Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Pixar Eaten by Mickey Mouse

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the i'm-so-confused dept.

Entertainment 409

The rumors went flying this weekend, but Dekortage writes "It is official: Pixar has been sold to Disney. Steve Jobs will join the Disney board, and John Lasseter is now Disney's Chief Creative Officer. So, dear Slashdot, does this mean that Disney's movies will improve, or that Pixar's will become worse?" Also the price of Pixar was $7.4 billion with a b dollars.

cancel ×

409 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Could be worst... (0, Flamebait)

creimer (824291) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556660)

Pixar belched on Mickey Mouse...

Re:Could be worst... (0, Offtopic)

Professor_UNIX (867045) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556741)

Pixar belched on Mickey Mouse...

For a second there I thought you said Pixar felched Mickey Mouse. Ewww.

At least... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556748)

... At least any Toy Story sequels will now not suck.

Price (5, Informative)

Ours (596171) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556662)

price of Pixar was $7.4 billion with a b dollars

Thats a lot but it may have been interesting to say it was in Disney stock.

Re:Price (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556765)

I'm wondering if it was Disney dollars, or US dollars?

Nice deal (4, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556667)

I think the devil made a nice deal; only $7.4 billion for a prime quality soul.

Re:Nice deal (1)

creimer (824291) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556679)

So you're saying Steve Jobs only got $7.4 billion. Or is the devil in the details?

Re:Nice deal (4, Funny)

Urkki (668283) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556708)

So, what's so evil about Disney again? I mean, other than the whole no-pants thing corrupting minds of youngsters, and the various "Donald Duck"-parties that have been inspired by this...

I guess I could google for the evilness of Disney, but you should never trust the Internet so I'd rather read about it here on peer-reviewed slashdot.

Re:Nice deal (2, Funny)

creimer (824291) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556803)

Be careful... weirder things are happening at Google [userfriendly.org] than Disney these days.

Re:Nice deal (5, Informative)

thesandtiger (819476) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556820)

So, what's so evil about Disney again?

That they're one of the key corporations behind the ever increasing extensions of copyright duration would be the biggie for me.

Granted, if it weren't them, someone else would do it, but they did do it. So meh.

Re:Nice deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556895)

So, what's so evil about Disney again?

They have an army of lawyers with frickin' lasers on their frickin' heads.

Re:Nice deal (4, Informative)

soft_guy (534437) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557158)

The fact that they are hypocrtical. First, they used stories from the public domain to build their empire. Then they use their money and power to bribe congress to extend copyright from the original 14 years to be basically infinite. Thus, no material can ever enter the public domain again.

Don't kid yourselves (5, Insightful)

nagora (177841) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556671)

Disney is a supertanker of a company and it'll take more than a seat on the board or even being nominally in charge of animation to turn it around from the pile of crap it has become. Pixar is dead, for all serious purposes, although I'm sure Disney will make a big deal out of exploiting its "brand" on more of its third-rate tat.

TWW

Re:Don't kid yourselves (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556763)

What does this mean: it means that with Jobs in charge, Apple is now more of a media company than it ever was... which means that they are definitely going to push ahead with the customer-screwing, privacy-invading Trusted Computing versions of Apple Macs and severe DRM.

Someone want to tell me again why I should buy an Apple Mac when it is going to be little more than a Hollywood set-top box?

Re:Don't kid yourselves (5, Insightful)

tpgp (48001) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556873)

Disney is a supertanker of a company and it'll take more than a seat on the board or even being nominally in charge of animation to turn it around from the pile of crap it has become.

Kinda reminds of Michael Dell saying (about Apple) "What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders" [com.com]

I think if anyone can turn around disney, then Lasseter with Steve Jobs backing will be the ones to do it.

What I think we should be more worried about is the creation of the most vertically integrated entertainment duopoly since paramount case of 1948 [cobbles.com] broke up the old vertical monopolists.

I mean we're going to have one guy (Jobs) essentially controlling two companies that will between them produce the content, the distribution network, the playback codec and the playback device.

The potential for abuse is frightening

Re:Don't kid yourselves (4, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557045)

I'm pretty sure people said the same of Apple before the NeXT people took over (that was carefully worded and I'm still sure someone's going to point out Apple bought NeXT - yes, they did, but NeXT's people took over Apple, I mean, they became the senior people and stuff.) Right now, with John Lasseter being Disney's Chief Creative Officer, and Jobs both on the board and being Disney's largest shareholder, it looks like, at least nominally, a replay.

