In 2004, Pixar announced they would not renew their contract with Disney, and several film studios including Warner Bros, 20th Century Fox, Columbia, and MGM announced their interest to work with Pixar. The Incredibles and Cars would be the last Disney Pixar co productions with Ratatouille being an entirely Pixar production and copyright with Disney only holding distribution rights. However, Micheal Eisner was dropped from Disney as a CEO the next year and Bob Iger took over. Iger sought to mend relations between Disney and Pixar, which in 2006, Disney bought Pixar. The Pixar heads were given head roles of the Disney animation studio with Walt Disney Animation Studios and Pixar remaining separate companies. The Pixar personnel made important decisions at Disney, ushering an era called the Disney revival, an era that is still ongoing. But what if the purchase never happened? How would Disney evolve without Pixar?
Disney without Pixar?
- Thread starter Admiral Bloonbeard
- Start date
That didn't change with Pixar Inside... if anything I can see them absorbing marvel earlier and adopting their current formula much earlier too.... I think SW purchase might be butterfly away as Pixar one might have influenced Lucas decision in that regard
John Lasseter was very important at Disney, he banned direct to video sequels at Disney which seriously improved the quality of Disney's films and Disney's reputation
The acquisition of Pixar is ultimately what turned things around for Disney. Had it not happened, it's quite possible Disney would meander around until it got bought out by another company. Perhaps Comcast would make a second (this time successful) attempt at acquiring them. Then again, Rupert Murdoch and Fox may try to buy them. The other question would be who would Pixar partner with or be acquired by? Universal or Time Warner seem like possibilities. It's also possible that say 5 or 10 years later a new partnership with Disney is formed if neither company is acquired.
Bumping with OP's permission.
I looked into this a tiny bit and came to the conclusion that in order to have Disney and Pixar separate, you need to have Michael Eisner remain in charge of Disney longer. And the reason he was let go was Roy E. Disney's campaign, Save Disney, second such campaign (first one, ironically, brought in Eisner himself to replace Ron Miller). Roy died in 2009 IOTL, four years after second Save Disney, after battling stomach cancer for a year. If he dies earlier, even if there is a second Save Disney (Roy had a partner in Stanley Gold), it might have less influence since there won't be nephew of Walt himself to spearhead this.
As far as Pixar goes, it's hard to say what exactly are they going to do after going away from the House of Mouse. One thought I do entertain myself with in this regard is that this whole experience might color Pixar's works — likely not as heavily as DreamWorks (with Shrek being an excuse to bash on Disney tropes and Lord Farquaad allegedly being a caricature of Michael Eisner), but some shades of it might be there. John Lasseter did say something about your children being adopted by child molesters, after all.
In regards to Circle Seven, they were an extension of Eisner's direct-to-video sequels tactic, and as far as their actual ideas go, I would not call them groundbreaking. Their Toy Story 3 proposal is the only one I personally found solid enough, others are just meh and retreading the ideas of original films. Depending on how Disney turns out, the fate of Circle Seven can go a few different ways, from breaking into something original and going theatrical (how successful it would be is a different matter) to being folded into a different Disney studio.
If I'm being honest, I'd enjoy a TL about Disney getting screwed — there's not enough of that on this forum. This looks like a good starting point for that.
I looked into this a tiny bit and came to the conclusion that in order to have Disney and Pixar separate, you need to have Michael Eisner remain in charge of Disney longer. And the reason he was let go was Roy E. Disney's campaign, Save Disney, second such campaign (first one, ironically, brought in Eisner himself to replace Ron Miller). Roy died in 2009 IOTL, four years after second Save Disney, after battling stomach cancer for a year. If he dies earlier, even if there is a second Save Disney (Roy had a partner in Stanley Gold), it might have less influence since there won't be nephew of Walt himself to spearhead this.
As far as Pixar goes, it's hard to say what exactly are they going to do after going away from the House of Mouse. One thought I do entertain myself with in this regard is that this whole experience might color Pixar's works — likely not as heavily as DreamWorks (with Shrek being an excuse to bash on Disney tropes and Lord Farquaad allegedly being a caricature of Michael Eisner), but some shades of it might be there. John Lasseter did say something about your children being adopted by child molesters, after all.
In regards to Circle Seven, they were an extension of Eisner's direct-to-video sequels tactic, and as far as their actual ideas go, I would not call them groundbreaking. Their Toy Story 3 proposal is the only one I personally found solid enough, others are just meh and retreading the ideas of original films. Depending on how Disney turns out, the fate of Circle Seven can go a few different ways, from breaking into something original and going theatrical (how successful it would be is a different matter) to being folded into a different Disney studio.
If I'm being honest, I'd enjoy a TL about Disney getting screwed — there's not enough of that on this forum. This looks like a good starting point for that.