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."
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
...distribute.
Either way, go Pixar!
"1984" was ment to be a warning, not a guidebook. You hear that Kim Jong-il!? BushCo?!
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.
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'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
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!
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
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
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.
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.
But then they'll get sued by SCO for infringing on their business model.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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
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!
mine Mine mine MINE mine Mine
Anybody want a peanut?
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!
I admit I had no idea (the answer is Andrew Stanton(story) & Lee Unkrich but I had to look it up)-- but poll a crowd of people and the answer will be 'Pixar'... not the director but that answer will still win.
How many people know (and care) who the distributor for Kill Bill is?
The names Pixar and Tarantino respectively draw the audiences and get the pay dirt - so they hold the power - the rest are all become negotiable contracts.
> It had a very good message about the pointlessness of materialism
So, Disney won't complain if people download it without paying?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
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.
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