Now, that said, there are differences, chief among them being that neither Jobs nor Lasseter is a former CEO of Disney, and as such are not necessarily as familiar with the culture and market as Jobs was with Apple.

Disney, like Apple in the mid-nineties, has lost its way. For the past 30 years, it's not really had any significant direction, and has concentrated largely on media takeovers and lobbying for copyright extentions to protect Mickey Mouse, arguably a brand that has fizzled out anyway over the last decade. There's still a lot of good coming out of it, clearly there are good people in parts that are trying to find good things and pump Disney money into them, whether it's Pixar or Miramax (Pulp Fiction.) While I'm not necessarily going to argue that Jobs or Lasseter are the right people for the job, it certainly needs a fresh approach, and Jobs and Lasseter may, ultimately, be the right people to do that.

Re:Don't kid yourselves (4, Interesting)

node 3 (115640) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557123)

In the early 80's, Disney was severely in danger of fading away. Eisner not only saved Disney financially, but built it into the huge, powerful media corporation it is today. However, it's not all roses. As you noted, "Disney is a supertanker of a company" that "exploit[s] its brand[s] on ... third-rate tat."

Disney's new CEO, Robert Iger, has impressed Steve Jobs enough to make this deal possible. Jobs is the type of person who wants to make [insanely] great things, and he wouldn't send one of his greatest creations into the maws of mediocrity. If you recall, it was recent that Jobs was ready to leave Disney in a very public row between Jobs and Eisner.

I fully expect the Pixar acquisition will make Disney better far more than it will make Pixar worse. I also suspect that under Iger, Disney will be vastly different from the Disney your post describes. How Disney's new CEO fares has yet to be decided, but the prognosis is positive, especially if Steve is willing to trust one of his three greatest creations to him.

My Guess: (2, Insightful)

bakes (87194) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556675)

does this mean that Disney's movies will improve, or that Pixar's will become worse?

My Guess: both.

We shall see.

Re:My Guess: (-1, Troll)

TheSwirlingMaelstrom (580923) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556738)

You're way too optimistic: Disney movies will suck more, Pixar movies will no longer be worth going to see.

I hope it is too late in the process for Disney to F**k up 'Cars'.

News headlines eaten by trollishness (-1, Offtopic)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556681)

Is this Fark, where the wittiest headline gets submitted?

Re:News headlines eaten by trollishness (1, Offtopic)

kevn (730412) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556703)

You think " Pixar Eaten by Mickey Mouse" is witty?

Donald Duck (1)

VGh0st (800358) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556686)

Does this mean new donald duck episodes may include luxo?

No... (0)

xusr (947781) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556709)

it means Geri and the Genie go head-to-head in the next short...

Re:Donald Duck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556802)

No, it may mean that Donald Duck and friends will leave flatland.

More Like Pixar Took Over Disney (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556688)

Lassiter is now Chief Creative Officer of the animation studios, as well as Principal Creative Advisor at Walt Disney Imagineering. Pixar president Ed Catmull is now president of the new combined Pixar/Disney animation studios. And as much as I dislike Technomessiah Steve, I would love to see him take over the creative vision aspect of the theme parks.

Re:More Like Pixar Took Over Disney (1)

f0rtytw0 (446153) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556745)

I would have to agree with this. I also hear that Steve Jobs is now the largest share holder of Disney.

iTunes (4, Insightful)

Peter Bonte (919202) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556689)

I'm wondering what the Disney/Pixar - Apple relation is going to work out. iTunes is selling Disney material now so apparently there is some cooperation.

Pixar - Disney deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556705)

I don't know for the movies, but I can confirm you that Steve Jobs's bank account will improve (not that it was so bad though :-))

Pixar Buy Disney for -$7.4b Dollars (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556707)

Well, with Steve Jobs being the largest stockholder, and that other guy from Pixar become head of creative stuff and of the themeparks, it would seem this is the actual outcome. Steve Jobs will probably get a nice title at Disney too.

Isn't it the other way around? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556710)

Considering Steve Jobs is now one of the (if not _the_) biggest share holders in Disney, and John Lasseter is head of the artistic department, one could say Pixar now controls Disney's future...

Re:Isn't it the other way around? (4, Insightful)

csoto (220540) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557148)

Exactly my thoughts. Basically, Disney Animation is gone. It has been replaced in whole by Pixar, which isn't altogether a terrible thing. I mean, Disney couldn't milk the Lion King forever, and they had no new ideas.

