Slashdot Mirror
Pixar Drops Disney To Find a New Studio Partner
da_anarchist writes "After much speculation, Pixar has announced that it will end its distribution agreement with Disney. This comes after much bitterness at Pixar over the terms of their current deal with Disney, where Disney took a sizable (and some would say unfair) portion of the $2.5 billion in revenue generated by Pixar's films. Pixar is best known as the studio behind the Toy Story series and the more recent movie Finding Nemo."
Pixar Rulez! Ya Slashdot bitches.
- Moomin
Then why isn't it iPixar?
Disney may have been good, long ago, but after the success of Toy Story I don't think Pixar needed Disney for distribution. Worse, I've felt, is a Disney influence on characters in the films, certain attitudes and stereotypes which are pretty tired and one reason Disney's animated offerings don't impress.
Sadly, this will also mean any sequels to the Disney-associated films will be done by Disney, which as I've said, employs some pretty tired ideas about character development. Hopefully the well at Pixar is far from dry and fresh new ideas continue to emerge.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Has SCO gone after Pixar? You'd think they would.
...distribute.
And since Disney is completely ditching 2-D animation, it's gonna be fun to see if they can pull outta this.
Either way, go Pixar!
"1984" was ment to be a warning, not a guidebook. You hear that Kim Jong-il!? BushCo?!
Imagine.. pixar now can do ANYTHING they want.. they are now unleashed. Imagine a porn flick by pixar? Imagine hot grits.. Seriously.. now they can really get into the adult market with their style, their writing.. the previous stuff was cool and all, but lets see what they do without disney holding them back..
I don't believe they will have a hard time finding a new partner, I think that what they did was the best stuff disney has done in a long time. So What does disney have up its sleves now? I seems that the upper management are making poor decisions(something had to prompt Walt's son to leave), marketing is making poor decisions(disposable dvd's), they are shutting down animation studios left and right. What is thier current future focus?
They have to do something to pay for Eisners new Bel Air Home thats just down the street from his current one.
moo.
Disney has already massively scaled down its traditional cell animation division to concentrate on digital animation. But without its relationship with Pixar, does Disney have any digital animation capabilities of its own? Does this leave Disney -- the quintessential animation studio -- with neither traditional nor digital capabilities?
Help Save Disney from Eisner, who has turned the company from setting trends to following the current trend of the time. He fires the animators who have made the company great simply because it will increase their short term profit. They have completely abandoned the principles Walt Disney used in running the company. If you own Disney shares, support Roy Disney, the surviving member of the Disney family.
I have always admired his direction.
He is pretty hands off with respect to the artists from my understanding. Just creates an environment for great art to thrive.
Bravo Pixar!
"They say travel broadens the mind, so I went over the falls in a barrel." -Thomas Dolby
Pixar's newest release: "Finding Aboo"
Nemo: Where'd that stupid monkey go?
Sarge: I shot him.
(3-D Render of a monkey slowly sinking to the bottom of the ocean floor)
THE END.
*bows*
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
In Soviet Russia, find NEMOS YOU!!!
this is great news. disney is total dead weight. my hat's off to pixar!
If you thought Pixar was good, think of how classy they'll be without the Mouse!
I'm a father of two great kids and a part-time Linux geek to boot. Pixar's films have given myself and both of my children hours of enjoyment - the youngest (2 3/4) is in love with Woody and Buzz, found Bruce the shark a frightening (and probably life changing!) image at the cinema, thought Mike and Sully were as cute as teddy bears, and literally danced on the spot when A Bugs Life kicked into life on our DVD player... all I have to say to the guys at Pixar is a huge THANK YOU for making my childrens lives so the much happier for the hours they have enjoyed your films :)
...and fsck Disney!
I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born - Ronald Reagan
You shitcanned your traditional-animation studio in FL, and now Pixar has told you to go piss up a rope.
Ut oh....
Bwahahahahahahahaha!
I know, I know...too flaky, mod away. =)
"You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo
Pixar hooked up with Disney in 'ancient times.' When Toy Story was still just an idea, nobody had *ever* made a 3D animated feature. Pixar knew they could do it, but they didn't have the marketing muscle. So, They signed a contract with disney to deliver, IIRC, five features. Disney had a sweet ride, but Pixar was never really very happy with the contract. Watch, for example, Brother Bear. Now, go watch any Pixar film. You will notice that there is a lot more interesting, grown up humor in the Pixar movies. This isn't to say that Pixer will strike out and target adult audiences with violent-anime-esque features from now on, or anything, but Pixar is going to have a lot of room to flex its creative muscles, and basically do whatever it wants. Huzzah! I simply can't wait to see what they come up with over the next five years. It ought to be grand.
Disney, meanwhile, decided to scrap all 2D animation recently. They did this because, apparently, they think Pixar's success is because they work in 3D. While this may have had a lot to do with the buzz behind TS1, it just ain't the case. The reason Pixar movies make mad money is because they are good movies. Finding Nemo could have been made with a dull pencil on notebook paper, and those guys still would have made something worth seeing!
We'll all be spared of Finding Nemo 2.. 3.. 4.. and 5?... or will it follow all the other disney movies.. like Lion King, Aladdin... Though, guess its still better than the "Land Before Time" 1-10 series...
~~ Please keep your arms, legs, and outright stupidity inside the ride at all times. Thank You ~~
but there's a good bit happening in the background.
first, the campaign to get rid of eisner. this, combined with the recent pooh suit setback, means a potential loss of millions of dollars. maybe even a billion or two. shareholders don't like that sort of thing.
second, there's persistent rumors that pixar is going to start up a 2d animation department. disney just closed theirs. nothing like losing talent to the enemy.
in any case, i think disney has done a fantastic job of marketing the films. i don't see a warner bros. doing a similarly nice job.
that's the only thing they've done right. disney lost track, about 10 years ago, with the concept that money is not the reason to make art. the art is the reason. sure, if it's done right, you can make a lot of money- and early eisner benefitted from that. pixar hasn't gotten even remotely close to losing that important knowledge.
stored on computers from birth to the grave
Disney is with Nike on the list of companies that I won't have anything to do with. But now I'll be able to watch Pixar's new movies. http://www.google.com/search?q=disney+sweatshops
bits and peace
Nicholas Daley
mod parent up!
