Jim Hill Media's blog

[PatrickvD]

Thinking about it, I'd really like Disney and Pixar to stick together. If they part ways, there'll be too many players in this whole CGI game. I'd Prefer Disney, Disney/PIXAR and Dreamworks to remain the key players... and it would be healthier for PIXAR, Disney really can offer them what they want for their characters. eternal life in Disneyland etc etc.

[Brandon Neeld]

I don't think Pixar's requests are unreasonable - what would be unreasonable is if they got it. Jobs is no idiot - he knows that in dealing with a power house like Disney you're not going to get everything you ask for - especially when the Mouse is in the driver's seat. By aiming high he knows he's more likely to get reasonable terms in the final deal and if he's lucky maybe a bit extra. When all's said and done we'll have a good firm deal worked out with fair and reasonable terms for both sides and Disney can walk away claiming victory because they talked Jobs out of so much and Pixar can do the same because they've established themselves as a reputable company and long term partner with Disney. It's all corporate politics - it's just one of the all time greatest corporate political minds (Jobs) is playing the game.

[Meg]

Makes sense.

[Kaszubas]

I don't think Pixar's requests are unreasonable - what would be unreasonable is if they got it. Jobs is no idiot - he knows that in dealing with a power house like Disney you're not going to get everything you ask for - especially when the Mouse is in the driver's seat. By aiming high he knows he's more likely to get reasonable terms in the final deal and if he's lucky maybe a bit extra. When all's said and done we'll have a good firm deal worked out with fair and reasonable terms for both sides and Disney can walk away claiming victory because they talked Jobs out of so much and Pixar can do the same because they've established themselves as a reputable company and long term partner with Disney. It's all corporate politics - it's just one of the all time greatest corporate political minds (Jobs) is playing the game.

Quoted for agreement

[ShyViolet]

Surprising? Not really.

But Pixar are asking for waaaaaaaaaay too much, without any consideration for the company who paid for half their movies, marketed them extremely well, and helped put them on the map.

I agree. Like someone said on another board, Pixar is forgetting who's working for whom here.

[Ben]

Yes, Toy Story was completely Mouse House financed (hence the "Disney's Toy Story" on original issues of the film).

The story was also boarded and much work done at WDFA, while Pixar wasn't big enough to handle it. The original picture was a road movie and went through three/four re-writes. Lasseter wanted to pack it in when the story ran out of steam and JK suggested keeping the whole thing tied to around Andy's room.

I also agree with Brandon in that Jobs is aiming higher than he will get. It's totally understandable, and is the corporate game, as he says. But Disney took a big gamble on the fledgling studio and it paid off for both.

What I was saying is that Jobs shouldn't be too hard nosed about giving up some, if not most, of the options, as they wouldn't be where they are now without Disney.

And, frankly, given the history between them, if Pixar does walk, I don't think Disney should give them sequel rights to at least the Toy Stories, and I would look forward with great interest to a TS3 from the folks who did such a good job on Chicken Little...

[ShyViolet]

Could it be????



Scroll down to bottom:



http://www.animationnation.com/ubb/ulti ... 1;t=010872

[bullwinkle]

i cant wait to see Flushed Away. the pictures for the movie look great. oh i cant wait to see that.

[ShyViolet]

This article talks about the fact that Eisner's image has actually been erased from different places in the parks as well as the documentary "One Man's Dream".

www.jimhillmedia.com

[GeorgeC]

Frankly,

I'd rather if the Disney Company brought back WALT DISNEY'S IMAGE.

The past 10 years a lot more time and effort was spent on the battles between various executives and former executives at the company and less time was spent promoting what the company USED to be about... or the fact that a Midwestern band of brothers actually started the company.

Besides, Eisner's 10 minutes ago. You could plug in any of about at least a half-dozen executives in Hollywood and you'd get the SAME RESULT.

There's a reason WHY the company was called the WALT DISNEY Company.

It should be celebrating its past history and talking about its founder again... Not running away from that history and wallowing about Eisner who's finished at any rate.

[Ben]

I still love how all of Jim Hill's "sources" speak exactly like him.

Y'know?


On a more serious note, I think its a shame that such troubles are taken over removing people from a company's history. There can be things that they may not want to dwell on, but erasing someone shouldn't be among them.

While the Disney ride may not have been re-voiced just to "freshen it up", I do agree that, as Eisner is no longer with the company, that his voice should go, and Andrews is a good and natural choice.

As for the portrait removal, well, those are OLD portraits which regularly get updated. Of course, Eisner's will probably not get updated now he has left, and Roy still isn't back on the board, but he's really reading too much into that.

I'm still upset that after all the in-fighting, Roy has decided to sell his stake in the company that he apparently loves so much, leaving Eisner as the biggest sole shareholder...

[ShyViolet]

There can be things that they may not want to dwell on, but erasing someone shouldn't be among them.

So true....

[ShyViolet]

OY! I'm gettin' kinda sick of "waiting to see what happens."

How long can it take to say: "O.K., you've got a deal"??

[Wonderlicious]

Whilst I love Jim Hill's website on the whole, I've been getting annoyed by his attitude towards many things of the new Iger regime (mainly the Pixar merger). You can obviously tell that he's not a fan of him at all, and at least to me, it seems like he's trying to persuade people in to thinking that Iger wastes money and will damage the Disney company (look at some of his articles on the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels and their cost) and that buying Pixar was a bad idea as Cars "under-peformed" (when in my opinion, it only appears like that as some Disney and Pixar executives were simply too cocky about the film). The hatred of the current regime also seems to be leading Hill into tainting the reputations of all the creative people over at both Disney and Pixar. All this stuff is irritating me. Is anybody in the same boat as me?

[Ben]

Hill just seems to swing hot and cold, left to right.

Problems make good articles, and when there are no problems, create them!