I don't think Jobs would have agreed to this if he wasn't sure the talent were also coming along. He did the same with Apple - he brought Avie and gave Ive the carte blanche he required. If Jobs cares about Pixar, and my understanding is, he does, then there's little to worry about. Lasseter is the creative force behind Pixar, and not only will he be in charge of Disney's animation vision, but they're putting him in charge of theme parks, consumer goods and even their broadway stuff. That's a massive shift in power, and it's long overdue.

Either which way (3, Insightful)

TehBlahhh (947819) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556712)

I think it is too early to draw any conclusions from this deal. It could still go any which way - better films, worse films, more web X.0 content, more DRM, and so on and on. I'd say we need about half a year before any 'conclusion' on this deal is more then mere speculation.

With that in mind, allow me to say: WOHOO! all the backlog of (quality) disney movies on my ipod!

In the best of all worlds, (4, Interesting)

ameline (771895) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556713)

This will be similar to Apple buying Next. In the end, all the senior people of Next wound up running Apple -- Apple adopted NextStep as their OS, and called it OSX.

With any luck, Jobs, Lasseter, and other senior Pixar people will wind up running Disney. It would be a substantial improvement.

Pixar = NeXT (1)

illtron (722358) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556714)

Somebody said this elsewhere on another site, but Pixar will be to Disney as NeXT was to Apple.

I expect very good things from now on from Disney. This will be their saving grace. And they're very lucky to have Steve Jobs on board now. I suspect he'll be CEO someday.

Re:Pixar = NeXT (0, Offtopic)

grahamlee (522375) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557067)

They did in slashdot too [slashdot.org] .

Not hard to see why.... (5, Insightful)

FalconZero (607567) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556718)

...from the box office totals (in millions of US dollars)

Pixar
  • Toy Story (1995) $191
  • Bugs Life (1998) $162
  • Toy Story2 (1999) $245
  • Monsters, Inc (2001) $255
  • Finding Nemo (2003) $339
  • Incredibles (2004) $261

Disney
  • Aladdin (1992) $217
  • The Lion King (1994) $312
  • Pocahontas (1995) $141
  • Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) $100
  • Hercules (1997) $99
  • Mulan (1998) $120
  • Tarzan (1999) $171
  • The Emperor's New Groove (2000) $89
  • Atlantis (2001) $84
  • Lilo & Stitch (2002) $145
  • Treasure Planet (2002) $38
  • Brother Bear (2003) $85
  • Home on the Range (2004) $50

Can you guys spot the trend too?

(Data from Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] /www.boxofficemojo.com [boxofficemojo.com] )

Re:Not hard to see why.... (1)

poeidon1 (767457) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556754)

Yeah, Disney released twice the number of movies than pixar 1995-2005, but revenue was almost half per movie, so its the same in the end for both. Now are they trying to get disney number of movies with pixar revenue or pixar number of movies with disney revenue

Re:Not hard to see why.... (1)

FalconZero (607567) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556842)

Not quite. In the period since 1995 Pixar's box office returns totalled $1,453million, where Disney's totalled $1,122million. (Pixar come out $331 million up, which isn't to be sniffed at), however (and crucially) Disney's recepts are in decline, whereas Pixar's are not.

Re:Not hard to see why.... (1)

chrisgeleven (514645) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557008)

Except Pixar had 6 films since 1995, while Disney has had 11 films. And with barely half as many films, Pixar killed Disney by roughly $300 million.

More bang for the buck if you go with Pixar movies. It isn't even a question.

Re:Not hard to see why.... (1)

iamdrscience (541136) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556932)

Yeah, Disney released twice the number of movies than pixar 1995-2005, but revenue was almost half per movie, so its the same in the end for both
I think actually what he was trying to point out was that Pixar's revenues are going up while Disney's are going down. Besides that though, in regards to what you said, given the numbers in the grandparent post, the average Pixar film makes ~$242M and the average Disney film gets $127M, so already Pixar is getting close to double the revenue.

Re:Not hard to see why.... (1)

augustz (18082) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556808)

My gut tells me Cars is not going to do as well as other Pixar films, though with disney owning pixar, they will probably promote the hell out of it. You read the prediction here :)

After that though, they could crank out blockbusters. I loved Monsters, toy story, even nemo. Sequels (to monster etc) are obvious, and franchise films can make big bucks..

Be interesting to see how it turns. out.