Actually I'm quite glad. In my opinion, the only thing keeping Disney's (animated) movie quality afloat was Pixar's stunning contributions.
Disney seems to be playing the role of the archaic ruler here, desperately trying to advance to the next level (abandoning 2d animation department in favor of their own 3d department), but missing the entire point.. It isn't 2d animation that's the problem; it's the quality of the storyline, plot, characters, and overall tone of the last crop of 2d Disney movies. 2d offers a lot of stylistic options that 3d, in this case, hasn't quite been able to emulate. As sad as it is to see 2d's death in Disney, I'm quite glad that pixar is going solo. Disney needs to learn that it is the both the quality of the work and the execution that is driving Pixar's success, and not just eye candy.
They are better off without Disney. My wife is a film buff, and I have it on her good authority that Disney is in touble, all over the board. Movies, animation, parks, everything is tanking.
But as good as Pixar is at making great movies, financial success doesn't come from that. You need good marketing and distribution. I hope Pixar finds a good partner that won't take the lion's share of the profits. They will also need to scramble a little bit more to find funding, but with their reputation, capital should be no problem.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I see this as being both good and bad...
;) (assuming they don't squash all competition).
Disney needs to pull out of its slump. They make the whole industry look bad right now.
Pixar will go on to bigger and better things, which will help the industry.
They are big enough now, they could probably handle self distribution, although they probably don't want to get into that role yet.
Best of luck to the both of them. The better they become, the better we all become, the more secure my job is
I imagine the Pixar boys are out celebrating tonight... (if deadlines aren't killing them...) maybe I should head over across the bay and buy them a round.
-Tim
-I just work here... how am I supposed to know?
I hope this means that Pixar will get into some less "family oriented" annimation...
I am become Troll, destroyer of threads
By the end of the year, 90% of Disney's revenue will come from licensing its characters to junk food restaurants, manufacturers of lunch boxes and backpacks, and makers of disposable training pants.
It will use its last bit of influence to convince Congress to make image piracy punishable by death or five years janatorial duties in the Disney[world|land] Outlet Malls.
Stefan
The only good things Disney has done lately were the Pixar movies and Fantasia 2000, which was driven mainly by Roy Disney. Now both these creative sources are gone, they are running out of out-of-copyright stories to rip off, and everybody thinks Eisner is an ass. The only think they can do now is churn out cheap marketing-driven shlock; the age of considering Disney as "art" is over. (Incidentally, I've always maintained that Disney and Microsoft had simular business models: "steal other peoples ideas, then jealously guard them as your own.")
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Any bets that Dreamworks is in line to receive a Pixar union?
Basically it is cool having Disney as a distributor becasue everyone blames them for all the nasty stuff like merchandising. See this story for more.
Read Epic the first RPG novel.
With _Nemo_, the bar got raised too high for Disney again (although you could argue that Disney didn't do much in the way of making it.) Now that Disney isn't hooked up with Pixar, I hope that the bar is set appropriately for future Disney animation.
Not that I didn't like _Nemo_, I thought it was great, wonderful, funny, my kids loved it and I loved it too. But that's a once-in-a-generation thing; it's great it happened, but we shouldn't let _Nemo_'s success stop us from appreciating good work. If Disney had stuck with Pixar, they'd be afraid to release anything that wasn't going to gross more than _Nemo_; now that they've broken up I hope we can look forward to seeing three or four good animated features a year, with some of them being really original.
Leaving Disney hasn't changed the fact that Pixar still needs a distributor and, perhaps, investors. (Anyone know where I could sign up to invest in Pixar?? :D ) The only difference is that, having proven themselves, they now have free reign and should be able to get much better deals. Still, that doesn't mean they're about to start making R-films.
The big bucks are usually with the G to PG-13 crowd... For a film of a given quality, the broader it's potential audience is the better it's earnings will be. As rare as they may seem, G rated films that are actually good are literal box-office gold. The folks at Pixar now has several such films under their belts.
Here's a question to ponder though... Everybody know's who directed Kill Bill. Everybody and their freaking dog knows who directed the LOTR trilogy. How many of you honestly know who directed "Finding Nemo" and don't have to look it up on IMDB? Be honest now!
Man, I really feel sorry for that guy.
It will be interesting to see Pixar's target audience now.
Do you mean SKG Dreamworks? Or is it Dreamworks SKG?
Either way, the G in SKG stands for Gates, as in Bill Gates.
Do you really think that Steve Jobs is going to place the fate of Pixar's movies into the hands of Dark Helmet himself?
It means I can stop boycotting Pixar films. Hooray!
Random and weird software I've written.
Disney will probably start suing the hell out of everyone for copyright infringement, including ANYBODY who made a cartoon mouse. Their main source of income will be from litigation. Their theme park will be called the Copyrighted Kingdom.
about your creative works becoming part of the public domain, there just isn't as much incentive to be creative. Laurel resting, and corporate branding are a lot more lucrative than they should be.
Yea, Pixar, long live Luxo. when it comes to animated feature, one brand I don't look to is Disney. That would be EXACTLY like going to a Bueno Vista movie based on that name alone.
I hope this is swiftly followed up by a shotgun full of Intellectual Property sensibility right inbetween Mickey's eyes.
So Pixar wanted a bigger cut and Disney wasn't willing? Is that the gist of this? A business deal. One bunch of staggeringly wealthy white guys bickering with another bunch of staggeringly wealthy white guys.
um, hoo ray and stuff. I'm so pleased.
Ya know, at some point Pixar is going to hook up with a firm from India and cut their labor costs about 80%...
Anyhow, I'm going back to Slashdot. They specialize in geek news, not this Forbes jet set play-by-play.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
You know in Soviet Russia... (no jokes here) the cartoons had to be the most free expression of the artist's spirit since the party paid little to no attention to their messages. But the films came out with better moral message than the average tom and jerry. In fact NO ONE almost got hurt there
http://www.russiananimation.com
Hmm, Pixar does all the work, Disney gets the copyrights. I guess this might have been beneficial years ago when nobody knew who Pixar was, but these days they've made a big enough name for themselves that they don't need to be exploited by a megacorp to be noticed. In fact, Pixar has been responsible for the only good stuff coming out of Disney in the past few years.
