So, which ones among us will end up as colleagues if Disney buys Pixar, as announced?

the key to pixar's success is to use cartoonish 3D characters and to avoid realistic humans, the latter being a practice that the public won't accept yet. disney has the distribution muscle, and pixar supplies the creative void that developed under eisner's tenure.

nah..the key to Pixars success is good story telling,it could all look like final fantasy & I bet it would be just as good

I agree with stonemason; Pixar just makes really good films. I'm hearing rumblings that Steve Jobs is going to play a big part in this. Keep your fingers crossed.

It's already a done deal if I read right today. Disney dissolved their traditional animation units, and moved people into cgi only animation units long ago. With Eisnet gone, Dinsey might rebalance itself.. it's hard to say. Interesting though that Pixar dissolved their partnership with Disney a year or so ago, and then Disney just bought them out wholesale. There may be some hard feeling on both sides there. CBS also bought out the WB network, and UPN as well.. they are going to merge both channels into one later in the year. Interesting day, entertainment wise.

I heard on the news that Disney has just paid over 7 BILLION dollars for Pixar! -ScottA

The end of Pixar, from now they only will do stupid 3d.

Eisner and Jobs did NOT get along at all. With Disney's new CEO, there is apparently a MUCH better relationship between the two parties which laid the groundwork for the deal. Fortunately both "sides" understand the need to keep the companies separate and continue the creative cultivating at Pixar while bringing Disney "up-to-speed" with this sort of creative environment.

Megalodon

beware 3d art that looks too human in a few years, computers will take over the world and use the perfectly created ultra-real looks to deceive us!

In a few years? We took it over years ago, and our ultra real looks have been decieving you all this time. You will all be assimilated...

If they continues making movies as good as Toy Story, Fining Nemo and The Incredibles, this isn't important for me...

How can someone sell out to Disney???? This is sad news. Pixar made great and fun stuff. Uncomplicated and excellent. With Disney I always get the idea the pushing something unwanted on me, their views on certain issues and such.

" nah..the key to Pixars success is good story telling,it could all look like final fantasy & I bet it would be just as good" Exactly. The failure of the FF films wasn't how they looked, it was just that the story only appealed to people who followed the FF games, and not mainstream crowds. Everyone I talked to who saw the movie (people not even into CG at all) said the same thing... the movie bored them to death, but it looked really cool. ;-)

It's a question of creativity. If Disney cuts Pixar's creation freedom (their best value), they are professional with success posibilities in any new place. Drawers are leaving the company since Disney is Disney (Don Bluth for example). While Disney put the money and Pixar the creativity and good stories, all will be ok

It also puts Disney in the 3D software business. I wonder if they'll spin off Renderman?

"If they continues making movies as good as Toy Story, Fining Nemo and The Incredibles, this isn't important for me... " But won't do it, they will make Disney movies!

Well, if Buzz Lightyear starts to sing, I can scream a lot of blasphemies...

Remember the Trojan Horse? Let us in so we can take over your company LOL! ^ ^ (Apple being the Trojan Horse)

Message edited on: 01/25/2006 09:05

Hmm I wonder if they would ask Roy Disney to return, now that Eisner is gone, and Pixar is working with them again? He left in protest of Eisner's bad decisions, and was in charge of the animation divisions, during the Little Mermaid, Tarzan, Lion King, Atlantis, Treasure Planet timeframe.

It's sad that they aren't doing traditional animation anymore. 3D is only cool when there is something else to compare it to. There needs to be a balance of media produced for them to stay interesting. I once read where the animators for Disney were treated like slaves and forced to crank out work under really long hours. Then tossed out when the movie is completed. Today on the news. They were talking about how Pixar needs to crank out more than one movie per year now under Disney. That kind of thing really puts this whole 3D hobby into perspective for me. It's a fun hobby. But I'd really hate to have to be creative while under high pressured deadlines like that. Creative artwork done on a tight deadline is not my idea of a good job. -ScottA

