I didn't think they did.SWillie! wrote:Okay so, does Lucasfilm own any of the rights to the Land Before Time? How will that work?
Disney Buys Lucasfilm
-
Kraken Guard
- Special Edition
- Posts: 570
- Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 2:47 pm
- Location: The Flying Dutchman
-
DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3644
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
I'm not so much against diversification, as we've seen thru their Touchstone features and ABC programs. It's just that Disney can spend so much less by coming up with their own ideas.Prince Edward wrote:People are prejudiced against Disney, they think the company only makes movies about talking animals and singing princesses (and I love those movies!). In fact they make a lot of movies, diverse movies and also dark movies. As we all know on this site. And since Disney bought Marvel the Marvel universe have flourished on the big screen and we can thank Disney for The Avengers. I have high hopes for the future of Star Wars, perhaps this gigantic universe can be revitalized and perhaps Lucasfilm now can make a longterm strategy for what stories they want to tell and in what medium they want to tell them:)
What they're doing here is dangerously close to building a monopoly. Is the Disney brand name really so limited that they now have to snatch up outside properties like an octopus to stay relevant?
"OH COME ON, REALLY?!?!"
-
DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3644
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
You know something ironic? I was considering adding Star Tours/Wars elements/characters (mainly Darth Vader) to my crossover film trilogy, but wasn't sure about it due to Star Wars being copyrighted to Lucasfilm and I even thought of adding characters from Buzz Lightyear if Star Command. But now, this changes everything.
Would the Star Wars homages/references/parodies by Disney'sfilms be considered ironic, too?
Would the Star Wars homages/references/parodies by Disney'sfilms be considered ironic, too?
Disney's Greed: Anyone Else Worried? (An Essay)
I was stunned this afternoon to read about Disney devouring yet another company/studio into its ranks and unlike the 56-page long wankfest in the box office forum, and probably on other sites, I'm not impressed.
Firstly, I'm not sure how many people on this forum are Disney fans- and by that I mean Disney animation, since that's what started the studio, and what the studio has relied on for decades. Disney, of course, have tried to expand into live action, but I'm pretty sure have not won any Oscar for a film they produced and most of it can be written off as family fluff, whether fair or not. This is obviously completely opposite to long standing studios like Warner Bros., Paramount, Columbia and so on.
In recent times, despite immense success with the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, Disney decided to have a blanket ban on anything even remotely considered risque with even On Stranger Tides feeling the brunt of this outcome. Everything had to be squeaky clean PG-13 stuff, not that there's anything wrong with good wholesome fun, but it should never be a dictated point. There are other problems, but I felt this stringent ruling has made potentially exciting ideas trainwrecks or left potential at the door- Sorcerer's Apprentice, Prince of Persia, John Carter... the list is long and has lots of big budgets and red numbers.
Then, Bob Iger, after the runaway success of the Proposal in 2009, said they would no longer be producing mid-budget features and would focus only on brands. This too, after the expensive flops of G-Force (Jerry Bruckheimer), Race to Witch Mountain and A Christmas Carol. Even with Bruckheimer supposedly "reeled in" Pirates 4 managed to be as expensive as the 2nd/3rd but looking like it was made with half the amount, and of course Imageworks with Zemeckis was shut down. 2D animation was once again suspended at Disney after Princess and the Frog failed to perform up to expectations. Pixar had already been acquired, by this point, and Up made a staggering amount of money.
Expanding on that last point, Cars, Ratatouille, Wall-E, Up and Toy Story 3 were all released after the acquisition but were already in production, given a four year production window, when Disney made such an acquisition. Those are four original movies and the conclusion to Pixar's one and only beloved franchise. Since then, their production schedule morphed into Cars 2, Brave, Monsters Inc 0 and Finding Nemo 2 with newt being cancelled and original movies having been continually pushed back.
Disney only ever released 2 sequels in their time as an animation studio to cinemas, but presided over what Disney fans mostly know as cheapquels, basically rushed, poor quality DTV animation ruining or bastardizing the actual canon. Sequels to Fox and the Hound, 101 Dalmatians, Tarzan, Pocahontas, Hunchback of Notre Dame etc were particularly clueless and abject. John Lasseter once voiced his hatred for DTV stuff but he has had no problems pushing out DTV TinkerBell movies and starting "Planes" for Pixar.
