Henson sells Muppets to Disney

[BoyRaisin2]

I have complained to Disney before that I would LOVE to see more stuff done with their classic characters, and they won't do it.

I would love to see more Mickey. I wish ABC/Disney Channel/Toon Disney would continue making episodes of House of Mouse. But they are releasing "The Three Musketeers" and the CGI "Mickey's Twice Upon A Christmas" for video and DVD this year, and that's a good start.

Mickey Muppet: BoyRaisin2 is right on another thing too....about WB (even tho i don't like that company one darn bit!) they treat Scooby and the others like.....well..... crap!

No, Scooby is treated pretty well. The other H-B characters are basically nonexistent. They are basically nostalgic properties.

 

[dmx10101]

Here's the article from Video Store New magazine-

Disney aquires Henson's 'Muppets' and 'Bear in the Big Blue House'
By Erik Gruenwedel

The Walt Disney Co. has purchased from The Jim Henson Co. the rights to "The Muppets" and "Bear in the Big Blue House" properties for an undisclosed amount. Under terms of the deal, Disney will own copyrights and trademarks to all Muppet TV, film, and library assests including Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie Bear, and Gonzo, in addition to a similar agreement for all assests pertaining to "Bear in the Big Blue House", according to company executives. "Disney's principal plan is to strengthen these properties with new productions and enhance and revitalize merchandising and licensing programs." said spokesperson Michelle Bergman. Both properties to date have had licensing agreements between ABC/Disney and Henson for a variety of cable TV programs, merchandising, and theme ppark attractions. It remains to be seen what effect the Disney acquisition will have on home video distribution agreements for "Muppets" and "Bear" product with MGM Home Entertainment and Columbia TriStar Home Entertainment (CTHE). At deadline, representatives from MGM and CTHE were unavailable for comment. Bergman said there is "certainly a possibility" DIsney will incorporate the properties into proprietary home video content in addition to TV shows, stage, and theme park productions. "It could be more of anything", Bergman said, "Exact programming opportunities will be announced in the future."

 

[Mark Filton]

Boyraisin you say that I said "And you say any other company besides Disney would trwat the Muppets like royalty."

NO I did not say that! Come on

I am saying that if the Muppets started to get big again, Disney would say "That is enough of that. We are MOUSE after all, and not FROG."

So I am saying the Muppets will always be limited with Disney. It is like if HENSON bought BARNEY from PBS. It might be nice to have, but it is understood that it is just a sideline. That is what the Muppets now are.

I am just saying that they would have a better CHANCE under somebody else.

YES, the Henson kids (I don't mean they are kids like babies. What do I call them..."offspring?") have a right to a life of their own, and probably they want to PUKE whenever they see a puppet, but I am still disappointed with them.

Jim Henson gives us something special. Brian has sent that off to the Dr. Frankenstein. Too bad, I am not accepting as an excuse that they "need to live their own life." YES have your own life, and let somebody else run the Muppets for a while. Try some NEW stuff.

The Henson kids are multimillionaires. Would it KILL THEM to lease the Muppets for one dollar to somebody cool like Pixar for a while and find out what happens? Well? Would they be in the poorhouse? Would they die?

Kermit sang about IMAGINATION so much......I think Brian has no imagination at all.

The end result is wonderful Muppets are sold off to a stupid company that treats kids stuff as kid stuff, and the Muppets won't be very "deep" or "philisophical" anymore. They will be stupid from now on.

Maybe all you guys are happy with more exposure for Muppets that have no soul, but already the Disney people will never call them "Jim Henson's" Muppets ever again.

The thing about Ashman is different. It isn't like Hunt or anybody else or AIDS or anything else. Jim created the Muppets and they all had his philosophy. Hunt worked for Jim and Ashman worked for Disney, but Disney is TREATING Jim Henson as if he was "just" a hired hand with an ENTIRE CREATION and that is why I hate Disney for one reason at least.

Wait until you check out the crap that Disney makes

So many here believe press releases. Who can anybody trust? I feel like the Muppets are killed and now Disney will wave their dead bodies around in a sickening display. Am I supposed to be happy?

