Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 6,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by InexorableTash
That said, the article is poorly written...
The poor writing could be due to the fact that the authour is probably French. Other than that, I can only quote Lando from "Empire":
"This deal is getting worse all the time!"
Why is there a squad of Imperial Stormtroopers marching down Main Street, U.S.A. in the Magic Kingdom? What does that have to do with Disney?!? If the Lucas association has become so strong, to change the layout/theme of the experience more than it already has, then the parks should be re-named: Disney-Lucas Land.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry W Jones
I have to say I was almost six when Raiders came out and I totally knew who George Lucas was due to Star Wars and heard Spielbergs name a billion times before due to Close Encounters and Jaws. If you watched TV or could read it was hard not to hear and see those names. I guess it depends on the kid though.
Henry, I've already replied to this comment but will do so again, because...
A couple of months ago, my brother took his family to Walt Disney World in Florida for the 2nd time. A few weeks ago, at Easter dinner, I learned that his 6-year-old daughter fought Darth Vader in the "Jedi Training" thing (it was the 1st time I've ever heard of this attraction).
Talking about 6-year-olds knowing/not knowing the difference between Disney & Lucas: Guess what? She is 6 years old and I asked her:
Q: Who is your favourite Disney good guy?
A: Poomba!
Q: Who is the scariest Disney bad guy?
A: Dark Vador!
Q: Who is the scariest Disney bad guy?
A: Dark Vador!
I didn't bother making the correction...
This really has nothing to do with Disney, but when I was a young chap I used to call lightsabers "life-savers" kinda like the candy. To me it made sense as the weapon could save your life. ahh to be young and dumb.
But I can totally see kids assuming that Disney properties and Lucas properties are one in the same. Besides kids don't really know much about corporations anyway... or do they? I'll have to ask my 7 year old nephew.
Henry, I've already replied to this comment but will do so again, because...
A couple of months ago, my brother took his family to Walt Disney World in Florida for the 2nd time. A few weeks ago, at Easter dinner, I learned that his 6-year-old daughter fought Darth Vader in the "Jedi Training" thing (it was the 1st time I've ever heard of this attraction).
Talking about 6-year-olds knowing/not knowing the difference between Disney & Lucas: Guess what? She is 6 years old and I asked her:
Q: Who is your favourite Disney good guy?
A: Poomba!
Q: Who is the scariest Disney bad guy?
A: Dark Vador!
I didn't bother making the correction...
I see what you mean but still don't get why it annoys you so bad and what it is hurting.
Disney did buy Marvel, so I suppose we'll eventually see Marvel characters in the parks, but since they've been seen at Universal parks before that, it'll be quite a while before kids will be getting an Iron Man ride or getting Spider-man's autograph. And even then, I'm sure they'll only be place in proper places like Disney Hollywood Studios.
Try Disneyland's Tomorrowland and 2013. Not as far off as we thought it would seem. While plumbing the depths of the 'net for info on the Temple of the Forbidden Eye, the ever reliable Al Lutz let slip that the great round building opposite the Autopia is set to become home to the combination of the Stark Expo & Tomorrowland's next E-ticket attraction featuring Iron Man.
Bob Iger can’t wait to get the Marvel characters added to the theme park environment, and WDI is running with this one since the budget is healthy and Cars Land has emboldened them to push for higher quality in these big headliner projects. The question remains whether they can keep this quickly approaching project under wraps until the 2013 D23 Expo in Anaheim next August, or if they at least announce the E Ticket this winter but hold back on the details publicly until the D23 Expo.
Didn't know exactly where to put this, so mods feel free to move it if necessary...
The Indiana Jones Adventure in California has been closed now since September for refurbishing until the 8th of December, just wanted to give any fans out there a heads up.
Apparently they are doing some new construction,work on animation and some lighting work in there...
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 6,950
Now that this topic has been pretty much rendered obsolete by the recent acquisition, it's only fitting to re-post this conversation from the 7th-9th March, 2011.
What's eerie is that CNN International reported that the negotiations started "about a year & half ago". That would be right around March 2011!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junior Jones
That being said however, there is one disparity that's specific to Star Tours and Indiana Jones. Disney hasn't "acquired" LucasFilm (yet).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Me
I honestly hope that never happens but who knows what lies in store after George Lucas passes away. (Knock on wood.)
It wouldn't surprise me at all if Disney tried to absorb his empire in 30 years time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pale Horse
By and Large, I don't think that would ever happen...
Erm, no. (With all due respect to Violet, of course). She was participating in this thread when it was being discussed but never commented.
Her post in the other thread came just over a full year later in March 2012.
You were the first to warn us about this. I always assumed it was just a way to bring broader interest to the parks by creating attractions featuring two great movie franchises. I was shocked to see it happen and cannot believe Lucas is doing more Star Wars films after saying so many times the saga is over because the story of Anakin's life was complete. What a money hungry liar, he is just selling out the franchise for more dough. RotJ really wraps up the series perfectly with no loss ends, there is no reason to make more films other than cash. Many people fault the prequels but at least they brought something to the table by explaining how a man/government turns to evil.
As for the good doctor, who knows what will happen. Indy 5 may be pushed to the backburner and I really hope they don't try to revive the series with a new actor in the role
Stoo warned us about this connection and now it is complete.