Furthermore, under their home video banner, Disney has grown egregious for cheapening the quality of products and generally showing disrespect to the consumer. Having lived in the UK, I was excited for Disney's promised "Diamond" line, after their Special Edition/Platinum DVD lines dropped the ball towards the end. However, once again, after the magnificent start, they blew it and began shoveling them out with less and less respect for the material and the consumer. They already do not seem to acknowledge or support their live action catalogue from Walt Disney's era, but also anything produced under their Hollywood, Miramax and Touchstone labels from the late 80s until early 2000s. Basically anything unfriendly toward their family base was ignored for years. Now the rate of releases has improved dramatically but probably only because Iger wants to make some last stop gap cash before throwing his "Keychest" invention on us. (For those who don't know, that is Disney's alternative to Ultraviolet.) However, going by reviews, they have simply thrown many onto discs without so much as bothering to check them or review them.
Many people were claiming that the Original SW trilogy might now make it on to Blu-Ray, but if you follow Disney's releases, you should know that it's probably even less likely to ever appear. Disney have not the consumer in mind but the bottom line. They are more likely to release twenty different editions with none ever having the actual original product. They drop extras for no rhyme or reason when discs now have so much space. The quality of extras themselves dropped precariously. Compare the extras on Paramount releases of Iron Man and then Disney's release of the Avengers. Surely the mega-extravaganza should have more, but that is not the case. Disney preferred to spread it out as exclusives and further delay proper extras, if any at all were produced. They also almost released the briefcase edition before they were sued by Lenovo for breach of contract, trying to squeeze out every last dollar without having to pay any rights. Typical Disney, then, in fact. Only concerned about the pennies.
Now, I know it's all about the money, yes, but Disney are blatantly showing no regard for anything else. Not the quality of their products nor the consumers or anyone else but their bottom line. The focus on brands is one of the worst you could point out in Hollywood's increasingly unoriginal fare. Disney are not willing to take chances and prefer to kill the integrity of the industry with commercial schlock. Look at their television with all their manufactured teeny bopper brands and how their stars kept rebelling once they were out. Disney only cares about cross-promotion and with their stranglehold on princesses, then Cars and then Marvel superheroes, and now Star fucking Wars, well, it's never-ending and their money train will keep on coming in as quality be damned and left to rot in the outback. See, with all their money, they should be leaders in innovation. Yet, they have let their keystone industry-animation-fall behind not only Pixar, but Dreamworks, Blue Sky and Illumination. They continue to force creatively bankrupt franchises on us with Pirates 5 and 6 teetering in the horizon and now, have already announced Star Wars 7.
My first thought was "what a perfect match" for Lucas and Disney. Both have shown no concern for their fanbases over the years with elitist and commercial goals only on the mind. Whether rightly or wrongly the masses have still turned up to all of the shit from SW prequels to Alice in Wonderland, On Stranger Tides and the 3D re-releases. But, even so, Star Wars and Disney are arguably the biggest brands in the industry and their combined force is scary for both box office and merchandising. This step will ensure Disney continues to feel nothing even if they released 10 John Carters a year- but, will they even give another John Carter a chance? (If you didn't get it JC is an allegory as not only a bomb, but original fare)
Pixar, Lasseter, Disney and Andrew Stanton may deny it, but Finding Nemo 2's conception seems to be intertwined with the failure of John Carter. Do we really need more of this? But this is what we'll continue to get with the current crop at the apex.
One should be excited for such an acquisition in the market, sure, but given their history and current leadership, it is a worrying time ahead. The honeymoon with Marvel still runs on, but it didn't take very long for Disney's infectious corporate suit mentality to penetrate Pixar and so one is weary of the future. (Avengers was made under Paramount) LucasFilm is another story, with Lucas himself appearing in the dictionary as the definition of greed, but add in Disney's superficially unrealistic clean policies and a character like Han Solo will be a thing of the past. Does anyone remember Tron Legacy? Thought so. After 18 months of cross-promotion, Legacy was still a disappointment and a non-entity. That is what Disney is good at- inundation of promises to cover up an empty, sombre, hollow shell.
