Iger rumored to extend his term as CEO

[Earl Sweatpants]

For what it's worth, John is creative director, not president, so he's not exactly the overall leader.

I cannot fathom the problem here. Iger actually did something right (in placing Lasseter where he did) but because John proved himself somewhere else first, it doesn't count as Disney anymore?

I'll keep that in mind the next time a quarterback acquired from another team throws a touchdown to a receiver who was drafted on day one. Those points won't be put on the scoreboard for his current team.

Whatever his title is, nothing happens at Disney animation that doesn't have to pass John's approval, so he's in charge.

Honestly, I think you're reading into this too much. Obviously your football analogy is ridiculous and no one in their right mind would reach those conclusions. I'm not saying that Disney under John "doesn't count as Disney" because he also oversees Pixar. Honestly, I think we should just drop it and agree to disagree and carry on with out lives

 

[doctornick]

And all those animated successes have come under the Iger-bought leadership of John Lasseter and not home-grown through Disney's ranks.

So? I see this stated over and over and I can't fort he life of me understand why it matters. People aren't born working for a company. Whether they join the employee rank via purchasing of their current employer versus being hired directed, what does it matter? Getting the right talented people in the right place is the important part and, for many of his other faults, Iger has done that quite well on the creative side.

(Also ignoring that Lasseter actually did come through Disney's ranks before going to Pixar.)

 

[doctornick]

Let's assume Steve Jobs was still president of Apple. Then Apple was acquired by Samsung and Steve was put in charge of their phone division also. Then all of a sudden Samsung starts making good phones again. Would you be inclined to say, "Wow, I didn't realize Samsung had it in themselves to make good phones again." No, you'd credit Steve's influence as a driving factor behind their success. And I think you have to do that with Lasseter and Disney animation. The overall point is, Disney animation needed outside help in order to be good again.

You mean just like how Katzenberg came from outside the company?

It's an absurd thing to dwell on. People move around all the time in the entertainment industry between companies.

 

[Earl Sweatpants]

So? I see this stated over and over and I can't fort he life of me understand why it matters. People aren't born working for a company. Whether they join the employee rank via purchasing of their current employer versus being hired directed, what does it matter? Getting the right talented people in the right place is the important part and, for many of his other faults, Iger has done that quite well on the creative side.

(Also ignoring that Lasseter actually did come through Disney's ranks before going to Pixar.)

Yeah, I guess it doesn't really matter than much. I just wish in the future, Iger could bring Disney up from within and not have to poach outside companies. The pool is already overcrowded.

 

[PB Watermelon]

Meet the Robinsons
Bolt
The Princess and the Frog
Tangled/Rapunzel
Wreck-It Ralph
Big Hero 6
Frozen
Zootopia
Moana

And all those animated successes have come under the Iger-bought leadership of John Lasseter and not home-grown through Disney's ranks. Point remains, Iger didn't have enough faith in people at Feature Animation to be great on their own, and felt they needed an outside companies help to get them back on track.

John certainly *was* in-house, trained at Cal-Arts, the school created by Walt himself and still receives funds from his estate. Brought into the Disney animation fold, he began to experiment and explore new technology for animation...right up until Ron Miller fired him after John's pitch for "The Brave Little Toaster". So John joins Pixar in its infancy, and uses new tech to tell stories that could have come straight out of Disney. Goes on a creative and commercial tear, costs Disney $7 billion to get him back and bring Pixar under the Disney Animation banner for good.

 

[BrianLo]

So conflicted here. Part of me would be quite happy to see Iger face the reality when the sequel machine stops working and the whole thing starts to crash and burn.

The sequel factory already crashed and burned. 2016 was a bloodbath for sequels people didn't want. However, the sequel factories include all the other major studios these days.

WDAS is the furthest any animation studio is currently from a sequel factory. Especially with Ghibli taking a break. That's the most important thing in my mind. Pixar dabbles and seems to be refocusing on their own original content. But between the two, the Walt Dis co.still produces a ton of original animated efforts annually.

Marvel is still going to be Marvel, it's not a sequel factory, it's a comic book factory. Sequels, serialization and spin offs are how comic books have always worked. As long as they continue exploring new heroes and don't give us Iron Man 9, the universe continues expanding. The credit is quickly lost in retrospect, but the studio has made a lot of risky bets on Guardians, Ant man, Dr. Strange etc. I always scratch my head when people complain about Marvel movies, when their complaints pretty much boil down to they are too much like comic books. Serialization is kind of the whole point.


Then we have Disney live action. Which, yes, is an adaptation/sequel factory. The most disposable film division of the lot. Animation is the life blood, live action has rarely actually been a successful thing historically.

