1. Welcome to the Muppet Central Forum!
    You are viewing our forum as a guest. Join our free community to post topics and start private conversations. Please contact us if you need help with registration or your account login.

  2. Help Muppet Central Radio
    We need your help to continue Muppet Central Radio. Show your support and listen regularly and often via Radionomy's website, official apps and the WinAmp Media Player. Learn More

    Dismiss Notice
  3. "Muppet Guys Talking" Debuts On-line
    Watch the inspiring documentary "Muppet Guys Talking", read fan reactions and let us know your thoughts on the Muppet release of the year.

    Dismiss Notice
  4. Sesame Street Season 48
    Sesame Street's 48th season officially began Saturday November 18 on HBO. After you see the new episodes, post here and let us know your thoughts.

    Dismiss Notice

If you support Disney owning the Muppets...

Discussion in 'Muppet Headlines' started by Philip Kippel, Sep 6, 2007.

  1. CensoredAlso

    CensoredAlso Well-Known Member

    But like, doesn't the fire burn the marshmellows? Hmm, there's some symbolism there! On the other hand, marshmellows and fire can together to form a tasty treat! Even more symbolic! ;)
  2. BeakerSqueedom

    BeakerSqueedom Well-Known Member

    What a genius you are!

    *Looks at the marshmellow and the fire reverently*

    Together! We'll make smores for MC members!

    >_> and sexy muppeteers.

    Well, I find myself going off topic and getting very hyper...


  3. frogboy4

    frogboy4 Inactive Member

    Nothing ever gets my complete support, and I still don't know if the Disney deal is a good thing. One thing for certain is that Disney will probably own the Muppets forever. They tend not to sell such acquisitions. There have been interesting and disappointing developments. Things got off-track for a while. Looks like they're finding a way back and I'm interested in the results. Disney gets my support until I am given a very good reason why not to. ;)

    :attitude: On another note - Why the "muffining" and attempted censorship of this thread? I don't see what contradicts the forum guidelines. Maybe I missed something. :sympathy:
  4. BeakerSqueedom

    BeakerSqueedom Well-Known Member

    Well, it is the type of critiscm that does not really help the other members.
    It kinda causes an uproar to some degree. The forums were made only for the interests of the people. You understand?


    The forums kinda was meant for it to be pleasing rather than upsetting.

  5. CensoredAlso

    CensoredAlso Well-Known Member

    Well to be fair, I don't think it's just the critiques of Disney that creates the negative feeling. People have made a lot of good points on the subject. Again, it's us sometimes not being able to let people have their opinions and move on, on both sides of the argument. I'm not pointing out anyone specifically, it's just in general. :)

    I really don't mind the debating. But it should be a debate, rather than an argument. :)
  6. TheJimHensonHour

    TheJimHensonHour Well-Known Member

    Like I said I don't agree with everything they're doing but either side ranting and raving like mad fraggles isn't going to solve anything.
    I don't see any problem with fans posting what they see the company holding their favorite characters should be doing. Well as long as it's constructive and not destructive.
    Forming little I'm better than you groups is not a good things and I'm sure Jim would frown upon than. ;)
  7. CensoredAlso

    CensoredAlso Well-Known Member

    Well I do think it would be nicer if we could just debate things civilly, rather than separating ourselves because we don't agree.
  8. frogboy4

    frogboy4 Inactive Member

    The Muppet Central site and forum were around a while before I started coming around in late 99 (the old Delphi days). Over the past seven years I have seen many debates of this sort. It is a healthy topic and part of the bread-and-butter of what a Muppet forum is (and always has been) about.

    MC is a wonderful place for fans to enjoy, but it's not all (spectacular) menus ;) , cute smileys :flirt: and product-pushing. It's also about friendly connections and healthy (sometimes lively and respectful) debate.

    Getting back to topic. I pop by the Disney Store in San Francisco's Union Square every month or so. I know the ownership of the stores isn't directly Disney anymore - they license the name and supply products etc. However, there's hardly any Donald anything. Try to find a Donald Duck mug -actually in the Disney Store- and most of the time you will be disappointed. This is a top Disney character! Second in command if you ask most Disney enthusiasts.