PS: Criticize Lucas all you want, but Disney too have a long reference list of post-release tinkering due to ridiculous complaints by parents in an attempt to preserve the pointless family friendly image. A timely analogy would be Disney being Mitt- easily moulded and influenced by a minority extremist group of individuals. Who else would force frames to be redrawn because some lines resembled an object that could potentially be a penis or have lines cut out because it sounded like a request for one to take their clothes off?
Firstly, I'm not sure how many people on this forum are Disney fans- and by that I mean Disney animation, since that's what started the studio, and what the studio has relied on for decades. Disney, of course, have tried to expand into live action, but I'm pretty sure have not won any Oscar for a film they produced and most of it can be written off as family fluff, whether fair or not. This is obviously completely opposite to long standing studios like Warner Bros., Paramount, Columbia and so on.
In recent times, despite immense success with the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, Disney decided to have a blanket ban on anything even remotely considered risque with even On Stranger Tides feeling the brunt of this outcome. Everything had to be squeaky clean PG-13 stuff, not that there's anything wrong with good wholesome fun, but it should never be a dictated point. There are other problems, but I felt this stringent ruling has made potentially exciting ideas trainwrecks or left potential at the door- Sorcerer's Apprentice, Prince of Persia, John Carter... the list is long and has lots of big budgets and red numbers.
Then, Bob Iger, after the runaway success of the Proposal in 2009, said they would no longer be producing mid-budget features and would focus only on brands. This too, after the expensive flops of G-Force (Jerry Bruckheimer), Race to Witch Mountain and A Christmas Carol. Even with Bruckheimer supposedly "reeled in" Pirates 4 managed to be as expensive as the 2nd/3rd but looking like it was made with half the amount, and of course Imageworks with Zemeckis was shut down. 2D animation was once again suspended at Disney after Princess and the Frog failed to perform up to expectations. Pixar had already been acquired, by this point, and Up made a staggering amount of money.
Expanding on that last point, Cars, Ratatouille, Wall-E, Up and Toy Story 3 were all released after the acquisition but were already in production, given a four year production window, when Disney made such an acquisition. Those are four original movies and the conclusion to Pixar's one and only beloved franchise. Since then, their production schedule morphed into Cars 2, Brave, Monsters Inc 0 and Finding Nemo 2 with newt being cancelled and original movies having been continually pushed back.
Disney only ever released 2 sequels in their time as an animation studio to cinemas, but presided over what Disney fans mostly know as cheapquels, basically rushed, poor quality DTV animation ruining or bastardizing the actual canon. Sequels to Fox and the Hound, 101 Dalmatians, Tarzan, Pocahontas, Hunchback of Notre Dame etc were particularly clueless and abject. John Lasseter once voiced his hatred for DTV stuff but he has had no problems pushing out DTV TinkerBell movies and starting "Planes" for Pixar.
Furthermore, under their home video banner, Disney has grown egregious for cheapening the quality of products and generally showing disrespect to the consumer. Having lived in the UK, I was excited for Disney's promised "Diamond" line, after their Special Edition/Platinum DVD lines dropped the ball towards the end. However, once again, after the magnificent start, they blew it and began shoveling them out with less and less respect for the material and the consumer. They already do not seem to acknowledge or support their live action catalogue from Walt Disney's era, but also anything produced under their Hollywood, Miramax and Touchstone labels from the late 80s until early 2000s. Basically anything unfriendly toward their family base was ignored for years. Now the rate of releases has improved dramatically but probably only because Iger wants to make some last stop gap cash before throwing his "Keychest" invention on us. (For those who don't know, that is Disney's alternative to Ultraviolet.) However, going by reviews, they have simply thrown many onto discs without so much as bothering to check them or review them.
Many people were claiming that the Original SW trilogy might now make it on to Blu-Ray, but if you follow Disney's releases, you should know that it's probably even less likely to ever appear. Disney have not the consumer in mind but the bottom line. They are more likely to release twenty different editions with none ever having the actual original product. They drop extras for no rhyme or reason when discs now have so much space. The quality of extras themselves dropped precariously. Compare the extras on Paramount releases of Iron Man and then Disney's release of the Avengers. Surely the mega-extravaganza should have more, but that is not the case. Disney preferred to spread it out as exclusives and further delay proper extras, if any at all were produced. They also almost released the briefcase edition before they were sued by Lenovo for breach of contract, trying to squeeze out every last dollar without having to pay any rights. Typical Disney, then, in fact. Only concerned about the pennies.
