Chris Sanders talks about what happened with Disney

[Sotiris]

Q: Chris, what exactly happened at Disney and how did that experience shape the projects you took on at DreamWorks?

Chris Sanders: You know…It’s a very common thing in Hollywood. Because I had the opposite experience at DreamWorks (and I’ll explain that in one second)… I was working on a movie there called “American Dog” and it had the normal amount of problems, I think, that those movies have. And we were working out those problems. I take fifty percent of the responsibility for that thing. But at the same time I think it wasn't exactly Pixar’s cup of tea – that sort of story. So they didn't want to go forward with that particular version of the movie. And as you know they made their version of the movie and the one that they made was the one that they were much more comfortable with.

I think that was when I realized that I wasn't necessarily going to be able to make the type of movies that I wanted to make there, which is why I decided to move on. So interestingly I came to DreamWorks and suddenly I was on the other side of the coin. I came over to work on “The Croods” but I was asked to take over the directing and writing responsibilities on “How to Train Your Dragon” because they were changing directions on that. I left a project they wanted to change directions with and came over to DreamWorks to work on a project where they wanted to change directions. I must say, I love DreamWorks. I like their openness to different directions. One of the things we've found at DreamWorks that’s a strength is that they don’t really have a “house style” per se, and if you've seen a lot of DreamWorks movies, you've seen that they’re very different from one another. And that’s really neat. Because if you’re working on an existing project or are pitching a new project, you have a great deal of latitude to set the course.

They have proven to be very, very good to you once they've decided that, yes, we’re going to go in that direction and actually keeping you on course. That happened on “How to Train Your Dragon” a few times where [DreamWorks Animation head] Jeffrey [Katzenberg] caught us being a little bit timid and he would point that out to us.

Source:: http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/ ... k-20130325

Q: Chris, since you've had experience in the Disney system, there are consistent accusations that the culture within the company has gotten more corporate and bottom line. Counter to that, how do you think the company has improved in the modern era to keep producing consistently interesting animation?

Chris Sanders: Well, when I started in Saturday morning animation, that was directly driven by product. I never had that feeling at Disney, where the product was even a consideration. It’s the same at Dreamworks. It’s really deep in the process when you finally get, ‘wow, I hope they make a toy of this.’ It was all was story driven at Disney, which was nice.

I did get to a point at Disney when I felt it was doubtful that I’d be able to write and direct the kind of animated films that I like. That was what prompted me to go to DreamWorks. It was ‘American Dog’ that I split on, and I take fully half of the responsibility for that. Sensibility-wise, it wasn't really Disney’s cup of tea, and that’s when I felt I couldn't carry on with the same voice that I like.

Source: http://www.hollywoodchicago.com/news/21 ... the-croods

[Pokeholic_Prince]

A lot of what he says is kind of very true. While, I love Disney and Pixar, they do tend to have a style that they don't like to divert from. One thing about Dreamworks is that they take more risks whether it be with idea, visual style, or just giving someone new a chance.

[Elladorine]

I'm kind of surprised he referred to it as not being Pixar's cup of tea.

[Sotiris]

I'm kind of surprised he referred to it as not being Pixar's cup of tea.

Well, didn't Pixar basically take over WDAS?

[disneyboy20022]

I'm kind of surprised he referred to it as not being Pixar's cup of tea.

Well, didn't Pixar take over WDAS?

Well the conspiracy theorist in me thinks.....

[Sotiris]

No conspiracy theory needed. It's a reality. Since Lasseter and Catmull have been put in charge of the studio, it's only expected they'd bring in their own people, and implement similar practices and management strategies as that of Pixar.

Whether that's a positive thing or not is up for debate.

[SWillie!]

Yeah, I've found that many people within the industry seem to still refer to Lasseter and Catmull as "Pixar" even when discussing their involvement with WDAS. I think the way people inside all the different studios see the separation of the studios is very different from the way which we, the fans, see them.