Bad news for Disney. I for one won't miss 'em.
Heh, that made me laugh. Thanks!
They've surely got 3d projects of their own, waiting for an opportunity to use an internal Disney studio to compete with Pixar. I don't think they are closing down one section of the company (orlando animation) without something else in mind.
the only question left is should it be called "Prixar" or "Dixar"?
I wouldn't consider Pixar's stuff to date "watered down."
In fact, I think they've done a great job of making films that entertain adults as well as kids.
It would be interesting to see them take on other projects, though.
So yea, Eisner did wonderful things for Disney during his first 10 years (so says Roy Disney), but is now driving the company into the ground (also said by Roy Disney).
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
just went to see where you work (asusming it was tolldog.com and not having any idea what or who tolldog is/does) and i got this message
Not Found
The requested URL / was not found on this server.
so yeah - just letting ya know.
Hold up.
I thought Pixar did the animation/cgi work, while Disney provided the story?
Eisner is a total idiot for letting Pixar go. They were practically stealing from Pixar getting 1/2 the profits plus a distribution fee. Mr. "Mickey Mouse" CEO has now fully gutted the Disney animation legacy. All the talent has either been laid off or fled to Dreamworks and Pixar. What a darn shame. I mean Treasure Island vs. Shrek & Finding Nemo? Total disaster.
Best Community for Gaming and Gadgets!
Is it me or does everything Disney do seem a bit Mickey Mouse?
It sounds like Disney-insiders blame the CEO of Disney.
From the article:
Roy Disney and ally Stanley Gold, who both resigned from the Disney board late last year and called for Chief Executive and Chairman Michael Eisner to step down, placed the blame on Eisner.
"More than a year ago, we warned the Disney board that we believed Michael Eisner was mismanaging the Pixar partnership and expressed our concern that the relationship was in jeopardy," they said.
and so must disney.
disney. your time is up. your glory days are over. sorry. fare well.
move out of the way for the new players.
[enter on stage pixar without disney]
Privacy is terrorism.
why always when someone mentions Pixar they say that "Pixar is best known as the studio behind the Toy Story series and the more recent movie Finding Nemo"? Monster's Inc. anyone? and For the Birds? thats masterpieces!
Sounds fine to me: Pixar wants to make a sequel to the highest grossing animated film of all time? Fine, pay Disney. If Pixar wants to go out on there own? No problem, and Disney gets nothing.
Sounds like a win-win situation for Pixar, and Disney looks like the loser in my opinion.
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
While this could concievably just be a negotiating tactic by Pixar, it's more likely to be a simple case of Disney needing Pixar more than Pixar needed Disney.
"Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."
At the time they first made a deal with Disney it was good move for them, but they have rapidly outgrown Disney. Pixar is better off on their own. Disney has become associated with crappy, low quality movies. Plus, they are real scum suckers for corrupting public officials to change the copyright law for their exclusive benefit.
Now that Pixar has dumped their crappy ass, I can finally boycott them completely.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
It should be... In Soviet Russian, Nemos FIND YOU!
Pixar has a reputation for quality work. Distributors yes, marketing... not so much (thought the two often go hand in hand). Pixar's work will speak for itself, without all the marketing-speak that goes along with movie companies' attempts to bolster first week sales. Even if they have a fairly quiet release of their next big movie, they'll have nice second & third week ticket sales, which is much more than most movies can claim. With the way reviews are done now, Pixar could probably float along just with the papers and people calling up their friends saying 'see this movie'.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Not updated regularly for obvious reasons, but one of my favorite hidden gems on the web nevertheless.
"Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."
I hope so, too. But an unfortunate plausibility is that Pixar, now deprived of Disney's guaranteed distribution aerosol, will for the time being focus on even "safer" projects. (Think FINDING NEMO without the shark ...or Ellen DeGeneres.)
Seeing bad movies only encourages them. Watch responsibly
I'm sorry, but I side on Eisner on this one. People on /. love to hit on Disney but, frankly I've been pretty happy with what disney has done:
1. Sat morning-esque cartoons - Much better IMO than the competition (FOX, etc). Kim Possible (I hate to admit it, although the art looks a lot like penny arcade), Proud Family, etc are actually funny while kid centered.
2. Feature films. Like Pirates of the C. and Freaky Friday (surprisingly good as well). A few other flops, but they are trying.
3. They distributed pixar. I realize it was the creative genious of someone else, but that is the way *all* big studios work. Pixar was theirs to keep and they shouldn't have let them go.
4. Anime. Say what you will about burying studio ghibli films. They bought them and brought them to the US and played a big part in popularizing anime to the general public.
5. Other things. Like Broadway musicals. Bringing back sunday night disney movies. etc
That is a lot better in my opinion than Disney has been since its golden age. There are few things disney puts out that are *worse* than watching another episode of pokemon.
-Sean
Apparently, Disney is also doing Toy Story 3 now that Pixar is breaking off contact as it owns them... without Pixar. Sad, it had such a good shot at being the second trilogy to do better with each film.
That movie rocked. The david spade character was great, and the traditional art styles used in the characters and setting was impressive. It had a very good message about the pointlessness of materialism and the songs were actually cool for a disney flick.
Eisner's a punk b!tch. I can't believe why they keep that guy around... Eisner's been CEO since I was like a kid while every other major company has swapped out CEOS like every 4-5 years... Oh well, I still like going to Disneyland, etc... guess Eisner knows it... punk... =)
Goodbye Disney, hello Vivid.
I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
Really, how is this news? The Incredibles was meant to be the last film made under the current partnership anyway. They were going to review whether it was working out or whether Pixar was leaving at this point. As many expected, this deal has let Pixar find its feet and go off in its own direction, now that they can afford their own avenues of licensing and distribution.
Disney also has the right to finance and produce sequels if Pixar declines to co-finance and produce them under the current agreement
...all done with that craptastic bargain basement 3D animation you see every afternoon on the WB. Ugh. Ugh.
NO NO DAMMIT NO!
