The Mouse is Wooing Miss Piggy

[Drtooth]

Well, I'm still kinda worried about Warners. Look at what they did to the Pink Panther. They made him a girls only character. I bet I got a weird look while I purchased the Pink Panther Bobbing Head, though. (This is assuming that the MGM character got bought out in the Time/Warner Merger) Anyway, If Disney purchases Henson, the only way I'll sleep at night is if the Muppet people have creative controll over the characters. But anyway, I've got to say that I like cartoon Network's line up, mainly because the shows are created by cartoonists and not the board of directors that killed Saturday morning in the 80's (As a firm believer in John K. I say that) I especially think that Cow and Chicken and Dexter (as well as Power Puffs) are much more imaginative (and funny) than the bull they have on broadcast, non-cable TV (How many times must they copy Pokemon before someone realises that they're all the same?) Regardless, I hope that this doesn't effect the Palisades toy line!

 

[frogboy4]

And who's decision was it to make the Pink Panther talk a decade ago? Total heresy!

 

[Jrobert]

Disney supporter

I personally will vote for Disney in the buyout (even though I think we all know it's the best choice and probably inevitable).

It was not too long ago that I heard of some of the creative thoughts for Disneyland and some of the other Disney parks that were chalk full of nothing but greatness for the Muppets. All of these thoughts were from the past before the last Disney/Henson deal fell through. But I think it would be amazing to see at least part of those plans come through to have things like the Muppet characters in the parks, additional attractions, shows, parades!

Muppet would be taken to a new level in live entertainment.

Just my .02

 

[danielromens]

Here's a real responce and not just me and Luke playing post tennis.

I really feel Jim Hill is looking into things a little much on this. I actually agree with Luke. Goelz is a good man, and come on, he's got to work. Why can't these guys do freelance or outside work. We see Henson puppeteers on Sesame Street, no longer owned by Henson, we've seen them work for Nickelodean, we see them work for Between the Lions, yet it's only when Disney comes knocking do the wheels of conspiricy get put into motion.

I do find it odd that they'd team up Disney and Henson Pictures though. That's odd. What happened to Sony. I just don't think working with all these rivals is a good idea, or maybe it is. Keep your options open and just work, who cares who it's with. I suppose we should just be glad they are doing something. On the other hand.....ugh let's not start that.

I'm going to stick by my regular opinion, granted Disney is big, but that's just it. Bigger is not always better. Disney has a million characters, what makes you think the Muppets will be anymore important to them. Where's Doug now, what's going to become of Pokemon (not that I care). All they're doing is buying the competition so they can make the money for themselves. Do you think they buy these things for the love of the product. Please. If that's true let my skull explode in Muppetty fashion. Well it's still there. Also it sickens me to see there name then plastered on someone elses creation. Did you know that Tim Burton's Nightmare Before Christmas sat undone for years. I did a paper on it a while back. Here's the back story that I remember.

Burton worked as an animater for Disney during their Black Cauldron days. Burton created some of the characters on company time, thus they are owned by the company. He had pitched the idea to them and they turned it down saying it would never fly. Time passes, Burton gains notariety as a director and voila, Nightmare is made. Yet not by Disney, but by Touchstone Pictures, which is owned by Disney. Not knowing if the project would be a success they did not want to put the movie out under their label. More time passes, Nightmare becomes a cult classic and gains a huge fan base. Ala peanut butter sandwhiches, suddenly we see Nightmare merchandise in the friggen Disney stores. So this is the treatment we want for Kermit. F*** that!

That's not to say any other company is less greedy, but Disney has made an art of it. I love Henson, but at least I'm realistic that they aren't the same. I don't see this reality in some of the pro Disney folks here.

I'm sure some of these other companies could easily be good for the longevity of the characters. In my opinion Dis has enough on it's plate to worry about. Let someone who can use the characters have em. I think Viacom would be great personally. Nickelodean is a kids station, but their work has an uncanny ability to span the age gaps. This is something Disney has seem to have lost.

 

[frogboy4]

I object to the accusation of not being realistic as you have suggested. I am not exctatic about a Disney buyout, but I would favor it over the other companies you have listed. Sure the others have some great content, but once the novelty wears off from their projects they shelve them. Disney has a way of keeping things in perpetual circulation. I do see that there are many cons to Disney, but there are cons for all the other companies. Being a harsh critic of Disney (as can be seen in many threads) I still feel that they could be the best bet. We'll see. It's not like we actually have control over the situation.

 

[Muppets1985]

Originally posted by danielromens
**Where's Doug now**

Try Toon Disney or Disney Channel. Disney still owns the rights to Doug (not the Nick Doug which I hate by the way!). Worry worry worry... Disney is the best Company for them point blank!!!

