Disney/Pixar no more

[YoHo]

Oh, I don't doubt Roy and Mitchell fight, I just think that the timing is a little too coincidental. I also think it was done on Pixar's terms not Micheal's.

Plus, there are rumors that Roy made a little trip up to the Valley earlier this month.

Then of course there are those pesky brothers in New York. The weinsteins have been trying hard to annoy Eisner for a while for their own purposes. They only stay for the LOTR money. Well, that gravy train is about to come in and while they don't care about ROy or Pixar, they surly must see that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. If Miramax gets antsy before March 3, then The Disney fan(as in the device that circulates air and can have things hit it) is going to need some serious cleaning.



And JeffH, none of that changes the fact that there are a lot of empty animator's cubes around florida and we could discuss the relative value of TP, but it's lack of revenue has certainly had a negative effect on Disney Animation. Pixar was their single best source of revenue as far as Animation was concerned and now that source will be working for someone else. Better to get any money then let your competitors get it.

 

[JeffH]

and now that source will be working for someone else.

Now who is that? Not necessarily.

Better to get any money then let your competitors get it

Not if you have to pay good/real money up front for the POSSIBILITY of a long term payoff. And if Pixar does go to a competitor, the competitor will probably have to pay more then they are worth to them...then pray that Pixar stays hot. Another factor that may drive pixar back to Disney is how they like to include references to their previous creations, something that will be missing if they go with another company, which is something that could make them less novel and less successful (as well as NOT being a Disney 'product')

Wait a second...
If you pay ME $100 million, I will agree to let you distribute my next 5 films starting in 2006 and give you 30%. Now these films could possibly make $350 million each, which means you could maybe gross $525 million for a possible $425 million profit. What a deal, right? Please email me and I will send you my address to send the cashier's check for $100 million and we have a deal! I know that I'm not Pixar, but who says I couldn't be the next Pixar, or the next hot thing after Pixar has become a memory.

 

[YoHo]

But Jeff, that's exactly how the movie buisness works.

Pixar is a hot prospect. They know it, so they are trying to get what they think they deserve.

They are playing the Hollywood game.

If JeffH productions had a string of 5 hits already, then maybe I would be willing to pay up for the chance of even more. The risks are outweighed by the possible rewards.

You can't play this game by being a wuss.

The problem is, Disney backs away from a deal with a gorup known for quality, but Dives into a deal like ABC/Family where the place was doing nothin useful. If Pixar isn't worth a huindred mil, then how can you justify something like Fox Family? or Pearl Harbor? or How could New line and Miramax justify Lord of the Rings?

 

[WDSearcher]

But also ... in the Hollywood Animation Game ... if Disney is ramping up its own CGI studio ("Chicken Little," coming soon to a theatre near you), do they need to be hanging onto what would simply be a distribution deal with Pixar? I mean ... if they're going to be distributing their own CGI films anyway, hanging on to a Pixar deal doesn't buy them much except that they'll be in competition with themselves. That's pretty much why people aren't even considering DreamWorks as a potential Pixar suitor -- becuase DW has its own product to distribute and they don't need to dilute their brand.

This is really going to be interesting to watch ....

 

[lenshanem]

Wow, what news to wake up to this morning. This is terrible! Just another reason to support Roy all the more. First thing I said to hubby is there goes our stock again...
Has Eisner totally lost it?!? Pixar has basically been its saving grace. I also read this morning Disney has NO?!? hand drawn projects in the works? Is this true?!? My gosh...........
How long do they think they can ride off the princesses? Nothing new to excite.

 

[PrincessDeb]

I was very sad when I watched "Good Morning America" this morning and found out that Disney/Pixar is no more. However, some of you have given me something to think about. It is true that if Disney is releasing their own CGI in 2005, they will not want to dilute their own brand. However, the level of artistry and creativity in the last few Pixar movies will be hard to beat. Good luck to Disney... At least their live action movies and their cruise line will still be cash cows.....

 

[KNWVIKING]

It's like we need to "freeze-frame" this discussion, and then pick back up on it in three years or so to see what really happens.

But until then.....

I don't think Pixar will walk away from Disney. I think Jobs is trying to throw a little gas on the up coming stockholders meeting to see if things work to his advantage.

I also think part of Pixars amazing success has been that big fat DISNEY name plastered all over their products. I think Jobs knows that also.

And as great as Pixar's films have been so far, we're still only talking about five films over an 8-10 yr period.