I will make it a personal mission to urinate on Eisner's grave if Disney rapes a single one of Pixar's excellent films. I am so f'ing sick of Disney executives walking around the park trying to figure out what movie, series even RIDE they can milk for another buck. Every time I see an advertisement for (classic movie) 2, 3 etc I want to scream.
Steve Jobs is the biggest ass in the world for allowing Disney this option. Give it a year or two after Pixar profits are gone, and get ready for
* Toy Story 3 - Buzz and Woody go to Camp
* Monsters, Inc. 2 - Giggles, Inc.
* Finding Nemo 2 - Doria's Quest for Paxil
Like how "spam" came to mean "unsolicited email" I propose we make "disney" as a synonym for cancer, as in "my grandfather's prostate got disneyed" or perhaps as synonym for necrophilia.
- JoeShmoe
.
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
you should not be considered a good source until you learn to corroberate facts. Or at least take what your roommate says with a grain of salt...the size of your head.
On the other hand, it is important to keep your significant other happy.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Anyone know if Dreamworks has a good inhouse distrobution channel, or if they use someone else?
Dreamworks has the only other animation house out there worth its salt. Imagine if these two joined up?
it's a distribution deal. There is no reason they couldn't strike a deal tomorrow for a specific movie.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
After a loud shouting match with Pixar executives, Michael Eisner was quoted as saying, "Hey guys, by the way, you can tell Jobs that I found Nemo!"
__ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
Probably won't happen (soon), as they just have too much cash (?) and name recognition, but I despise that company.
Treehugger? Treehugger... Treehugger!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Ah...now's the time for Microsh*t to finally get into bed with Disney and create xBox game titles and 3D movies at the same time. They'll have it all covered. They could push Disney to distribute movies in WMA format to theaters and make it the standard on all Windows boxes for downloaded movie rentals (that is, if you'd like to watch Disney movies on your portable/home media center that is also controlled by Microsh*t).
Why in the world would they choose to "negotiate" in that manner? It strikes me as extremely childish and immature at best. If they are as far as this in saying they are going to walk, they should actually just do it as soon as their agreement is up. Changing their minds at this point only makes it so that that they won't be taken as seriously if or when the next time they get fed up with things.
People should say what they mean, and not make what they intend to be idle threats.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Roy keeps the Disney flame alive once again. He quit over the liquidation of feature animation in Florida. He told it like it is. Disney has fallen so far away from it's core values (making excellent animated features, and then marketing them in it's parks) that he felt Eisner should leave.
Eisner and the other souless robots on the board countered by justifying Pixar and digital animation shopped out to other studios as the future.
Guess what? Pixar is gone, at best, Disney can only do cheesy straight-to-video sequels from now on. They have no decent feature animation left to speak of. It's all regurtitation of old ideas from here on out.
Roy will be back in about a year, when Disney's stock drops by $5. That should be enough to bring Roy back just like last time he did this. Eisner is a dead man walking. Perhaps Disney will be able to right the ship after he's gone. No more Mighty Ducks, Haunted Mansion, or Miracle movies unless they actually release actual animated flicks.
"Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect."- Steven Wright
Disney's claim to fame was being able to take classic stories an put them on the big screen in a very entertaining and good looking way. Or rehash said stories and slap them in a different setting.
I think they need to crack open Grimm's Fairy Tales again and get back to doing what they are (were) good at.
Pixar dominates Disney because they can pull off the fantastic visuals and they write entertaining stories.
If Disney doesn't get out of their rut and Pixar keeps being kid friendly while not rehashing the same themes over and over, I think they'll put Disney out of business.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
Let them sign with penthouse films!
I really think that beginning of the shit anmations by Dinsney started with Little Mermade.
I reall think really old disney animations were truely great. Black & White Mickey Mouse were the greatest amonst others..like Snow White, 101 Dalmation, etc. I really pity today's art industry where really talented people go by unheard... and I see many mediocre talented sweet talking corporate type guys in the helm of studios(I mean art director & etc etc). I also know many new generations of student who graduated from art college with no drawing skills....they may be able to manipulate 3d tools, but I really think that pen & pencil is the bread and milk of art creation. I have seen way too many computer graphics artists who can't draw shit using pen & sketchbook! I wonder how they managed to wing art classes where drawing / painting were necessary!
Oktokie
PS: Oh... I also hate those stupid loud mouth clumsy side kicks Dinsney keeps putting into their inferior animations. Not to mention all those songs by some celebraty musicians. In old times, music & singing used to be put into just right moment(can you spell magic?) with good story line. I have a feeling that today's Disney animations are done in backward.
1) First They sign a contract with celebrated singer.
2) Make up stories so they can put music/singing stuffed into animation.
3) It takes x3 tiems longer to draw characters on computer due to artist's lack of drawing talents(Um...he cannot draw without computer's aid).
4) copy & paste one and only drawing around. No wonder characters are less detailed than what it used to be in old days. Um..sometimes, characters look like icons on the desktop(no detail at all).
5) more copy & paste.
6) make multiple plots.
7) invite idiots to bring their kids to the studio and show them multiple ending/story and have them choose the story/ending.
8)
9)
10) Steal 70% of 2.5billion $$$ from pixar
11)
12)
13)
14)
15) Profit!
Man...I miss black & white mickey mouse! They were awesome!
I suppose the contractural mandate for at least one homosexual character won't be an issue anymore.
And you missed another flop, though - Brother Bear
Disney's Brother Bear may have been a flop, but the real Brother Bear isn't.
When Pixar started off, they had no experience with distributing their work and marketing. So that's when they decided to collobarate with Disney. Disney being the giant that it was then, obviously had the better cut of the deal. The deal was to make 6 films. Pixar has done Toy Story, A Bug's Life, Toy Story 2, Monster's Inc., Finding Nemo. That's 5 movies they've done for Disney and by rightly, it would've been 1 more film and the contract would've been over. But why is Pixar making 2 more films for Disney (The Incredibles & Cars)? Well, Disney argued back that Toy Story 2 is a sequel. They twisted Pixar's arm on that, and that's why Pixar isn't doing anymore sequels, they've practically done Toy Story 2 for free! Frankly, I'd say good riddance to Disney! Pixar's build a name for themselves and they are well loved by audiences of all ages. I don't think anyone else could have pulled off a story about fishes in the way Pixar has done. The originality and creativity of Pixar is seemingly boundless. Good job to Pixar for ditching Disney and I wish them all the best!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
mine Mine mine MINE mine Mine
Anybody want a peanut?
