Jobs sells Pixar to Disney! See Post#34 (1 Viewer)

[Chris Lockwood]

Now they just need to buy Apple.

 

[Ted Todorov]

Not possible -- indeed I would think that Apple has a higher market value than Disney -- certainly they passed Dell recently.

Ted

 

[Timothy Alexander]

Found some more detailed info on the merger from reuters...

Disney-Pixar pact lays out it's conditions.

To summarize, Pixar is essentially running the show over at Disney.

 

[BrianShort]

After reading this article, I think that this merger will end up being good for both companies, but especially Disney. And I'm really looking forward to Cars. Even if the current trailer doesn't reveal too much about the plot, the animation looks top notch.

Brian

 

[David Rogers]

My first reaction is GAAAH :frowning:

My second reaction reminds me they've changed senior management at Di$ney rather heavily, and there's a good chance there might be some people who don't have their heads quite as far up their asses as Di$ney's been blessed with over the past ~15years.

So I'm cautiously optimistic. I'd rather Pixar have gone independent and used standard distribution agreements to reach us. Obviously Jobs would rather act like an executive and build his stock portfolio than maintain the magic at Pixar.

So basically we have to wait and see ... in five years we should know if Pixar is still Pixar, or if they've become Di$ney.

Grrrr. Damnit Jobs ... didn't you already have enough money? Did you already have enough power? Why couldn't you satisfy your corporate cravings with a label / Ipod merger instead of ruining the best movie studio ever by merging with one of the worst?

 

[TheLongshot]

I agree with you Dave. I would have liked to have seen Pixar go on their own and do their own thing, rather than try to tame the 800 pound gorilla that Disney is right now, but with them in charge, they could possibly make it work, particularly since it now gives them resources to help them scale things up (quicker turnaround on films, the option to reestablish the 2D division and do 2D films again (Which it was rumored that Pixar was interested in getting into that.)

It is just a question of if the 800 pound gorilla is too much for the Pixar guys to tame.

In other news, Jim Hill posted his comments about the merger. For the most part, I don't agree with him, and seems to miss the main point for aquiring Pixar: to do business more like them.

http://www.jimhillmedia.com/article.php?id=1821

Jason

 

[Ricardo C]

Thi$ i$ getting increa$ingly $illy, guy$. Plea$e $top it, you're adult$ now. It'$ not "Micro$oft", "$ony", or "Di$ney". There'$ $everal $marter way$ of getting your point$ acro$$.

Cheer$.

 

[Adam Sanchez]

Ha ha Ricardo! Joke of the day.

That $ has always bugged the hell out of me when people put it in Disney to be totally honest. I'm a Disney defender. They aren't that great of late and I expressed my worry about this deal but I have changed to be really hopeful that Pixar can and will help them.

Confirm something for me please. Disney did do away with 2D animation right? But now that could change... we hope.

 

[Paul McElligott]

Ricardo:

I think the point of this article (and this deal) is that Disney needs Pixar a lot more than Pixar needs Disney.

From what I've observed (from a considerable distance, obviously) is that Steve Jobs has never been all about the money. For him, it's about having the power to do whatever he thought was cool. Being disgustingly rich is just a means to that end.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

The dilution of Disney was not about their talent...it was about the decisionmaking. Now that Pixar, a company that lets talent do what talent does, is running that side of the show, Disney and Pixar will flourish. Disney still had an immense stable of talented folks...they just weren't calling the shots. The merger, if nothing else, will allow the strangehold the business side had on the creative side to loosen a bit.

 

[David Rogers]

I call them Di$ney because it fits. Pitching a fit about it leaves me unmoved.

Cheers!

 

[Adam Sanchez]

Wow. Am I alone in thinking that was a totally rude and inappropriate comment?

 

[Ricardo C]

Who did what now?

(Thi$ po$t brought to you via a $ony laptop and a Micro$oft operating $ystem, both of which will $oon combine to play a Di$ney DVD.)

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

John Lasseter has asserted his authority over both animation units by pulling the plug on Disney's Planned Toy Story 3. I'm not opposed in principle to another sequel featuring Woody and Buzz, but I'd rather the original creative team revisit this one when and if they think they really have a good idea for a third film and a story worth telling. Running off a cheapo sequel (possibly for the direct-to-home-video market as Disney has done in so many other cases) strikes me as a very bad idea and I'm glad Lasseter has put a halt to this one.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Simon Massey]

I agree, and the next thing I hope he does is resurrect the traditional animation that Disney have canned. Previous films of this ilk didn't fail because they weren't CGI animation - they failed because they were mediocre films.

 

[mattCR]

Agreed. Look, this year we have a fleet of CGI animated films (Over the Headge, Barnyard, Open Season, The Ant Bully, The Wild, Ice Age 2, Cars, Hoodwinked)

What I think quite a few will quickly learn (Open Season, Ant Bully, Barnyard, Wild) is that just because you are CGI animated doesn't = good. It's the story that sells the whole thing.

 

[Dan Hitchman]

I'd like them to steer back towards traditional hand painted cell animation. Even computer painting can't touch it because so much of it is painted on computer in BOLD, BRIGHT swatches of primary colors with no individual detail (again, view Bambi where brush strokes create a 3D effect and texture to each and every leaf and tree), and is so sterile.

Goddamn! Look at Fantasia (the original), Bambi (the background cells are FANTASTIC and high art in and of itself!), Pinocchio, The Three Cabilaros/Saludos Amigos, Alice In Wonderland, & Sleeping Beauty... now THAT's art.

Throw in some good stories, and it could be the Disney of old.

CGI for CGI's sake is DUMB! It's only one of many tools, and is used so much now because it's quicker.

Hell, bring on board Tim Burton & his band of stop motion animators & puppet makers (like those who worked on Corpse Bride) and bring back that skill too!

 

[Amy Mormino]

One thing that I hope that will be reconsidered in this deal is Pixar's stance on not adapting material. While Pixar's decision to use original stories has resulted in great films, I hope the new creative people will respect that a lot of Disney's greatest cartoons were adaptations. I think the need to speed up production (they'll need at least one big cartoon out each year) will make them more flexible on this front.