Posted on 01/30/2004 2:47:54 PM PST by Way2Serious
Walt Disney has pulled out of the new $140 million film version of Peter Pan after refusing to give a share of its profits to a children's hospital in London.The disclosure of Disney's departure over a merchandising dispute with its fellow producers comes just weeks before the film's release.
The latest film version of J.M. Barrie's original 1904 play was directed by an Australian, P. J. Hogan, and filmed mostly in Queensland.
It is being released to coincide with the 100th anniversary of the play's first performance, and has the full backing of Great Ormond Street Hospital, the play's legal owner.
Barrie transferred the copyright of his famous creations to the hospital in his will. The hospital has full control over all productions of the play and is supposed to benefit financially from each subsequent adaptation.
Despite these conditions, Disney believed it should be exempt from making any payment to the hospital from the sale of spin-off books, board games, soft toys and computer games, which are expected to generate tens of millions of dollars in their own right.
Disney executives argued that unlike its partners at Sony and Revolution Studios, it had already made regular payments to the hospital to secure the animated rights to the story. The company produced an animated version of the film in 1953 and a sequel, Return to Neverland, last year.
Nina Jacobson, the head of production at Disney, said any new deal would have had a domino effect on the existing agreement with the hospital. "We did not want to be in a situation where we were paying twice."
But one producer connected to the film said Disney was "trying to pretend that they left the project for all sorts of reasons . . . The bottom line is that they wanted a share of the merchandising but did not want to pay for it."
The continued success of the Disney animated versions has not carried through to the hospital, although Disney has made voluntary one-off payments to it over the years.
Last year Disney wrote to a Scottish retailer demanding she change the name of her Peter Pan clothes shop because it infringed the company's copyright.
The retailer was, however, able to keep the name after Great Ormond Street issued a statement confirming that it owned the copyright and was happy to let the shop continue trading in exchange for a one-off payment of £500 ($1180).
The Telegraph, London
Whether Disney is in the wrong legally or not, what CEO wants to be known as "that guy who screwed over the children's hospital"? Eisner might think he dodged that bullet by pulling out of the movie, but it's too late. The faster Disney loses this guy, the better its chances of possibly surviving into the next decade. So far, it ain't lookin' good.
Well deserved meltdown.
Disney alleged infringement of a copyright it knew the hospital owned, even after Disney had paid royalties on that same copyright? I wonder if they have any problem with Michael Jackson.
They just released a live action version of Peter Pan this past Christmas. This makes no sense
They just released a live action version of Peter Pan this past Christmas. This makes no sense
The article is from November of '03. I thought it discussion-worthy, and a keyword search came up empty for previous articles on the subject.
I recall seeing trailers for the PP movie's release scheduled for Christmas of '03, but do not recall seeing any notices that it actually came out on schedule. If it was released, it either bombed, or was devastatingly overshadowed by LOTRIII.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.