Disney live action? Like Escape from Witch Mountain and The Apple Dumping Gang? Those already almost led to the death of the company, why believe this time it's any different?
Of course The Walt Disney Company has produced well-received audiovisual works featuring live action. What about Pirates of the Kazaabean starting Johnny Depp? What about Miramax-branded films such as Chicago and Scream 6 ? What about TV shows on Disney's ABC and ESPN networks such as Nightline, Home Improvement, and sportSCenter?
That I would pay double to see.
free speach
Did you mean: free speech
Supposedly, Disney considered the subject matter too mature for its daytime audience (kids) and instead of moving it up to prime-time... banished it to the archives.
I'm just curious as to how much Disney was actually "involved" in the making of their films at pixar...
Were the movies written at disney and animated at Pixar, or is the whole thing done at Pixar (and Disney takes care of the marketing)?
I just wonder, because, while Pixar does indeed produce some of the highest quality animation in the world, it's the story and the creativity which make the movie (anyone remember the Final Fantasy movie? blah).
That being said, I wish all of Pixar the best of luck, and hope their last two Disney films are as great as the last few. (It would be tragic if disney significantly cut funding to pixar for these films as a result of this announcement).
That also being said, I want to wish Roy Disney the best of luck in his quest to bring the company back to the way it used to be.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
Journalists mention Toy Story because it was the first film to have every pixel[1] of every frame generated by a computer. (Disney's older Tron was mixed CG/live action.) They mention Finding Nemo because it grossed the most at the box office.
[1] "Film doesn't have pixels!" Pixel, filmgrain, whatever.
The idea that Pixar would crank out five consecutive blockbusters was simply not on the table in 1995. Pixar's output up to that date consisted of a couple of award-winning animated shorts; suggesting that Pixar would outshine Disney Animation by 2000 (with Disney releasing The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and Lion King in the five years prior) would have gotten you laughed out of the studio.
But then Jeff Katzenberg decided he'd had enough of Michael Eisner, and went off to Dreamworks to make Antz (and Shrek). Lion King turned out to be the high-water mark for Disney's 2D animation unit; their best effort since was Tarzan, which grossed $435 million worldwide -- a little more than half of Finding Nemo's leviathan take, which is currently at $844 million.
So, Pixar has ended up paying Disney about 10-20 times what Disney's contribution to the process is worth. Eisner was probably using these lucrative terms as the starting point in his negotiations, while Steve Jobs (who already has Sony and Warner on speed-dial) was starting from the idea that Pixar could snap its fingers and have five studios vying for the honor.
Eisner is unquestionably an idiot for failing to recognize this, because he desperately needs Pixar to feed quality product into the gaping maw of his marketing, distribution and merchandising empire -- he's not going to make as healthy of a living selling Brother Bear plush toys and video sequels, that's for sure. Pixar just needs a distributor, though, and they're big enough now that they can get one for the asking.
Being the undisputed cartoon motion picture producers have certainly bloated their ego, but done nothing for their movies. Take any 5 Disney movies of the last 10 years and I guarantee they each have the mandatory criteria/characters:
1. The comedic relief
2. The love interest
3. The complacent good natured affable hero
4. The easily-identifiable bad guy (always in black and smoking something)
4. The up-beat music song
5. The slow-dance music song
6. The Billboard song
7. The humorous evil sidekicks.
Put 'em all in a bag, add some celebrity voices, and presto-chango, we've got ourselves another cliche by-the-book Disney flick.
Now take a Pixar movie, not quite such an easy formula? AND NO STUPID SONGS. I hope they mop the flour with Disney.
PS. I must say though The Gummi Bears cartoon series was awesome.
Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
IceAge is a movie too.
Impeach Bush
No more Mighty Ducks, Haunted Mansion, or Miracle movies
Isn't that a little redundant? Wasn't "D4: The Mighty Ducks" the working title for "Miracle"?
Actually the G stands for "Gordan," of "Gordan's Fish Sticks" fame.
Close. You're talking about Gorton's frozen fish products, right? And do you plan to see Dreamworks SKG's Shark Tale: More Like Eating Nemo ?
The story I heard was that they had development deals with multiple studios. They would reward the best result with a multiple picture deal. This means that the losers will have to find someone else to finance and distribute their following projects. Given that it takes more then one film to make money in any new studio (animated or not), this is a big gamble for the people making the films.
EDITORIAL CONTENT: The existence of this deal makes it clear that Disney is currently artistically bankrupt. They are unable to make interesting and/or profitable content. The only group with any results besides Pixar was the Florida group that made 'Lilo and Stitch'. The reason given for shutting down this group was that they were 2D only, but I think it was because they made the Feature Animation management in Burbank look bad.
GOSSIP: Disney Feature Animation has a current project based around Chicken Little. They are so confused that they haven't been able to decide if Chicken Little is to be a male or female character, and they have been running around in circles changing the design and plot. The sky is falling on Disney right now!!!
Anyone hear about how Disney dropped out of Peter Pan because they didn't want to donate any money to a London children's hospital? The author of Peter Pan left the copyright to the hospital in his will. When the most recent movie was made, Disney believed it should be exempt from making any payment to the hospital from the sale of spin-off books, board games, soft toys and computer games, which are expected to generate tens of millions of dollars in their own right.
Read the full story here
So FUCK YOU Disney! Guess how much 50% of 0 is you bozos!
One of these days I'm moving to Theory - everything works there
Hand a 3 year old a GBA? I don't think so. He can break Jello.
Sorry; I was thinking 5 rather than 3.
And the Berenstain Bears are a bunch of socialists.
What do you find wrong with a little socialism at the local level? Or could you show me where Libertarian privatization, such as of health and income insurance, has Just Worked(tm)?
I'd rather have the animism of Brother Bear.
