PDA

View Full Version : Eisner's troubles



jrad32
01-30-2004, 08:48 AM
Very interesting news on the wires this morning following the Pixar departure from Disney. Darkbeer has some of the articles in the news section, and over at mice age there are a bunch of articles as well.

This has to be a kick in the gonads for Eisner. After all how many times has he glossed over the problems in the parks and focused on the success of Finding Nemo and Pirates? Well it looks like one of the companies big money makers is now gone.

Does the end any chances of future pixar rides in the parks? I guess Buzz and the others in place will stay, and TL will still get its Buzz, but any Nemo overlay on the Subs or Monsters Inc. on Superstar Limo would seem to be dead or doubtful.

Forbin
01-30-2004, 09:05 AM
Acutally, just because Pixar left doesn't mean that they can't do those rides.


Nemo and Monsters Inc are property of Disney (I think) even though Pixar made it, they were contracted by disney hence making it Disney property. So they could do anything they want with it.

I'm not sure on Toy Story though.

JeffG
01-30-2004, 09:07 AM
Disney owns the rights to all of Pixar's films to date (including "The Incredibles" and "Cars"), including the rights to merchandise them or create spin-offs, sequels, or other tie-ins. While Pixar would probably receive a royalty, Disney is apparently not required to obtain their permission or participation. In fact, Disney underscored that by essentially announcing plans for "Toy Story 3" in their press release yesterday responding to Pixar's announcement.

If Disney wants to create theme park attractions based on any of the Pixar properties to date, there is likely nothing stopping them from doing so.

-Jeff

jrad32
01-30-2004, 09:12 AM
Thanks I didn't know the status. So I guess it will just be any new movies Pixar makes.

LifelongAngelsFan
01-30-2004, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by JeffG
Disney owns the rights to all of Pixar's films to date (including "The Incredibles" and "Cars"), including the rights to merchandise them or create spin-offs, sequels, or other tie-ins. ...
If Disney wants to create theme park attractions based on any of the Pixar properties to date, there is likely nothing stopping them from doing so.

If this is the case then I can see why Jobs told Eisney to pound sand.

Forbin
01-30-2004, 11:30 AM
I think that is Disney's SOP because of the Winnie-The-Pooh Issues.

I wonder how much trouble they are getting into for the Winnie the Pooh Ride?

SoCalDisneyLover
01-30-2004, 04:02 PM
Eisner is going to single handedly Ruin the Disney company. He's destroying their name & reputation on a daily basis.

Lucas....Jobs...Roy D....the list continues of people that Eisner apparently can't agree or get along with. Unfortunately, there appears to be little that can be done to get rid of this cancer. He who is in power, can exercise control to keep himself in power. Regardless of the consequences. His decision making has definitely had an impact on everything Disney touches.

It's a shame, because Pixar has done nothing but good things for Disney. Every single one of their films has done extremely well, with a few Blockbusters(Toy Story, Nemo, Monsters Inc.). Eisner blew it on this one.....AGAIN!

SoCalDisneyLover
01-30-2004, 04:09 PM
I'm not the only one who thinks Eisner blew it:

"It makes it look like Eisner did something wrong again, but we shouldn't jump to conclusions." said Patrick McKeigue, an analyst at Independence Investment.

Roy Disney and ally Stanley Gold, who both resigned from the Disney board late last year and called for Eisner to step down, placed the blame squarely on the Disney CEO.

"More than a year ago, we warned the Disney board that we believed Michael Eisner was mismanaging the Pixar partnership and expressed our concern that the relationship was in jeopardy," they said in a statement issued late Thursday.

Gauchograd99
01-30-2004, 09:10 PM
This is the kind of thing that happens when Disney (i.e. Eisner) thinks they still control the world when it comes to "kiddie movies" so to speak. It is the old "since we are Disney we can keep everything and give you nothing in return for your hard work" ideal that ended the thought of a Roger Rabbit 2 (Disney wanted all new characters for their own if I remember correctly) and a redo on Star Tours ("you can pay to replace the movie yourself Mr. Lucas"... or something to that effect).

Sure is hard to manhandle a company who is winning the awards while you don't even have a true creative staff anymore. I wonder when "Jungle Cruise The Movie" is coming out... or maybe "Enchanted Tiki Room" starring Brendan Frasier. :fez:

wendybeth
01-30-2004, 09:13 PM
Originally posted by JeffG
Disney owns the rights to all of Pixar's films to date (including "The Incredibles" and "Cars"), including the rights to merchandise them or create spin-offs, sequels, or other tie-ins. While Pixar would probably receive a royalty, Disney is apparently not required to obtain their permission or participation. In fact, Disney underscored that by essentially announcing plans for "Toy Story 3" in their press release yesterday responding to Pixar's announcement.

If Disney wants to create theme park attractions based on any of the Pixar properties to date, there is likely nothing stopping them from doing so.

-Jeff

It would be nice if Disney was actually paying these royalties to Pixar; from what I understand, they haven't been doing so with regards to the Pixar themed rides and attractions in DL and DCA.

sleepyjeff
01-30-2004, 09:24 PM
Originally posted by JeffG
Disney owns the rights to all of Pixar's films to date (including "The Incredibles" and "Cars"), including the rights to merchandise them or create spin-offs, sequels, or other tie-ins. While Pixar would probably receive a royalty, Disney is apparently not required to obtain their permission or participation. In fact, Disney underscored that by essentially announcing plans for "Toy Story 3" in their press release yesterday responding to Pixar's announcement.

If Disney wants to create theme park attractions based on any of the Pixar properties to date, there is likely nothing stopping them from doing so.

-Jeff

The funny thing is, both Disney and Pixar could actually make "Toy Story 3". Two completely different movies with the exact same characters based on the first movies. Of course the voices would most likely be different, and one(Disneys) would go straight to video.

Don't laugh, when two production companies owned the rights to James Bond---back in the mid-eighties there were two 007 movies released in the same summer! One with Roger Moore, the other with Sean Connery.

JeffG
01-31-2004, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by sleepyjeff
The funny thing is, both Disney and Pixar could actually make "Toy Story 3". Two completely different movies with the exact same characters based on the first movies. Of course the voices would most likely be different, and one(Disneys) would go straight to video.

What is your basis for this? I doubt very much that the deal is structured this way at all. Since all the news reports have indicated that Disney has the sequel rights to the previous films, I can't imagine that Pixar would have any rights at all. In fact, the article that ran in Daily Variety this week mentioned that their separation from Disney was essentially the equivalent of giving up their film library.


Don't laugh, when two production companies owned the rights to James Bond---back in the mid-eighties there were two 007 movies released in the same summer! One with Roger Moore, the other with Sean Connery.

That was a very specific and unusual situation, not based on any co-production deal. Ian Fleming had a co-author on the novel "Thunderball". As part of that agreement, that author ended up with the film rights to that novel and that one only. The movie "Thunderball" was made by Albert Broccoli's production company under a license from that author. Some years later, the author licensed his rights to another production company, which made "Never Say Never Again". If you watch both "Thunderball" and "Never Say Never Again", you will notice that the plot and supporting characters are the same in both movies.

-Jeff