I was literally sick to my stomach when I heard this. Disney ran their own animation divison into the ground. The reasons were attrocious management, and a cynical attitude towards their audience. "OK let's shovel some more of the same unoriginal crap at them, add Phil collins music, a stupid mascot or 2, and some shmultzy sentiment... They'll eat it up!" When they didn't and people got tired of the same junk, they blamed the medium of 2d animation... (Never mind that 2d animation from Japan is like the biggest thing with the kids these days) not their own bad decisions. So they fire all the 2d animators and trash the entire company's legacy. So they make a 3d feature... Guess what? It's just as bad as their 2d stuff... what a suprise. Mark my words they will do the same to Pixar... They will crank out half-assed direct to video sequels of evrything in Pixar's catalog, and they will destroy Pixar with their corrupt corporate culture. All the while Japan and Korea will continue to make inroads with "gasp!" 2d animation.

The other day I was looking at Disney 1930's cartoons, those were the days my friend!!!!, no computers and excellent animations without todays stupid music!

To quote a line (sort of) from one of my favorite movies last year: Disney is the devil, and they're here to do the devil's work. ;-P

If they continues making movies as good as Toy Story, Fining Nemo and The Incredibles, this isn't important for me... Be careful what you wish for. Disney owns all of these movies... and the rights to make **** sequels. Did anyone see the direct-to-video "Buzz Lightyear of Star Command" or the TV series on the Disney Channel? Let's just say it didn't even come close to the Toy Story movies. So, Disney has the ability to crank out sequels to these movies as long as they make money. Anyone up for "Finding Nemo 2: Finding Dory"? Or how about "The Incredibles 2: The Return of Syndrome"? I think the problem with Disney's animated features has been the predictabilty: another year, another pop song, another hero with a cute-animal side-kick. If a movie has a good story, it doesn't matter if it's CGI or 2D. In fact, Finding Nemo may have worked just as well as a 2D movie. Even though last year's non-Pixar movie, Chicken Little, was mostly hated by critics, it made its money back... which the accountants will claim is "profitable"... and will order Disney to churn out more of these types of movies. I may be wrong, but I think we may have seen the end of Disney's grand animation movies. I doubt we'll see another Beauty & the Beast or Lion King. --John

No troubles about "Finding Nemo 2: Finding Dory" or "The Incredibles 2: The Return of Syndrome" IF THE STORY AND THE ANIMATION IS AS GOOD AS EVER When Toy Story 2 released, I was trembling... usuallY second parts are worse than first ones ('worse' means 'infernal'). But TE2 had a story as good (or almost better) as the first movie. I don't bother if behind stage Pixar and Disney kills one by one. I want results. If the results are good, Aleluya. If not, anime movies is a good option (they don't SING!!!). I will pay to watch CARS, but not to watch BAMBI 2 (eewwwwww!!!!)

"(they don't SING!!!)" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ALELUYAH, I was not born to pay my sins!

Message edited on: 01/25/2006 13:13

People... get a grip.

MSNBC:

Disney has co-financed and distributed Pixars animated films for the past 12 years, splitting the profits. That deal expires in June after Pixar delivers Cars, and it had once appeared the companies would not renew it amid friction between Jobs and former Disney CEO Michael Eisner.

But the talks revived under Iger, who became Disney CEO last October. Disney, the theme park owner that also owns the ABC and ESPN TV networks, and Pixar had discussed a new relationship for months.

The two companies will remain separate, with Pixar keeping its brand name and headquarters in Emeryville, near San Francisco. Maintaining Pixars unique creative character was a priority in the talks, executives said.

Most of the time that Bob and I have spent talking about this hasnt been about economics, its been about preserving the Pixar culture because we all know that thats the thing that is going to determine the success here in the long run, Jobs said on a conference call with analysts."

---

And there is more, but that pretty much sums it up. Disney will OWN Pixar, but will NOT control its creative processes. Okay? Now get back to doing something constructive! :)

Megalodon

"Disney will OWN Pixar, but will NOT control its creative processes. Okay?" Just wait to see next Pixax-Disney movie.......

If Disney does something as simple as force Pixar to crank out things at a faster rate. They don't even have to be in the same state to cause trouble for Pixar. Hopefully Pixar will dictate the direction. But Disney has a history of being an evil sweatshop overlord. We shall see.