[Disney's Divinity]

A lot of what he says is kind of very true. While, I love Disney and Pixar, they do tend to have a style that they don't like to divert from. One thing about Dreamworks is that they take more risks whether it be with idea, visual style, or just giving someone new a chance.

That's why I laugh when people say either Tangled or Wreck-It Ralph are "creative." It's too bad Dreamworks films are so hit-and-miss with me, because they do seem like the best company.

[Sky Syndrome]

Good for Chris! Disney was hindering him from using his full potential so I'm glad he went to another studio where he has leeway to do what makes him happy.

[Elladorine]

Yeah, I've found that many people within the industry seem to still refer to Lasseter and Catmull as "Pixar" even when discussing their involvement with WDAS.

Yeah, that's what I figured. It just caught me off-guard for a moment.

[magicalwands]

Lately I've been loving Dreamworks films more because of their variety of film composers. The most recent ones being Silvestri's Crood score and Desplat's Rise of the Guardians. Being a huge fan of musical scores, their variety of composers is an advantage to Pixar always using Giacchino. (Note: I am a huge Giacchino fan!)

[Pokeholic_Prince]

Lately I've been loving Dreamworks films more because of their variety of film composers. The most recent ones being Silvestri's Crood score and Desplat's Rise of the Guardians. Being a huge fan of musical scores, their variety of composers is an advantage to Pixar always using Giacchino. (Note: I am a huge Giacchino fan!)

I'd second that. The scores for "Rise of the Guardians," "How to Train Your Dragon," and now "The Croods" have been some of the best scores of their respective years.

[Semaj]

What Disney failed to remember about Lilo & Stitch was that film was so cool, in part because it was so different from what people came to expect in Disney films. The simple fact that it's still Disney's last major triumph in hand-drawn animation proves this. It seemed like that would've given Chris Sanders some leverage on his next project.

While there was nothing really wrong with Bolt, the film was kinda generic. Nothing truly memorable about it. Whatever flavor it did have was probably sucked out along with the rest of American Dog.

All that aside, I do feel that DreamWorks has matured enough from their Shrek phase ("HURR HURR, LOOKIT HOW ANTI-DISNEY WE ARE! HURR HURR HURR!!!1!!!11") that they deserve a fair chance.

[Sky Syndrome]

While there was nothing really wrong with Bolt, the film was kinda generic. Nothing truly memorable about it. Whatever flavor it did have was probably sucked out along with the rest of American Dog.

Bolt suffered without a good outstanding character like Ogo in it. Ogo is the name Chris gave the cat with a eyepatch meant to be in "American Dog", a character someone at Disney graciously let Chris take with him when he left Disney. That cat would have made things way more fun than Rhino and Mittens did. Ogo is hilarious in Chris Sander's web comic "Kiskaloo".
Here's the archive for "Kiskaloo" comic strips.
http://kiskaloo.com/comic-archive/

[DC Fan]

The way he talks about Disney and Dreamworks is kind of like Marvel and DC.

Marvel is indeed more open to all kinds of translations of the properties (that´s good) but on the other hand for the most part (up until recently) they didn´t care for quality. It was all about quantity and exposure.

DC on the other side is owned by Warner that is very careful (for the most part) with the licenses. They go for quality over quantity. And for the most part is good. However, they have a grip so tight that they don´t diversify.

As said, kind of similar to Dreamworks and Disney business thinking. Dreamworks might let almost anyone do something and that´s good but honestly, how many truly good movies do they have? Not to mention the early beginnings when everything were copycats of Pixar´s. Disney may have this too strict way of doing things (that up until recently hasn´t done that good) but still is their way and in that sense they are in complete control

In the end I think the best way is to have a litte bit of both.

[milojthatch]

That's why I laugh when people say either Tangled or Wreck-It Ralph are "creative." It's too bad Dreamworks films are so hit-and-miss with me, because they do seem like the best company.

Isn't that why DreamWorks films are hit or miss, because they are so much more experimental and free? You don't know if something will work till you try it!

