Disney War Over?

Post by **PatrickvD** » July 9th, 2005, 9:52 am

so what exactly does the "putting aside differences" and "acknowledgement of eachother's roles in the company " mean for Disney? Does this mean Iger really IS interested in bringing back everything that made Disney great (in other words, become a living legend and be known as the man that saved the company) Or did Roy and Stan simply give up (in other words, bring on Cinderella 3!)

What exactly is Roy's new function within Disney? I thought I'd start a new thread because everything seems a little vague and very sudden... out of the blue. Hope there isn't already a thread, looked but couldn't find.

Post by **Meg** » July 9th, 2005, 7:42 pm

I'm pretty curious myself, too. Hopefully it means Iger really is trying to do a good job.

Post by **Ben** » July 10th, 2005, 7:04 am

Discussions between both camps have been happening since Iger took control.

The recent filing of the SaveDisney movement was a make or break thing, to show that they were still willing to put the pressure on.

Iger, I think, realises that having a popular face for the company and not having these very public splits is a good thing for Disney - whatever happens with the continuation of the DTV sequels.

Iger IS his own man, and it seems he is stading up - very slowly but extremely surely - to be someone that can carry Disney through at least the next 10-20 years. With Roy on board (basically as an official "guardian" of the legacy) and with the ear of Iger, I think we can look forward to something of a return to Disney's past.

It will take time, but the rumors of a return to 2D and the re-upping with Pixar can only be a good thing, right?

I guess the only pay off we might have to face is an added push for Iger's baby - ESPN - in such things as the Cinderella extras tie-in.

Post by **askmike1** » July 10th, 2005, 9:29 am

PatrickvD wrote:What exactly is Roy's new function within Disney?

Director Emeritus. According to Dictionary.com...
Emeritus: Retired but retaining an honorary title corresponding to that held immediately before retirement: a professor emeritus.
So judging by the name alone, this seems nothing more than an honorary position. Having a title but not much else.

-Michael

Post by **Ben** » July 10th, 2005, 5:40 pm

Ahh, but he's also a consultant, which means that he'll be listened too.

Plus, Iger wouldn't have gone to the trouble just to have him around and not use him. Roy will be back, as I say, front and center as company spokesman and the face of Disney.

Yes, it's an honorary position, but this is a title with a lot more behind it than people may think.

Post by **askmike1** » July 10th, 2005, 9:41 pm

Jim Hill has a nice article about the terms of the resolvement. It's definately worth a read.

-Michael

Post by **PatrickvD** » July 11th, 2005, 7:49 am

askmike1 wrote:Jim Hill has a nice article about the terms of the resolvement. It's definately worth a read.

-Michael

ah thanks for the link, was waiting for a nice JH article where good ol mr Hill would pretend that he knew of this whole deal months before

Now I'm gonna go read it

Post by **Ben** » July 11th, 2005, 8:57 am

Y'know, I don't always "get" Hill. He sometimes comes over as some kind of used car salesman.

That opening quote - isn't it convienient that the "JHM reader" just happened to succinctly cover all of the recent events in that one line?

Yep... he does sorta, kinda mention that he knew something like this could have been on the cards "for a number of months now".

And I always find it strange that his sources speak in the same start-stop, comma-punctuated way that he does, although of course that could just be him interpreting their words.

And just what is it with him and naming SaveDisney all the time in quotes: "Save Disney"? That's just rude of the man toward their campaign, surely?

"I've been hearing some awfully interesting rumors lately..." - Of course you have, Jim.

"Toy Story III"? Could it be that this announcement is just another Mouse-made bait-and-switch tactic designed to get Steve Jobs & Pixar back to the negotiating table?"

Isn't he a little late coming to this conclusion?

In the words of Mr Hill: "Your thoughts?"

Post by **ShyViolet** » July 11th, 2005, 4:43 pm

Ahh, but he's also a consultant, which means that he'll be listened too.

Plus, Iger wouldn't have gone to the trouble just to have him around and not use him. Roy will be back, as I say, front and center as company spokesman and the face of Disney.

Yes, it's an honorary position, but this is a title with a lot more behind it than people may think.

Oh, G-d. That's all I'm going to say.

I am not happy about this.

Post by **Ben** » July 12th, 2005, 7:18 am

Even if it brings back traditional animation?

Post by **ShyViolet** » July 12th, 2005, 1:57 pm

I would love that, yes, (that's the only good thing about this whole mess) but I can't stand the thought that those four movies that brought back animation in the first place will continue to be promoted again and again w/out ever mentioning the man who was responsible for their quality....I'm sorry but that does not sit well with me.

They've been savaging JK for ten years. In every way imaginable. At least if they continue to do it, (which I expect they will, with Roy there) there won't be that old excuse that: "Oh, it's just because Eisner hates him and Eisner controls everything."

Someone will have to be responsible....

Well, that's all I'm going to say.

Post by **Ben** » July 12th, 2005, 2:33 pm

Well, I would calm down and I'd expect the company to now start saying that it was all Eisner's fault!

Post by **ShyViolet** » July 12th, 2005, 2:48 pm

Sure, but the question is will they actually be changing this policy or not?

And how much? Will it just be a token mention here and there or will they actually acknowledge his existance again? (JK)

Post by **ShyViolet** » July 13th, 2005, 2:53 pm

http://cganimation.blogspot.com/2005/07 ... owell.html

Post by **Ben** » July 14th, 2005, 3:48 am

I think "towell" is only spelt with one l (towel). But nice try!

Disney War Over?

Disney War Over?

Re: Disney War Over?

...

Re: ...