I think that is ridiculous but there you go. Out of curiosity, of the twenty-seven DreamWorks films that have been produced over the past fifteen years, how many have female leads?DisneyJedi wrote:I dunno about you, but I think Pixar is pretty damn sexist.!
It's not only a matter of the female leads in their films but of the culture that exists at each studio. It's a well-known fact that DreamWorks treats women better. I'm not saying Pixar is "sexist" but they do have issues they need to work on. For instance, they don't have enough women in key creative positions (see story/direction). Chapman was the only woman there and now that she's gone they've only hired Marti Noxon as their token female.DisneyAnimation88 wrote:Out of curiosity, of the twenty-seven DreamWorks films that have been produced over the past fifteen years, how many have female leads?
I can agree with much of that, what I don't agree with is saying Pixar is "pretty damn sexist". I think we'd all like to see more women in those positions you mention, not just at Pixar but right across the industry.Sotiris wrote: It's not only a matter of the female leads in their films but of the culture that exists at each studio. It's a well-known fact that DreamWorks treats women better. I'm not saying that Pixar is "sexist" but they do have issues they need to work on. For instance, they don't have enough women in key creative positions (see story/direction). Chapman was the only woman there and now that she's gone they've only hired Marti Noxon as their token female.
Of course. It's an industry-wide problem.DisneyAnimation88 wrote:I think we'd all like to see more women in those positions you mention, not just at Pixar but right across the industry.
You're one of the last guy who should excuse someone being bias, especially to someone like Pap64- one of the least bias member on this forum. And even if he admit the was bit bias on the issue(which he just did), at least he able to make a well thought out argument the weighs in both side of the spectrum as oppose to just his own side when calling in on his opinion.Disney's Divinity wrote:Case in point--this forum.Sotiris wrote:You can provide two people with the exact same information, but they could still come up with radically different conclusions.
I could take pap64's post more seriously if it wasn't already clear that he is as biased as anyone in this thread. He clearly sees Brenda Chapman in a negative light, so I don't see why it's such a big deal that others may see Pixar or John Lasseter negatively. And I don't think it's true to assume that all people that dislike where the company is right now or where it's currently going hates change either.
This "doing what's best for the film" argument is highly subjective though. It depends on whose creative vision you trust. Considering I found the final film incredibly underwhelming, I can't help but feel it would have turned out better had Chapman remained at the helm. Had Brave been amazing, I wouldn't be bothered about the directorial change. I would understand the management had the film's best interest in mind. I wasn't upset when Jan Pinkava got replaced because Ratatouille turned out to be an amazing film. Also, if you had read Chapman and Andrews' interviews, you would know that the most significant changes were the addition of silly humor, the shenanigans of the triplets, the multiple action scenes, as well as making the men in Brave comic relief characters who don't pose any real threat and can't be taken seriously. I consider all these changes detrimental to the story. Therefore, I believe if Chapman had been allowed to execute her vision, Brave would have turned out much better. Not perfect, because I find the premise itself flawed, but still considerably better.pap64 wrote:We are forgetting one key element in this situation: film, and especially animation, is a collaborative medium. That means that EVERYONE, from the producers to the in-betweeners, has to collaborate in order to bring a vision to life. And sometimes when creating something, some sacrifices have to be made, even if it comes from a very precious source. Even in the days of Walt Disney, scenes had to be cut, ideas had to be either changed or dropped entirely and people had to rotate for the sake of the final product. What seems to have happened here was that the idea was not working out, and Chapman may not have allowed the process to continue normally, or Pixar did not allow it. One or the other did something that caused the firing, but it was a drastic measure done to make sure the final product was alive and well, especially since it was already underway.
It's not. Producers are not considered more important than directors and they usually do not enjoy the exposure, fame, salary and status that directors do.pap64 wrote:And last I heard, producer is a higher, much important position than director.
I think you're jumping to conclusions based on the attitude of a handful of people. They hardly constitute the majority of this board, let alone the fanbase. I haven't witnessed "extreme anger and venomous hatred" by anyone else here outside of a couple of members.pap64 wrote:It isn't bad to be passionate about something, but when that passion becomes extreme anger, bias and venomous hatred, something is wrong. That's why I won't back out of my opinion that a lot of people here have an immature view on things, and it not gonna help things out in the long run.
Again you are twisting what happened to bash Pixar without any real evidence.DisneyJedi wrote:Sorry. I'm just a little annoyed at the fact that they treated Brenda's pitch like it was nothing special, but they were all for it when some guy pitched a similar idea to them.