What Disney failed to remember about Lilo & Stitch was that film was so cool, in part because it was so different from what people came to expect in Disney films. The simple fact that it's still Disney's last major triumph in hand-drawn animation proves this. It seemed like that would've given Chris Sanders some leverage on his next project.

While there was nothing really wrong with Bolt, the film was kinda generic. Nothing truly memorable about it. Whatever flavor it did have was probably sucked out along with the rest of American Dog.

All that aside, I do feel that DreamWorks has matured enough from their Shrek phase ("HURR HURR, LOOKIT HOW ANTI-DISNEY WE ARE! HURR HURR HURR!!!1!!!11") that they deserve a fair chance.

I can agree with all of that!


I like Chris Sanders' work for the most part and feel he made the right choice moving to DreamWorks. I'm just sad that Pixar let him go the way they did. And yes, I agree, these days Disney Animation is just Pixar's satellite unit. It's all computer animation with the same kind of characters or stories you'd expect from a Pixar film. Disney stopped being Disney a few years ago.

[Lnds500]

I don't get it. Are Pixar's film a certain style? The only "style" I would attribute to them is "consistently good" (at least before Cars 2 / Brave). Other than that I believe they are vastly different between each other.

Thanks Sotiris!

[The_Iceflash]

That's why I laugh when people say either Tangled or Wreck-It Ralph are "creative." It's too bad Dreamworks films are so hit-and-miss with me, because they do seem like the best company.

Isn't that why DreamWorks films are hit or miss, because they are so much more experimental and free? You don't know if something will work till you try it!

More experimental? No, I don't think so. There seems to be a quality control issue with Dreamworks. Walt-era Disney was very experimental and full of risk taking and trying new things. They didn't have nearly as much quality control issues. As far as free goes, like a good Music Producer is to an artist, they need someone willing to be critical and say something if an idea isn't working. Sure the animators might like it since they won't be told if something of theirs isn't working but if they are using someone else's money to make a product and collecting a paycheck themselves to make the product, they need to put their ego aside. Dreamworks may stroke their ego and let anything be made but that hurts quality. Being given free rein doesn't always mean a better product.

Q: Chris, since you've had experience in the Disney system, there are consistent accusations that the culture within the company has gotten more corporate and bottom line. Counter to that, how do you think the company has improved in the modern era to keep producing consistently interesting animation?

Chris Sanders: Well, when I started in Saturday morning animation, that was directly driven by product. I never had that feeling at Disney, where the product was even a consideration. It’s the same at Dreamworks. It’s really deep in the process when you finally get, ‘wow, I hope they make a toy of this.’ It was all was story driven at Disney, which was nice.

I did get to a point at Disney when I felt it was doubtful that I’d be able to write and direct the kind of animated films that I like. That was what prompted me to go to DreamWorks. It was ‘American Dog’ that I split on, and I take fully half of the responsibility for that. Sensibility-wise, it wasn't really Disney’s cup of tea, and that’s when I felt I couldn't carry on with the same voice that I like.

Source: http://www.hollywoodchicago.com/news/21 ... the-croods

That bold part says wonders. Saturday morning animation influences are felt all over Lilo and Stitch. In fact, Stitch is a Saturday morning animation character incarnate. I know many of you loved the trailers to Lilo and Stitch but I found those to be such a turn off to the film. It was if it was trying to be hip and cool.

[estefan]

Also, it's not like DreamWorks doesn't replace directors, either. It's just not as widely publicised. Shrek went through multitudes of directors. Peter Hastings was the original director of How to Train Your Dragon, but the producers thought he was making it too younger-skewing, so Sanders and DeBlois were brought in to replace him.

Of course, the ironic thing is when Brenda Chapman directed a movie at DreamWorks, she wasn't replaced so they could lighten the story and add butt jokes....but Pixar did.

[DC Fan]

Still, I would like to see what Bolt would have been given how great Lilo and Stitch is.