Why the Muppets?

[King Triton]

I don't understand why Michael Eisner had to buy the Muppets? In my opinion, Disney characters and the Muppets don't mix well. I understand that Disney has the Muppet's 3-D movie at two of their parks, but anything outside of that would be overkill. When you are a true Disney fan like myself, you want to see Disney characters NOT Muppets. This is another example on how out of touch Michael Eisner is with the Disney fans.

Why spend mega millions to buy the rights to the Muppets? When you see Mickey Mouse, you think of Walt's dream. When you see the Muppets, you think of Jim Hensen's dream. They are so different from each other. Why can't Disney have a brainstorming meeting with all of their imagineers and come up with their OWN new characters??? Disney doesn't need to buy other people's characters. I rather see that instead. With the mega millions saved, we can put that back into the parks and add new rides!!!

Buying the Muppets is bad idea. I love Disney so much, but I am sick and tired of seeing Michael Eisner running this company down into the ground. Roy Disney is right....Disney has so much potential but Micahael Eisner is holding the company back.

Disney Fans Unite!
www.savedisney.com

 

[Chuck S]

I think the Muppets have great potential for the Disney company. While I can't say I loved the characters when I was younger, they have really grown on me. True, I don't think "Disney" when I see them...but they certainly have growth potential. Especially if they are used in some new movies and perhaps a new version of "The Muppet Show", as long as it isn't too sterile, and allows room for the dry wit along with the slapstick. Henson wasn't doing much with them, of course Henson had been busy (until recently) with Farscape, but poor Kermit and Piggy seemed forgotten in recent years. Plus, the Muppet Vision show is popular with WDW guests (don't know about DCA guests, I visited their just prior to 9-11 and park crowds were light, and the show attendance was light as well.

I also think they could be popular as costumed characters in the parks, just not DL or MK--but they are certainly appropriate in the Studios or DCA areas.

 

[disney_parrothead]

The potential for long-term revenue is probably there. The muppets have pretty much been stagnant since Jim Henson died, so maybe Disney will be successful in bringing them back. Either way, your average eight year old won't know that Kermit was "adopted" by Disney, and ten or twenty years from now, most adults probably won't realize it, or care.

 

[meowthew2]

Originally posted by King Triton
Disney doesn't need to buy other people's characters.

Why not? That's what Walt did. Think about it -- other than Mickey, Minnie, Goofy, Donald, etc., all the characters and films created under Walt were borrowed from other people's stories and ideas, or real-life events.

 

[Rachael Q]

I don't disagree with the buying of the Muppet Characters...it's probably a good business decision.

and as a previous poster said, some of Disney's most famous characters were bought by Disney, just like the muppets...

Winnie the Pooh, Eeyore, Tigger, Piglet etc were bought from AA Milne's family

The following were not originally Disney Characters but Disney has acquired the rights to:
Aladdin
The Jungle Book by Rudyard Kipling
Pinocchio - originally written in Italian
Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll
Peter Pan by JM Barrie
Cinderella
Beauty and the Beast
Sleeping Beauty
Snow White
- the last four all being fairytales written by the Brothers Grimm - originally in German.

Some if not most of our beloved "Disney" Characters started out not as Disney - so the muppets are really no different.