Now, I know it's all about the money, yes, but Disney are blatantly showing no regard for anything else. Not the quality of their products nor the consumers or anyone else but their bottom line. The focus on brands is one of the worst you could point out in Hollywood's increasingly unoriginal fare. Disney are not willing to take chances and prefer to kill the integrity of the industry with commercial schlock. Look at their television with all their manufactured teeny bopper brands and how their stars kept rebelling once they were out. Disney only cares about cross-promotion and with their stranglehold on princesses, then Cars and then Marvel superheroes, and now Star fucking Wars, well, it's never-ending and their money train will keep on coming in as quality be damned and left to rot in the outback. See, with all their money, they should be leaders in innovation. Yet, they have let their keystone industry-animation-fall behind not only Pixar, but Dreamworks, Blue Sky and Illumination. They continue to force creatively bankrupt franchises on us with Pirates 5 and 6 teetering in the horizon and now, have already announced Star Wars 7.
My first thought was "what a perfect match" for Lucas and Disney. Both have shown no concern for their fanbases over the years with elitist and commercial goals only on the mind. Whether rightly or wrongly the masses have still turned up to all of the shit from SW prequels to Alice in Wonderland, On Stranger Tides and the 3D re-releases. But, even so, Star Wars and Disney are arguably the biggest brands in the industry and their combined force is scary for both box office and merchandising. This step will ensure Disney continues to feel nothing even if they released 10 John Carters a year- but, will they even give another John Carter a chance? (If you didn't get it JC is an allegory as not only a bomb, but original fare)
Pixar, Lasseter, Disney and Andrew Stanton may deny it, but Finding Nemo 2's conception seems to be intertwined with the failure of John Carter. Do we really need more of this? But this is what we'll continue to get with the current crop at the apex.
One should be excited for such an acquisition in the market, sure, but given their history and current leadership, it is a worrying time ahead. The honeymoon with Marvel still runs on, but it didn't take very long for Disney's infectious corporate suit mentality to penetrate Pixar and so one is weary of the future. (Avengers was made under Paramount) LucasFilm is another story, with Lucas himself appearing in the dictionary as the definition of greed, but add in Disney's superficially unrealistic clean policies and a character like Han Solo will be a thing of the past. Does anyone remember Tron Legacy? Thought so. After 18 months of cross-promotion, Legacy was still a disappointment and a non-entity. That is what Disney is good at- inundation of promises to cover up an empty, sombre, hollow shell.
PS: Criticize Lucas all you want, but Disney too have a long reference list of post-release tinkering due to ridiculous complaints by parents in an attempt to preserve the pointless family friendly image. A timely analogy would be Disney being Mitt- easily moulded and influenced by a minority extremist group of individuals. Who else would force frames to be redrawn because some lines resembled an object that could potentially be a penis or have lines cut out because it sounded like a request for one to take their clothes off?
-
ajmrowland
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 8177
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:19 pm
- Location: Appleton, WI
-
ajmrowland
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 8177
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:19 pm
- Location: Appleton, WI
It's got nothing to do with that. It's that they're getting too big! Disney's well on their way to taking over the world. Too much influence. And what does that mean for us? More cutbacks on marketing and bonus features.Prince Edward wrote:People are prejudiced against Disney, they think the company only makes movies about talking animals and singing princesses (and I love those movies!). In fact they make a lot of movies, diverse movies and also dark movies. As we all know on this site. And since Disney bought Marvel the Marvel universe have flourished on the big screen and we can thank Disney for The Avengers. I have high hopes for the future of Star Wars, perhaps this gigantic universe can be revitalized and perhaps Lucasfilm now can make a longterm strategy for what stories they want to tell and in what medium they want to tell them:)
I think The Land Before Time (the first one, anyway) is owned by Amblin and Universal Pictures. I don't think it would be part of the deal.SWillie! wrote:Well why not? It's part of their filmography.Kraken Guard wrote: I didn't think they did.