We shall see. Pixar has a high average of quality in all their movies (higher in each new one, I think). If after CARS they make POO... obviously Disney's evil hand will be discovered Hey, maybe Pixar are humans too and they could do a bad movie without Disney's intercession ... ... ... ... naaah, impossible ;)

" "Disney will OWN Pixar, but will NOT control its creative processes. Okay?" Just wait to see next Pixax-Disney movie......." good advice. lets put the crystal balls and tealeaves away. we can't see the future. so lets see what comes out after Cars shall we? before we get the pitchforks or make unfounded predictions?

ATTENTION! WBM crowd here, it will be rather hard for the 'mouse house' to mess up Pixar since the head of Pixar is now the MAJOR shareholder of Disney.

First, it's absolutely the case that Pixar's success is more about excellent storytelling than gee-whiz technology. "Interesting though that Pixar dissolved their partnership with Disney a year or so ago, and then Disney just bought them out wholesale." Thanks to the departure of ebullient Eisner and the allegedly graciously placating overtures of Iger, Jobs was woo'd back to the table. As I understand he offered the sale to Disney; this isn't a "hostile takeover" as some seem to want to characterize it. "There may be some hard feeling on both sides there." There are indeed worries that Disney will squash Pixar's corporate culture and thus compromise the films, however Emeryville is a long way from L.A., Lassiter retains creative control, and Jobs will still be Lassiter's boss. Jobs is not a man who wants products with his name on them to go out with substandard quality, so there's definitely hope for a win/win situation here. And yeah, the knee-jerk cynicism about this deal sort of reminds me of the knee-jerk bad attitude that some folks have about every little thing that SJ and Apple do. It's sort of silly, given the very high quality of Apple and Pixar products. So let's wait and see. If in two or three years' time this appears to have ruined Pixar while not doing much for Disney, then yeah, get out the pitchforks. :-)

what I think is kind of funny is the HUGE amount of money Disney paid for Pixar. It would have been much more cost effective to... I dunno actually look at what makes Pixar so good (instead of just assuming it's cuz they do 3d) and fixing their own animation division.

"what I think is kind of funny is the HUGE amount of money Disney paid for Pixar. It would have been much more cost effective to... I dunno actually look at what makes Pixar so good (instead of just assuming it's cuz they do 3d) and fixing their own animation division."

That's actually a pretty good observation Berserga! :) And a VERY good point!! You figure that ANYONE here can do the same thing Pixar has done - provided they have a great script/story.

Megalodon

weeeeeell I wouldn't go that far... Pixar has some of the most talented 3d animators around... They pulled off a virtual miracle with The Incredibles... But in fact Disney is no slouch at 3d, It's just the stories where they lack...

I agree on that Berserqa. Their stories have run the gamut from hackneyed, preachy, contrived, formulaic, and then, sadly, uninspired. Hoh.

Okay... well maybe not HERE... :) But there are INCREDIBLY talented people on the various forums that DO have the talent to pull off what Pixar has done. It's just a matter of grouping together and focusing that talent AND have a great script.

I have NO doubt many amateurs could pull this sort of thing off; though they must have talent, persistence and determination. I've seen MANY shorts on the web that show "unbelievable" talent in animation, and thought to myself that that same talent applied to a great feature-length story would be wonderful. This WILL eventually happen, it's just a matter of when.

Of course this is just my opinion and everyone is free to agree or disagree. We shall see.....

Megalodon

Bookmark

Is not a question of a good scripts, if you look at Nemo the script has nothing special, what makes Nemo great is how the personages interprete the script and their personality.
On the other side, Disney turns any good script into a stupid movie probably because believes that his audience is stupid so has to do stupid movies for them.

