Search results

weirds me out...

Yeah, who knows what two years of this crap can do to ya...:crazy:

Hopefully this link works Article from New York Daily News, also found at EM.TV section of Hoover's Online: http://www.nydailynews.com/03-11-2003/business/story/66050p-61521c.html The article's interesting (in some respects) compared to others we've read.

So, under the EM.TV/Henson/Sesame/whatever deal, SW was "restricted" from creating entertainment programs, only educational? How did that work? And is this Sesame debt the remainder of the $180 million SW paid back in Dec. '00 or somthing else?

311th post on 3/11 Dang, Luke, where have you been the last couple of days? Anyway, can anyone explain what that whole Sesame Workshop part in the article means? Really, it's saying something like "EM.TV frees the creator of Elmo and Big Bird from creating educational-type programming and...

We can keep speculating (you know I will), but I think we won't REALLY know what's going on 'til we see an actual press release, not article from a journalist (which ALL these are). I mean we don't know officially know whether Disney just wanted the catalog and characters or EM.TV wants to keep...

101. But we must move on...

Kermit's Irish?

I don't think EM.TV could afford it at the moment.

:smirk: Dear God, I hope it's Janice's.

Yeah, through Warner Bros. and/or Hanna-Barbera (all these companies are sorta linked), Turner/Time Warner did make more things using the MGM characters (under Turner Entertainment Co.), like Tom and Jerry Kids and The Magic Ring. As for the journalist(s), these are the same who wrote some of...

Saban's out, yet CM's still aiming for a 49% purchase, and Valentine is still trying to structure some sort of deal. I just wonder if Disney will actually buy Henson (or their characters and library, whatever) since it seems they come into picture in and out. I wish there was a concise internet...

Though I root for a Disney purchase of Henson (though I'm kinda agitated at this point), it seems (according to the wording of these articles), that they (or whoever) may just buy the Muppets themselves and Henson's programming library, not the actual Jim Henson Company, so to speak. Though I...

replying to Chilly Down I think I'm sure about the "Bear" stuff. Key word is "I". Maybe Disney has some licensing deal. "Bear in the Big Blue House" was in the EM.TV press release of 2000. Concerning Farscape: Blech. Anime. Please, y'all, keep up your "Save Farscape" campaign. (I'm currently...

Well, now to reply to the mouthful you've said I know "Bear" is on Disney Channel and is treated as good as any Disney character, but Henson/EM.TV still controls and produces "Bear in the Big Blue House." It don't say Walt Disney Television in the end credits. I'd like to be sure I'm right, but...

300th message (and what a crappy one) Great, in the two hours since I wrote that post I've been thinking about "the Muppet movie catalog and characters" thing. Something seems wrong about that. Very very wrong. Thank you daniel for making me think. :sympathy: :concern:

Yeah, no doubt ABC was No. 1 (and became No. 4) because of "Millionaire." As for its reality shows, ( :smirk: ) hopefully this trend that pervades broadcast TV will run its course soon.

So that odd phrase "the Muppet movie catalog and characters" is what IT means? Or is it just an odd choice of words. I can never tell with these half-baked articles.

I think until 2000 or 2001 Eisner (and whoever else) were doing a pretty good job. In animation (Pixar or not), they were at the top of the game. ABC was the No. 1 broadcast network. They had prizes like Miramax and ESPN. Etc, etc. I just think Disney just lost its way in some of their creative...

Just curious, Phil. Have you gotten the e-mails I've recently sent you?