The film divisions wont crash and burn due to sequels, they will crash and burn when the quality slips. The public in 2016 rewarded 'quality' films. Sequels are clearly no longer assured success.

 

[RobidaFlats]

Whatever his title is, nothing happens at Disney animation that doesn't have to pass John's approval, so he's in charge.

Honestly, I think you're reading into this too much. Obviously your football analogy is ridiculous and no one in their right mind would reach those conclusions. I'm not saying that Disney under John "doesn't count as Disney" because he also oversees Pixar. Honestly, I think we should just drop it and agree to disagree and carry on with out lives

I guess to me the football analogy is perfect. I am not a fan of Iger and I think he's been bad for the company (parks especially). But I won't fault him in areas where he actually succeeded.

Football owners make the same decisions all the time. If I'm an owner and my QB gets injured, retires, whatever... I am going to replace him with the best player I can, even if I have to trade to get him and overlook the backup. That is neither a slight against the backup (he could be good, just not as good) and it is certainly not a bad move on my part since the goal is to win and getting better players lets you do that. Nobody has a perfect record on draft day and so no one can ever be blamed for reaching outside for talent. A true leader gets talent from wherever he can.

I'm all aboard the Iger hate train, but he has enough actual failures that I don't need to jump on the dubious ones.

 

[Earl Sweatpants]

Meet the Robinsons
Bolt
The Princess and the Frog
Tangled/Rapunzel
Wreck-It Ralph
Big Hero 6
Frozen
Zootopia
Moana



John certainly *was* in-house, trained at Cal-Arts, the school created by Walt himself and still receives funds from his estate. Brought into the Disney animation fold, he began to experiment and explore new technology for animation...right up until Ron Miller fired him after John's pitch for "The Brave Little Toaster". So John joins Pixar in its infancy, and uses new tech to tell stories that could have come straight out of Disney. Goes on a creative and commercial tear, costs Disney $7 billion to get him back and bring Pixar under the Disney Animation banner for good.

All while keeping the Hawaiian shirt alive.

 

[doctornick]

Yeah, I guess it doesn't really matter than much. I just wish in the future, Iger could bring Disney up from within and not have to poach outside companies. The pool is already overcrowded.

So, given the option between a more talented person working for another company or an inferior person "developed in house", you'd want Disney to promote the in house person "just because"?

Seems silly to me. Get the best people possible. If they bring in a new prospective due to coming from a different company, all the better. This is a creative field, after all.

 

[Earl Sweatpants]

I guess to me the football analogy is perfect. I am not a fan of Iger and I think he's been bad for the company (parks especially). But I won't fault him in areas where he actually succeeded.

Football owners make the same decisions all the time. If I'm an owner and my QB gets injured, retires, whatever... I am going to replace him with the best player I can, even if I have to trade to get him and overlook the backup. That is neither a slight against the backup (he could be good, just not as good) and it is certainly not a bad move on my part since the goal is to win and getting better players lets you do that. Nobody has a perfect record on draft day and so no one can ever be blamed for reaching outside for talent. A true leader gets talent from wherever he can.

I'm all aboard the Iger hate train, but he has enough actual failures that I don't need to jump on the dubious ones.

I guess for me the football analogy falls a bit flat because the QB can only play for one team at a time. But I can get the overall sentiment.

Hey, I'll eat crow, it don't taste so bad.

LETS MOVE ON.

 

[Earl Sweatpants]

So, given the option between a more talented person working for another company or an inferior person "developed in house", you'd want Disney to promote the in house person "just because"?

Seems silly to me. Get the best people possible. If they bring in a new prospective due to coming from a different company, all the better. This is a creative field, after all.

I see your point and in a sense I agree...but that begs the bigger question, why are the current in house people not good enough and what's wrong thats holding them back? Again, I'm willing to eat humble pie here and say that the Lassester situation is one that Iger actually made a good call with. So, let's move on ya?

 

[RobidaFlats]

I guess for me the football analogy falls a bit flat because the QB can only play for one team at a time. But I can get the overall sentiment.

Hey, I'll eat crow, it don't taste so bad.

LETS MOVE ON.

Haha, I really wasn't trying to make you eat anything. I know others will disagree because they hate "confrontation", but I enjoyed our little debate. It made me think and even made me go back and check a couple sources. Really got the old brain chugging a bit.

So for engaging in a reasonable discussion, I thank you.

 

[Earl Sweatpants]

Haha, I really wasn't trying to make you eat anything. I know others will disagree because they hate "confrontation", but I enjoyed our little debate. It made me think and even made me go back and check a couple sources. Really got the old brain chugging a bit.