You are underestimating the NASCAR crowd. (1)

jocknerd (29758) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556915)

Cars will be a HUGE hit, maybe the biggest Pixar movie to date. My soon to be 3 year old son is already asking to go see it. It will be his first movie in a theater. I personally can't wait.

Now is the time (2, Interesting)

aiabx (36440) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556725)

It's hard to judge a movie by it's trailers, but if Cars turns out to be as awful as it looks, Pixar is going to crash and burn when it's released. Best to sell now while Pixar's reputation is still riding high.
        -aiabx

Pixar trailers (2, Interesting)

xusr (947781) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556757)

Pixar trailers have never been very good, at least not in the 'traditional' way. Some movies (star wars ep. i-iii, matrix rev and reloaded...) pack every decent shot into a 59 second trailer. Pixar actually concentrates more on the movie than the trailer. That says something about them as a company.

p.s. the Incredibles? Incredible.

Re:Now is the time (3, Insightful)

Stan Vassilev (939229) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556863)

"It's hard to judge a movie by it's trailers, but if Cars turns out to be as awful as it looks, Pixar is going to crash and burn when it's released. Best to sell now while Pixar's reputation is still riding high."

This happens almost before every Pixar feature. Examples.

Finding Nemo? A story about fish? WTF can't they animate stuff with legs anymore, this is going to be so lame, omg Pixar is ruined. Results: critical acclaim and great box office, awards, great public perception.

Incredibles? Omg those are so stylised, nothing creative about it, some story with CG humans. It looks so lame, omg Pixar is ruined. Results: critical acclaim and great box office, awards, great public perception.

Now it's happening to cars. But all those who are trolling on the teaser trailer will be in for a surprise. Pixar isn't randomly greenlighting movie screenplays based on explosion/boob ratio.

I'm sure it's gonna be a great movie and I'm looking forward to it.

Re:Now is the time (1)

eclectic4 (665330) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557092)

"It's hard to judge a movie by it's trailers, but if Cars turns out to be as awful as it looks, Pixar is going to crash and burn when it's released."

Yes, it's very dificult to judge most movies by it's trailer. This is why we shouldn't do it. And to suggest that one bust in a string of hits will destroy PIXAR, then again, there is another gap in reasoning here...

Plan for Profit! (4, Funny)

wbren (682133) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556726)

1. Buy Pixar for $10 million
2. Build it into a great animation studio
3. Sell yourself to the devil (Mickey Mouse [anomalies-unlimited.com] )
4. Personal profit of $3.5 million!

Great work, Steve Jobs! See, this time I didn't even need to include the mysterious "..." step. Amazing!

Re:Plan for Profit! (1)

stunt_penguin (906223) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556788)

Duh, it was sold for $7.4 BILLION dollars- seve jobs only put in a couple of hundred million back in the day so it makes him about a 1000 percent profit. Read the fuckin' article.

Re:Plan for Profit! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556800)

"3.5 billion"

- entire Slashdot readership en masse

Re:Plan for Profit! (1)

ericof (175183) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556815)

4. Personal profit of $3.5 million!

should be:

4. Personal profit of $3.5 Billion!

Re:Plan for Profit! (1)

stunt_penguin (906223) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556961)

Yea, Steve Jobs doesn't get out of bed for less than $3.5 million. Unless he's got mail.

I predict: the iBed :0)

Re:Plan for Profit! (3, Informative)

iamdrscience (541136) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556983)

Personal profit of $3.5 million!
I think you may have misread something important. He bought Pixar for 10 million and it is now worth 7.4 billion of which he owns >50% of the shares. His personal profit is far far greater than 3.5 million.

Gates' background Plan for Profit! (1)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557124)

1. Watch Steve Jobs buy Pixar.
2. Watch Steve work and toil to make it great.
3. Watch it be sold to the Reign of the Rat.
4. Watch Steve make chump change.
5. Watch Disney build it up to be corporately evil.
6. Wait until the right moment and buy Disney.
7. Gain board of director status and challenge Steve to a there-can-be-only-one style fight to the death in the thunderdome with employees from both companies jeering you on from the sidelines.
8. When Steve tries to use his iWin fighting style, destroy him with your "blue screen of death" move.
9. Pose for Playgirl after the world realizes how great of a man you are.
10. Ponder what will be the next industry that needs Microsoft to triumph in by unecessarily dumping unlimited funds into it.

$3.5 **B**illion (1)

green pizza (159161) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557129)

B de Burro

B as in Billion.

He bought the Lucasfilm computer graphics department for $10 Million. His share of the Pixar sale is $3.5 Billion.

