Disney . . . buying Pixar?

[Juuchan17]

This is what I've been hearing about online today. Disney has made a deal to buy Pixar for . . . a lot of money.

Here's the article : Disney to Acquire Pixar for $7.4 Billion (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/disney_pixar)

So . . . would this be a good thing or a bad thing for either company?

[starlac]

Disney would have been foolish to lose Pixar, since the company made it that 60% profit this story refers to. As long as Pixar isn't interferred with too badly, and allowed to continue making original stories, then this "could" be of benefit to both of them, but as the saying goes, only time will tell.

[Magnus]

Hmmm...I dunno about this. On the one hand, this is a union of quite possibly the most successful (former) 2D-animation company with the most successful 3D-animation company. Assuming that things will get even better than the great works the two companies have produced together in the past, this could mean the creation of some true classics in the near future.

But is this a safe assumption? What worries me is Disney, to be honest. I may not be the biggest fan of 3D animation, but I've held a fondness for Pixar ever since I saw their animated lamps at the Chicago Museum of Science & Industry. While I hold the utmost admiration for the hard work and attention Disney gives to all their animations, I'm afraid that their reputation for watering down stories (censoring, adapting for kids, Americanizing, etc.) will pollute the constant stream of fresh ideas that has come from Pixar, if they haven't already. But what do I know? Maybe Pixar has been guilty of the same thing. But to me, Pixar always seems to know exactly what they're trying to do, while Disney seems to harvest great ideas and then cut off everything but the core, so that anybody can digest them.

(P.S. That's not to say that I don't like many of their movies.)

[athena]

I'm afraid that their reputation for watering down stories (censoring, adapting for kids, Americanizing, etc.) will pollute the constant stream of fresh ideas that has come from Pixar, if they haven't already.

hmm, just to play devil's advocate here, with the exception of Cars, all of Pixar's films have been joint productions with Disney... if Disney was going to do the censoring/watering down thing, wouldn't they have done it while as part of these joint productions as well?

[lupercal]

I'd also say Pixar, unless they're going through a slump, are past their peak, which IMO was Toy Story 2. I know I'm in a small minority in being bored with 'The Incredibles', but less controversially 'Bug's Life' was inferior to 'Antz', 'Monsters Inc' while still good was a step down from the Toy Story movies, and 'Finding Nemo' a notable further step down, as reviews here seem to agree.

Of course I'm something of a 2D purist, but that didn't stop me giving both the Toy Story movies 4 stars. I just can't help wishing that the money/talent had stayed with 2D after it seemed to reach something of a new peak around 1999. I think if Brad Bird is remembered for anything he's done (so far) in another 50 years, it'll be for 'Iron Giant' not 'Incredibles.' It's just terribly sad that some 2D films were coming out with that level of artistry just as the medium wa dying. Disney's 'Tarzan' was also 1999, which was arguably their last real classic, and the best thing they'd done in years.

I haven't seen 'Cars', but I wonder if Pixar aren't already at least losing their grip on the torch.
Loop

[Juuchan17]

I'd also say Pixar, unless they're going through a slump, are past their peak, which IMO was Toy Story 2. I know I'm in a small minority in being bored with 'The Incredibles', but less controversially 'Bug's Life' was inferior to 'Antz', 'Monsters Inc' while still good was a step down from the Toy Story movies, and 'Finding Nemo' a notable further step down, as reviews here seem to agree.

Of course I'm something of a 2D purist, but that didn't stop me giving both the Toy Story movies 4 stars. I just can't help wishing that the money/talent had stayed with 2D after it seemed to reach something of a new peak around 1999. I think if Brad Bird is remembered for anything he's done (so far) in another 50 years, it'll be for 'Iron Giant' not 'Incredibles.' It's just terribly sad that some 2D films were coming out with that level of artistry just as the medium wa dying. Disney's 'Tarzan' was also 1999, which was arguably their last real classic, and the best thing they'd done in years.

I haven't seen 'Cars', but I wonder if Pixar aren't already at least losing their grip on the torch.
Loop
So, would that mean that both companies are in possible slumps . . . and Disney is probably buying Pixar so that they won't continue to suck?

Because let's face it: Disney computer animated movies suck and Pixar's are much better, and Disney is slowly and surely killing off their 2-D animation, making traditional animation an endangered (almost extinct) species of film (with exceptions of foreign films and the computer-shaded ones, like Curious George).

Hmm . . . Not sure where this whole thing go . . .

[Inkwolf]

"Slowly but surely?"

I thought Disney already threw out all their 2D animators and sold off their equipment...

[athena]

I thought Disney already threw out all their 2D animators and sold off their equipment...

That's what I heard too... although I'd heard an even more extreme version in that even their DTVs would be 3D from now on... in the same mould as Twice Upon a Christmas (http://keyframeonline.com/Animation/Mickey's_Twice_Upon_a_Christmas/299/)... it's hard to know if stuff like Kronk's New Groove and Bambi II are indicators that Disney has decided not to go that route after all... or just the last dying gasp for 2D animation...


btw, nice to see you InkWolf. Haven't seen your reviews in a while. :)

[MonkeyFunk]

Y'all take a look at Cartoonbrew.com, There's been a lot of recent posts about the aquisition covering the positives and the negatives.