Disney/Pixar In General

The other thing with this is that technically only the screenplay is being revoked, as other elements could still be up in the air such as music and visual likenesses of these films. This is why the Friday the 13th series stalled, because Jason’s hockey mask and adult self did not appear in the original film that got reclaimed and the director/producer is trying to contest ownership of that, in addition to the claim itself. Another wrinkle is that only domestic rights are being reverted, so hypothetically a studio could make an international film of these properties but not release it in the US or a new film would need to go through the original studio for an international release if it was picked up by a different studio.

Predator for instance is something I could see this happening to, as while the original film was a script that got mailed to Fox and the first sequel written by the Thomas Brothers, which could give them leverage, the Predator look was famously not finalized until during filming. I could easily see Disney trying to contest its likeness as a result.

On the other hand, it was noted by others that David Mamet and Stephen King have managed to do this with several adaptations of their work and Wes Craven’s estate reobtained the original Nightmare On Elm Street. In the case of Nightmare, it was noted there would be no difficulty in making a new film if someone wanted to, with no legal red tape being involved.

In that case, I would imagine Gary K. Wolf will be wanting to pitch a more accurate adaptation of his book if (or when?) the copyright goes back to him, but I'm not sure who'd be interested in it.

Maybe Netflix?

Or would it not fit the agenda of current Netflix, which seems to be maintaining its members by reeling in mainstream-pandering content like the gloriousness that is Big Mouth all the while tossing good stuff under the bus after the one season?

EDIT: Reading what really happened in WCRR, it turns out that Roger doesn't really die, but he faked his own death with a doppelgänger of his or something. I officially don't know what I'm talking about.

Edited by TargetmasterJoe on Oct 7th 2019 at 12:20:03 PM

Funny, I thought I read that Gary Wolf not only thought that the Roger Rabbit film was superior to his book, he even wrote two book-only sequels to the movie.

Gary K. Wolf evidently liked the Disney film, because he wrote another Roger Rabbit book where the characters are more like the movie versions and the original novel is written off as a dream.

At one point he pitched an idea to Disney to remake the Martin-Lewis film The Stooge with Mickey Mouse and Roger. That evidently has been going nowhere.

But, in all honesty, if he wants the rights back let him have them. Who Framed Roger Rabbit could only have been made once. No amount of creative alchemy can recreate that again.

Not to mention that Richard Williams is no longer alive... it would be nigh impossible to find someone as good as him.

Once again, I don't know what I'm talking about.

But yeah, it'd be pretty tough to do another Roger Rabbit anything, given Richard Williams' passing...

They could do an alternate take on it. As I understand it, Wolf's original book was more a send-up of comic strips than classic cartoons, complete with all the characters leaving behind speech balloons as they talked. It also had way more overt segregation themes. That kind of movie would be open to a wildly different visual aesthetic.

Personally, I think it would lend itself far more to a comic adaptation. The speech bubble text and no voices thing is actually a major plot point and kind of a world building element, but having an entire half of the cast that we don't read through subtitles but text boxes built into the setting itself might... not translate well and become difficult. Also becomes A LOT more work for localization.

I would imagine Disney will try to keep the rights as they need. Roger is still part of Toontown and they're not removing him despite the new attraction going in.

Disney Channels Closing In Australia, New Zealand & Other Countries After Disney+ Launches

I disagree. I think it'd translate poorly to a comic adaptation because then there's nothing differentiating the toons from the regular humans, who inevitably would also bend to the rules of the comic medium.

I feel like a comic book could differentiate the toons' speech bubbles vs. the humans'.

At the very least, reading in a film medium is super iffy. They usually don't mix in my opinion.

It's the same reason Bonkers didn't always work, except maybe in its earliest days when the humans had grungier animation.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Oct 8th 2019 at 7:50:27 AM

To be fair, you had the constraints of a TV budget.

I'm sure all you folks have heard that our World Famous Jungle Cruise is getting a movie staring the Rock. Look, there he is now! (Points to large rock)

Edited by megaeliz on Oct 14th 2019 at 4:00:04 AM

It's weird to see the Rock in an old-timey sailor suit.

Looks like Disney+ is tweeting out their entire catalog. https://twitter.com/disneyplus/status/1183715553057239040

I'll be honest with you, much as I despise the fact that streaming is turning into cable, albeit more expensive, we're getting a hell of a lot of animated TV Disney's barely acknowledged all these years. Recess, Teacher's Pet, Bonkers, Quack Pack... even all the classic Marvel shows... Can you believe it?

Of course, there's a few titles that should be on there but are not - Shnookums And Meat, Pepper Ann, Dave The Barbarian... and, of course, The Tick. But there's always hope, I guess.

Will X Men be one of them?

Yes. For whatever reason the '67 Spider Man isn't on there, though. Disney owns it. They remastered it back in the early 00s. I don't know why it's not there.

Something to akin to that swing/pop/jazz/R&B/Frank Sinata-esque/mobster/50's-60's/prohibition/energetic kind of music. What I'm talking about is stuff like Facilier singing "Friends on the Other Side" or that scene from The Mask when Stanley is leading an entire street full of police officers in song and dance. Anything with echoes and energy and really nice suits and that edgy, smooth criminal type of feel.

I don't know if all of the things I listed really go together but I'd like to see more of them in animated form.

Edited by Soble on Oct 14th 2019 at 8:14:28 AM

x4 ... Bambi came before Dumbo, not after it. In fact Bambi's failure to recoup it's money was partially what made Disney make the cheaper looking Dumbo...

EDIT: So looking at the list, it does appear The Muppet Show, or Muppet Babies (1984), or even The Muppets Take Manhattan won't be on Disney+, at least to start with. A shame, but for the Muppet Shows that's to be expected (surprised about Manhatten). All the other Muppet Movies are on Disney+, though.

Edited by DingoWalley1 on Oct 14th 2019 at 11:43:13 AM

Disney doesn't actually own The Muppets Take Manhattan. Sony does.

There's no excuse for them not putting the Muppet Show on this, though. You can say, well, there's all those songs they have to license, but they did it for the DV Ds. Why not do it again for streaming?

Edited by Aldo930 on Oct 14th 2019 at 8:52:07 AM

There sure are a lot of goofy live action movies in the mix (looking at you, The Shaggy DA).

Some of the TV series seem to be missing - Davey Crockett for instance.

But they've got Sammy the Way-Out Seal, and White Wilderness aka the lemming snuff film. (They enacted the myth that lemmings commit suicide.)

Edited by alanh on Oct 14th 2019 at 1:03:57 AM

Disney just released a 3 hour video on everything coming to Disney+.