Toy Story 3 and history of Pixar (4, Insightful)

boxlight (928484) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556728)

does this mean that Disney's movies will improve, or that Pixar's will become worse?


Disney owned all the sequel rights to Pixar movies, so a few months back Disney was saying they were going to do Toy Story 3 without Pixar. If that'd happened it would've produced a better Disney movie, but a worse Pixar movie -- if you follow me.


Despite popular fanboy and media opinion, John Lasseter is the mind behind the success of Pixar's movies. Steve Jobs is the owner, distribution negotiator, but Lasseter is the talent.


BTW, there's a great chapter in THE SECOND COMING OF STEVE JOBS [amazon.com] about the history of Pixar. Check it out.


boxlight


Re:Toy Story 3 and history of Pixar (1)

njen (859685) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557034)

Disney began production on Toy Story 3 about 8 months ago, and it's still in full swing.

does this mean we'll see Pixar's TRON 2? (4, Interesting)

boxlight (928484) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556746)

I wonder if this means we'll see that remake of (Disney's) TRON that John Lasseter wanted to make?

Cool!

boxlight

Re:does this mean we'll see Pixar's TRON 2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556844)

I certainly hope not. While I personally loved TRON when it came out, since I'm a geek (I even had a Priority One Catalog and related to the ending), my kids still tease me about bringing it home from the video store 10 or so years ago. Why did we keep watching it? In the hope that it would get somehow better.

Nope, let the dog lie, it broke ground back then, but it would take more than even Pixar to bring it back.

It's also worth mentioning... (1)

mikeisme77 (938209) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556747)

that Steve Jobs has also officially been given a seat on the board of directors. This means that he POTENTIALLY has more clout in persuading Disney to release more of their content to become iTunes exclusive downloads. It would also be interesting to see if he can convince them to release movies in iTunes music store AT THE SAME time as the theatrical release. I'm not saying it's very likely, but it would be nice (as long as they up the resolution of the videos they sell on iTunes...)

"Eaten" a bit extreme. (2, Insightful)

Syberghost (10557) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556770)

The deal wasn't exactly "here's some money now eff off we own you." It was more like "here, you can have my living room if you'll take the 'Pixar' sign down and replace it with this 'Disney' sign". Disney has been bankrolling all their films for years anyway, and Steve Jobs is now the largest single Disney stockholder.

Dammit!! (0)

no reason to be here (218628) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556773)

I was hoping that I could begin watching Pixar films again seeing as how they had freed themselves from Disney's grasp, but alas, 'tis not meant to be.

Shame, too, as Cars sounded pretty good.

iRich (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556783)

Damn. According to MSNBC, Steve Jobs has just become 3.6 BILLION dollars richer today. I can't wait till he has enough money to buy Microsoft ;)

I don't understand (1)

Funakoshi (925826) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556789)

I must be slow (I know, I'm opening myself up with that one, so take your shots :P).

Why is everyone slamming this? And since when the hell did Disney become evil? I for one think it's great. The minds from Disney and Pixar have given us some of the best animated work in years. The Toy Story movies, Monsters Inc., and recently, the Incredibles. They all rocked, and I was dismayed when I originally heard that the two companies had ended their contract together. I think the potential here is great. Disney has a system for writing good storys, and Pixar's people have a system for making them look really frickin cool.

The more posts I read on Slashdot slamming these major corporations for the sake of slamming them, the fewer times I update the page every day. It's getting quite ridiculous.

Re:I don't understand (1)

mccalli (323026) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556861)

The minds from Disney and Pixar have given us some of the best animated work in years. The Toy Story movies, Monsters Inc., and recently, the Incredibles.

Those would be 'the minds from Pixar'. Disney merely distributed.

Disney has a system for writing good storys, and Pixar's people have a system for making them look really frickin cool.

Disney has written one good story in the last ten or fifteen years - Lilo and Stitch. The Lion King is good, but there's rather strong evidence it was just lifted from Kimba The White Lion. Even Lilo and Stitch wasn't the company's main focus at the time, I believe that was meant to be The Emporer's New Groove or something equally horrific.

Despite the above, I still think this is good news. However I see it as a potential improvement in Disney, not as anything great for Pixar per se.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:I don't understand (1)

Funakoshi (925826) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556917)

"The Emporer's New Groove or something equally horrific."

Gear down, big trucker! That movie was hilarious...Kronk was brilliant!

