4 ms·

Disney picked up pixar and didn't screw it up (too) much.

nitrogen 13y ago
I've wondered whether Pixar would have ventured into making more grown-up movies if they hadn't been bought by Disney (not that I don't enjoy their current stuff, even as an adult).
- thedudemabry 13y ago
  A very good point. Pixar is notably a huge fan of Ghibli studios, which has ventured into less child-friendly fare in the past. But they have always been a big proponent of universal stories, stories which do not demean children nor sacrifice their integrity to subtextually cater to adults. I would bet that they would be making the same movies that they are now, but Disney would not have released Frozen (as a childless 20-something duder, I was absolutely ecstatic watching that old-style Disney musical.)
Piromancer 13y ago
Cars 2.
frandroid 13y ago
Yeah but Pixar was already a mature business minting money by that point, with a mature business model, which is very similar to Disney's: Make animation. Release to the big screen. Profit. No need to tinker. It's not like when you buy a startup that's bleeding money with 50 engineers that you could add to your existing products.
- joelrunyon 13y ago
  Yeah - but the parent company didn't make a distinction about startups - just big evil companies acquiring smaller ones.
devcpp 13y ago
Disney had extensive successful experience with animated movies prior to acquiring Pixar. Facebook with games? HN's community and most people who would buy something solely for games would disagree. But who knows, maybe we'll see Facebook operate a successful diversification strategy by perfectly catering to both casuals and hardcore gamers. Unlikely but one can dream...
bsenftner 13y ago
Actually, it was the other way around: Pixar took over Disney and they kept both names going, but the entirety of Pixar's management team replaced their counterparts at Disney. Sounds to me like Pixar did the taking over there.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > Actually, it was the other way around: Pixar took over Disney and they kept both names going, but the entirety of Pixar's management team replaced their counterparts at Disney. Sounds to me like Pixar did the taking over there. Yeah, corporate acquisitions are often not in substance what they are superficially described as...in technical terms, Disney "bought" Pixar, but they did so entirely with Disney stock, $7.4 billion dollars worth, and made Steve Jobs by far Disney's largest single shareholder, and, while Pixar remained a distinct entity within Disney, much of Disney's management was replaced with Pixar management (who retained their roles in Pixar, as well.)

I've wondered whether Pixar would have ventured into making more grown-up movies if they hadn't been bought by Disney (not that I don't enjoy their current stuff, even as an adult).

thedudemabry 13y ago
A very good point. Pixar is notably a huge fan of Ghibli studios, which has ventured into less child-friendly fare in the past. But they have always been a big proponent of universal stories, stories which do not demean children nor sacrifice their integrity to subtextually cater to adults. I would bet that they would be making the same movies that they are now, but Disney would not have released Frozen (as a childless 20-something duder, I was absolutely ecstatic watching that old-style Disney musical.)

Piromancer 13y ago

Cars 2.

frandroid 13y ago

Yeah but Pixar was already a mature business minting money by that point, with a mature business model, which is very similar to Disney's: Make animation. Release to the big screen. Profit. No need to tinker. It's not like when you buy a startup that's bleeding money with 50 engineers that you could add to your existing products.

joelrunyon 13y ago
Yeah - but the parent company didn't make a distinction about startups - just big evil companies acquiring smaller ones.

devcpp 13y ago

Disney had extensive successful experience with animated movies prior to acquiring Pixar. Facebook with games? HN's community and most people who would buy something solely for games would disagree. But who knows, maybe we'll see Facebook operate a successful diversification strategy by perfectly catering to both casuals and hardcore gamers. Unlikely but one can dream...

bsenftner 13y ago

Actually, it was the other way around: Pixar took over Disney and they kept both names going, but the entirety of Pixar's management team replaced their counterparts at Disney. Sounds to me like Pixar did the taking over there.

dragonwriter 13y ago
> Actually, it was the other way around: Pixar took over Disney and they kept both names going, but the entirety of Pixar's management team replaced their counterparts at Disney. Sounds to me like Pixar did the taking over there. Yeah, corporate acquisitions are often not in substance what they are superficially described as...in technical terms, Disney "bought" Pixar, but they did so entirely with Disney stock, $7.4 billion dollars worth, and made Steve Jobs by far Disney's largest single shareholder, and, while Pixar remained a distinct entity within Disney, much of Disney's management was replaced with Pixar management (who retained their roles in Pixar, as well.)