Films/DVD Asylum

Re: Disney today

67.124.119.197

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display All Email ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ]

ephemere

(A)

In Reply to: Disney today posted by Bambi B on May 27, 2004 at 17:01:24:

For the record, Disney does not own Pixar.
To see the best Disney has to offer today, I recommend Lorenzo, a rather dark animated short that will be screening directly before Raising Helen, opening tomorrow. This may be the only opportunity ever to see it.
Lorenzo was rendered completely with computer graphics. Victor, Patrick, gwlvrns and others who turn their noses up at CG should watch Lorenzo and then learn how it was made.

Lorenzo (Open in New Window)

Follow Ups:

Disney Pixar - Bambi B 07:34:52 05/28/04 (5)
ephemere,
Yes, you're correct re Pixar/Disney. I should have been more specific. Disney does not own Pixar, but the two companies have the tighest level of co-production and participates in "co-branding". "Bug's Life", "Monsters Inc", and "Finding Nemo" are "co-branded" which is in my book a kind of modern partnership that suggests merger- but is specifcally for I think 5 or 6 features- temporary merger. This arrangement lets Pixar to remain independent at the same time. If I were Pixar, and given what appears to be Disney's creative slide since the 60's, I would keep a wide back door open too. But, Pixar gets Disney industry punch: marketing, merchandising and distribution and Disney gets Pixar's considerable creativity. What amazes me about Pixar too is the way Steve Jobs reinvented himself -yet again. Watch Pixar- one of the very smartest companies in the Biz- reminds me of the young George Lucas.
Thanks for the recommendations.
I am a strong conservative when it comes to animation- and still think "Pinocchio" (1940) was the World high point, but "Shrek" and "Monsters Inc." (which had a more cohesive graphic style than Shrek) are quite astounding. -Someday computers will be useful! It was amusing to me how much of the time "Shrek" was a parody of classic Disney. -and Disney was smart enough to see the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ in allowing it!
I don't know much about "Shrek 2" but from indications, I'm hoping that Pixar didn't make it's first serious slip into marketing-driven conventionality. Has anyone seen it?
Cheers,
Bambi B
- Some clarifications about Disney, Pixar, and Dreamworks - ephemere 09:52:11 05/28/04 (4)
  Dreamworks, a private company, bought Pacific Data Images (PDI), another private company, in the 1990s to make 3D CG animated movies for them. So far, Dreamworks/PDI in northern California has made Antz , Shrek , and Shrek 2 . Dreamworks is also currently producing Shark Tale , their first 3D CG animated film without PDI. This is happening in southern California. Dreamworks animation is headed up by Jeffrey Katzenberg, who left Disney in the mid-1990s under terms that were not altogether friendly and loving, hence the jabs at Disney in the Shrek franchise and so forth. From what I read in the news, Dreamworks is considering having PDI go public.
  Disney, a public company, and Pixar, another public company, have had an evolving business arrangement since the early 1990s in which Pixar will produce and deliver a series of films. So far, Pixar has delivered five films: Toy Story , A Bug's Life , Toy Story 2 , Monsters Inc. , and Finding Nemo . Pixar is currently working on the final two films under the agreement, The Incredibles and Cars . The economic collaboration between Pixar and Disney is specified in the contract; but creatively, Pixar's films originate and are produced completely within the confines of their studio in northern California. It is interesting that you say Pixar reminds you of the young Lucas, because Pixar was in fact the young Lucas's CG division before he sold it to Steve Jobs in the early 1980s. Pixar had an interesting early history that I won't go into.
  - Thanks ephemere - Bambi B 12:46:52 05/28/04 (1)
    Bambi,
    Gosh, you're very well informed. The way these corporate situations change and become so convoluted, I just can't keep up piecemeal- good to see it all in one place! Thanks for the link- I need to study!
    The idea of "co-branding" is still nebulous to me and the sharing of merchandising with Pixar seems unusual if not unique for Disney. They just aren't good at sharing!
    I had no idea of an actual Lucas connection, but it does make sense given ILM's early CG exploits and Pixar's northern California location.
    Cheers,
    Bambi B
    - co-branding - ephemere 13:54:31 05/28/04 (0)
      Yes, I think the level of sharing with Pixar may very well be unique in the long history of Disney. I'm not completely sure, though. Anyhow, it will be ending after Cars .
  - The current Wired spells it all out. nt - clarkjohnsen 11:31:43 05/28/04 (1)
    s
    - Yes, that is a good article (link enclosed) - ephemere 11:55:23 05/28/04 (0)
      Good Wired article about Pixar (Open in New Window)
Re: Disney today / Hum..Interessant.... - patrickU 05:46:19 05/28/04 (0)
I will look at this picture. I wonder, how much can be lost in the digitalisation of the original painting?

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Parts Connexion

You can not post to an archived thread.