The Emperor's New Groove (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556964)

The odd thing about The Emperor's New Groove is that Disney actually made it twice. Once in was a serious film titled something like "The Land of the Sun." They almost finished the movie, shelved it for a few years, and then remade it as a screwball comedy.

It's a pretty funny movie, if you can accept that it doesn't make any sense in a traditional Disney semi-epic way. The conflict doesn't matter, the characters are powerless, it's a farce.

Lilo and Stitch is indeed the best traditional animation made in North America in fifteen years, and maybe the only time Disney has really hit it out of the park on an original story. Pixar, on the other hand, does nothing but original stories. This is the real secret of Pixar's success. Everyone's tired of repackaged folk tales.

Re:I don't understand (1)

Fross (83754) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556879)

when did disney write a good story, as opposed to taking something from history and paraphrasing it in a PC-way?

anything vaguely original they've ever tried to write has been ridiculously bad quality.

Re:I don't understand (2, Funny)

Tim Browse (9263) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557020)

Prepare to eat your words! [imdb.com] :-)

Becuse Disney buys laws (2, Interesting)

backslashdot (95548) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556898)

Disney bought a law extending copyrights for 25 more years so they can hold on to Mickey Mouse until 2020. I don't care about a stupid mouse .. but it's unacceptible to have perpetually lasting copyrights. Disney made money from stories like Snow White and Beauty and the Beast without having to py the original authors .. and now they are trying to make perpetual copyrights for themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extens ion_Act [wikipedia.org]

Hope this clears things up?

Re:Becuse Disney buys laws (1)

Funakoshi (925826) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557055)

Ok, so I do stand corrected, Disney has nothing to do with the stories. This was not my understand previous to the first 6 responses to my post. Let's see if I have the whole story straight now:

- Disney has nothing to do with the Pixar films, and has perhaps once or twice in it's existance made quality original films (which would lead to the conclusion that at best, there will be no change in the quality of Pixar's films, and at worst a decrease in quality).
- Disney is horribly evil because it has manipulated copyright law that is just plain "wrong" (even though the American courts don't seem to think so), and they have used older material, writen by others, which is also "wrong" (though they have never been successfully prosecuted for such a thing?)

- Microsoft sucks.

Do I have it right now?

Re:Becuse Disney buys laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14557142)

Objection. Objection. BUYING LAWS is by DEFINITION wrong. What the court thinks is irrelevant. They might be the law, but the law is not always right.

Elaborating on this:
Disney takes from others that which no longer has a copyright attached. It then earns money which is later on used to bribe politicians into lengthening copyrights thereby giving Disney greater control over the material they produced by relying on other peoples' work.

Re:I don't understand (1)

AgNO3 (878843) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556904)

the only input disney had on the pixar movies was the check. The stories where all pixar(well chosen by pixar) Disney did not write any of those movies they just distributed them.

Re:I don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14556928)

There's a story of a group of workers being paid peanuts for work in china (iirc) and they made it known to the disney execs.

what did disney do? cancel the orders.

Re:I don't understand (0)

rcongdon (466588) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556943)

Sorry to disagree here, but the Pixar films are exactly that: Pixar's. The writing and production were not done by Disney, but Lassiter, Stanton, etc. Disney's part was mostly marketing and distribution. This was a major reason for the former fallout as Disney(i.e. Eisner) wanted way too big a cut given that they weren't really making the movie.

Re:I don't understand (1)

scottennis (225462) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557048)

And since when the hell did Disney become evil? Obviously you've never had to sit with your six year old through the Disney On Ice version of Monsters, Inc.

Who ate whom here? (2, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556794)

Pixar has been sold to Disney.

I keep hearing this, but the details strike me as an entirely different story...

Disney "bought" Pixar for stock. Steve Jobs owned Pixar. Steve Jobs now owns more Disney stock than anyone else. This would seem to mean that Steve Jobs now "owns" Disney, no?

I mean, the rest of the stockholders could outvote him collectively, but in general Jobs now more-or-less controls the future of Disney.


So, considering that, would it sound more accurate to say "Apple has Borgified both Disney and Pixar"?

