The Incredibles Dilemma

[nile455]

This movie is practically guaranteed $300 million gross, a figure that absolutely demands a sequel. And with only 1 film left on the Disney/Pixar contract before they end their bitter relationship, I guess they won't be able to make a sequel. Disney cannot create this type of computer animation on its own, and Pixar cannot release this film without Disney's distribution since Disney owns the rights to the characters. Any thoughts?

 

[WDSearcher]

Just because Disney and Pixar don't have a new multi-film agreement doesn't mean they can't or won't work together again in the future. Jobs can strike off and run his own company out from under the Disney umbrella and still partner with Disney on new films or sequels.

We need to get away from the mindset that once Pixar and Disney split, they are mutually exclusive.

The mere fact that Disney and Comcast are now partners in a children's TV channel in Europe should be proof that past relationships don't preclude future deals.

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

Originally posted by nile455
Disney cannot create this type of computer animation on its own, and Pixar cannot release this film without Disney's distribution since Disney owns the rights to the characters.

But Disney can create sequels without Pixar.

Disney owns the characters and the sequel rights. Disney can buy the computer animation skills, either by contractng with another computer animation studio or by building up their in-house capacity and skills.

The real question is whether Disney is willing and able to pursue the quality that Pixar has put into their movies. Or will Disney settle for the level of quality demonstrated by their direct-to-video sequels of their animated classics?

 

[raidermatt]

Just because Disney and Pixar don't have a new multi-film agreement doesn't mean they can't or won't work together again in the future.

True. Of course it depends on whether Pixar signs with another studio, or goes it alone and makes "one-off" deals.

The mere fact that Disney and Comcast are now partners in a children's TV channel in Europe should be proof that past relationships don't preclude future deals.

Nothing is impossible, but there wasn't the long term wrangling with Comcast that there was between Eisner and Jobs.

But with Eisner apparently beginning the looooooong walk out the door, who knows?

Its probably also important to remember that there were "rumors" that the Comcast discussions started as a mutual discussion of a merger, as opposed to an uninvited takeover. Its very possible Disney wasn't as opposed to the idea as they said publically. Let's not forget the "coincidence" of Disney scheduling their annual meeting last year in Philadelphia, location of Comcast's headquarters.

The point? Comparing doing a TV channel deal in Europe with Comcast to a film deal with Pixar probably isn't all that strong an analogy.

But again, that's also not to say it couldn't happen. After all, Pixar has not signed with anyone else yet.

 

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by raidermatt
The point? Comparing doing a TV channel deal in Europe with Comcast to a film deal with Pixar probably isn't all that strong an analogy.

I didn't mean for it to be an "apples to apples" thing -- just an example about how two businesses who were once at odds can indeed work together if the project is right.

 

[raidermatt]

Agreed.

 

[Nlihte]

Actually, when we were in WDW we went on the animation tour. On it, we were told that they are currently working on Toy Story 3. So The Incredibles 2 seems possible.