I'm still amazed though that the people who have screamed the loudest that Disney no longer creates anything, they just slap the logo onto someone else's work, are now screaming louder that ME is a moron for not sucking up to Jobs because Disney can't survive without them. Please decide which side of the fence you're on.

PS: It's also nice to know what the Disney Elite think of those who don't agree with them: http://www.jjewell.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=Disney;action=display;num=1075440735

 

[noblemickey]

It's a real shame that the Pixar/Disney alliance could not continue. We really don't know why despite all the speculation. More importantly, why did Disney need an alliance with Pixar? Why couldn't they do this quality work inhouse? Is it because there are no creative, competent animation movie makers left at Disney? I don't know the answer but Disney better gear up real quick to fill this gap. Maybe they should raid Pixar for some of their very best talent to jump start their own operation. It's disappointing from a lot of view points and does add some support for Roy Disney's position regarding the loss of creative focus and the necessary quality people to accomplish the Toy Story, Finding Nemo type of wonderful animation films that Disney used to do but may not, at least at this time, be able to do. It is hard to turn a big ship around in terms of its focus and energy. I hope that Disney wakes up and smells the roses!!!!

 

[crusader]

Pixar was their single best source of revenue as far as Animation was concerned and now that source will be working for someone else. Better to get any money then let your competitors get it

Pixar played a major part in Disney animation success this past decade. But with Nemo, there now exists an incredible financial burden to measure their product by.

Money spurns chaos.

No, it is not better to get any money than let your competitors have it because cash does not equal profit. If you lose 100 mil to get 50 mil you quickly learn what it means to be at the mercy of a ruthless entity with deep pockets.

Did I hear correctly that The Incredibles is due out ahead of schedule and may be released by the end of this year?

I doubt anything will happen before that.

So what's really going on?

Timing is everything.

Pixar will want a deal before the next release because Nemo becomes a minnow after that.

Everybody else will proceed with caution knowing full well a repeat performance is statistically not in Job's favor.

Meanwhile, Shrek 2 hits a theatre near you.

And the clock continues to tick against Roy.

 

[hAm53]

Let me start by saying that I am nowhere as knowledgable as some people here, so the following are just my thoughts, so please no flaming
I work for a major company that just emerged from bankruptcy a few months ago (in fact I'm willing to wager that 85% of the people here have one of our products in their house, although I will not say whom said company is), and although I know we're not talking about bankrupt companies here, we had stuff floating around in the press every day about who was going to buy us. We had "new owners" 2 sometines 3 times a day. So my gut reaction to the Pixar statement is "Now Mikey, lets get down to some business now that you know we're not afrad to walk away". Sending messages through the press is an age-old negotating ploy, that is becoming more and more prevelant today.

Now a question:
Lets say Pixar and Disney do in fact part ways next year (for this example let's say the deal expires on a Tuesday). Does this mean that on noon on that Tuesday, we'll see Buzz, Woody, Scully, and Mike being escorted from the parks by security and The Living Seas being drained causing a slow painful death for Nemo and his friends? Is part of the current deal that they get to keep whatever attractions they have in the parks, or will we see The Brother Bear Forest Ranger Spin in Tommorrowland?

~ Chris

 

[DisneyKidds]

Please tell me.... what should he have done ?

You may be right, Vike. ME may have been in a no win situation AT THIS POINT. However, Matt is correct that ME never should have allowed himself to be put in that position in the first place.

This apparent falling out is the culmination of a relationship that has been souring for some time. While anything can still happen, we just went beyond the bounds of normal negotiating ploy and tactic. Then there is the whole Roy thing........so who knows. Anyway, o be honest, there is blame to be had on both sides, tilted more in the direction of the Big Cheese. Reasonable business men would have found a way to work out a compromise, one that no doubt would have netted Disney much less than the previous deal. I don't think we are dealing with reasonable men on either side. The egos are just too big, again tilted in the direction of the Big Cheese. Don't get me wrong, I agree that Disney was right to stick to their guns on the basic requirements of the original deal, but there are probably other things they could have done, or not done, that might have kept the relationship a bit more viable. I don't think ME actions showed that he held that relationship in that high a regard. That was either a huge strategic decision..................or a huge oversight.

So what should ME have done? If his disregard for the relationship results from some strategy then perhaps just what he did. Does anyone have any confidence in Ei$ner strategy at this point? If it was oversight he should have made Jobs happy so as to keep the name Disney/Pixar together.