Re:Who ate whom here? (2, Insightful)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556963)

10 years down the line I could speculate about Apple taking over Disney .. if I were Dvorak I would at least . Since I am not , it sounds just silly.
Though Steve Jobs has definitely done this to bolster iTunes and the iPod , at least in part .. so perhaps it is not that far fetch to see Disney becoming Apple Entreatment

Itchy & Scratchy infringement (2, Funny)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556798)

First Samba eats the cat, then Mickey eats Pixar...
Is this an indication that companies are getting so desperate that they are starting to copy the collected works of Itchy & Scratchy? [mit.edu]

Apple computer on the phone for you Mr. Jobs. (4, Informative)

mrshowtime (562809) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556804)

Jobs should have waited a few more years and maybe could have acquired Disney :) However, I seriously doubt Jobs will let any of the idiots running Disney or any "middle management" types even on Pixar's Holy Ground, let alone put -any- suggestions on anything creatively. Why attempt to break what is "money in the bank" for Disney by letter Pixar do what Pixar does best. Remember, Jobs is now "Mr. Disney" he owns the most stock out of any shareholders and is on the board of directors. Do not be surprised if you do not see Jobs as CEO in a few years of Disney. Apple who?

Re:Apple computer on the phone for you Mr. Jobs. (1)

OwnedByTwoCats (124103) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556971)

Iger (Disney's CEO) will discover soon enough that Jobs bought his company. Jobs will end up with his job.

Hi! I am an animator. I am a millionaire. (5, Insightful)

Shihar (153932) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556837)

Guys, what happened is GOOD. Disney just made anyone holding stock in Pixar a millionaire. I once consulted at a company where this has happened. You pull up into the parking lot and no one has a car worth under $40,000. Everyone shows up to work because they want to and like working there, not for the salary. If the company goes down the shitter, they just leave.

IP and equipment didn't make Pixar great. The people made Pixar great. If Disney fucks it up, everyone just ups, leaves, and forms a new company leaving Disney with nothing but a name. Disney shelled out a few billion for the SHOT at using Pixar to do something good. If they blow it, the real 'assets' of Pixar can simply leave and go make another few million each.

I saw good for Pixar. Way to make yourself horrifically rich and still leave a dozen escape hatches to bail from Disney. Those people deserved a big steaming pile of money. I hope they go out and enjoy it.

Re:Hi! I am an animator. I am a millionaire. (1)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557085)

Those people deserved a big steaming pile of money.

And who says you can't just pull money out of your ass?

Pixar's movies created on Windows? (1, Flamebait)

OwlWhacker (758974) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556852)

does this mean that Disney's movies will improve, or that Pixar's will become worse?

Probably the latter.

I would guess that Microsoft will make a deal and persuade Disney to use Windows for Pixar movies rather than Linux.

Har har. (0, Flamebait)

kiehlster (844523) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556876)

I think Disney's desire to be politically correct and to taylor to all ethnic groups in their movie making will result in a decline in Pixar's quality of humor.

The way I saw it (3, Interesting)

MickDownUnder (627418) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556908)

Well.... Steve Jobs is not just on the board of Disney... he's now the largest stock holder. I saw a TV interview with disney's CEO Robert Iger and Steve Jobs, if that interview is anything to go by Jobs is going to have a major input on how Disney is going to be run from this day forward, Mr Iger actually looked quite uncomfortable in the interview when jobs began to speak... and speak.... and then speak some more.

Powerful (1)

Brass Cannon (882254) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556919)

I like this. On the surface this sounds like Disney is aquiring Pixar. But it's really Jobs aquiring Disney.

Now Jobs controls pixar - Height of digital movie content, Disney - very large store of movie content and and general great reputation for entertainment, and Apple - the new distribution channel in i pod.

Jobs will own the living room in a short time.

It's about time.. (3, Interesting)

seven of five (578993) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556937)

... Steve Jobs finally 'made it'. After all that hard work and risk taking... I sincerely hope he kicks ass and offends people in the Disney board room, and has not mellowed out overmuch the past few years...

SORRY, BILL... (1)

djupedal (584558) | more than 8 years ago | (#14556981)

...another Gates desire bites the digital dust. Apple owns the living room, Bill - you own the, umm...oh, DOS, that's right - get used to it.

I can see Bill roaming around his oversized domicile in Seattle, having to see Apple in charge of the content on every tv/monitor in the house :)

Its actually the other way around (1)

rogerborn (236155) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557007)

Jobs will soon run and own Disney, and then make it a subsidiary of Apple.

Just wait and see.

Jobs already did this with Apple, selling them Next, didn't he?

Whose OS does Apple use now? Who runs and owns Apple now?

Regards,
Roger Born
rogerborn.com
"Sorry, No Refunds"

Disney has no influence over Pixar? (1, Insightful)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557040)

Someone said that Disney has no creative control over Pixar. Or that Apple probably could have bought Disney.