"There are two wolves and they are always fighting. One is darkness and despair. The other is light and hope. Which wolf wins? Whichever one you feed." - Casey Newton, Tomorrowland
-
DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3644
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
-
Kraken Guard
- Special Edition
- Posts: 570
- Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 2:47 pm
- Location: The Flying Dutchman
DisneyJedi wrote:Wait, why are some being all doom and gloom? Almost everyone was the same about Disney buying Marvel and that didn't really turn out so bad.
The same could be said of their planned Avatar Expansion for Animal Kingdom.
On that note, however, I... Well, aside from scratching my head and wondering what they'll do with the new trilogy, I can't help but think to myself: They're slowly replacing things that ARE Disney, with things that are NOT Disney.
And please, for the love of all that is evil: Do NOT Include Princess Leia in their Disney Princess Franchise. I don't care what people say: She is NOT Disney. It would be like including Neytiri in the princess line-up, when she is not Disney.
And I still have that same stance with Marval as well!
-
kbehm29
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1184
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 7:49 am
- Location: Too Far Away from Disney
- Contact:
I am actually OK with this news. I'm excited to see what Disney can come up with regarding future SW movies, and if they use the same marketing team they used for Avengers?
Keeping my fingers crossed.
Keeping my fingers crossed.
Disneyland Trips: 1983, 1992, 1995, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2016, Aug 2018
Walt Disney World Trips: 1999, 2007, 2011, 2014, 2016, ~Dec 2018~, ~Apr 2019~
Favorite Disney Movies: Peter Pan, 101 Dalmatians, Tangled, The Princess and the Frog, Enchanted, FROZEN
Walt Disney World Trips: 1999, 2007, 2011, 2014, 2016, ~Dec 2018~, ~Apr 2019~
Favorite Disney Movies: Peter Pan, 101 Dalmatians, Tangled, The Princess and the Frog, Enchanted, FROZEN
-
milojthatch
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2646
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:34 am
Disney is getting too big. This is not good. Lucas haters, wake up and see the bigger picture. This isn't about "Star Wars," this is about a super media monopoly being formed and getting stronger. When you then keep in mind that it's Disney, the guys who have a hand in copyright laws being changed to suite their needs, this is getting scary.
____________________________________________________________
All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.
-Walt Disney
All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.
-Walt Disney
You are probably right. As excited as I am about the news, this isn't healthy for the rest of the industry. In the past 6 years, Disney have acquired Pixar, Marvel and now Lucasfilm. They should really stop here.
I've also been checking up on Twitter and its amazing how some still think that Eisner is Disney's CEO.
I've also been checking up on Twitter and its amazing how some still think that Eisner is Disney's CEO.
-
PatrickvD
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 5171
- Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:34 am
- Location: The Netherlands
It's not getting scary. Disney only has a few successful films per year. Their market share is not that big. If you take The Avengers out of the picture their market share is actually shockingly small.milojthatch wrote:Disney is getting too big. This is not good. Lucas haters, wake up and see the bigger picture. This isn't about "Star Wars," this is about a super media monopoly being formed and getting stronger. When you then keep in mind that it's Disney, the guys who have a hand in copyright laws being changed to suite their needs, this is getting scary.
I wouldn't worry about them getting too big. Because they're not.
-
Maerj
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2748
- Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 11:31 pm
- Location: Ephrata, PA
- Contact:
Because this is the internet! The place where people who love things come on and complain and say bad things about whatever they are into then are the first in line to buy the next product or see the next movie.DisneyJedi wrote:Wait, why are some being all doom and gloom? Almost everyone was the same about Disney buying Marvel and that didn't really turn out so bad.
This is a suprising but great move, I think. It's an exciting time now, just waiting to see what is going to happen next.
-
PixarFan2006
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 6166
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 8:44 am
- Location: Michigan
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wire ... star-wars/
I still think does not change anything for me. I personally think They missed the opportunity to buy DC Comics to go along with Marvel.
I still think does not change anything for me. I personally think They missed the opportunity to buy DC Comics to go along with Marvel.
Warner will never, EVER give up DC. Disney would sooner have to buy Time Warner to get to DC.PixarFan2006 wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wire ... star-wars/
I still think does not change anything for me. I personally think They missed the opportunity to buy DC Comics to go along with Marvel.
Which gave me a scary thought...