The Death of Pixar
Well, it's apparently official: tomorrow, Pixar's board is going to approve a $7 billion takeover bid by Disney. Steve Jobs will get $3.5 billion, in Disney stock, out of the deal--which will make him the single largest Disney shareholder.
1) "Disney animation" has, of late, been synonymous with "crap".
I brought this up in conversation more than once over the last few years, and often the friend took issue with my assertion. For some odd reason it's always a female friend, and The Emperor's New Groove is always the movie cited as not being crap. I agree that it was rather amusing, but I still think that Pixar's films are a cut above. They have something more, something recent Disney films have lacked.
They have an edge. Take, for example, The Incredibles, where Pixar was willing to make marital infidelity play an important role in its plot-line, and Dash follows his mother's claim that "everyone is special" with the comment "which is another way of saying no-one is." Pixar is not afraid of touching a nerve in the audience, and as a result their characters have believable, realistic depth--their heroes have flaws, and their villains are not wholly evil.
Disney used to have guts too. Watch The Aristocats and you'll find a scene in which one of the older, pseudo-parental characters staggers around, completely intoxicated. And The Lion King blatantly compared Scar and his hyenas to Hitler and the armies of Nazi Germany.
2) Risk-averse Disney suits will stifle Pixar creativity
The problem with modern Disney, in my opinion, is that it is primarily concerned with making money. Not that money isn't the inherent primary objective of any business; my point is more that there are different ways of going about it, and Disney has apparently chosen one that works, but lacks foresight.
One way for a business to make money is to sell great products. Pixar takes this route. The problem with this approach, from a business perspective, is that it's high-risk. Greatness is poorly defined and nearly impossible to predict, and films (even bad ones) cost a lot of money. Miss the mark, and you'll lose money. Another way for a business to make money is to sell mediocre products, repeatedly--which looks like Disney's approach. This is low-risk because you can churn out several mediocre movies in the time it takes to make a single great one, amortizing the risk, and--since you don't care about quality--you can reuse movie formulas that have proven successful. And, if you produce enough mediocre movies, you might even make more money than you would producing great ones.
The problem, obviously, is that eventually customers catch on that your product is teh suck, and stop buying. Especially when there is a superior alternative.
3) Without creativity, Pixar will decline, and another will fill the void.
I just hope it doesn't take too long.
1) "Disney animation" has, of late, been synonymous with "crap".
I brought this up in conversation more than once over the last few years, and often the friend took issue with my assertion. For some odd reason it's always a female friend, and The Emperor's New Groove is always the movie cited as not being crap. I agree that it was rather amusing, but I still think that Pixar's films are a cut above. They have something more, something recent Disney films have lacked.
They have an edge. Take, for example, The Incredibles, where Pixar was willing to make marital infidelity play an important role in its plot-line, and Dash follows his mother's claim that "everyone is special" with the comment "which is another way of saying no-one is." Pixar is not afraid of touching a nerve in the audience, and as a result their characters have believable, realistic depth--their heroes have flaws, and their villains are not wholly evil.
Disney used to have guts too. Watch The Aristocats and you'll find a scene in which one of the older, pseudo-parental characters staggers around, completely intoxicated. And The Lion King blatantly compared Scar and his hyenas to Hitler and the armies of Nazi Germany.
2) Risk-averse Disney suits will stifle Pixar creativity
The problem with modern Disney, in my opinion, is that it is primarily concerned with making money. Not that money isn't the inherent primary objective of any business; my point is more that there are different ways of going about it, and Disney has apparently chosen one that works, but lacks foresight.
One way for a business to make money is to sell great products. Pixar takes this route. The problem with this approach, from a business perspective, is that it's high-risk. Greatness is poorly defined and nearly impossible to predict, and films (even bad ones) cost a lot of money. Miss the mark, and you'll lose money. Another way for a business to make money is to sell mediocre products, repeatedly--which looks like Disney's approach. This is low-risk because you can churn out several mediocre movies in the time it takes to make a single great one, amortizing the risk, and--since you don't care about quality--you can reuse movie formulas that have proven successful. And, if you produce enough mediocre movies, you might even make more money than you would producing great ones.
The problem, obviously, is that eventually customers catch on that your product is teh suck, and stop buying. Especially when there is a superior alternative.
3) Without creativity, Pixar will decline, and another will fill the void.
I just hope it doesn't take too long.