It just goes to show you how the mythology of Steve Jobs continues, however unfounded it is.

Disney makes about 8 billion in sales, A QUARTER! They make nearly a Billion in net profit A QUARTER.

So yeah, Disney is going to have an effect on Pixar movies. Look, when Pixar finished their 6.5 movie contract with Disney, Disney simply went ahead and created a new computer animation division. The fact that the movie created sucked big time pales in comparison to the fact that Disney could setup an animation studio at the drop of a hat and have a movie out in 2 years, and still earn a billions in profit.

While Pixar may have more creativity in its little finger compared to the whole Disney Empire, Disney still has final say on whether a movie gets release or not. If Toy Story didn't conform to Disney's values, it would have been redone or not released, period. Steve Jobs isn't going to have a say in it (but Steve Jobs has no creative input at Pixar at all, he is just a figure head).

The fact is, Pixar could easily make movies that don't simply target children and the adults that take their kids to the movies. Pixar could become the leading computer special effects studio in Hollywood, or make movies that target an older audience, this will never happen under Disney's umbrella. As long as Disney is at the wheel, Pixar will churn out cutesy kids movie that may have some appeal to adults, but will never reach their full potential. Also expect Toy Story 3, Finding Nemo Again, Monsters Inc 2, A Newts Life, The Incredibles Chapters 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. I mean, Disney will milk the creativity out of Pixar and leave them a dried up husk of their former selves.

I do agree that its the people that make Pixar shine, and if Disney decides to suck the life out of this company, those people will up and leave and form a new company (unless Disney imposes some contract conditions on them, then they are stuck). However, Steve Jobs will be the figurehead for a company that he ruined by whoring itself to Disney. His motiviation are based purely on profit. 7 billion from the sale of Pixar will go into Apple. Apple will become the provider of computer technology for the Disney Empire ensuring billions in sales.

In the end, while there may be a few excellent movies that will come out of this partnership, once the Disney marketing engine kicks in, and Disney's and Steve Jobs greed overwhelms Pixar, Disney will ruin another great animation house.

Pixar 1986 - 2006. You made us laugh, and then you made us cry out why! RIP.

Zero dollars (1)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557047)

"Also the price of Pixar was $7.4 billion with a b dollars."

No, it wasn't. Zero with a z dollars. From TFA: "in an all-stock transaction, expected to be completed by this summer. Under terms of the agreement, 2.3 Disney shares will be issued for each Pixar share."

Does this mean... (5, Funny)

PurpleButter (928282) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557057)

Does this mean that Mickey Mouse will now only have 1 button?

How does it work? (4, Insightful)

ceeam (39911) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557080)

7-odd billion dollars. Let's suppose that Pixar employees work for peanuts and every movie is a hit and they net $200mil with each one (I'm generous today). That would take 35+ titles to bring those 7-odd billions back. Seems unlikely. OTOH - maybe Disney _needs_ something to prevent their image going _completely_ through the floor... They need someone to go to Disneylands, for example, etc... Still... Looks like a bubble.

Re:How does it work? (1)

saboola (655522) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557144)

The company itself is worth 7 billion. They don't need to "make it back". Buying a company who has actual market value is not the same as buying 7 billion dollars worth of cheeseburgers. The company can increase in value, and maybe sell later for an even greater amount (or vice versa, depending if pixar bucks the trend).

Its all good (1)

thunderpaws (199100) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557099)

Eisner is gone. Creativity has returned to Disney, and Disney has made a fine aquisition.

Well I am happy about this! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14557122)

I have a small amount of Pixar shares (200) and today I am a happy guy - not a millionaire - but happy.

This will help the Disney franchise - saw the possibilities at WDW in an interactive show that is really cool at Epcot - called "Turtle Talk" - kids get to talk and ask questions with Crush from Finding Nemo - there was a huge line to get in - more of that and Disney parks are reborn.

Its very cool.

Roy Disney (1)

theurge14 (820596) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557126)

Does this mean he's coming back? He's spent some time hanging out at the Pixar studio, and like Jobs, wanted Eisner out. They both got their wish.

Non-independent (0, Offtopic)

Morky (577776) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557134)

Does anyone know what is meant by an independent vs. non-independent member of a board of directors?

not impressed ... (0, Flamebait)

xdesk (550151) | more than 8 years ago | (#14557170)

... both companies are on a downwards trend and the entire story is more about who tricked the other more ...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?