DVDizzy Forum

That article has me worried - if the films they mentioned wouldn't be made "today" (ahem... that was only a year or so ago they were made, how could times change so drastically?) what's left? I am not against sequels, re-makes, etc. interspersed with original content. But original should outweigh the re-make/sequel/spin-off content.

If Disney starts doing all manner of Maleficent Movies, Pixar sequels, etc. and it overpowers original works, I may distance myself from the company.

DisneyJedi wrote:

Disneyphile wrote: That means that if they had it to do over again, they wouldn't greenlight those movies now.

Well, that sucks.

There are two words that help that decision.

Twi. light.

Praise for Rich Ross:

http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2010/ ... overs.html

***

And, Andrew, I read your Twilight comment when you posted it, but didn't write anything. Yes, the franchise would bring Disney money, but a) it's almost over, they're not going to go to Disney with it. b) I mean, it'd be different if Disney had gotten the rights from the beginning; Disney doesn't need getting outsider's castoffs (like how Fox got Narnia). c) As a Twilight fan, and I'm saying this as a Disney fan, I'm glad that Disney didn't make the films- not that they're "edgy", but I imagine that they'd be less so if Disney were making them.

Rich Ross is a douchebag. Can't wait for his head to roll with Iger following.

Hmm, so he's responsible for Pixar advising the Tron and Muppets team? I'm still pretty luke warm on the guy, but anyone who allows Pixar to give notes/suggestions to other departments I like.

The Talent Pool...
http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2010/ ... -pool.html

The Mouse has a lot of big named talent developing projects right now...

The verdict on Rich Ross is still out and it'll be a year or more before we start seeing the results of his taste, but I'm quite surprised and curious as to the people that he's attached to films in the Disney future...

More at the site.