Yeah, except the real Brother Bear is one of the Berenstain Bears. Disney just ripped off the name.
And already have Land Before Time and Secret of NIMH along with about 50 other movies for the monster
Even though I'm mostly boycotting Disney, I still occasionally watch Disney movies. I don't see them in theaters, I don't buy them on home video, and I don't rent them when they're new releases. I wait about a year (until they're $1 for 2 nights at the local Video Stop) and then rent them. Heck, if I can find them at the local public library, I get them for free (as in root beer) instead. This way, I get the most movie for my money, and Disney doesn't get as much to funnel back into lobbying. You might want to investigate this for your kid(s).
Someone explain to me why Pixar signed a contract whose terms it's unhappy with. Inking a deal and the bitching about how rotten the revenue is strikes me as odd. Couldn't they have forseen the outcome when the contract was presented and either passed or worked to get better terms?
If this turns out to be true, then there will likely be no Toy Story 3. In case you do no know Toy Story 2 caused a major problem between Disney and Pixar. Disney does not put out theatrical releases of sequels to their animated movies. Instead, they normally go out straight to video.
Pixar puts out Toy Story 2. Does this count as one of the flicks that Pixar needs to produce to meet the Disney contract? Pixar says yes, Disney says no. Bad blood ensues.
Pixar wants to get a much better contract with Disney. Frankly, Pixar animated products have been much better than those from the copyright extended protected mouse.
This might just might be a bargaining move on the part of Pixar. Disney needs Pixar (and bogus extensions of copyright). Go into a Disney Store in your local shopping mall. All the new stuff, except to Lilo and Stitch, as mainly Pixar based items.
Eisner is playing poker with Jobs. I bet on Jobs.
Sounds like at least one angry cartoonist just received his pink slip . . . j/k I think the problem lies in the content of 2d animated films of late. All the money is going for 3d blockbusters with the latest hot tech, leaving only crappy kids projects to rely on 2D in the States. I think this creates an opportunity for 2D to find new niches, like more adult-oriented content. This has worked well in Japan, and there are very successful 2d movies being released there (as well as animated series on TV); that's because they target a much more diverse demographic. If all those kid movie cartoonists who get laid off from Disney decide to recycle themselves into an edgy adult-oriented animation house, they would probably do quite well. South Park was a start, but some better quality animation, and willingess to explore graphic, mature content, would be sure to attract a LOT of attention. There is a great void in this domain, and some serious money to be made.
"I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
Now that would be an interesting combination...hmmmm..
I think Nemo was a good movie, despite the movie!
That sounds dumb, but what I mean is that without an inspired performance by Ellen Degeneres, Nemo would be a merely adequate movie.
With Ellen, who is a brilliant character actor, it goes from being just adequate to being wonderful.
That said, it simply isn't as good as Toy Story. Toy Story is the once in a generation story that you talk about; its the one that people will watch 100 years from now (maybe...or maybe not... maybe nobody will get those toys).
But its hard to argue with success. Pixar has it all right now, and I think Eisner is jealous of Jobs, the same way that Bill Gates was and is jealous of Jobs. It colors their decision making process both good and bad when it comes to dealing with jobs.
While this is certainly good news for the future, but I'm wondering what's happening to the new Studio Ghibli films' dubs(Nausicaa and Porco Rosso) because of this? Wasn't Lasseter involved with them as well? Who are the actors working for now? I'm not that interested in the English dubs themselves, but I do want the DVD releases, badly :)
I remember saying when the X Box came out if the game console sucked Microsoft wouldn't make any sales.
/.)
It's an entertainment device.
Microsoft has a (ever growing) reputation (deserved or not) for shotty software (outside
Disney has a reputation for liccensing poor games.
Disney Adventures for the X Box...
People will just avoid it. Not even visit the booth at the E3. They'll be lucky to get anything on the store shelfs.
Nither Disney nore Microsoft need to waist time or money in such an obveous failure.
It won't matter how good the game as the majority won't get past the combind reputations of Microsoft and Disney.
I don't actually exist.
I find it very hard to hear or read anything about Disney without getting frustrated with their copyright practises. That name has become the definition of evil copyright abuse.
And you missed another flop, though - Brother Bear
According to sources on the net, BB cost between $70-80 mil (less than Lilo & Stitch) for its production. So far, (it's still in theaters), BB has made $84.2m domestic, plus, according to Box Office Mojo,
Brother Bear drew an excellent crowd in Hong Kong, grossing $560,000 on 29 screens, which was the second-highest debut ever for a traditionally animated film behind Mulan. Brother Bear has collected $41.3m in 16 countries to date highlighted by Mexico's $12.4m and South Korea's $1.3m in 10 days.
This is with several more big countries (like Japan) to go. BB is also the #1 film in Argentina, Poland (knocking ROTK out of first this week, and has been #1 in Mexico for four weeks running.
This is all before the DVD release, where, generally speaking, more profits are made than in the theaters!
For comparison in the 2d world, the last two major-budget traditionally animated films to come out in 2003--Dreamwork's "Sinbad", and Warner Bros' "Looney Tunes", made 26.4, 20.9 domestically to date.
Not to mention the ancillary products (hats, shirts, video games, etc.). According to Jim Hill Media.com, they're expecting a profit of $300-$400m all told when BB finishes its run.
Doesn't sound like a flop to me.
Since the CEO of Pixar is known to take risks in his other job I would guess he will not stray from the tried path. After the two movies they still have to do with Disney are done expect them to try even more far out things than monsters using kids' screams as a source of power.
Maybe we'll see some movies that are for the older crowd like PG-13 and above.
I think Steve Jobs' decision to sever Pixar's relationship with Disney maybe the final straw that will force Michael Eisner out of running the Walt Disney Company.
This turn of events is not surprising, given that Roy E. Disney is a close friend of Jobs. I believe that Jobs did this out of his friendship with Roy E. Disney.
Given what has happened with Disney's 2-D animation department lately in addition to losing Pixar, I would not be surprised that we will see a shareholder revolt that forces Eisner and his cronies from the Disney Board of Directors. In Eisner's place, Roy E. Disney becomes the new head of the Board of Directors, and Steve Jobs will be offered (and accepts!) a Disney Board of Directors position.