You were the first to warn us about this. I always assumed it was just a way to bring broader interest to the parks by creating attractions featuring two great movie franchises. I was shocked to see it happen and cannot believe Lucas is doing more Star Wars films after saying so many times the saga is over because the story of Anakin's life was complete. What a money hungry liar, he is just selling out the franchise for more dough. RotJ really wraps up the series perfectly with no loss ends, there is no reason to make more films other than cash. Many people fault the prequels but at least they brought something to the table by explaining how a man/government turns to evil.
I don't think it's unreasonable for Lucas to want to see to the company's future while he's able to do so, and in such a way that he can enjoy his retirement, pursuing other philanthropic or artistic projects. Isn't it better to ensure a succession he can be happy with? I know "money grab!" is an easy charge to make, but there's more to it than that. He didn't have to sell, and he's not keeping most of the money from the deal besides.
* * *
Despite Stoo's assertion to the contrary, I don't see that this thread has been "rendered obsolete." Perhaps the ownership argument has been rendered moot in the present, but there are at least some questions still on the table about the suitability of the match, likely not in the film arena (as films stand alone to an extent, and Lucasfilm will remain its own boutique label anyhow), but otherwise, predominantly the theme parks. There may also be some chance that the deal will affect the sorts of licensing agreements that are made.
I don't think it's unreasonable for Lucas to want to see to the company's future while he's able to do so, and in such a way that he can enjoy his retirement, pursuing other philanthropic or artistic projects. Isn't it better to ensure a succession he can be happy with? I know "money grab!" is an easy charge to make, but there's more to it than that. He didn't have to sell, and he's not keeping most of the money from the deal besides.
* * *
Despite Stoo's assertion to the contrary, I don't see that this thread has been "rendered obsolete." Perhaps the ownership argument has been rendered moot in the present, but there are at least some questions still on the table about the suitability of the match, likely not in the film arena (as films stand alone to an extent, and Lucasfilm will remain its own boutique label anyhow), but otherwise, predominantly the theme parks. There may also be some chance that the deal will affect the sorts of licensing agreements that are made.
I don't have a problem with him finding a line of succussession during his lifetime but allowing DIsney to make more movies just seems to cheapen the product. It will wind up like Bond or the super hero franchises, where they are just crankin em out every few years for a profit. He has been saying for years that the saga was complete with RotS. The six part saga told a very complete story and everything was wrapped up perfectly in RotJ. But Lucas can change his mind whenever he wants...he did it with Darth Maul in the cartoon show. I have heard him say the reason they had Maul cut in half was to show he was clearly dead and would not be coming back. Later he decides to bring back the character in The Clone Wars, so he could sell more Maul merchandise and create more reason for kids to want to see Episode I.
Many on this message board would say he already tarnished his legacy with KotCS and the SW prequels. While I think they are inferior to the original movies, I still enjoyed all of them. Lucas crated these series and characters and he could do whatever he wants with them. Films such as the original Star Wars and Raiders have not only become very popular but are also some of the greatest American films of all time, ranking high on list such as the ones put out by the American Film Institute. If he wants to allow the SW saga to continue beyond RotJ, even though these new films would have no connection to the life story of Anakin Skywalker than so be it. I just hope if we don't get Indy V with Harrison Ford as the man in the hat, than the series be left alone to become a part of American film history.
I am not against Disney and as I have posted previously on this message board, I always enjoyed the Lucasfilm franchises appearing in the parks. I have been to Walt Disney World many times and went to Disneyland last year. I love all of the Lucasfilm attractions, especially Temple of the Forbidden eye which is my favorite theme park ride. The queue alone is just epic for a fan of Indiana Jones. I just want to see classic film franchises treated as more than just a means to make a profit for a company that has no shortage of profitable franchises to begin with. Walt Disney himself didn't want certain films to have sequels after he died because he did not want to cheapen what he created.
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 6,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr.jones1986
Stoo warned us about this connection and now it is complete.
DISNEY: I've been waiting for you, George. We meet again, at last. The circle is now complete. When I left you, I was but the customer. Now *I* am The Master!
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 6,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montana Smith
Until a few minutes ago I was blissfully ignorant of this unholy union.
Smiff, you never knew about "Captain EO" before? (That's OK if you didn't. I recently met with a European Raven member and he said, "I don't know much about Disney." In a certain way, I envy him.)
Subject matter (Wacko Jacko) aside: The positive aspect of, "Captian EO", is that at least it was something NEW and not a milking ca$h-in of a film series that Disney didn't produce. This particular Lucas/Disney collaboration produced something ORIGINAL. For that simple reason alone, it should be applauded.
Subject matter (Wacko Jacko) aside: The positive aspect of, "Captian EO", is that at least it was something NEW and not a milking ca$h-in of a film series that Disney didn't produce. This particular Lucas/Disney collaboration produced something ORIGINAL. For that simple reason alone, it should be applauded.
Until a few minutes ago I was blissfully ignorant of this unholy union. Now it will haunt me to my grave. The Wacko monster will no doubt visit me in nightmares.
You keep opening doors in Old Man Lucas' Mansion and you're bound to find some skeletons Scoob...!
ahh to be young and dumb.
