New Pics: Jason Segel and the Muppets at the L.A. movie set

[Drtooth]

Isn't it funny how a lot of us ol' vets on MC have gone from Disney haters to being in love with the company? I never woulda imagined in 2001, heck 2004 that we'd be where we are now. I thought the Muppets were just going to be shelved. And yeah, that whole Oz period pretty much made me wonder if ANYthing was going to happen with our gang.

All it takes is ONE bad project to kill a franchise, be it a relaunch or not. Look at what happened to Batman after Shoeshiner got to them. I've been on the "Why Oz sucked and ruined our chances of anything" soap box for ages now, so I guess everyone knows my stance on it. The sad thing is, Disney didn't have all that much involved with the movie sucking... I still say their buyout rushed the film to an extent... and I really think that (at the time) they somehow goaded them into having Dorothy be a pop star... but the direction, the look, the story, the gratuitous American Idol tie in... they just soured the whole thing, and it's no wonder why it did so poorly with fans and others. Though, they were foolish enough to debut it Star Wars episode 3 weekend opposite the Daytime Emmys.

But the fact ANYTHING landed on how well that movie did was why we hated the Disney buyout in the first place. But things are pretty good now.

 

[matleo]

Isn't it funny how a lot of us ol' vets on MC have gone from Disney haters to being in love with the company? I never woulda imagined in 2001, heck 2004 that we'd be where we are now. I thought the Muppets were just going to be shelved.

I think a BIG part of that credit goes to Bob Iger and how he has handled things since taking over. It seems like he's very open to not just having bean-counters run thing but also making sure that creative people have say in things. I think Disney as a company itself has just changed so much in the last 5-6 years and it's ultimately been a good thing for the muppets.

--Matt

 

[Nick22]

For the thousandth time, I'm not being negative, I'm trying to be realistic.

nope yer being negative. in what way is it realistic to shelf a movie that's already in production?

 

[Drtooth]

There have been EXTREME cases, I just can't think up any examples off the top of my head. it's a blue moon type of deal, and NOTHING we should worry about. I've heard of films in production with indefinite delays, but they're too far in production to shelf completely.... this film, again barring the Apocalypse, will happen.

 

[Slackbot]

One example: Roger Corman's Fantastic Four movie. But that case is so far into the twilight zone, I'd call it the exception that proves the rule.

 

[Drtooth]

Too bad Christian Bale's blowup didn't get Terminator Salvation shelved. He would have deserved an honorary Oscar for stopping that one.

But yeah... something very VERY stupid would have to happen for the film to be shut down. Good think Andy and Randy don't have a part in the film.

 

[Mupp]

I think a BIG part of that credit goes to Bob Iger and how he has handled things since taking over. It seems like he's very open to not just having bean-counters run thing but also making sure that creative people have say in things. I think Disney as a company itself has just changed so much in the last 5-6 years and it's ultimately been a good thing for the muppets.

--Matt

I agree.

Generally speaking, the Walt Disney Company has been much better since Eisner left.

I know I keep mentioning this, but one of the best things is that John Lasseter is chief creative officer at Disney Animation in addition to Pixar. He is also principal creative adviser at Walt Disney Imagineering.

 

[Mupp]

I never woulda imagined in 2001, heck 2004 that we'd be where we are now. I thought the Muppets were just going to be shelved. And yeah, that whole Oz period pretty much made me wonder if ANYthing was going to happen with our gang.

As I understand it...
by 2004, Eisner probably did think of the Muppets as just a trophy.

Although that's just something I have read, I'm not sure how accurate it is. Still, it is telling that things didn't start getting better for the Muppets (and the Walt Disney Company in general) until Eisner left the company.

 

[frogboy4]

Eisner did bring the Disney Company back from the ledge in the 80's, but later proved to be its greatest liability. He did initiate the Muppet deal in the first place, but was also the reason it became sour even before Jim's death. Eisner is the reason Disney lost the Muppets, lost Katzenberg to DreamWorks, lost Spielberg's support with the Roger Rabbit power struggle, shut down their traditional animation department and nearly lost Pixar! The man couldn't play well with others. He dulled Disney's shine in getting rid of all the magic that makes the company special. The Muppet sale was his swan song, but I agree that it likely resulted from the idea of his exiting the Disney Company. They have a way to go before they fit the image that I grew up knowing, but they're certainly on their way and I'm glad the Muppets have gone to them. I've mostly supported the Disney sale. Most of my concerns have been put at ease.

 

[Mupp]

I want to add that even though things are looking good right now and I'm glad that the the Muppet Show characters are with Disney, I am VERY glad that Disney does NOT own the Sesame Street characters.

The Sesame Street characters deserve to live on forever on public television.