Like you, I hope that this development leads to Disney doing more for themselves, and I agree with you that only time will tell. This won't bury Disney, but last year's profit sure would have been a heck of a lot lower without Nemo's take.

I do kind of agree with your observations regarding those who say that the Disney outsourcing relationship with Pixar was less than ideal................and now view this development as a huge negative. No doubt the development shows that ME was not capable of managing the relationship, a valid criticism of his abilities. However, if Pixar has been bad for Disney's internal development and creativity with regard to animation this could be viewed as a long term positive.........................but that will be veeeerrry long term as it will likely take some time for Disney to become what it once was, if they can at all. No doubt the road just got rockier, but hopefully it will lead somewhere.

 

[Another Voice]

"Disney hasn’t failed, TA (traditional animation) has failed…"

Utterly, utterly wrong.

Disney killed animation by producing shoddy stories and aiming to please its marketing department instead of its audience.

It doesn't matter if the movie is hand drawn, computer animation, scribbled in crayons or made with shadow puppets – a soulless movies is going to be a bad movie irregardless of the technology used.

Unless Disney solves that basic problem, namely that they cynically view movies as simply a way to make a quick buck, their CGI efforts are going to self-destruct just as their other efforts have.

Pixar was important to Disney because it showed that the true path to success was through well made, passionate films like Finding Nemo instead of the-public-are-suckers efforts like 102 Dalmatians 2: The Animated Sequel. Disney is unwilling to put in the heavy effort to make great films and instead tries to slash their efforts faster than their audience disappears to continue making a profit. Pixar proved that hard work pays off much, much, much, much, much better.

This is even all the more desperately important now that Disney has slaughtered its only successful in-house group (Feature Animation – Florida) and the loss of key talents like Clements and Musker. At this point, almost no one in Disney animation has made a successful film, traditional or computer (even Glen Keane has never directed before). And trying to play the Hollywood Animation Game with a bunch of unproven, poorly motivated rookies is playing with disaster.

So yes, we scream that Eisner has toppled another pillar of success to the cheers of the "anything for money" magic® crowd. Without any sort of internal guidance, Disney has to find direction from any source it can.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Utterly, utterly wrong.

Agreed AV. It has very little to do with the medium, and very much to do with the story and committment.

Pixar was important to Disney because it showed that the true path to success was through well made, passionate films like Finding Nemo instead of the-public-are-suckers efforts like 102 Dalmatians 2: The Animated Sequel. Disney is unwilling to put in the heavy effort to make great films and instead tries to slash their efforts faster than their audience disappears to continue making a profit. Pixar proved that hard work pays off much, much, much, much, much better.

Very well stated. Do you think there is any chance that anyone in the Mouse House was paying attention? Really, if someone, anyone was then maybe some good comes of this. If not.........well .

And trying to play the Hollywood Animation Game with a bunch of unproven, poorly motivated rookies is playing with disaster.

Well, it may be a bit of an assumption that those who are left are unmotivated. Just a quick note though...............a couple guys named Walt and Roy were once unproven rookies playing in the big leagues as well. Now I'm not saying there is anyone like that left in Disney, but unproven commodities can do great things. Here's hoping we are surprised by someone or something. Optimistic, yes. Unlikely, yes. I'll take a wait and see approach though.

 

[crusader]

Disney killed animation by producing shoddy stories and aiming to please its marketing department instead of its audience.

That's an age old argument used to defend any shift in the industry away from traditional source. It's not the whole story here and you know it.

This new wave of animation is what Pixar envisioned 20 years ago and it is the sole reason they only produce such pictures.

It is not simply a matter of story. It is a culmination of variables which brings about true box office success. One of them is distinction.

You yourself argued that Pirates lacked the finesse and quality of true artistry yet look at the numbers it drew.

We're not dumb. We just can't be predicted.

That's the biggest problem everyone in your industry has.

So yes, we scream that Eisner has toppled another pillar of success to the cheers of the "anything for money" magic® crowd. Without any sort of internal guidance, Disney has to find direction from any source it can.

Until the ink is dry let's try to refrain from absolutes. While it may be true that they lack internal capabilities right now within the animation division they can always hire talent from the Japanese for the old style. Besides that, they've got some catching up to do with a 2007 target.

 

[airlarry!]