No

 

[MuppetNewsFlash]

I am saying that if the Muppets started to get big again, Disney would say "That is enough of that. We are MOUSE after all, and not FROG."

How can Disney be both only in this to make a profit and at the same time they would stop making a profit if Muppets were too popular?

 

[BoyRaisin2]

Like I said before, it's NOT a popularity contest between Mickey Mouse and Kermit the Frog. If the Muppets were to become a phenomenon again, Disney would be pleased because THEY'RE the ones making millions of dollars off them!

You can argue whether they'll do a good job or not and whether the product will be entertaining, but for goodness' sake, if Disney's not going to care whether Pooh or the Pixar films, or ESPN for that matter, are getting more attention than Mickey Mouse, they're not going to care if Kermit and Piggy are getting more media exposure. They're Disney characters that are getting Disney money.

They're not going to "have enough" of the Muppets unless it becomes such a stale franchise that they can't do anything more with it; they're not going to pull the plug when/if the characters become more popular. The "Mouse" is not going to be jealous.

 

[a_Mickey_Muppet]

You can argue whether they'll do a good job or not and whether the product will be entertaining, but for goodness' sake, if Disney's not going to care whether Pooh or the Pixar films, or ESPN for that matter, are getting more attention than Mickey Mouse, they're not going to care if Kermit and Piggy are getting more media exposure. They're Disney characters that are getting Disney money.

Yeah!!!! Go BOYRAISIN2, lol Like Kermit HIM SELF sayed... "Mickey and I are old buddys" "we're BOTH members of F.A.S.A." So see they BOTH have been "buddys" b4 we even foundout on Muppets @ WDW gang!

BoyRain2: They're Disney characters

Ahhhh lol, Ive been watin YEARS to here that!

 

[Carpeteria]

Wait until you check out the crap that Disney makes

I would suggest you take your own advice before deciding that this is the end of the Muppet legacy. No one can say right now for sure how this will turn out. If this results in more exposure for a new generation of Muppet fans (outside of commercials, the West Wing and Weezer videos) then I am all for it. Muppets do not get the exposure or attention they deserve, and this will only help the brand gain a new following and very likely produce some great new material.

Why do you assume that, because the Disney name (and money) are now behind the Muppets, that anything Muppet related will now suffer creatively? There are many different facets within the Disney camp, in any case. Films like Lilo and Stitch (which is some of Disney's best and most up-to-date work so far) are completely seperate from those like Brother Bear or Lion King 1 1/2, etc. Let's all just give this a chance; what other alternative do we have?

 

[Mark Filton]

Sure, Disney is gonna want to make money with Muppets, but put yourself in another's shoes

Let's say Henson bought Mickey. They would want to make a buck with the mouse, but if the mouse took off big time, they would say "wait a minute," that's enough. Focus on the frog.

"I would suggest you take your own advice before deciding that this is the end of the Muppet legacy. No one can say right now for sure how this will turn out"

Oh? Well how about Disney removing Jim Henson's name from Kermit forever? How is that for a start?

"this will only help the brand gain a new following and very likely produce some great new material."

LIKELY not. You take the Disney "spin" at face value. I stand with Steve Jobs, who walked away from Disney and said they are boring. And like people said before, what the heck new movies do you get with Mickey and the gang? Well?

But I want a big audience too. But a big audience of crap versus a small one of good stuff. That is the choice.

Muppets successful in dollars or quality? Which is more important?

If they don't make it big, they shrink anyways. What is the thing we are losing? We are losing greatness. Disney guys don't care. It's just a job to them, and people move on. Anybody makes 3 stupid movies and a cartoon show about "The Mighty Ducks" is making CRAP, not MAGIC.

Look, anybody can make a Muppet these days. All puppet characters in TV today look like Muppets, so it doesn't matter anymore. Disney's Muppets are just dead, empty shells that look like something we loved. They're just making more stupid kiddy stuff like everybody else. Face up to it.

