Jim Hill update

[Bean Bunny]

This is from Jim's offical page:

I’ve also got outstanding commitments to MuppetCentral.com (I.E., a 30-40 part series on the history of the Jim Henson Company circa 1986 to today),

The thing that I find strange about this is, Jim waiting until the Muppets are sold to publish this on Muppet Central. I am guessing he is doing because he want to go on about (depeding if Disney get the Muppets or they don't) Disney really wanted the Muppets badly and were sad that they couldn't get them. Or Disney is so happy that they have finally bought the Jim Henson Company.

Don't me wrong, I like some of Jim Hill's article, I just realize that most of article deal with Disney in some manner or form no matter what, ever if topic has no relation to Disney. It like Jim will up a fictional tale about how Disney did this or that to tie into the story.

I read this Muppet series over at the Laughing Place, one thing get me. You know the part, where he talk about how Jim Henson worked on a Little Mermaid show called Little Mermaid Island and made a pilot. Okay, if Jim did indeed make a pilot why has nobody ever mention until know.

Oh well, overall Jim is a good writer but sometime his stories are hard to believe.

 

[Phillip]

The reason we are waiting for the completed sale to launch this series is because Henson asked us to wait due to some of the content that is included.

 

[Luke]

but come on Phillip, lets all be honest about this and the point thats being made here - there's absolutely no doubt that it will focus heavily on errr ..... Disney is there ?

The thing is, should any 30-40 part history of the 'Jim Henson Company' be so narrowly focused on the small amounts of work it did with Disney, and sale negotiations that didn't even happen ? It's kinda insulting to Muppet fans to make out that in the last 16 years the major focus has been about Disney which as any real informed Henson follower would know it so clearly hasn't and there has been much more. When the guy struggled to write a one page article about Henson sale negotiations without making really stupid, uninformed and untrue comments just because somehow he had to work in Disney it made me realise this isn't the kind of person Muppet fans want to read.

It just really baffles me - why get a Disney 'mark' to come over and write a Disney heavy article on a Henson fan site ? (the time period covered is the big clue to that one). Was Craig Shermin not available - Henson has many talented fan writers too who (from his past article) are probably better informed as to what is really happening instead of what a pro-Disney person would like to think is happening. Unless the sale is specifically to Disney i see absolutely no need for all this and think it's going to go down very badly with the visitors to the website. I think they'd like to read a 30-40 part article on the REAL history of the Henson Company from inception to the present - y'know who should write that one ------ you !

I'd love to hear a response to that seeing as you've obviously read this article, are more a Henson than Disney fan, and commisioned it in the first place.

 

[BoyRaisin2]

Wow, first visit in one week, and first post in two.

Anyway, in Jim and Phil's defense, if you read the original announcement about Jim Hill's article that was written earlier this year, it said it'd talk about Henson from the mid 80s through today and all the crap they've been through. The article didn't even say it'd be focusing on "Disney's pursuit of the Muppets."

I'm sure when 1989-1990 comes around, Disney will be a focus (that just being the Jim Hill way), but it seems the real topic will be Henson's little struggles over the last 15 years (which is probably how much longer we'll have to wait 'til Henson gets sold to...whoever). When will it end?

On the other hand, this is Jim Hill who we're talking about. But Muppet Central needs something new (besides the awesome new look of the site itself) and I want some news and/or info on what the freak is/was going on behind-the-scenes.

I'm giving the Germans one more month.

 

[Luke]

Well if it isn't Disney focused then why is Jim Hill writing it, and why has Jim Hill chosen a time period where you can focus heavily on Disney ? From reading his last article at MC you don't exactly get the impression that he is informed in what has gone on behind the scenes at Henson, more that he wants to try to use any event or news item to make it Disney related and suit his theories. My point is that there's plenty that has gone on between 1986-Now that has been Disney related, but there is also so much other stuff that hasn't been. I can understand a 3 page article on the Henson/Disney relationship as being very relevant and interesting, but having a really well known Disney person write a 30-40 part article on the Henson Company as a whole seems wrong to me. It's like he was invited to write because he is (or at least, was) quite a 'name' on the internet.

The majority of Henson fans are going to want to see stuff written from an informed Henson watchers point of view, going with a Disney biased person will be irritating at best but will probably provoke a strong reaction (maybe thats the aim here, who knows ?). Maybe it's just me, but unless Phil & Jim Hill know something we all don't (ie:- that Disney will own Henson in a few months time) then i just don't see the point of knocking on Disney's door before our own.

 

[MrTheFrog]

"The Little Mermaid's Island" stuff is legit. I've seen the Flounder puppet, and the sculpted but incomplete versions of Sebastian and Scuttle.
-Artie

 

[BlueFrackle]

Guys,

Yeah, I also heard about someone seeing the Puppets.

see ya

 

[Bean Bunny]

So the show really is real?