by Disney. Whether or not Eisner approved/disapproved of this release, is, to me, debatable. Could it be that he fronts his disapproval for public opinion, while really approving of this release? Just not wanting to appear as though Disney is engaging politically? And the contract between Disney and the brothers Miramax isn't up until 2007, but there is an opt out in 05.

I can't tell you how much this bothers me personally. I love Disney and its products. I have long had a problem with their foray into "Hollywood", especially with Miramax. And now this. Regardless of your politics, this is not a good thing for Disney, Michael Eisner, or the reputation of Disney.

I say that Disney gets rid of Miramax, and gets back to its roots. It's time for a clean sweep of management at Disney.

What do you all think?

 

[wdwmaniac]

Not releasing Moore's film was Disney putting it's foot down. No matter what you believe you can't take sides when you are a corp. like Disney. When you take sides you alienate people. If Disney did release the film I would have been extremely upset and many other people are. Moore is just playing off of Gibson, Moore says freedom of speech but what about Disney opinions? I may not like his views but if you are only one sided and self center I won't watch your movies, but if you bring up some plausiable facts like why were are in Iraq not just because of Bush Jr. but Clinton had a very large part in it also. But as for Disney selling Miramax- they can't it would hurt Disney to much right now. Disney has many options out there all it has to do is go get them. Why can't they remove Mr Eisner and buy PIXAR and Dreamworks. Bring Katz, Speil, and Lass over to Disney maybe buy MGM give the Wein. brother control that would give them something to play with.

the funny thing in about this story is Disney bought Miramax- Wein. could have said no, Disney doesn't really use there option on releases that often, and they did sell the movie back (they didn't withhold it from the public eye).

 

[wdwmaniac]

Starring Michael Moore

Director(s) Michael Moore

Screenwriter(s) Michael Moore

Studio Lions Gate Films

Producer(s) Michael Moore
from movies.com
A little big headed? :lol:

 

[Legacy]

Starring Michael Moore

Director(s) Michael Moore

Screenwriter(s) Michael Moore

Studio Lions Gate Films

Producer(s) Michael Moore
from movies.com
A little big headed? :lol:

Not big headed, just not ashamed of the statement he is trying to make. If he produces, directs, wrote and starred in it, then being credited those things is warranted. It happens all the time in Hollywood.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

Well, all those things aside, I find it funny that he makes claims about Corporate America, The Evil Empire, etc., yet takes big money from movie investors. As well, he lives very very well. He can dress like he's from the neighborhood, but he sure doesn't live in mine. Yet another example of a tremendous hypocrite.