So why am I upset? Because the only thing that makes the Muppets different is the magic, which is the intelligence and quality and artistry. I would love it if the Henson kids had a love of their own Dad's Muppets, but THEY DO NOT

We are all just NOT LUCKY that Jim's kids have not interest in the Muppets. Like I said about the HENSON BUILDING, the selling means they are SICK of it all and want OUT of puppets, and I PREDICTED RIGHT.

What can you or I do? Nothing.

The Henson kids wash their hands of Kermit, and they weren't great business people, and they have not much imagination or love of Muppets. They want to do other things in life. FINE! It is their RIGHT.

But what an UNLUCKY shame it is that they walk away and sell to a stupid kiddy video company.

Sure, maybe more success, more money, more exposure, but all they had was that special magic.

It is gone now. Muppets are just another kiddy video.

I wish it were different, that Jerry Juhl was still around, that Brian had a love for Muppets like Sophia Coppola likes to be in movies like her Dad, but...

...Brian doesn't want to make a career of Muppets...

...so they are now DEAD.

You all want me to be happy about that?

 

[Luke]

Like I said about the HENSON BUILDING, the selling means they are SICK of it all and want OUT of puppets, and I PREDICTED RIGHT.

No you didn't. The Henson's are gonna be making the Muppet shows and movies for at least another three years. You say they might suffer creatively but then why hire the Henson Company as consultants for further years if Disney don't care about the qualtiy? Of course they do - if the Muppets fell flat they'd lose a $60-$100 million investment. Henson use puppets sometimes in Farscape which is getting a push and own the Creature Shop which make puppets. The workshop at Henson will likely still make the Muppet puppets (as well as Sesame ones) and this doesn't mean to say that new properties they develop won't use puppets. If Brian Henson hated puppets THAT much then why would they have Rygel in his pet project, Farscape? The Henson Company have definitely NOT got out of puppetry. If anything, the Disney deal means there will be MORE puppetry for them to work on.

I know you seem upset with ever move the Muppets make Mark but i think you could probably do with a little more knowledge and a little less of the angry tone and long rants. We've got the point ok?

 

[BoyRaisin2]

Let's say Henson bought Mickey. They would want to make a buck with the mouse, but if the mouse took off big time, they would say "wait a minute," that's enough. Focus on the frog.

Muppets successful in dollars or quality? Which is more important?

Look, anybody can make a Muppet these days. All puppet characters in TV today look like Muppets, so it doesn't matter anymore. Disney's Muppets are just dead, empty shells that look like something we loved. They're just making more stupid kiddy stuff like everybody else. Face up to it.

1. Well, Bear has been a major hit since '97. Farscape was a major hit during its Sci-Fi run. Do you think the corporate leaders at Henson CARED if these shows were bigger than Kermit? No, it's their product. They WANT it to be successful. Kermit is the icon of Henson, but that's not the end of their creative vision, and it's obvious that Kermit wasn't the "focus" during those years. Mickey is the icon of Disney, it doesn't mean they don't have OTHER shows and movies that they want to do amazingly well (i.e. Pooh or "Finding Nemo"). Nobody is going to say "wait a minute" is their stuff is successful! No media executive thinks that way.

2. Muppets successful in dollars or quality? Yeah, you can argue or speculate whether the Muppet product will be GOOD, but if it is GOOD and it's making a profit, Disney is not to going to bite their nails because the Muppets are making more TV appearances than Mickey Mouse. They don't think that way. The company is bigger than Mickey Mouse, just like Henson is bigger than Kermit the Frog.

3. Disney's Muppets aren't ANYTHING yet, for The Jim Henson Company still owns them. Jim Henson's Muppets 2004 aren't exactly as the same as Jim Henson's Muppets 1990. Doesn't mean that's a horrible thing (sorta), it's just the way it is. Under Disney ownership, they'll get the kind of distribution and marketing they deserve (which is the POINT of the deal), and hopefully the quality will be good as well. We'll see what happens, 'cause it hasn't happened yet.