 

[Zack the Dog]

radionate

Well there was not that many All Dogs Go to Heaven Videos, i mean at least the 2nd movie was in theaters, the TV show based off the 2nd movie was pretty good and the christmas video was based off the tv show, so it worked out good....land before time is another story, or is it like 8 stories now? An American Tale took a turn for the worst as well.
the thing that kept All Dogs alive would be the great Dom Deluise! Itchy wouldn't be Itchy with out him! he's the gule that kept it together. they had a few series so the show did well and was very funny. Denny's even had plushes of Charile and Itchy when the Christmas video came out so the marketing was well.|



Zack)Rowlf the, Always have been an All Dogs fan, just like the Muppets,Dog.

 

[Zack the Dog]

Steve

Hi Steve, Yeah Doug is littered all over Disney AND Toon Disney!!!That goes for that Peper Ann Pig as well! Toon Disney got rid of TaleSpin to shove Doug & Peper ann there! TALESPIN! why TaleSpin? one of there best cartoon shows other then DuckTales.

Zack)Rowlf the,they got rid of Bumb in the night as well,Dog.

 

[frogboy4]

I think the original All Dogs Go to Heaven was a good film, but all the ones that came afterward were really poor quality. They took a plunge in frame-rate as well - it appeared to be a cheesy 6fps. It's just not considered high quality work by industry standards and I didn't enjoy the projects either. Fival Goes West was a kind of weak idea, but the animation was fantastic so I found some value in it, but not much.

 

[Luke]

Hey Daniel

I get where you are coming from - basically, yes, i have given my own interpretation of the news before and in some people's opinions it might have been seen exactly in the same way as Jim's has been interpreted here, but i posted on the forum along with all the other joe's here and as such it is just seen as a fans personal comment - Jim Hill's article is published on the main site and it kinda gives the impression that 'Muppet Central' supports what he is saying. Maybe there should be a disclaimer ? I do also think that myself saying that it would be easier and less controversial for Brian Henson to leave JHC at a point in the future with less fuss than if he was chairman is more common sense than a 'conspiracy theory' - certainly nowhere near as slanderous as implying a Muppeteer is being given work not on his own merits but simply as a 'bung' to accept any sale to Disney.

As for Toughpigs - I have written one series of articles for it, and have contributed two or three things for MC. When i posted to Ken about Toughpigs i was giving my own personal view of how i saw the style at 'Toughpigs' and i feel that it's a kind of loving satire. I'm not saying that this makes it right or wrong, though i can see Danny's viewpoint and you have to remember that he was writing NOT about anything Ken had said on this forum but the OFFICIAL dates given out - it is indeed a special insight that Ken has given to MC readers and so they can perhaps be a bit more understanding but Danny was writing from the viewpoint of those not privy to this info. When i said 'its your fault' to Ken i did so in a humorous way - you can't seriously expect to hype something up so much to fans and them not be slightly dissapointed when the product doesn't turn up.

I do think there is a world of difference from the articles at Toughpigs to Jim Hill's article here. Things written at Toughpigs in this style are presented in a humorous way - Jim Hill's article is written more as an informative piece, like you are being given insight into whats really happening. Although i think they are as you say - B.S - i don't have a problem with his personal opinions regarding the business side of Disney/Henson being aired, but i think it should have been pointed out CLEARLY that these are Jim Hill's personal insights and may not be correct, and are certainly NOT the opinions of the people who contribute to and support this site.

The major thing i do have a problem with is the Dave Goelz references and picture - it is NOT appropriate to suggest that a kind and honest, and incredibly experienced muppeteer such as Dave is somehow being given jobs as a 'sweetner' to accept any kind of Disney deal unless you have proof. It's quite a slanderous thing to say, especially as we all know how unhappy the Muppeteers have been about a possible sale to Disney. Dave has been very supportive of this site giving an interview and also endorsing MC by wearing a 'pin' at Muppetfest. I think maybe the 'powers that be' should have remembered that before giving weight to Jim Hill's allegations. Yes - it's a valid observation to say that it's interesting that Dave got the job voicing a Disney character, but it went too far by implying he got it as some kind of 'bung'.

I've actually now gone and read some of Jim Hill's other articles and i feel that compared to the others (most of which are very good, and informative) this Henson one seems rushed and ill judged. Jim is obviously used to writing Disney stuff and it shows, in fact this would be right at home on a Disney site. What i'm saying is that when you are writing things for a Henson site you have to consider things from that point of view - the Henson company are nothing like Disney and don't operate anything like them so a lot of the conclusions that the article has come to seem way off base, perhaps it might have been kinder for the editor to have gently pointed this out before the publication and re-worked it rather than lead the writer into the lions den.

I just don't understand what this site achieves by making allegations about how Dave gets his professional work - it does absolutely nothing to either prove or disprove the main point of the article and it makes a mockery of the respect and support we all have for him.