[blahblahblah]

[quote=AN]
A world without Pixar, we still have Kungfu Panda, Shrek, Aladin, Lilo & Stitch, Mulan, the Lion King, etc. Doesn’t sound too miserable to me. Aladin and Kungfu Panda > Toy Story IMHO.[/quote]

Sure those are great films, but you’re missing a little of the point. Before Pixar, computer animation was not a commercial technology. It was the exclusive realm of the SIGGRAPH geeks. I know because some of my friends were in this field in the late 80s/early 90s. There was little funding for the research as it was not seen as having much commercial potential beyond flight simulators and videogames. Steve had a vision that this technology could change the way movies were made years before anyone else did. When Pixar was started in 1986, it took days to render even short 20 second raytraced animations on the most expensive hardware available. You needed megabucks, tons of hardware and manpower to make a crummy short 5-minute film that no one would pay to see. To think that you could make a commercially-viable feature-length film with this technology was just nuts. Steve was exactly that kind of crazy though, and his Pixar team made “Toy Story” not only a technological breakthrough (first feature film created entirely using CGI) but a box-office mega-smash beloved by people everywhere.

Pixar basically invented modern computer animation, it took them 9 years from when Jobs bought them to produce their first real product, “Toy Story”. In that time they had to design and develop all of the software and techniques necessary to pull it off. Who else would have ever funded such a crazy idea for nine years with no payoff? And what if it hadn’t succeeded? Computer animation would be a joke rather than the very serious business it is today.

Aladdin, Mulan, The Lion King, and Lilo & Stitch were all made using traditional cel animation by Walt Disney. WD basically had a lock on the animated film industry using this expensive, old-fashioned technique that they pioneered many decades ago.

Shrek (2001, 6 years after Toy Story) and Kung Fu Panda (2008, 13 years after Toy Story) are from DreamWorks and were made using CGI technology. Without Pixar, it is unlikely that other companies would have undertaken the enormous expense necessary to design the tools and techniques necessary to make films like this. Without Pixar, WD would probably still have a virtual monopoly on animated films. Now however, more companies can compete in this arena.

Pixar really changed the way movies are made. You probably wouldn’t have had the same sort of special effects in “The Matrix” because Hollywood wouldn’t have invested as much in CGI without the success of “Toy Story”.

[blahblahblah]

[quote=AN]
A world without Pixar, we still have Kungfu Panda, Shrek, Aladin, Lilo & Stitch, Mulan, the Lion King, etc. Doesn’t sound too miserable to me. Aladin and Kungfu Panda > Toy Story IMHO.[/quote]

Sure those are great films, but you’re missing a little of the point. Before Pixar, computer animation was not a commercial technology. It was the exclusive realm of the SIGGRAPH geeks. I know because some of my friends were in this field in the late 80s/early 90s. There was little funding for the research as it was not seen as having much commercial potential beyond flight simulators and videogames. Steve had a vision that this technology could change the way movies were made years before anyone else did. When Pixar was started in 1986, it took days to render even short 20 second raytraced animations on the most expensive hardware available. You needed megabucks, tons of hardware and manpower to make a crummy short 5-minute film that no one would pay to see. To think that you could make a commercially-viable feature-length film with this technology was just nuts. Steve was exactly that kind of crazy though, and his Pixar team made “Toy Story” not only a technological breakthrough (first feature film created entirely using CGI) but a box-office mega-smash beloved by people everywhere.

Pixar basically invented modern computer animation, it took them 9 years from when Jobs bought them to produce their first real product, “Toy Story”. In that time they had to design and develop all of the software and techniques necessary to pull it off. Who else would have ever funded such a crazy idea for nine years with no payoff? And what if it hadn’t succeeded? Computer animation would be a joke rather than the very serious business it is today.

Aladdin, Mulan, The Lion King, and Lilo & Stitch were all made using traditional cel animation by Walt Disney. WD basically had a lock on the animated film industry using this expensive, old-fashioned technique that they pioneered many decades ago.

Shrek (2001, 6 years after Toy Story) and Kung Fu Panda (2008, 13 years after Toy Story) are from DreamWorks and were made using CGI technology. Without Pixar, it is unlikely that other companies would have undertaken the enormous expense necessary to design the tools and techniques necessary to make films like this. Without Pixar, WD would probably still have a virtual monopoly on animated films. Now however, more companies can compete in this arena.

Pixar really changed the way movies are made. You probably wouldn’t have had the same sort of special effects in “The Matrix” because Hollywood wouldn’t have invested as much in CGI without the success of “Toy Story”.

[blahblahblah]

[quote=Arraya]
Yeah, I meet confused kids in their 20s that think he is “anti-establishment” and hence cool.

I set them straight.[/quote]

So what do you recommend these young kids do? Who should they vote for? Or should they just stay home?

[blahblahblah]

[quote=Arraya]
Yeah, I meet confused kids in their 20s that think he is “anti-establishment” and hence cool.

I set them straight.[/quote]

So what do you recommend these young kids do? Who should they vote for? Or should they just stay home?

[blahblahblah]

[quote=Arraya]
Yeah, I meet confused kids in their 20s that think he is “anti-establishment” and hence cool.

I set them straight.[/quote]

So what do you recommend these young kids do? Who should they vote for? Or should they just stay home?

[blahblahblah]

[quote=Arraya]
Yeah, I meet confused kids in their 20s that think he is “anti-establishment” and hence cool.

I set them straight.[/quote]

So what do you recommend these young kids do? Who should they vote for? Or should they just stay home?

