PDA

View Full Version : Relationship between Disney and MGM



thekirk
08-29-2004, 08:57 PM
Does Disney own MGM, or do they just work together?

iwannabeanimagineer
08-30-2004, 07:39 AM
I'm no expert, but since no one else has responded, I'll give it a shot!

It's my understanding that MGM and Disney signed a partnership agreement in order to build and operate the Disney/MGM studios, using both Disney and MGM copyrighted images and characters. I believe the goal was to take away theme park market share from Universal by opening a movie-studio-themed park (with a backlot tour) and to use the Disney and MGM names and intellectual properties to assure its preeminence. The Great Movie Ride is the best (only?) example of how the MGM characters and images were used.

Another media partnership, this time between Disney and Henson, came about during the development of the Disney/MGM Studio as well, resulting in the Muppetvision 3-D attractions at MGM and DCA and the appearances of Muppet costumed characters for at least the first few years of MGM park operation. Henson later sued Disney for using the Muppet characters beyond the terms of their agreement and I have seen much less of the Muppets in Disney theme parks since then.

Now, if only Disney could work a sweetheart deal with J.K. Rowling and the other rights-holders to Harry Potter, we could get a Harry Potter attraction at the Disney parks! (I was sad to see the Seuss characters show up at Universal instead of Disney.)

Disney Vault
08-30-2004, 08:27 AM
I dont like seeing non-disney things being brought into the disney parks. The muppets are okay because disney now owns them but i dont want any harry potter or Seuss characters. And their is already a Warner brothers park somewhere that has a Harry potter attraction.

iwannabeanimagineer
08-30-2004, 08:39 AM
And their is already a Warner brothers park somewhere that has a Harry potter attraction.
Cool! Is it in the U.S.?

JeffG
08-30-2004, 11:11 AM
It's my understanding that MGM and Disney signed a partnership agreement in order to build and operate the Disney/MGM studios, using both Disney and MGM copyrighted images and characters. I believe the goal was to take away theme park market share from Universal by opening a movie-studio-themed park (with a backlot tour) and to use the Disney and MGM names and intellectual properties to assure its preeminence. The Great Movie Ride is the best (only?) example of how the MGM characters and images were used.

This is generally correct, although it is really more of a licensing agreement rather than a true partnership. MGM does not have any significant ownership stake or control over the park. Disney basically just has a deal to use the MGM trademark and to feature some of their properties in the park.

There have been rumors for years that Disney might drop "MGM" from the name of the park once the licensing agreement expires. They already refer to the park simply as "Disney Studios" in some of the promotional materials, since the licensing agreement puts some limitations on how much they can use the MGM name in advertising.


Another media partnership, this time between Disney and Henson, came about during the development of the Disney/MGM Studio as well, resulting in the Muppetvision 3-D attractions at MGM and DCA and the appearances of Muppet costumed characters for at least the first few years of MGM park operation. Henson later sued Disney for using the Muppet characters beyond the terms of their agreement and I have seen much less of the Muppets in Disney theme parks since then.

This one is a lot more complicated. Disney had a tentative agreement in place to purchase The Jim Henson Company and all of its assets in the late 80s. This was intended to be a complete buy-out of the company, which would then also include a fairly long-term, exclusive contract for Jim Henson himself to produce projects for them. While the sale was in progress, they established several immediate partnerships, including production of Muppetvision 3D and several other smaller projects at Disney/MGM Studios, a multi-year home video distribution deal for Henson's existing film and television projects, a multi-film deal for new movies (this ultimately resulted in "A Muppet Christmas Carol" and "Muppet Treasure Island"), and a couple TV production deals, including the "Muppet's Tonight" TV series for ABC.

Before the sale was completed, Henson passed away suddenly and unexpectedly. Without the services of Henson himself, the value of the company came into question and Disney eventually pulled out from the purchase. There was a fair amount of anamosity that developed at the time between the Henson family and Disney over that, although they were able to at least keep a few of the key deals intact for a while and I think lawsuits were generally avoided. This included establishing a pretty long term deal for them to continue using the "Muppetvision 3D" film in the parks. In time, the Henson company eventualy took their film, television and video rights to other companies (mainly Sony) after the Disney deals expired. That was why the theatrical release of "Muppets from Space" was from Columbia Pictures and most of the recent video releases (including re-issues of older titles) were on the Columbia/TriStar label.

Disney actually did finally acquire the Muppets and all related assets earlier this year. Unlike the original deal planned in the late 80s, though, this was only for the Muppet properties and not for the entire Henson company. Basically, the purchased all the trademarks and copyrights related to the characters as well as ownership of all of the previous Muppet TV shows, movies, and other media. The deal also included "Bear in the Big Blue House", but The Jim Henson Company retained all of their other properties (including films like "The Dark Crystal" and "Labyrinth" and the "Farscape" TV series). Henson also retained the Jim Henson Creature Shop, which is their puppet-making and special effects company. The deal with Disney did include a fairly long-term production deal for The Jim Henson Company to produce Muppet-related films and TV shows for Disney.


And their is already a Warner brothers park somewhere that has a Harry potter attraction.

Warner Bros has theme parks in Spain and Australia, but neither one currently has a Harry Potter attraction. The ownership of the theme park rights to Harry Potter is pretty unclear right now, even though Warner owns the movie rights. There are even rumors that Disney might own the rights, based on a quote by the head of Universal Parks indicating that the rights were unavailable and that he believed Disney had them.

-Jeff

Disney Vault
08-30-2004, 01:43 PM
Why would disney keep it a secret if they owned the rights. ANd it was the one in spain that has some sort of harry potter attraction or exibit.

thekirk
08-30-2004, 04:53 PM
Thank you all for your responses - and I'm glad I learned about the relationship with Henson - more than helpful. Thank you.

I hope that Disney doesn't have the rights to Harry Potter, and that they won't try to get them. Harry Potter is alright - but Disney doesn't need it. I would be afraid that we'd just get stuck with another ride based on a movie.

TempoNZ
08-30-2004, 06:46 PM
Cool! Is it in the U.S.?

LAst time I was in MovieWorld Australia they had a Harry Potter walk through which was basicaly just a chance to see the props etc from the movies. It was rather intereting but no more exciting than going to an interesting Museum etc.