“Since Sunday’s announcement that the next Disney CEO will be the internally promoted Robert Iger, lots of news stories have come out advising Iger that his first move as CEO should be to find a way to extend Disney’s soured relationship with Pixar. Even a poll on Forbes.com had ‘securing a new deal with Pixar’ as the voters’ favorite in a landslide,” Rick Aristotle Munarriz writes for The Motley Fool. “I couldn’t disagree more.”
“Pixar’s leaving, folks. Get used to it. It doesn’t need Disney. It has the golden brand, immaculate box-office track record, and clean balance sheet that Disney can no longer offer. Flip the mentor some Mentos and move on. Pixar has earned the right to collect all of the fruits of its computer-rendered labor, so why tithe to the mouse-eared deity? The only reason that Pixar would come back would be to collect its belongings — the rights to the six franchises that it delivered under Disney’s watch. Disney would be nuts to box those up and heave them out the window,” Munarriz writes. “Unless we’re talking about Disney acquiring Pixar whole — a move that wouldn’t come cheap and would naturally require the blessing of its majority shareholder, Apple’s Steve Jobs — Disney and Pixar would simply be wasting each other’s time.”
Full article here.
Duh!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cool grin” style=”border:0;” />
is troo, hunney, so troo.
I thought Pixar and Disney had finally gotten back together…?
I like the idea of Pixar getting back the rights to the first films. But, independence from Disney is probably more important in the long term.
Come onnnn, people. When was de last time Disney mattered? Exactly. I mean, really, they haven’t made a decent movie since Love Bug. And their animation blows now, too. Yesss. I’ve seen people with no limbs do better drawings with their teeth! Come onn, you know it’s true. No, but seriously, when’s de last time that the mouse house really deserved attention? Here, I’ll give you a clue: It’s de same answer every time –When the last Pixar film was released!! Hey, I keed, I keed. No really, I think we’ve all come to expect Disney to know it’s place in the 21st century — just keep making news when your theme park characters molest paying guests, ye-he-hessss. That Tigger, he’s quite a wack-job, know what I mean?!
The point is, Disney has NO animation studio anymore. All future animated features will be cg. I am a big disney fan, but the problem with disney is they cant leave well enough alone. Sure they have the occational good sequal (Toy Story 2) but many if not most of their direct to video sequal blow and only serve to kill the quality of the brand. What is great about Pixar is the quality of their films, not just visually but story and writing as well. I will hate to see Monster’s Inc. 2, but hell, Ill probably buy it for th kids anyway, which is why Disney will make it
It is VERY inportant for Pixar to get back control to the sequel rights for all of their earlier films. There is a lot of financial value in this. Consider it brand equity.
If DIsney is willing to give that back to Piixar and is offering a future distribution deal that is competitive with others on the table, Pixar would be retarded to walk away from Disney.
For better or worse, the Disney/Pixar relationship is like a divorce involving children. They are both better off being reasonable and finding a way to get along.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but EVERY ONE of Disney’s movies suck. And NONE of Pixar’s movies suck. I’ve bought cheap soap that leaves a better film than Disney. Steve Jobs has a net worth of $3 billion, up $1 billion from the last time I checked. Why wouldn’t he just form a new 100% Steve-owned distribution house to distribute Pixar’s films? Maybe he could sell it to Apple later (Steve’s doesn’t strike me as one to balk at a potential conflict of interest) and make another cool billion, setting up Apple as a digital movie distributor in the process.
Or hey, maybe he will just go grovelling back to Disney, pleading “Please please please forgive me and sell my movies for me… I’m not worthy.”
Buffy, Toy Story 2 was NOT a “Disney” sequel. It was PIXAR (under Disney’s banner). Disney would likely not have even released a sequel except direct-to-video without Pixar involved.
It has been sad watching Disney go down the tubes so far as it has done. It has been many years now since they created their own animated movie of any quality at all. They have released or bannered a couple of live action films I felt had merit (wasn’t Miracle a Disney release?). But, not enough to restore the company’s reputation of old.
We don’t like doing sequels. Disney’s sequel track record is horrendous. Why would we break a winning formula to do the “safe” thing?
Sorry. The new Robots movie is really about Hollywood’s love of recycling old ideas.
Pixar is not a recycler. We are creators. We don’t need some paternalistic mouseketeer telling us how to do business.
Just watch, Pixar, Apple and Sony will soon have an iMovies web site where you can download HD movies and watch them on your Sony HDTV and Apple Cinema display!
This is the year of HD.
When was Disney ever that cutting edge?
NEVER!
Disney is currently in production doing what it does best – rape and exploit established content. Currently Disney is creating as cheaply as possible “sequels” to the established Pixar movies. Toy Story 3, A Bug’s Life 2.. these direct-to-video releases are trying to extract maximum profit before an unsuspecting public who has learned to expect only the best value from Pixar movies.
Google to find out how the Milne family feels about what Disney has done to Winney the Pooh, or the Rudyard Kipling estate about The Jungle Book. And that would be a mosquito itch compared to Steve’s umbrage at what Isner approved vis-a-vis the Pixar properties.
Personally, I plan to boycott any and all Disney interpretations of the Pixar classics. I am advising my family and friends – especially parents of young children. I ask that you consider doing the same.