    There is a method to the madness (I've been told) and they do hold back the duck so he doesn't out-shine the mouse. Not sure how much of that is accurate but his absence at times doesn't mean Disney doesn't want him. They just try to find the right place for Donald Duck.

    Other Disney owned characters are chosen for promotion quarterly/seasonally. Not just with media endorsement, but they rotate the characters as not to over-expose them. I truly believe they are doing the same with the Muppets. Seeing where they fit.
  9. CensoredAlso

    CensoredAlso Well-Known Member

    Exactly, these debates bring out a lot of great points and occasionally make things more interesting. We should be able to discuss without getting hostile. :)

    I won't pretend to know how Disney or any company runs things. But I've seen enough of the real world to know that people aren't so strict about what's "out of date" as companies seem to think they are. There seems to be this sense of "Oh this is out of date, no one cares." Those statements are huge generalizations and don't represent the real world.
  10. MelissaY1

    MelissaY1 Well-Known Member

    Exactly. To post a thread in a public forum and say "Post here only if you agree with it" is ridiculous. You have tons of different people on here with tons of different opinions. What's the point of having a public forum then if you can't voice your opinion? If you want people who are only going to agree with YOUR views, then make your own website, make it exclusive so only like minded people can join it and then see how quickly it becomes BORING. That's one of the reasons I like this forum: because we can discuss and debate about something we all love!
  11. frogboy4

    frogboy4 Inactive Member

    Hmmm. Seen it happen and totally agree with that. Still I'm inching quietly away and whistling. He he! :o

    Long time ago I was a moderator here (kind of honorary because of the staff stuff). That stopped when I took a loooong hiatus. Thank goodness! It really is a tougher task than one might think. I've been asked to mod other forums and turned it down flat. Not where my gifts are. They do a good (thankless) job here!

    It seems these days that some companies don't create products - not because the property isn't popular, but that they perceive that it's not popular enough. I see a sort of sliding scale while corporations seem to see products as either hot or niche. I guess most companies want to bet on the sure thing - but of course that's how "turkeys" are born! :zany:
  12. CensoredAlso

    CensoredAlso Well-Known Member

    Yeah I can see that, whatever will make the most money fast enough.
  13. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member

    Listen... I'm going to say this once and only once. We shouldn't just sit around saying "ooh, we got 2 box sets, and a dozen appearances on horrible horrible shows (The telethon excluded. I'm glad Disney loaned them out for charity), so we should shut up and be happy with the little we get."

    Things is, it's no so much I don't support them being owned by Disney, but I just can't think of too many reasons to. I mean, at first i was afraid they'd overexpose the heck out of them (like they Did with Pooh in the 90's) and they'd be a shell of their former selves. But that's not the case. A couple staccatto products and DVD's... just to satiate the fans.

    Now I realized something. For the longest time, Disney didn't even use it's Disney characters for marketing. For a period in the late 90's to 2001 they exclusively had nothing but Pooh and 101 Dalmations stuff (in the Disney Store) to the point where they actually had a Winnie the Pooh dressed up as one of the 101 dalmations. No kidding.

    But then again, Warners pretty much only sold Tweety bird and Scooby Doo products (and still do) for quite a while too. So I'm not singling them out.

    The truth of the matter is if they can do something amazing I'll relent it all. But only if they really do something. A top secret project and 2 unaired TV pilots are nothing. And who's to say the top secret bit won't be an unsold pilot to?

    All I'm saying. We need to be dissattisfied. if we weren;t dissatisfied with Sesame Street currently, we wouldn't have Old School box sets. If we weren't dissattisfied with Fraggle Rock not being on DVD, we wouldn't have Fraggle Rock season sets and an upcoming movie.

