Disney MGM-Studios is now Disney-Pixar Studios

[UmbrellaFish]

Well, I'm not sure if this is completly true, but it seems Disney-MGM is now officially Disney-Pixar Studios. It should be true because I got the news here, http://animated-news.com/, and here, http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2007/ ... lando.html. I don't think it's old news, but I've heard a lot of rumors, so I'm guessing it's all true now.

[Disney-Fan]

Oh dear god. Pixarland anyone?

[PeterPanfan]

I'll.Die.If.It's.True.

[Super Aurora]

pixar is a two side coin: It has it's good and it has it's bad to Disney.

[PapiBear]

Well, all things considered, I always wondered about the combined branding of Disney and MGM, two companies that didn't really have much of a history of partnering as it was. Sure, in some ways it allowed Disney to compete with Universal Studios Florida by offering another more generalized "Hollywood" experience, but there was very little at the park that was actually tied to MGM's film library, whether historical or contemporary. Star Wars? 20th Century-Fox. Raiders of the Lost Ark? Paramount. According to Wikipedia:

The only affiliation that Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer has to the Disney park is via contracts that allow Disney to use the MGM name and lion logo in marketing, and separate contracts that allow for specific MGM content to be used in The Great Movie Ride.

That's, uh, not much. A few scenes in ONE ride and a couple of marketing logos? Whoop-de-doo. With Pixar a part of Disney now, it does make sense for Pixar's presence to make itself felt in that park, rather than, say, the Magic Kingdom itself, like it does at Disneyland. Thematically it just makes sense. I don't think it'll turn into "Pixarland" so much (it could, of course), but at least the Pixar characters should be able to feel at home there. I mean, the Muppets do.

I don't have a big problem with it, although it'll take some time getting used to saying "Disney-Pixar Studios" rather than "Disney-MGM Studios" after 18 years.

[Poody]

Oh dear god, that's so lame....

[goofystitch]

I live and work in Disney World right now and I can confirm that it is still the Disney-MGM Studios. I was there last night and if there was such a change, I would have been informed by now.

[AwallaceUNC]

I have my doubts that this is true. animated-news is a reliable source, but I'm not sure about the blog that this apparently originates from. Nevertheless, I haven't seen it elsewhere. Given the popularity of "MGM's name is changing" rumors over the last decade or so, I'm hesistant to buy it. However, I do know that Mickey Avenue is slated to be rethemed along with the opening of Toy Story Mania. Therefore, I'll confess to being a little worried this time. I sincerely hope this isn't true. If it is, my confidence in Lasseter will be shaken.

-Aaron

[AwallaceUNC]

I live and work in Disney World right now and I can confirm that it is still the Disney-MGM Studios. I was there last night and if there was such a change, I would have been informed by now.

Yeah, it's definitely still Disney-MGM Studios as of now. I think the report is saying that it's set to be changed over sometime in the (presumably near) future. This could just be Toy Story Mania mania. Let's hope so.

-Aaron

[PapiBear]

If it is, my confidence in Lasseter will be shaken.

Over a name change?

As I pointed out before, the MGM connection is thin at best, mostly for marketing purposes as well as some MGM content on one ride. If that ride changes and/or MGM or Disney elect to sever the partnership, the name would end up changing anyway.

I'd recommend they change it to something like "Hollywoodland Studios" but that might cause confusion with the city of Hollywood, Florida. Maybe "Mickey Mouse Studios" or "Walt Disney Studios Florida" would work better. This co-branding idea may not be as good an idea as it would seem.

[Daisy Duck]

I agree with PapiBear. There really wasn't much of a relationship between Disney and MGM in the first place. The relationship with Pixar is much more significant and the name change makes more sense.

Personally, I don't see it as a bad move at all. I enjoy the Pixar movies and would like to see more of their characters at Walt Disney World. The Studios would be the perfect place for that. Perhaps we could even get more behind-the-scenes peeks of artists at work, both on 2D and 3D animation. And I doubt the Studios park would become entirely focused on Pixar. For example, I don't see them getting rid of the Tower of Terror just because it's not Pixar-related!

