Barbie films Mattel VS Disney for Sleeping Beauty

jp0518 posted on Dec 06, 2013 at 10:54AM
Here's why: link

After the success of Barbie in the Nutcracker in 2001, and Barbie of Swan Lake in 2003, Mattel Entertainment was supposed to adapt Tchaikovsky's The Sleeping Beauty ballet (the third of the three ballets he created) into a Barbie film, titled Barbie as the Sleeping Beauty. However, the Walt Disney Company filed a trademark application on March 13, 2007, for the name "Princess Aurora" that would cover all live-action and recorded movie, television, radio, stage, computer, Internet, news, and photographic entertainment uses, except literature works of fiction and nonfiction.[37] This has caused controversy because "Princess Aurora" is also the name of the lead character in Tchaikovsky's ballet version of the story, from which Disney acquired some of the music for its 1959 animated film version. Therefore, a campaign has emerged to complain to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office if people feel this trademarking of a pre-existing character name should not be allowed. The trademark was granted despite this on January 17, 2012.

The move could also sink any movie about the ballet or that uses a scene of the ballet in another movie[38]. This has caused Mattel to abandon Barbie as the Sleeping Beauty film production, and everything was shelved[39]. It would have been the sixteenth Barbie feature film, and the third to be based on a Grimm's fairytale. It was originally scheduled to be released during the fall of 2008, but was pushed back to 2009. Later, it was announced that Barbie and the Three Musketeers would be released in Fall 2009 instead, with no new release date or extra information announced for Barbie as the Sleeping Beauty. Mattel is currently quiet about this to avoid the trademark controversy.

Note: Found it somewhere. I do not own anything.
last edited on Feb 12, 2014 at 04:50PM

Barbie films 5 antwoorden

Click here to write a response...
een jaar geleden jp0518 said…
meh
I think Disney don't want Mattel to adapt Sleeping Beauty as a Barbie film...that's why they are making that live-action Maleficent movie...How dare they! They do not own Sleeping Beauty at all!
nmdis commented…
I agree i totally do een jaar geleden
een jaar geleden MirandaAlivia said…
hmmm
Really @jp0518? If yes, they're very annoying!

Sleeping Beauty was Tchaikovsky's own, same like Nutcracker or Swan Lake, not them. And I think the story is own by around the world, because the story is made by Tchaikovsky for amuse everyone in the world. Anyone can make the adapted of the story.

So they can't ban Mattel to make that. For this problem, I think it looks Disney claim the story is theirs.

Besides that, Mattel ever to adapt Rapunzel as a Barbie movie first, and Disney adapt that too, even they're gave different title (Tangled). And Mattel never be tried to ban Disney.

I really wonder why Disney do it?
last edited een jaar geleden
MajorAbbey commented…
Probably because the characters have the same name. Aurora is part of the Disney Princess line, which is very profitable for Disney, so I can see why they wouldn't be thrilled about Mattel making another Sleeping Beauty with the exact same name. een jaar geleden
nmdis commented…
^Yes but that is very wrong :( een jaar geleden
een jaar geleden jp0518 said…
hmmm
Exactly as what MajorAbbey said, @MirandaAlivia...they are very annoying indeed...how could they claim the story? they are very selfish...because of that, not only Mattel was involved but also the story and the ballet...Because they have the rights for the story, only they can make movies for it. As long as they have the rights, Mattel can never adapt Sleeping Beauty, and there will always be a problem to the ballet. As I've read from the link, before they can perform the ballet onstage, they have to ask permission to Disney first!

After Mattel let Disney borrow Barbie in Toy Story series this how they're going to repay?...hmm. anyway, we really can't blame them, Disney is just very powerful...but they need to stop it! grrrr...
nmdis commented…
Yes Disney is very powerful + selfish. It is making me feel like I should kill Disney for this :( een jaar geleden
een jaar geleden MelodyLaurel said…
But shouldn't a company only trademark a name that they invented? Like how Neopets trademarked the names of their characters because they actually invented them? What's the point of trademarking a pre-existing character name? Granted, I can see why Disney did it, Aurora being a part of the Disney Princess lineup and all, but still.

I've been waiting for Mattel to adapt Sleeping Beauty forever, and now I know why they didn't. Same case with Cinderella, I guess. Gosh, it must feel good to be the rich and powerful company. Which is probably why Mattel allowed Barbie to appear in the Toy Story movies, they wanted their product to have more exposure because let's be honest, Pixar films are popular as heck.
last edited een jaar geleden
jp0518 commented…
i totally agree... een jaar geleden
jp0518 commented…
mattel can't do anything anything although they wanted to complete the Tchaikovsky ballets so bad. how i wish they really could adapt sleeping beauty...it will be perfect! Tchaikovsky will be happy for that... een jaar geleden
MelodyLaurel commented…
Well I don't care what Tchaikovsky might think, but I sure as hell would be happy to have a ballet adaptation of Sleeping Beauty. I never really liked the Disney version, anyway, een jaar geleden
een jaar geleden MJsValentine said…
The application was granted a while back: link

The whole affair is rather disturbing, if you ask me.
jp0518 commented…
Oh no! Now Mattel can never adapt SleepingBeauty...How I wish Barbie can complete Tchaikovsky's ballets. Sleeping Beauty is the last one since Mattel was able to adapt Nutcracker and zwaan-, zwaan Lake. I feel bad about this. very disturbing. een jaar geleden
MelodyLaurel commented…
Oh well, can't say I'm surprised. I remember reading that Walt Disney once prevented the voice actress for Snow White from working as anything other than Snow White's voice (because he wanted Snow's voice to be unique). Might be true, might not, but I wouldn't put it past him. een jaar geleden
MJsValentine commented…
What irritates me is the fact that now every theatre and ballet company has to negotiate a deal with Disney in order to perform 'Sleeping Beauty' on stage because of the 'Princess Aurora' trademark, which is bothersome as in Tchaikovsky's ballet the name of the princess is 'Princess Aurora'. This is one of the reasons why this whole affair sparked such a big controversy, because as u pointed out in your upper post, applying a trademark for an already existing name is theoretically speaking not possible. Also Disney is zei to be a ruthless business, so I suppose that negotiating some sort of deal with them is not exactly the most pleasant thing. een jaar geleden
MJsValentine commented…
Mary Kay Bergman was the official voice of Snow White in the late 80s until her death in the 90s. She voiced all the female characters in the first three seasons of South Park (a very ruthless, mostly offensive, inappropriate and not family friendly satire) and was credited under a pseudonym, because she was not allowed to be associated with such a toon as she was still under contract for Disney. So there's that. een jaar geleden