• gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Pixar wasn’t owned by them, but they were contractually obligated to be making movies for and with Disney

    • Coelacanth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      This article is a great rundown of Pixar and Disney, but while the latter did publish Pixar’s movies through the nineties and early naughties they had very little creative influence over them - especially compared to what would come post acquisition. Even the four “transitional” films (that had already begun production in 2006) are clearly more Pixar than Disney.

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Ok? Already knew all that

        The point is that Disney is famously child/family friendly and that they had influence on the film, thats why a direct reference to suicide in the first 5m is especially surprising: Disney let it happen

        Pixar actually being the ones who made it is entirely irrelevant to my point and also incredibly basic film trivia

        • Coelacanth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          In general I tend to differentiate between creator and publisher in all art. It would have been a more shocking inclusion had it been a movie made by Disney themselves - at least to me. I’m open to being wrong about how much Disney meddled in Pixar stories pre 2006 purchase though. I can’t say it’s a subject I’ve studied at length. I know there is a book about Pixar but I haven’t read it. Do you have any sources?