[blahblahblah]

[quote=Arraya]
Yeah, I meet confused kids in their 20s that think he is “anti-establishment” and hence cool.

I set them straight.[/quote]

So what do you recommend these young kids do? Who should they vote for? Or should they just stay home?

[blahblahblah]

[quote=jpinpb]
For those that are investors, why would you think they are empty? Most likely rented out and owner collecting rent(s) and not paying their mortgage(s). How many people during the bubble have bought multiple properties in their attempt to be real estate tycoons and gather rent from multiple properties, now just collecting rent and not paying the mortgage.

I think some people underestimate this b/c it’s not something that they would do themselves.[/quote]

+1. I have a feeling this is rampant. And guess what, these people will soon be sitting on piles of cash to — guess what — buy houses with! Someone I know did exactly this in AZ. Defaulted on 2 homes, collected rent on one of them, waited it out a couple of years, stashed away the cash. By the time the foreclosures went through they had purchased their new home for cash. Bad credit? Who cares?

When the Big Boyz at the top are getting away with murder, don’t be surprised to see your neighbor trying to do the same sort of thing.

[blahblahblah]

[quote=jpinpb]
For those that are investors, why would you think they are empty? Most likely rented out and owner collecting rent(s) and not paying their mortgage(s). How many people during the bubble have bought multiple properties in their attempt to be real estate tycoons and gather rent from multiple properties, now just collecting rent and not paying the mortgage.

I think some people underestimate this b/c it’s not something that they would do themselves.[/quote]

+1. I have a feeling this is rampant. And guess what, these people will soon be sitting on piles of cash to — guess what — buy houses with! Someone I know did exactly this in AZ. Defaulted on 2 homes, collected rent on one of them, waited it out a couple of years, stashed away the cash. By the time the foreclosures went through they had purchased their new home for cash. Bad credit? Who cares?

When the Big Boyz at the top are getting away with murder, don’t be surprised to see your neighbor trying to do the same sort of thing.

[blahblahblah]

[quote=jpinpb]
For those that are investors, why would you think they are empty? Most likely rented out and owner collecting rent(s) and not paying their mortgage(s). How many people during the bubble have bought multiple properties in their attempt to be real estate tycoons and gather rent from multiple properties, now just collecting rent and not paying the mortgage.

I think some people underestimate this b/c it’s not something that they would do themselves.[/quote]

+1. I have a feeling this is rampant. And guess what, these people will soon be sitting on piles of cash to — guess what — buy houses with! Someone I know did exactly this in AZ. Defaulted on 2 homes, collected rent on one of them, waited it out a couple of years, stashed away the cash. By the time the foreclosures went through they had purchased their new home for cash. Bad credit? Who cares?

When the Big Boyz at the top are getting away with murder, don’t be surprised to see your neighbor trying to do the same sort of thing.

[blahblahblah]

[quote=jpinpb]
For those that are investors, why would you think they are empty? Most likely rented out and owner collecting rent(s) and not paying their mortgage(s). How many people during the bubble have bought multiple properties in their attempt to be real estate tycoons and gather rent from multiple properties, now just collecting rent and not paying the mortgage.

I think some people underestimate this b/c it’s not something that they would do themselves.[/quote]

+1. I have a feeling this is rampant. And guess what, these people will soon be sitting on piles of cash to — guess what — buy houses with! Someone I know did exactly this in AZ. Defaulted on 2 homes, collected rent on one of them, waited it out a couple of years, stashed away the cash. By the time the foreclosures went through they had purchased their new home for cash. Bad credit? Who cares?

When the Big Boyz at the top are getting away with murder, don’t be surprised to see your neighbor trying to do the same sort of thing.

[blahblahblah]

[quote=jpinpb]
For those that are investors, why would you think they are empty? Most likely rented out and owner collecting rent(s) and not paying their mortgage(s). How many people during the bubble have bought multiple properties in their attempt to be real estate tycoons and gather rent from multiple properties, now just collecting rent and not paying the mortgage.

I think some people underestimate this b/c it’s not something that they would do themselves.[/quote]

+1. I have a feeling this is rampant. And guess what, these people will soon be sitting on piles of cash to — guess what — buy houses with! Someone I know did exactly this in AZ. Defaulted on 2 homes, collected rent on one of them, waited it out a couple of years, stashed away the cash. By the time the foreclosures went through they had purchased their new home for cash. Bad credit? Who cares?

When the Big Boyz at the top are getting away with murder, don’t be surprised to see your neighbor trying to do the same sort of thing.

[blahblahblah]

People tend to forget that Jobs is responsible for 2 insanely great, insanely successful companies: Apple and Pixar. He bought Pixar for $10M and sold it for over $7B 20 years later. Cha-ching.

A world without Steve Jobs? There would have been no “Toy Story” — kids wouldn’t have gotten to watch Buzz and Woody! I don’t even want to imagine such a miserable place…

[blahblahblah]

People tend to forget that Jobs is responsible for 2 insanely great, insanely successful companies: Apple and Pixar. He bought Pixar for $10M and sold it for over $7B 20 years later. Cha-ching.

A world without Steve Jobs? There would have been no “Toy Story” — kids wouldn’t have gotten to watch Buzz and Woody! I don’t even want to imagine such a miserable place…

[blahblahblah]

People tend to forget that Jobs is responsible for 2 insanely great, insanely successful companies: Apple and Pixar. He bought Pixar for $10M and sold it for over $7B 20 years later. Cha-ching.

A world without Steve Jobs? There would have been no “Toy Story” — kids wouldn’t have gotten to watch Buzz and Woody! I don’t even want to imagine such a miserable place…

[Author]

Posts