    Maybe you're right. Maybe the problem isn't just Disney. Maybe us fans hold a share of the blame too. Once again, rumor or truth, if they wanted to close up "Star Tours" there would be a million petitions and millions of angry Star Wars fans beating down the door.....
  14. frogboy4

    frogboy4 Inactive Member

    That's fuinny! Sad, but very, very funny! :)
  15. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member

    Heck, it took them until they came up with Mickey Mouseworks and House of Mouse to give the old characters a real vehicle.

    Just like how Warners took Daffy (and some others) and hid him in a closet, and they put out Tweety and Scooby Doo (which they aquired in a merger).

    Of course, while Disney did market Pooh to girls, let me point out that Warners actually dressed Tweety as a girl (or else gender ambiguous clothes, leaning towards female), causing confusion of the characters gender. They may have milked Pooh till the character was a shadow of his former self, but Warners does worse to their characters. And I used to prefer Warners to Disney all the time.

    I may not be a huge fan of Disney's ownership odf the Muppets and all, but there ARE worse companies (Muppetics unleashed.... that will keep you up all night)
  16. MelissaY1

    MelissaY1 Well-Known Member

    I agree with ya, Dr. Tooth. Warners has definitely done their fans wrong as well. Great they're putting out the Looney Tunes Golden Collections and all that but what have gotten in recent years as far as great new Looney Tunes projects? Two horrible Scooby-Doo live action films with a CGI Scooby, "Space Jam" and that other Looney Tunes animation/live action film that the title escapes me at the moment..., just more low quality stuff, again dumbing down the characters we know and love growing up. I know the times are different, and they have to make the characters appeal to the younger generations and so forth. But dumbing them down is not the answer. Were we as kids "smarter" watching this stuff when we were younger? We were still children and look how much we love these characters to this day.

    Even though Sesame has become more of a kids show in the past few years and the characters' personalities have changed a bit (I used to love Telly when he was a neurotic about everything) but the show is still clever and has a lot of stuff for adults. It still makes me laugh when I turn it on. It has a lot of competition now with thousands of other shows and networks to vie for kids' attention.

    But not so with the regular Muppet characters. What else does Kermit and the gang have to go up against with as far as other puppetry driven adult/variety comedy today? I mean jeez, we're going to be getting a new show with the Geico cavemen. You mean to tell me another Muppet related show couldn't fly if someone approved THIS crap to air?
  17. frogboy4

    frogboy4 Inactive Member

    I think it was Ebert (or someone of his stature) who remarked Space Jam as being "better than Roger Rabbit!" I couldn't stand that picture. WB didn't even consult with Chuck Jones who was still very much alive and working back then. He wanted to help and they shut him out. Disney, on the other hand, did want Chuck Jones' input on Roger Rabbit (as can be seen in the 2003 DVD special features). I thought it was neat to see Jones' drawing of Donald Duck. I feel that project shows Disney at the top of their game - learning about characters originating elsewhere and understanding how best to produce them. See...tied it back in. Woohahaha (evil laughter). :crazy:
  18. CensoredAlso

    CensoredAlso Well-Known Member

    WHAT? ! Hey, I admit I kinda liked Space Jam, but in no way did it compare to Roger Rabbit! lol
  19. MelissaY1

    MelissaY1 Well-Known Member

    I saw Space Jam in the movies with my sister and the only thing I DID enjoy about it was there was a couple of "in" jokes if you're a huge Looney Tunes fan you appreciated, like Schlesinger something was the name of a building named after of course Leon Schlesinger at WB, and I thought the animated scenes with Bugs and Daffy in Michael Jordan's house were well done.

    But compared to Roger Rabbit? Roger Rabbit to this day is still one of my favorite films and I am still awed when I watch it. Not only was a it an amazing homage to the golden age of animation and it's characters but also of film noir genre movies. The fact that so many people WERE consulted shows in the final product. It won many awards, it holds up today, and it's very well done. It holds everything that films today are lacking...!
  20. CensoredAlso

    CensoredAlso Well-Known Member

    Roger Rabbit was so sophisticated in its humor and mood. And it definitely was a homage to animation's glory days. Plus where else do you get to see all those different characters together in one movie (and getting along)? !

Share This Page