Message edited on: 01/26/2006 01:37

Over the last two decades and a bit, Disney has become synonymous with corporate greed and the destruction of artistic spirit. In that same period, the rise and control of one person who is widely known to have micromanaged everything to death is behind it. That person is no longer in charge, after his particilarly vile methods of domination finally failed to do what they had done for decades: improve revenue. Everything said above about Disney was either begun or based on the actions of the company under a man who is currently looking around for some other company to run. Eisner saved Disney from being bought up and destroyed utterly. Like his long ago archetype, he walked in through the gates and was hailed as a savior after he destroyed his rivals. He was named emperor, err, CEO, and ruled it with a pretty wicked fist. Even managed to get to the point where he was on the board of directors (deification, ya know). And then, when his personal excesses and wicked habits proved to be in opposition to the sena, err, other people in Disney (who hate that people see Disney as that way), some of them got to gether, and among them were some of the people he felt were close friends. Well, as close a freind as anyone could ever be with him, that is. And people say history doesn't repeat itself... in any event, He is gone. The changes in the daily operations of Disney are still rippling down, and wall street (that is, the people who invest money for regular folks who have 401ks and mutual funds or maybe a little money market account or pension or even a full fledged retirement fund) isn't entirely happy. Iger is definitely a compromise choice -- half way between the "don't you screw with my legacy" of Eisner and the "good god, we want anything but that SOB" of everyone else. Don't judge the company now on the way it used to be. See what it becomes in the future. Oh, and Jobs isn't the largest shareholder of Disney. But he does get a seat on the baord, and if he's willing to take a multimillion dollar loan from his arch enemy, then I certainly wouldn't put it past him to take over Disney...

What you say is true, But the way I've heard it from people who have worked there is that Eisner had quite a few toadies who are probably still with the company. I have to wonder, is it a bit like removing Hitler but leaving all the other war criminals behind? And no I'm not comparing Disney to the Nazis... Disney is only 70% as evil as the Nazis. ^_^

dunno why your worried about Disney buying Pixar.. with Jobs on the board (and tipped to become the new head of Disney in time)... anyone for iDisney? it's small.. it's stylish.. it fits in your pocket...

The first apple with ears I see on Apple's site, I'm installing linux on all my macs....

Attached Link: http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article341627.ece

" Pixar chief asserts his authority over Disney by axing 'Toy Story 3' To infinity but not beyond as merger brings successful series to an end By Jason NissPublished: 29 January 2006 John Lasseter, the creative chief of Pixar Animation Studios, has wasted no time asserting who is boss after Pixar's takeover by Walt Disney - by stopping production of Toy Story 3, the controversial sequel to the two wildly successful animated films. The original Toy Story, completed in 1995, was the first major collaboration between Pixar and Disney. Thehighly lucrative partnership went on to produce the hits Toy Story 2, A Bug's Life, Finding Nemo, Monsters Inc and The Incredibles. However, the joint venture became strained, partly because of personality clashes between the then Disney chief executive, Michael Eisner, and Pixar's chief executive, Steve Jobs, and partly because of Disney's desire to keep the Toy Story franchise running with a third and forth movie. Mr Lasseter was deeply opposed to the idea but Disney went ahead, as it owns the intellectual property, putting 100 scriptwriters, animators and other creative staff to work on Toy Story 3 at its own Walt Disney Studios animation complex in Burbank, California. On Wednesday, less than 24 hours after Mr Jobs and Disney's new chief executive, Bob Iger, unveiled the merger, Mr Lasseter went to Burbank with Pixar's president, Ed Catmull. He announced that Toy Story 3 would now be scrapped, without a word about the fate of the animation team. According to talk in Hollywood, Disney was struggling with a script in which Buzz Lightyear, one of the two stars, developed a fault and had to be recalled to Taiwan for repairs. According to regulatory filings in the US, the Disney-Pixar deal gives Mr Lasseter creative control over all of the two studios' animated film output, while still maintaining Pixar's independence. He also has a contract running to 2011 paying him a salary of $2.5m (1.4m) a year. Pixar's latest movie, Cars, will shortly be released, while Disney is apparently relieved at the success of its own new animated film, Chicken Little, which comes out in the UK next month. Chicken Little has already made more than $250m at the box office. John Lasseter, the creative chief of Pixar Animation Studios, has wasted no time asserting who is boss after Pixar's takeover by Walt Disney - by stopping production of Toy Story 3, the controversial sequel to the two wildly successful animated films. " and "According to regulatory filings in the US, the Disney-Pixar deal gives Mr Lasseter creative control over all of the two studios' animated film output, while still maintaining Pixar's independence." ok. so.. anymore worries? :)