KODAK Wanting Out of Imagination?

[hack2112]

I think Microsoft could be a good sponsor. The only issue I have is what will they use for their "Imagination". Natal could work but then you'd be dealing with only whatever the launch titles are.

Google wouldn't work imo. It's a search engine and an e-mail service, they've given no real creative pieces to the world at large(special logos aside).

I think RareWare could work, they're a development studio for Microsoft. Makers of Banjo-Kazooie and the Avatars on the Xbox, they've got a generally colorful palette. Figment could fit in with any of their "younger" astetics and would work well overall.

Google is arguably the most innovative tech company at the present. And they are not only searching and email (despite the fact that they did them both so well that everyone's copying off of them now), they also have two operating systems (Android and Chrome, which looks to be the future of web-based OSes), not to mention all of the projects that were incredible before other companies got greedy and sued them to stop what they were doing (Google Books being a huge e-library). Google is pretty much THE tech company to work for if you're trying to develop a new project.

As for Rare, I couldn't name the last great game they published. If we're going for a Microsoft studio, you may as well use Bungie. (oh, wait...)

 

[Sloan]

rights to Dreamfinder & Figment

After a cursory, quick search of official records, it appears that the Dreamfinder and Figment characters are owned by Buena Vista Distribution Company & Walt Disney Productions. (Though I guess that there could be some licensing agreement that gave Kodak some special rights or interest in the characters ....)

 

[MissM]

Why are Fig and DF on so many pins if they're owned by Kodak? And wouldn't we be seeing little licensing notations in everything about Epcot about Figment being owned by Kodak?

I agree here. Figment pins say © Disney.

Pins of Jessica Rabbit say © Disney & Amblin Entertainment, Inc. (example)

Jessica Rabbit is CO-owned and thus has both copyrights. If Figment were co-owned, it would have to say Disney & Kodak on the back - and it doesn't.

 

[TheBeatles]

I am now being told that Kodak is definitely leaving.

CMs should know more after EO opens.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

A true Kodak moment.

C'mon the FUJI.

 

[jt04]

I am now being told that Kodak is definitely leaving.

CMs should know more after EO opens.

I can't say I blame Kodak for wanting to leave. I can't think of anything more unimaginative than bringing back a failed attraction such as EO. It's not like it has improved over time.

Disney really needs to decide what the heck "Future World's" mission is because it has lost it's way. The Chinese are exhibiting their "EPCOT" type vision at this years expo in hai. It makes the original EPCOT look like an old cheap 1950's era roadside attraction.

Get some vision Disney.

 

[cowanfamily]

Agreed! :brick:

Ditto

 

[misterID]

Maybe this is a good thing. Hopefully they can find a sponser who'll fork over the refurb money.

 

[jt04]

Maybe this is a good thing. Hopefully they can find a sponser who'll fork over the refurb money.

Doubtful until/unless EO's run is over. Too controversial for any corporation.

 

[mp2bill]

Ooooooo crayola might be a good sponsor. They're full of imagination! And they would make everything so colorful! :lookaroun

Good call.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Is it just me, or has the Disney company been bereft of original ideas recently?

There's a lot of remakes in the works for movies, and the additions to WDW this year will be extinct attractions/entertainment.

 

[lebeau]

Doubtful until/unless EO's run is over. Too controversial for any corporation.

I am surprised any time a new sponsor signs on. Eo not withstanding.

 

[Master Yoda]

Is it just me, or has the Disney company been bereft of original ideas recently?

There's a lot of remakes in the works for movies, and the additions to WDW this year will be extinct attractions/entertainment.

It is not just Disney. It seems like everything is a remake, and adaptation of a comic book or novel, or simply the retelling of an old story line using different characters.

 

[lebeau]

Is it just me, or has the Disney company been bereft of original ideas recently?

There's a lot of remakes in the works for movies, and the additions to WDW this year will be extinct attractions/entertainment.

I think that's true of the entertainment industry in general. It's certainly true of Hollywood films which are more commerce than art.

Having said that, I remember in the summer of 1989 reading an article about how Hollywood had run out of ideas and was just cranking out sequels (Indy 3, Ghostbusters 2, Karate Kid 3, Lethal Weapon 2 and Star Trek 5 to name a few.) So, it's really nothing new.

When a few high profile sequels under-perform (like this summer) or a few remakes/reboots disappoint, Hollywood will decide people don't like them and they will back off. Then the cycle will start all over again.

 

[lebeau]

It is not just Disney. It seems like everything is a remake, and adaptation of a comic book or novel, or simply the retelling of an old story line using different characters.

