Around The Hub – Thursday thoughts

Posted on October 29, 2009 by John Frost
  • Game Informer has a 9 minute audio interview with Warren Spector, creator of the Epic Mickey game. Lots of great stuff is revealed in what is essentially the first official communication from Disney about the game.
  • ABC had to scrap some of its promotional plans for the new TV show ‘V’. Apparently dumping thousands of tons of pollutants into the air and potentially terrorizing unsuspecting city dwellers was seen as a bad move.
  • Via Animation Magazine we get to see a rare letter from Walt Disney currently up for auction. What’s interesting is how modern day intellectual property lawyers won’t even let Disney employees look at outside suggestions. Things were simpler back then for sure.
  • Disney’s purchase of the Little Einstein brand has come back to bite them. They’re now offering refunds for those ‘child development movies’ when the child movie inventor has revealed was just made up with no real science behind them. We have a few of those on our shelves.
  • The Walt Disney Studios has big plans for the the Golden Oak Ranch in Santa Clarita. They’ll be adding soundstages and support structure capable of hosting productions for film and TV concepts. This is good news for Los Angeles which has been losing production work to Canada for years now.
Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Buzz This
Vote on DZone
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Kick It on DotNetKicks.com
Shout it
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)
This entry was posted in Round Up and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Around The Hub – Thursday thoughts

  1. The Disney Blog says:
    October 29, 2009 at 4:40 am

    Tonight's Around the Hub now up – http://is.gd/4GHmy – rare Walt Disney letter, Epic Mickey game news, and an expansion for the Studios.

  2. JeffG says:
    October 29, 2009 at 6:38 pm

    The Baby Einstein company published a response to the recent news reports about the refund offer. They basically say that the offer was misrepresented by the advocacy group quoted in the NYT article.