I want some noses counted...just to show how far offbase some of the comments are.

Raise your hand on this topic if you believe that a public, messy divorce between Pixar and Disney is a good thing.

Not me. (And this is just the opening crescendo of what is looking like an eventful spring for Cou$in Mikey.)

I remember when the Pixar folks talked in glowing terms about how wonderful it was to work with the 'experts' from Disney Feature Animation...how there was room in this world for TA and CGI products from two companies who seemed symbiotically linked.

We debated all of this last year, but I had so much fun, let's do it again. This gambit by Pixar is clear: They will not work with Disney if Ei$ner is part of the deal.

Who on this board is really surprised at this news? Who can say with a straight face that a 'distributor' deal with Pixar is worse than the Fox Family deal? Who can say with a straight face that almost any deal with Pixar will not produce better product than most of the DFA and Retread Animation recent releases?

Do not applaud Ei$ner for killing this deal, while at the same time forgiving him for Fox Family and Retread Animation. I know not everyone wants to pin everything wrong with Disney on Ei$ner's shoulders.

But I've been following the public comments and rumor-mongering on this deal way back since TS2, and the buck stops in Burbank.

BTW: remember when someone said that Disney's glorious history of animation is not coming to an end? With the loss of Pixar (and Matt, it looks like the Vanguard thing may be done, too), and the fact that there are literally no TA projects in the pipeline for the first time since...since...I can't remember a time...this may be the saddest year for Disney animation fans ever.

I should soon see the 'Pixar ain't Disney' posts coming soon...but what they fail to realize that it is the opposite that is true. "Pixar is Walt's DFA, and Disney ain't Pixar anymore."

 

[KNWVIKING]

... because it is my hope that the divorce will force Disney to start making great products again.

They've been spoiled the last 10 years with the profits of Pixars work. With the existing deal still in effect for two years & two films, Disney still has the cash flow & the time to turn their own CGI or even TA program around.

So with the rosiest glasses I'll ever put on, I'm hoping the relationship ends.

 

[BRERALEX]

No matter what happens, Disney said in its statement that it can develop sequels to the films that have been produced by the two companies — with or without Pixar's help. Disney said Thursday that it planned to make "Toy Story 3." .

Pixar Ends Filmmaking Partnership With Disney
Fri Jan 30, 7:55 AM by Claudia Eller and Richard Verrier Times Staff Writers

comming soon from the same studio that brought you the beloved classics beauty and the beast 2, little mermaid 2 and the lovable laughable classic jungle book 2 comes a story for kids of all ages with the characters we've all grown to love Toy Story 3 starring Andy Dick as the voice of Woody, Corey Feldman as Buzz lightyear, Stephen Baldwin as Andy.

 

[Bob O]

It doesnt matter if it is "TA" or "CGI", it all gets down to the story being told, and that has been the main weakness of wdfa and the strength of Pixar. They have someone of the quailty of John Lassiter and disney doesnt.
Some may falsey claim the disney name made Pixar, but that couldnt be furthur from the truth!!!! If that was the case movies like Teachers Pet/Emperorer's Grove/Treasure Planet would have been blockbusters, but alas none of disneys animated movies of late can reach the success of the least succesful Pixar movie.

 

[YoHo]

In order to preserve the last shreds of sanity I have left, I'm going to not get into a debate with crusader over CGI vs. TA.

suffice it to say I think he's dead wrong.

 

[raidermatt]

It is interesting to hear how this maneuver is now construed as bad for this company by those among us who used the Pixar joint venture repeatedly to exemplify bad business practices of the past.

You're sharper than this. After all, I could say that its strange that people who praised the venture now think its a positive that its ending (probably).

The venture WAS a poor alternative to either (A) getting this talent in-house, or (B) developing it in-house with other talent (and sticking to it).

Once the venture is done, there are two possible outcomes:

1- Product isn't that good, so it doesn't bring much of a benefit and the venture dies.

2- Product is good, and venture must be continued at a reduced benefit to Disney, or the product becomes a competitor.

So, yes, it was a bad corner to let oneself be put into. Once in the corner, this was the more unfortunate outcome.

You may be right, Vike. ME may have been in a no win situation AT THIS POINT. However, Matt is correct that ME never should have allowed himself to be put in that position in the first place.

I agree with you agreeing with me.

hAm53, its my understanding the Disney owns the characters from the past films, as well as the next two, and can basically do what they want with them.