It will be interesting to see how this develops...

[Disney-Fan]

For example, I don't see them getting rid of the Tower of Terror just because it's not Pixar-related!

A. I wouldn't put it past them.
B. The creepy-crawly-grass-hopper-makeover anyone? Join Flick and Co. as they fight Hopper and jump 13 stories into the air.

I don't care much for the MGM name since, as stated previously has almost zero presence in the park anyway. I'm more concerned about the addition of Pixar. What's so wrong with keeping it Disney Studios and just add Pixar attractions to the park? Declaring the park as Disney-Pixar would make way for some over-the-top usage of the franchise. It's bad enough as is (Finding Nemo in Dinoland, anyone?). We don't need the situation getting any worse.

[Super Aurora]

I don't care much for the MGM name since, as stated previously has almost zero presence in the park anyway. I'm more concerned about the addition of Pixar. What's so wrong with keeping it Disney Studios and just add Pixar attractions to the park? Declaring the park as Disney-Pixar would make way for some over-the-top usage of the franchise. It's bad enough as is (Finding Nemo in Dinoland, anyone?). We don't need the situation getting any worse.

This is what I agree with. Besides why change it to Disney-Pixar? Pixar also has near zero to do with general hollywood movies such as Indiana Jones, Star Wars, muppets, Great Movie Ride, etc. If they going to Pixar stuff there make a new section that focus on pixar. Not have it consume the park.

[Daisy Duck]

Well, it is called the Disney-Pixar Park and not just Pixar Park. So let's hope that the Muppets and other things already associated with the park stay. At least the name change is probably making Pixar happy. I guess I consider this a sign of better times between Disney and Pixar now than the tension of a couple years ago. I would have hated for Disney to lose Pixar.

[kbehm29]

I wonder what sort of contract they have with MGM over the naming rights?

And also - when the change-over occurs....I bet the Great Movie Ride will be altered dramatically. I'm glad I got the chance to see it for the first time last month, even if my whole family thought it wasn't worth it. They could alter it to a faster moving vehicle with all Pixar movie scenes/interaction inside.

[Super Aurora]

I wonder what sort of contract they have with MGM over the naming rights?

And also - when the change-over occurs....I bet the Great Movie Ride will be altered dramatically. I'm glad I got the chance to see it for the first time last month, even if my whole family thought it wasn't worth it. They could alter it to a faster moving vehicle with all Pixar movie scenes/interaction inside.

I highly doubt that. it's pretty popular ride for it to be changed. besides what will it be changed into anyway?

[neurotic_Donald_Duck]

who's bright idea was that?
that's really lame!

[Simba3]

I think the name change would be really unneccesary, and most likely a little confusing. I say if it's not broke, don't fix it.

[Prince Charming 12]

I think it makes business sense to change the name, after Disney acquired Pixar last summer in that billion dollar deal. Why keep paying licensing fees to MGM, for bascially just using their name and logo? I agree with the statements that point out Disney's limited affiliation with that company. I even wondered why they choose that name in the first place, back in 1989.

I don't think it will become a Pixar attraction only park, but their presence will be intergrated more thoughout all the parks with Lasseter taking over as the Chief Creative Officer.

As long as the Disney name and philosophy remain first and foremost, I do not have a problem with the name being changed to Disney Studios or Disney-Pixar Studios.

[Maerj]

The big problem with changing the name to the Disney-Pixar Studios is that the theme park is themed to old Hollywood, thus the MGM in the name. Look at the lettering on the buildings, its a 1930's - 40's font. Many of the buildings were even modeled after old Hollywood landmarks, I remember that the Disney magazine had an article about that.

If they are going to change the name, then they should retheme the entire park. But really, aren't there enough Pixar related rides and attractions? Do we really need an entire park of them?