So for engaging in a reasonable discussion, I thank you.

Haha you're welcome. I am always a fan of rational discussion (sometimes rare on here) and I appreciate you taking the time to make your points clear and intelligible (again, a rarity). Sometimes its easy to forget we all genuinely love Disney and want it to succeed. We just often have different ideas on how that should happen. I honestly could never be mad at you simply based on your avatar

 

[BrianLo]

For me, the main difference between animation under Katzenberg vs Iger is that Katzenberg actually believed Disney had the talent in house to pull off amazing standalone movies (Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin etc.) On the other hand, Iger simply bought out Pixar and put them in charge of Disney animation.

Another major difference is that, under Iger, it seems like there is a huge push for sequels and a "franchise" mentality. Sequels were largely looked down upon under Katzenberg, and were often relegated to their own direct-to-video division. I seem to recall when Lasseter took over, he swore the awful sequel machine would get shut down. But it appears instead, he's just moved them from the minor leagues and put them in the hands of the big boys.

I disagree. The worst divisions are the ones that are most insular. Outside talent, that adheres to the values and mould of the company that came before, are the smartest way to grow a company.

John Lassiter and the entire Pixar group that came before him are true blue Walt Disney. There is nothing 'dirty' about bringing them into the fold.

Eisner believed in an insular company. It's only so sustainable before it rots from the inside out. It's the reason his first years were so great and the final years so bad.

The hope is the next CEO will come from the outside, not in. That's probably the best move for the company. Sometimes you need someone from the outside to objectively see the things that are broken. Yes, even if that means the merch guy in charge of the parks.

 

[Earl Sweatpants]

I disagree. The worst divisions are the ones that are most insular. Outside talent, that adheres to the values and mould of the company that came before, are the smartest way to grow a company.

John Lassiter and the entire Pixar group that came before him are true blue Walt Disney. There is nothing 'dirty' about bringing them into the fold.

Eisner believed in an insular company. It's only so sustainable before it rots from the inside out. It's the reason his first years were so great and the final years so bad.

The hope is the next CEO will come from the outside, not in. That's probably the best move for the company. Sometimes you need someone from the outside to objectively see the things that are broken. Yes, even if that means the merch guy in charge of the parks.

I never meant to imply there was anything "dirty" about bringing in Lasseter.

Just out of curiosity, where would you like the next CEO to come from? From a creative field or more of a Wall St. business background?

 

[TP2000]

I also figured that Iger wasn't going anywhere once he was appointed to that panel of CEO's.

Ideally, Iger should stay on until both Star Wars Lands are completed.

What really sunk Iger's post-Disney lifeboat was when he signed on to the losing team trying to bring the NFL back to Los Angeles, and then totally botched his presentation to the NFL owners. http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...ct-robert-iger-nfl-carson-20160121-story.html

Iger wasn't needed to bring the NFL to LA, and the NFL owners from around the country weren't impressed by Iger and didn't need him. It wasn't just a failure, it was a humiliation. So Iger had nothing else to do but keep running Disney for a few more years.

And since he's not needed elsewhere, it's obvious he wants to stick around until Star Wars Land opens at Disneyland. He wants and needs to be there to put his face on that concept, then he can finally retire.

 

[BrianLo]

I never meant to imply there was anything "dirty" about bringing in Lasseter.

Just out of curiosity, where would you like the next CEO to come from? From a creative field or more of a Wall St. business background?

I just want someone who believes in investing heavily in the company, not just the stock. Who surrounds themselves with creatives and let's the creatives be 'creative'.

That CEO could come from either field. They don't have to be creative themselves, they just need to support those who are.

Netflix comes to mind as a company that has been investing heavily in 'themselves' and 2016 really has paid off big for them.

 

[Earl Sweatpants]

I just want someone who believes in investing heavily in the company, not just the stock. Who surrounds themselves with creatives and let's the creatives be 'creative'.

That CEO could come from either field. They don't have to be creative themselves, they just need to support those who are.

Netflix comes to mind as a company that has been investing heavily in 'themselves' and 2016 really has paid off big for them.

I agree. I think I just want the next CEO to have a true visible passion for Disney AND be business savvy. I would also hope they adhere to the parks original mission statements when thinking about improvements and not just implementing synergy for the sake of synergy.

 

[Laketravis]

Meet the Robinsons
Bolt
The Princess and the Frog
Tangled/Rapunzel
Wreck-It Ralph
Big Hero 6
Frozen
Zootopia
Moana

Can't leave out "Up". Just sayin'...

 

[RobidaFlats]

Can't leave out "Up". Just sayin'...

Up was Pixar.