Disney has been sliding for years, not only creatively, but as a succesful business. Yet Michael Eisner, who once did the company real good, manages to hang on to the top job. No sign he is about to loose it either, given that their board is in his pocket, now more than ever.
It is my hope that they continue to rot away for another 10 years or so as punishment for their singular role in the obscene length of copyright terms in the US. My happy ending is that they get bought out by some indonesian media magnate who got his start hawking bootlegged disney fair to australian tourists and that he dusts off their trademarks for use in a line of interactive pornography.
"Teacher's Pet" i sthe most creative movie in years.
Too bad they screwed up with the advertising.
Walt Disney was last seen eating Eisner's brains, and asking WTF is a Fantasia 2000?
Kudos to Pixar for dropping Disney. I would really like to see Pixar team up with some of the old animators who left Disney a long time ago. Don Bluth specifically because he made some fine material after leaving Disney. On a side note, seeing some Pixar/Terry Gilliam collaborations would be enough to drag me out to a theater.
------- "I must create my own system, Or be enslaved by another man's" -William Blake
because they have used up the very public domain that they plundered getting to where they are now. Having capped the well, they are finding it a bit hard to develop new material.
They deserve it.
Blogging because I can...
The really smart parent will take the time to do things with their kids, right when Barney is supposed to be showing.
Does both parties some good!
Blogging because I can...
"shoddy software"
"licensing poor games"
"store shelves"
"Neither Disney nor Microsoft"
"waste time"
"obvious failure"
"combined reputations"
Also, you could use a few more commas in your phrasing.
To be sure Disney studio executives were surprised by the failed talks ... the chairman of Walt Disney Studios, who has been negotiating directly... received a call ... while he was out for lunch
Any questions?
Yeah isn't it funny how all of the "great" Disney movies were nothing more than remakes of old stories, legends, etc that are in the public domain, and yet they are fighting tooth and nail to prevent their own works from ever going into the public domain?
It's true that Disney used well-known stories from the public domain to build their empire, but it also means that they can't stop 2-bit animation houses from slapping together their own versions of Aladdin, Snow White, Cinderella, The Little Mermaid, et. al. Disney spends a tremendous amount of money to build each brand they create, and they are powerless to keep others from diluting that brand.
The value of Pixar is that they are creating entirely NEW and popular brands that cannot be appropriated by others. Disney's own efforts to use public domain stories lately has done a big belly flop ("Treasure Planet"), and their attempts to create new brands haven't done too well, either ("Brother Bear," "Teacher's Pet"). Sadly, Eisner doesn't realize how badly he needs Pixar--or, maybe he does, and it scares him to be that reliant on another company.
I would love to see more Shrek-type movies where the comedy goes beyond 'cute' and the characters are not one-dimentional.
Final Fantasy was good, even though it was technically a flop. Like normal movies, animated movies should also be clasified in catagories other than 'animation'. They should be action, adult, drama, sci-fi, art house, etc etc...
Disney with the help of Pixar have created this stigma.
Hopefully Pixar will get support or partner up and make something 'real'.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
People reckonise pixar films as pixar more than disney. THey are better off without those money hungry bastards.
-- Karma Karma Karma Karma, Karma Chameleon - Boy George
That movie is excellent. We've watched it a ton of times and it is definitely better than a lot of Disney crap. Atlantis was pretty good too.
Disney is dying.
dinner: it's what's for beer
I had not thought much about disney other than mickey mouse until about a year ago.
I had to go to Irvine for a business trip and decided to head to DisneyLand since I had not been there since I was in 4th or 5th grade.
What a shocker. I could not believe how commercialized it was. Rides sponsored by corporations. all of them. Space Mountain by Fedex. Indiana Jones ride by AT&T (i think). WTF.
Re: When bunnies are outlawed, only outlaws will have bunnies.
The foot of my page reads:
When Marriage is Outlawed, Only Outlaws will have Inlaws.
~Morosoph
If they would distribute high quality Hentai they could be known as Jizzney.
When I was a kid, I didn't watched the "educative" infantile programs.
I watched "Cosmos", of Carl Sagan fame.
Cosmos rocked. Everything else sucks
Toy Story 2 was originally supposed to go straight-to-video and therefore is not part of the original distribution deal. Once the Disney execs saw an early version of the film, they asked Pixar to expand on the story so it could be released as a full-length movie.
Considering how much money Pixar *did* make with TS2, I certainly wouldn't say that Pixar did it for free. I see your point, regarding that it was a movie that got distributed outside of their "feature" clause in the contract, but it certainly does fall under one of the clauses.
thanks for info. that cleared things up.
Disney certainly has dropped the biggest ball they were juggling by letting Pixar slip away. It's not just the movies that Pixar was developing, but everything associated with licensing the characters and creating additional theme park experiences that Disney will miss out on.
But one of Disney's more popular rides now is "Buzz Lightyear", a modern shooting gallery disguised as a ride through space. Would this ride be as popular if it had some generic theme instead of Buzz? In this case, being able to use the Pixar characters did enhance the ride experience, but is not critical to the basic enjoyment of the ride (ditto the Men in Black ride at USF, same concept). Disney certainly could have created this ride without Pixar.
But let's look at a different movie company that also does not have their own distribution arm: LucasFilm. They rely on other studios (20th Century Fox, for example) to distribute their movies for a small cut. They also retain all the rights to the sequels and all merchandising/licensing rights. I could see Pixar moving into a LucasFilm-like business structure, giving them the ability to completely control how their characters are used. It wouldn't mean that Disney would be blocked out from being able to license characters, it just may make it more expensive for them to bid to do so.
One drawback to having Pixar adopt that business model is that they believe that people flock to their films because they're "Pixar" movies. People do not flock to LucasFilm movies because they're from "LucasFilm", but because they're a franchise (Star Wars, Indiana Jones) film.
Yes, the Pixar name carries a bit of cache right now but does middle-America know the difference between "Pixar" and "Disney" when it comes down to who created the movie? How many folks flock to these movies because of the Disney name? What about those folks who then go to the Disney parks and get the reinforcement of the Disney name when they see Buzz and Woody walking around?