I believe it's been said that there are only 7 basic plots that have ever been told. I found this summary of the argument on-line:

1. 'Tragedy'. Hero with a fatal flaw meets tragic end. Macbeth or
Madame Bovary.
2. 'Comedy'. Not necessary laugh-out-loud, but always with a happy ending, typically of romantic fulfilment, as in Jane Austen.
3. 'Overcoming the Monster'. As in Frankenstein or 'Jaws'. Its psychological appeal is obvious and eternal.
4. 'Voyage and Return'. Booker argues that stories as diverse as Alice
in Wonderland and H G Wells' The Time Machine and Coleridge's The Rime of the Ancient Mariner follow the same archetypal structure of personal development through leaving, then returning home.
5. 'Quest'. Whether the quest is for a holy grail, a whale, or a kidnapped child it is the plot that links a lot of the most popular fiction. The quest plot links Lords of the Rings with Moby ________ and a thousand others in between.
6. 'Rags to Riches'. The riches in question can be literal or metaphoric. See Cinderella, David Copperfield, Pygmalion.
7. 'Rebirth'. The 'rebirth' plot - where a central character suddenly finds a new reason for living - can be seen in A Christmas Carol, It's a Wonderful Life, Crime and Punishment and Peer Gynt.

 

[WILWIJ]

Is it just me, or has the Disney company been bereft of original ideas recently?

There's a lot of remakes in the works for movies, and the additions to WDW this year will be extinct attractions/entertainment.

Great observation and I agree Disney (and a lot of other companies for that matter) have gotten away from creating.

The roller coaster "wars" are a perfect example. Everyone wants to build the fastest/tallest/take your pick roller coaster.

Imaginative, well themed dark rides transport me to another place where as roller coasters are just another thrill ride albeit the same here and there. I have been on Dueling Dragons at Universal Orlando several times, but after my third time or so it was the same old/same old. When I ride Pirates of the Caribbean or The Haunted Mansion, I am in awe every time I ride which is well over 50 each by now.

Show us the imagination and creativity that made Disney what it is today.

Ron

 

[misterID]

Doubtful until/unless EO's run is over. Too controversial for any corporation.

I don't know. It wouldn't be running there long, so they really wouldn't be sponsoring the film. I think the attraction itself would be the thing a company would want. I don't think EO will be a big deal.

 

[XS-Spence]

After a cursory, quick search of official records, it appears that the Dreamfinder and Figment characters are owned by Buena Vista Distribution Company & Walt Disney Productions. (Though I guess that there could be some licensing agreement that gave Kodak some special rights or interest in the characters ....)

You would see "©Kodak" on any Figment or Dreamfinder merchandise right next to the "©Disney" if there were any official licensing.

 

[twilight mitsuk]

read that kodak may be going under in a few years

Eastman Kodak
The company that brought us Kodachrome spent most of its life as a near monopoly. Back in the good old days, it only had to face down Fujifilm.

Eastman Kodak (EK, news, msgs) has bravely tried to catch up to the shift to digital photography. It has rolled out great digital cameras, digital photo printers and even retail kiosks where consumers can print digital pictures.

But it's still having a tough time in its new, intensely competitive battlefields. Formidable opponents in cameras include Sony (SNE, news, msgs) and Canon (CAJ, news, msgs), and the printer wars are just as fierce. Meanwhile, smart-phone makers are upgrading the cameras in their units.

More from MSN Money
Find a broker who's right for you
Corporate America's huge piles of cash
Farewell to Wall Street's decade of hubris
3 reasons 2010's economy looks iffy
Kodak retires Kodachrome
In 10 years, it seems we'll all be carrying one gadget that serves as camera, phone, music and video player, e-mail device and more. Will Kodak make those?

Sadly, the final Kodak moment may loom out there, somewhere, in the next decade.

Kodak responds that it has a leading position in most of its markets and is gaining share in new markets. The company recently raised more than $700 million, it says, and has $1.1 billion in cash. "By any reasonable assessment, Kodak is a financially sound company and a viable competitor," a company spokesman says.

 

[TheBeatles]

read that kodak may be going under in a few years

Eastman Kodak
The company that brought us Kodachrome spent most of its life as a near monopoly. Back in the good old days, it only had to face down Fujifilm.

Eastman Kodak (EK, news, msgs) has bravely tried to catch up to the shift to digital photography. It has rolled out great digital cameras, digital photo printers and even retail kiosks where consumers can print digital pictures.

But it's still having a tough time in its new, intensely competitive battlefields. Formidable opponents in cameras include Sony (SNE, news, msgs) and Canon (CAJ, news, msgs), and the printer wars are just as fierce. Meanwhile, smart-phone makers are upgrading the cameras in their units.

More from MSN Money
Find a broker who's right for you
Corporate America's huge piles of cash
Farewell to Wall Street's decade of hubris
3 reasons 2010's economy looks iffy
Kodak retires Kodachrome
In 10 years, it seems we'll all be carrying one gadget that serves as camera, phone, music and video player, e-mail device and more. Will Kodak make those?

Sadly, the final Kodak moment may loom out there, somewhere, in the next decade.

Kodak responds that it has a leading position in most of its markets and is gaining share in new markets. The company recently raised more than $700 million, it says, and has $1.1 billion in cash. "By any reasonable assessment, Kodak is a financially sound company and a viable competitor," a company spokesman says.

This is the only reason why I was told Kodak is leaving.