It’s unfortunate that Steve J gave Disney all the rights to Pixar’s characters & brands.Perhaps there was not much choice in the beginning. Disney will bring out Toy Story 3 and the fact the Pixar is not involved will be painfully evident in the quality of the animation and story. It will not be an Oscar winner.
The brands that Disney essentially stole from Pixar will not be as successful for Disney without Pixar’s magic. So I agree the best thing for Pixar to do is suck it up, let go of their attatchment to all those great characters & brands and move forward.Loosing all that property is the price they paid to become successful and respected.
Besides, they’ll continue to get a % of whatever Disney makes.They’ll strike a new distribution deal, 12-15%, with someone and retain all rights to the future characters and brands they create.Their future is bright indeed.
Yet, there is no way to know what affect Steve’s cancer has had on his plans and how he wants to spend his time.Perhaps he will sell Pixar to Disney & walk away with billions of dollars in his pocket.
Personally that’s what I would like to see. That would give him the money & time to work on the “Steven P Jobs Foundation.” It is P isn’t it? Not to mention continue to leads Apple’s revival.
Disney gave Pixar a raw deal, and Pixar walked. There is nothing Disney has to offer them, except the dubious priviledge of paying up front for every movie they make for Disney, and if Disney had its way, and endless stream of Toy Story sequels. Pixar only needs a distribution channel, and with the new Cell/H.264 paradigm coming, Pixar might only need the internet and perhaps some help from its elder sibling Apple for that.
Besides which, Disney is the walking dead. Not only does Pixar have the real 3d talent, when Disney gave walking papers to any of its 2d cartoon artists who refused to move across the country and to 3d, Pixar hired them. And to make the deal sweeter, they bought all their old animation stations that Disney had sold, so they even had their old desks at Pixar. Disney has no more innovation (hence the return of Herby the Love Bug), no 2d guys, no Pixar, a couple of theme parks (if the local Six Flags is any indication, they didn’t do well at all last year), and a couple of nonDisney things they own like ABC. While Disney might make a living with that and reselling their old library, they aren’t Disney anymore. If anything, Walt Disney’s tradition continues at Pixar, not Disney.
Disney used to be the innovator, but this hasn’t happend since Walt died. After that, Disney went into a “dark age” of its own, producing animated films that were dark (The Black Cauldron, The Fox and the Hound, etc). Once Eisner came on, the annimated field lightened up, but there was no real advancement of innovation in the company. The annimation peaked in the late 80’s and early 90’s. Since then, the annimation has been poor with very bad story writing. This is a sad commentary on one of America’s great iconic companies.
Pixar on the other hand has been a very large innovator. They landed many famous commercial contracts in the late 80’s/early 90’s (Listerine, Gummy Lifesavers/Holes, etc) as well as several shorts that were popularized and honored with many awards. The CGI work of Pixar quickly was recognized and with Disny’s financial and distribution help of the full length CGI films, Pixar became a houshold name.
Pixar is the ‘New Disney’. Walt should roll over in his grave since his first love is now a last rate, non-innovative multinational conglomerate. As long as Pixar is at the cutting edge of technology with great writing and superior directing, Pixar will continue for many years to come, surpassing what Disney should have been and is now.
The thought of The Incredibles 2 made by Disney without Brad Bird or Pixar makes me want to eat my own vomit.
PIxar IS the new disney.
They are innovators in animation.
Disney was like that but stood still while little Pixar took over and left them for dust!
The same thing is happening with Apple and Microsoft now.
Microsoft os too big to move fast enough with new products in the new computing age.
As soon as someone creates a new ‘Word’ killing app Microsoft will be left for dust.
“Disney is currently in production doing what it does best – rape and exploit established content. Currently Disney is creating as cheaply as possible “sequels” to the established Pixar movies. Toy Story 3, A Bug’s Life 2.. these direct-to-video releases are trying to extract maximum profit before an unsuspecting public who has learned to expect only the best value from Pixar movies.”
This is what Eisner has brought to Disney. Walt Disney himself hated sequels and only attempted it a couple of times early in his career. They where sequals to the “Three Little Pigs” which was one of Disney’s biggest hits. They performed poorly and gave Walt to remark: “you can’t top pigs with pigs”.
Eisner was heard to say that nobody can tell the difference between one of the studios animated movies and one of the direct to video sequals he was so fond of spitting out. If it wasn’t something to be milked to death or exploited than Eiser wasn’t interested.
What does this have to do with Mac Daily News?
yea, what is this,
PixarDailyNews?
No, it’s “Final Rendering by Intel Processors” Daily News…
I saw the Robots movie with my son. I thought it was very good. Worked better for me than Finding Nemo ever did. It had Pixar-like touches in places (the signs on the doors of the toilets, for example). It’s also largely about the story rather than the CGI, which is also a Pixar-like trait.
It’s much better than Ice Age, their previous film.
I’ll probably go to see it again, because I discovered after I’d seen it first time, that it’s showing in IMAX theatres.
Although there are probably parts of it that are intended to show off the IMAX stuff, they also work on the smaller multiplex screens, and it’s not to the detriment of the film.
It’s a kids film, and ALL of the kids in the cinema were involved in the film, were laughing and shouting in all the right places. It’s a good film. It is not a bad film just because Lasseter wasn’t involved !
The only thing I’m wondering about is just which girl Rodney Copperbottom ended up with at the end.