Perhaps a better example: how many people know that Shrek comes from Dreamworks? Would this mean that the next time Dreamworks releases a non-Shrek movie... and is able to market it without using "from the makers of Shrek" in the new movie's tagline... would folks go to see it just because it's from Dreamworks?
Of course this could all be some sort of bargaining ploy by both parties. Time will tell. The interesting point would be if Pixar lets slip that they refused to sign because of Eisner... and with Disney's stockholder vote coming up in the next few weeks, this could have been a setup for Roy to use to show shareholders and the board the type of issues that Eisner allegedly brings with him.
That was an interesting spectualtion at the end of the NY Times article. I dont think Jobs would be that interested in a mainstream company.
It seems that many of Disney's scripts are stolen or cleverly plagerized. They're legal team is a swampy moat around their castle to keep out any who might say otherwise. The entertainment they "Disney-fy" is way below the quality one would expect.
I wonder where I've seen that business model before?
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
It's Dreamworks. Just goes to show how hardcore the association between "Good CG Movies" and "Pixar" is. Anytime somebody else makes one, people just assume it was Pixar.
Damnit, I guess that means no Tron sequel.
- IP
It's like Don Corleone's dimwitted cousin.
...he didn't last very long.
"Make'm an offer they can't afford"
fs
That, and bad, direct to video sequels destroying any emotional value we placed on the original.
Their shit would be worth nothing if it didn't capture the imagination of the public. Once a story has an audience, to a degree, it belongs to them.
Here's the key : Copyright is a legislated exception to the natural state of affairs.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
And Jobs is the messiah who set us free by throwing a hammer at big brother!
Plus, Pixar's been making better movies than Disney lately...
Puts Monsters Inc. in a whole new light...
Picture the power company as Disney; the evil CEO as Eisner, and Pixar as Sully; much as Disney tries to force money out of people, but would wind up making so much more if they went back to basics, so the power company learns...
It all makes sense now....
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Times have changed, our movies are getting worse,
They're so incredibly formulaic that they make you want to curse.
Should we blame the animators?
Or blame our youth focus panel,
That'd rather watch Nickelodeon than the Disney Channel?
No!
Blame Eisner, blame Eisner.
For stealing Winnie the Pooh, and losing Hillary Duff too.
Blame Eisner, blame Eisner,
We need to form a full assault.
It's Eisners fault.
Don't blame me for shooting my TV,
I was forced to watch the ads that you can't skip on their DVDs.
And our partner Pixar once, had their pictures on our shelf,
But now when he sees us Steve Jobs says he wants someone else.
Well? Blame Eisner, blame Eisner.
It seems that everythings gone wrong since Eisner came along.
Blame Eisner, blame Eisner.
He's clearly the king in Shrek I must say.
My son sold on eBay, a Mickey Mouse flash cartoon.
Now he's going to trial for copyright infringement soon.
Should we blame the lawyers?
Should we blame the buyer?
Or Congress who refused Mickey to expire?
Heck no.
Blame Eisner, blame Eisner.
With all his cocky hubabaloo,
And his hundreds of millions too.
Blame Eisner, shame on Eisner!
For the lame we must name,
And you'll never last.
The laughter and fun,
Is all in the past.
We must blame you the cause of fuss,
Before somebody thinks of blaming us!
This is a popular misconception from the Slashdot article that reported on the animation studio closing. I tried to point it out but got modded down as "Off-topic."
Disney didn't close up their 2D studios. The Florida studio was closed because they want to keep their animation in the same building, and Eisner's micro-managing style made it difficult for a studio to work from a distance like that.
Of course, Slashdot reported it as "DISNEY CLOSES 2D ANIMATION STUDIO," when it had nothing to do with it being 2D at all.
Disney, meanwhile, decided to scrap all 2D animation recently.
Could you cite a source, please? Disney didn't scrap all 2D animation. They just killed a Florida studio because they want everything in one building, under Eisner's thumb.
Source, please?
Haha, finally you cave and admit there is no proof, then vaguely reference some writing credits as "backing evidence." It was a nice try.
I'm sick of Slashdotters repeating this over and over, just because the Slashdot article on the Disney closure of the Florida studio had a headline that said "Disney Closes 2D Studio" (typical misreporting that everyone accepts as fact...this is why people complain about journalistic integrity on this site, because people accept everything as gospel).
It had absolutely nothing to do with 2D. Disney has 2D animators--they just wanted everything in one building, so they killed off the Florida studio.
At least from now on, I don't have to tell everyone whenever we see a Pixar film that the animations weren't really made by Disney, but by Pixar. The creative guys at Pixar have made these beautifull movies with their blood and sweat (and some Linux clusters) and Disney the 'distributor' was getting half of the earnings as well as credit on these movies. This isn't fair, maybe it was fair in 1995 when no one knew Pixar, but not anymore.
John Lasseter (sp?) and his crew have made such memorable pictures that I think the audience are now familiar with the name Pixar. Now I admit that 'Pixar' doesn't still produce the same kind of effect that 'Disnay' produces on kids, but I also know of many adults that had never enjoyed watching an animation, before Toy Story. Besides, as others have noted, just mentioning 'from the creators of Toy Story and Nemo and Monsters Inc' is perhaps enough to make it a must-see for many. Jobs is smarter than Eisner, and Lasseter is perhaps the most creative brain in the movie industry right now. They used Disnay to promote their own brand name, and now it was time for them to end this unfair cooperation, and get full credit for their creations.
I haven't watched L&S, but to be honest I have not enjoyed watching any of Disney's animations after Lions' King (Which, surprise! was made by Lasseter himself when he was still in Disney). Making so many boring pictures in the past decade was enough to make the unthinkable happen; and that is: I feel reluctant to watch a Disney movie these days; and this comes to you from a long time adoring fan of animations and cartoons. Someone who used to whorship Disney when he was a kid.
And BTW, last time I checked, Disney's total income from it's own productions was less than what it was getting trough distributing Pixar's films. The way I see it, Disney needs Pixar more than the other way. I'm sure that Pixar will always be able to find someone to distribute their movies.I suppose you are very much mistaken, if you think that Eisner is sleeping happily these days.
--
nt