-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Pixar Ending Talks With Disney!
- Thread starter brian_gaudio
- Start date
WDWSwashbuckler
New Member
Originally posted by NowInc
Steve Jobs as CEO of disney would just make things way worse. First of all, he has a pretty shady corporate history (those who ever followed the great computer wars of the 80s), has a pretty well documented history of drug usage (yeah..i know he's probobly past that at this point..but uh..not exaclty someone youd want to be CEO of DISNEY), and wouldnt know what to do with such a large corporation with so many divisions. Apple and Pixar are both big..yes..but combined they arent even half of what Disney is. Eisner came from paramount, which at the time owned a LOT of different divisions..so it was an easier transition.
....all that aside...expect pixar talks to resume by the end of the summer
assuming that Eisner is out, that is.
*mumbles about Eisner under his breath*
prisoner
New Member
I note elsewhere how funny this is, considering Lucas was the one who created Pixar in the first place.
I've heard this claim twice now about the lack of marketing power of Warner Bros, and I'll be honest - I don't understand it. Warner marketed The Matrix In the US and worldwide quite successfully, going so far as to launch the third one worldwide simultaneously. They have marketed Lord of the Rings in some countries, they marketed AI worldwide (lousy movie, but it made a big profit, so they must have done something right). They have a long-standing arrangement with The Cartoon Network, so its not like they don't know kids shows, either, nor how to market to kids.
Now, maybe they don't have "marketing power". I'm not in the industry - but this certainly sounds like they could pull it off at least as well as Disney did with Monsters Inc - Disney didn't even make some of the trailers for that movie, Pixar did.
If the deal was with Buena Vista or Touchstone, sure. But distributing something under the Disney name specifically creates problems; people expect heavy merchandise licensing, McDonald's Happy Meal stuff, and theme park attractions (like characters) based on Disney films. The new Pixar deal wouldn't have made that feasible since Disney wouldn't have long-term rights to the films and characters. So sure, they'd be earning 20 mil or so (I actually bet the percentage was closer to 7-8%, which is what Lucas gives Fox), but at the same time they'd be having to deal with this expectation on the parts of theme park guests, Happy Meal consumers, and whatnot.
Plus, Disney is trying to get their own 3D thing going, remember? "So, let's see, guys. We can distribute this Pixar flick for thirty mil, which will compete with our own 3D animations and make it even HARDER for those to succeed." Disney probably figures if they aren't gonna make megabux from Pixar films, then they're better off competing with Pixar under a Sony (or whatever) label than competing with Pixar under the DISNEY label.
Look at Warner's track record for marketing animated family films instead. Not so good. it's not a question of money, it's a question of how that money is applied. The WB gets th audience that goes to see Matrix and LOTR flicks; they don't get the Disney audience, although Lord knows they've tried in the past.
Originally posted by NowInc
Steve Jobs as CEO of disney would just make things way worse. First of all, he has a pretty shady corporate history (those who ever followed the great computer wars of the 80s), has a pretty well documented history of drug usage (yeah..i know he's probobly past that at this point..but uh..not exaclty someone youd want to be CEO of DISNEY), and wouldnt know what to do with such a large corporation with so many divisions. Apple and Pixar are both big..yes..but combined they arent even half of what Disney is. Eisner came from paramount, which at the time owned a LOT of different divisions..so it was an easier transition.
....all that aside...expect pixar talks to resume by the end of the summer
Something like 67% of Disney stock is owned by banks. They are not going to hire Jobs as their new CEO, even if Eisner gets ousted - which isn't likely, since the banks still love him. Odds are if Mikey goes, they'll get someone fans will like a lot less. Whoever it is, it's going to be a corporate, penny-counting badass.
NowInc
Well-Known Member
All warner brothers stores closed. Thats a WIDE way (and pretty vauge) of looking at it.
More specifically..
WB dosent market their CARTOON assets well. When was the last time you saw a LoonyTune character in a happy meal? When was the last time you saw a kid carrying a WB character stuffed animal? When was the last time you saw a WB cartoon on TV?
Disney has that art down to a science! They do it better than anyone else. Sad to say, but MARKETING is where ALL the money is. Box office only gets you so far.
As much as i dont LIKE the way disney goes about doing buisness (bitter former employee syndrome), i do have to admit that they and pixar are PERFECT for one another. Pixar having the creativity that disney has been lacking, and disney having the steamengine marketing power that pixar needs.
As said above..this is far from over.
ogryn
Well-Known Member
That's a quote from the ex-Director General of the BBC, who was forced to resign (I won't go into that. Political reasons. Government screwing the BBC over)
Now he is available, why not a job at the WDC? He has the right attitude about management. Allowing people to be creative, not micro-managing them will bring out the best results.
He seemed to be a man of the people as well, if going by the mass-walk outs by BBC staff supporting him.
Full Transcript ~ BBC Breakfast with Frost
MKCustodial
Well-Known Member
It actually happens quite a lot down here, Dan. And also, you have to remember that what WB calls "cartoons" today is not what we remember, but beautifull stuff like Cow & Chicken, Ed, Edd & Eddy and all that "new" crap that Cartoon Network churns out every single month.
I hate how Warners owns and has rights to the biggest cartoon library ever, yet they seem to make little to no use of it.
Its like they are trying to make the world forget about the past by buying up all these classic cartoon franchises and locking them up in their vaults, or by only airing them at 2:00 in the morning.
And they are doing the same with the actual good stuff Warners had been making in the mid 90s, like Animaniacs, Frekazoid, Pinky and the Brain, etc.
Sorry, had to get that off my chest.
Its like they are trying to make the world forget about the past by buying up all these classic cartoon franchises and locking them up in their vaults, or by only airing them at 2:00 in the morning.
And they are doing the same with the actual good stuff Warners had been making in the mid 90s, like Animaniacs, Frekazoid, Pinky and the Brain, etc.
Sorry, had to get that off my chest.
CTXRover
Well-Known Member
Talking about Warner's ability to market their toons, does anyone even remember last November's failed Looney Tunes movie? That came in with high expectations and failed miserably. Doesn't mean that can't market cartoons/animated features, its just I haven't seen them do it well in a very, very long time (Didn't WB also make and distribute Titan A.E. which also flopped?)
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
Titan AE was Fox, not WB.
CTXRover
Well-Known Member
I stand corrected. You're right. Sorry. I'm still thinking though that they made a movie that basically resulted in them shutting down their dreams of making animated movies. Does anyone remember. Maybe I'm just way off and who I'm actually thinking of is in fact Fox. I don't know :lol:
MKCustodial
Well-Known Member
Was it really that bad? We only got dubbed copies down here, so I refused to go see it. I'm waiting for the DVD.