By the way, I think this nice yet tough (fictional) lady describes Pixar's attitude towards women quite well.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-Ke0jzfkzo[/youtube]
I think DisneyJedi misinterpreted the following comments of Chapman. She's talking about the industry in general there; she's not specifically referring to Pixar.jazzflower92 wrote:Again you are twisting what happened to bash Pixar without any real evidence.DisneyJedi wrote:Sorry. I'm just a little annoyed at the fact that they treated Brenda's pitch like it was nothing special, but they were all for it when some guy pitched a similar idea to them.
Brenda Chapman wrote:Sometimes women express an idea and are shot down, only to have a man express essentially the same idea and have it broadly embraced. Until there is a sufficient number of women executives in high places, this will continue to happen.
I don't weigh both sides in my post because I'm not a mediator and I have never pretended that I'm giving anyone's opinion but my own.Super Aurora wrote:at least he able to make a well thought out argument the weighs in both side of the spectrum as oppose to just his own side when calling in on his opinion.
Source: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la ... story.htmlThe scarcity of women in creative leadership roles may simply come down to a Mars-Venus disconnect between how men and women communicate, "Brave" co-director Brenda Chapman says. "I think the issue is that women bring a different sensibility into the mix," Chapman says. "And I think the majority of male studio executives and producers are still expecting what they're used to — the traditional, male-driven, comedy-heavy stories."
"Frozen" co-director Jennifer Lee won the Oscar for animated feature in 2014, but a year earlier Chapman had the distinction of being the first woman to win in that category for "Brave." Chapman's journey, however, was far from easy. She conceived of the film's ginger-headed Scottish princess while working at Pixar and was named the film's director, the company's first woman in that position. Ultimately, though, Chapman was replaced by colleague Mark Andrews; she and Andrews were given co-director credits. That turn of events was in large part because of her being a woman, Chapman says.
"It was less open sexism and more just being in a room full of men and trying to explain my point of view and not being understood because they didn't get it, it wasn't in their wheelhouse," Chapman says. "On 'Brave,' I was trying to maintain some integrity for my characters and they just didn't get it. That was very difficult."
Looking forward, Chapman says she's concerned about how a continually shrinking job market could affect women coming out of college. "When I look at some of the young women filmmakers trying to get into the studio system, they're just so grateful to have a job they'll do whatever is asked of them," she says. "But I've seen a few that have a spark, and I think, 'They're going to push it when they get further along.' I'm hoping that happens."
Looking back at Brave, one can guess that Chapman wanted to take the dramatic elements of her story farther than what Pixar is used to. At its core, they may have been adhering to the "laughter for every tear" rule for a story that didn't need it.Mooky wrote:I guess this article deserves a thread of its own, but I'm going to post it here as it sheds some light on the whole Brenda Chapman/Pixar deal.
Inside The Persistent Boys Club Of Animation
I wouldn't call Big Hero 6 dry. Actually I don't agree at all that any of the projects that he's done are bad. I just think this just a case of sour grapes rather than actual criticism.PatrickvD wrote:And Lasseter's stubbornness in sticking to this 'for every laugh there should be a tear' philosophy is one of the many problems in his current leadership style.
Spirited Away has little big laughs, yet it is a masterpiece. The Emperor's New Groove is one big parade of quotable laughs and I would rate it above at least half of Lasseter's projects at WDAS. It had ten time more charisma and flair than the dry Big Hero 6 for example.
He's developed a kind of tunnel vision. It's not surprising Brenda Chapman's darker tale was never really going to go through under his leadership. I think she was very right when she said they "just didn't get it".
PatrickvD wrote:And Lasseter's stubbornness in sticking to this 'for every laugh there should be a tear' philosophy is one of the many problems in his current leadership style. Spirited Away has little big laughs, yet it is a masterpiece. The Emperor's New Groove is one big parade of quotable laughs and I would rate it above at least half of Lasseter's projects at WDAS. It had ten time more charisma and flair than the dry Big Hero 6 for example. He's developed a kind of tunnel vision. It's not surprising Brenda Chapman's darker tale was never really going to go through under his leadership. I think she was very right when she said they "just didn't get it".
Exactly. Lasseter has a very limited perspective on filmmaking (and art in general). I'm really tired of him passing his worn, mundane, conventional brand of storytelling as original and revolutionary. I'm tired of him being heralded as a visionary filmmaker when he's merely pandering to the lowest common denominator of public taste. I'm tired that he praises the Brain Trust at Pixar (and Story Trust at WDAS) as a framework that allows multiple and diverse voices to be heard when it's nothing more than a clique made up of people chosen by him who share the same storytelling values and sensibilities as him, regurgitating the same ideas and approaches while when anyone dares to deviate from that restricting creative box, inevitably gets the boot.