Pixar Star Wars

[216bruce]

Well, the next couple of films seem like they're going back to the "Let's come up with something off-the-wall". The Good Dinosaur, Inside Out, and the rumored Dia de los Muertes (Day of the Dead) film really look like they're branching out, storywise. Also, GD is gonna have John Lithgow and NPH in it!

What I saw of Inside Out and The Good Dinosaur at D23 Expo looked promising, especially Inside Out, but Dino has been bumped back release date-wise for a good while. This usually means trouble in some way, shape or form. This isn't uncommon at all and happened to Tomorrowland also, but if things were going just peachy-keen it'd be on schedule most likely.

 

[216bruce]

Well, the next couple of films seem like they're going back to the "Let's come up with something off-the-wall". The Good Dinosaur, Inside Out, and the rumored Dia de los Muertes (Day of the Dead) film really look like they're branching out, storywise. Also, GD is gonna have John Lithgow and NPH in it!

Agree that they are branching out IDEA-WISE. That doesn't mean great or even good story, just great idea/concept. Heck, an animated Beauty and the Beast "idea" doesn't blow you away as a concept, but everything worked, including and most importantly the story adaptation and execution. It also doesn't hurt to have tremendous songs that move the plot and reveal character.
The concept of an animated Atlantis movie sounded great (I even like the finished product), but it fell flat audience-wise and critically, not that critics matters much in reality. Fleshing out a great concept with a solid, usually simple story with characters you care about is the key. Great character animation and techinal 'wow' can only take you so far. BATB has technically inconsistent animation and just doesn't "look" great at times, but has a simple story and endearing characters. Atlantis looks incredible, but has a muddy, relatively complex story that folks didn't warm to and most of the characters were forgettable. Story and Character, but mostly story.
Pixar stuff always looks great, they just have to get the stories to match.

 

[Matt_Black]

Atlantis looks incredible, but has a muddy, relatively complex story that folks didn't warm to and most of the characters were forgettable. Story and Character, but mostly story.

I loved Atlantis, both the story and the characters (especially Cookie); the problem with that was that it was SO atypical of Disney that it's hard to accept it. Still, it did moderately well commercially, more so than other Treasure Planet (which was a result of poor marketing) or Home on the Range (which was, by Disney standards, AWFUL).

 

[Bairstow]

You mean like Snow White, Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan and Mary Poppins?

I think he means more like Cars, Pirates of the Caribbean, and Nightmare Before Christmas.

 

[Magenta Panther]

You mean like Snow White, Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan and Mary Poppins?

Yes, matter of fact, I DO. Disney created the iconic FILM VERSIONS of those stories. The ones people remember, cherish, and in many cases, think Disney DID invent, because they're so effective and memorable. What's with you people who can't tell the difference? Does a McDonald's burger taste like filet mignon to you? Does Dom Perignon Champagne taste like 7up? If so, your lack of discernment makes sense. But then I do wonder why you go to Disney parks in the first place. How EVER did you enjoy one in the past, before Kermit and C3PO started infesting them? Is a Disney park just a collection of attractions to you? If that's the case, then yeah, you don't get the Disney magic or the Disney legacy AT ALL. You probably think Stan Lee, Jim Henson and George Lucas are Walt's equals. You're the buffaloed followers of Robert Iger, and boy do I feel sorry for you!

 

[erasure fan1]

I don't think Disney needs Star Wars, Marvel or Muppets in its company. And I sure don't think the parks need them. It's like Disney's becoming an Old Folks Home For Faded Has-Been Properties. Buying them up and adding them to the parks is degrading to the company and an insult to the Disney legacy of creativity and innovation. If Disney needs new "brands", it should create its own.

While I agree that if Disney wants a new IP, then they should just create it. You would think that Disney, of all companies, would be a pioneer in that area and have no problems coming up with all sorts of awesome stuff. If they wanted to, they could. But they are to scared because of the risk. That said I would hardly call the Marvel and Star Wars franchises "has-been properties". The Muppets you can argue, but not the other 2.

 

[Matt_Black]

You realize that Kermit and Star Wars have been in the parks for over a QUARTER of a century so for many no, they HAVEN'T enjoyed the parks without those characters. They're enjoyed, thoroughly enjoyed, those characters. The purchases of the Muppets and Star Wars was not a Vegas marriage, but rather putting a ring on it after dating for years.

 

[Master Yoda]

I think he means more like Cars, Pirates of the Caribbean, and Nightmare Before Christmas.

I know what he meant, I was just pointing out the hypocrisy.

Disney has been acquiring IP's since well before the parks even existed. That is somehow OK when Walt did it, but it is wrong when the current Disney does it.

 

[Matt_Black]

And, it then case of Lucasfilm, there was a lot more to it than IPs, such as ILM and Skywalker Sound. You can see how a company that makes movies might be interested in buying another company that has a very good record at developing technology used in filmmaking?

 

[Bairstow]

I know what he meant, I was just pointing out the hypocrisy.

Disney has been acquiring IP's since well before the parks even existed. That is somehow OK when Walt did it, but it is wrong when the current Disney does it.

Except that Walt generally wasn't buying IP outright, he was optioning film and television rights for derivative works. Much of the value of something like Star Wars comes from simply reissiusing the old movies.

 

[Magenta Panther]

You realize that Kermit and Star Wars have been in the parks for over a QUARTER of a century so for many no, they HAVEN'T enjoyed the parks without those characters. They're enjoyed, thoroughly enjoyed, those characters. The purchases of the Muppets and Star Wars was not a Vegas marriage, but rather putting a ring on it after dating for years.

It was more like marrying an old spinster nobody else wanted. And I guarantee, if Disney closed both those attractions, attendance wouldn't drop off one damn bit. Look what happened when Star Tours was upgraded. Yeah. Nothing. Didn't create a blip on the radar as far as DHS attendance is concerned. And the Muppet theater is very sparsely attended. Most people know that by now. Which is why there are those rather substantial rumors that the Muppet theater's being closed at DCA. That would be awesome, especially if something Disney took its place.

 

[Bairstow]

Look what happened when Star Tours was upgraded. Yeah. Nothing. Didn't create a blip on the radar as far as DHS attendance is concerned..

It was a smash hit and attendance-driver at Disneyland, though.
Probably because they actually advertised it.

 

[Matt_Black]

= And the Muppet theater is very sparsely attended. Most people know that by now. Which is why there are those rather substantial rumors that the Muppet theater's being closed at DCA. That would be awesome, especially if something Disney took its place.

Every time I go, there's a good sized crowd. Compare that to Captain Eo where the audience, myself included, was a grand total of FIVE.