DVDizzy Forum

I believe in time we will learn more on why she was replaced and about her feelings about Pixar.

Brenda Chapman wrote:It was very hard to believe what was happening (when I was replaced) and I never really got a straight answer as to why. It still haunts me today.

Not only did they remove her from her own personal project but they didn't even have the courtesy to tell her why. That's the worst part of it all. I recall Chris Sanders having a similar experience. The issue here is not so much about a director replacement - this happens often in Hollywood studios - , but the way Disney/Pixar is handling situations like these and how they're treating their employees.

Brenda Chapman wrote:It’s only been a consulting job and I’m starting work with Dreamworks again in January. They've been very clear they want me back, which is great. I didn’t think I would want to direct for a while but now I think I’m ready to get back on that horse.

I'm not surprised at all about her moving to DreamWorks. Time and again they've shown to respect their artists and treat fairly their creative talent. It's no wonder they've become the best animation studio to work for which is particularly impressive since they're an independent studio.

Sotiris wrote:

Brenda Chapman wrote:It was very hard to believe what was happening (when I was replaced) and I never really got a straight answer as to why. It still haunts me today.

Not only did they remove her from her own personal project but they didn't even have the courtesy to tell her why. That's the worst part of it all. I recall Chris Sanders having a similar experience. The issue here is not so much about a director replacement - this happens often in Hollywood studios - , but the way Disney/Pixar is handling situations like these and how they're treating their employees.

Regarding the Sanders affair, I've heard from someone from another forum who is, or at least claims to be, a personal friend of Sanders who said that the parting was very amicable.

Here it is:



"American/Hollywood Dog was changed because the story was too strange and lacked focus. Having talked to Chris, though, there were really no hard feelings, and Lasseter actually felt so bad that Chris was leaving that he did Chris a favor that has NEVER been done and likely never will again by Disney Studios.

"Sorry! Shit, I had to run out the door for work and hit post by mistake.

Lasseter invited Chris to lunch a week before his last day and asked if there was anything he could do to make up for the unfortunate circumstances leading up to Chris's departure. Chris said that her KNEW that Disney would NEVER use the cat with eye patch (Ogo) ever again, and asked if he could take Ogo with him. Lasseter asked why, and Chris told him about the stories he wished to tell. So John had Chris write up a contract and draw a picture of Ogo, and he gave the rights of him over to Chris. (Just the print rights, they said they'd do the animation rights at another time.) The Disney Lawer Initiative were FREAKING OUT over this. It's something that has NEVER happened before, (basically, whatever you draw at WDFA becomes THEIR property and they will sue the shit out of you if you ever use it anywhere else) and it will likely never happen again.

So, I thought that was pretty cool. I don't think this is NDA info because he told me and another person at ComiCon just off his cuff when I asked how he was able to continue to draw Ogo if he was the same cat from American Dog."

Source: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread. ... 588&page=2

That's an interesting story. Though contractually obligated, Sanders of course still does the voice of Stitch. Always wondered if there were any hard feelings.

PatrickvD wrote:That and I saw the Animation Roundtable discussion and couldn't help but think Mark Andrews was the most annoying, pretentious douchebag in the world. He came across as another broken Pixar record repeating empty words like 'story', 'heart' and 'character' as if Pixar invented those things.

Yeah, on the Blu-Ray bonus features, I felt he came off as really obnoxious. Of course, not having met Mr Andrews, he could be the nicest person in the world, but in those interviews, he just seems to lack the likeability of Brenda Chapman or Brad Bird or Andrew Stanton.

Looking forward to what work she does at DreamWorks. I think The Prince of Egypt still remains one of their best films and while I don't what she specifically contributed to Shrek and Chicken Run, I wouldn't be surprised if she helped flesh out those characters a bit.

I would actually love to see her reteam with her old Beauty and the Beast/Lion King cohort Roger Allers on a project in the future.

estefan wrote: Yeah, on the Blu-Ray bonus features, I felt he came off as really obnoxious. Of course, not having met Mr Andrews, he could be the nicest person in the world, but in those interviews, he just seems to lack the likeability of Brenda Chapman or Brad Bird or Andrew Stanton.

I've often heard of Stanton being described as arrogant and unpleasant.

qindarka wrote:I've often heard of Stanton being described as arrogant and unpleasant.

He and Lasseter sure have been playing that part well in recent years.

Lnds500 wrote:

qindarka wrote:I've often heard of Stanton being described as arrogant and unpleasant.

He and Lasseter sure play that part good in the last year(s).

Knew it was going to happen eventually.

Now before you go all beserk, I do think Pixar does make good movies. But I kind of feel that the heaps of positive reviews and awards they have gotten over other animated features has kind of got to their heads a bit. I mean it was said that Lasseter replaced Chapman with Andrews because he wanted more "Pixar humor" which is probably him responding to how the audiences enjoy their movies. And while I still enjoyed Brave, it might have worked better with Chapman's involvement. And regarding Mark Andrews, I kind of remember a couple of things he said that may or may not have been a part of the general criticisms of the movie saying that Merida was the first princess to get dirty and climb rocks while saying "So Pocahontas runs barefoot through the woods. Big deal!" (Or something like that.) Really Mark? I know you're not a Disney fan but seriously? And also, in response to what some people have said about Merida being unlikeable, I saw a vid interview where he said that showing her as a kid would make her more sympathetic. No Mark. That is not the only thing you do to make a character more sympathetic. I don't think Merida's a bad character or anything but that is kind of a pathetic excuse.

And, as awful as this is going to sound, I'm glad Pixar didn't win the Best Animated Feature last year. As I've said they do make good movies, but am I the only one who kind of gets sick of them winning the award every single year from Ratatouille to Toy Story 3? It's not really fair to some of the other people who have turned out some incredible work (I would have picked either Coraline or Princess and the Frog for the 2009 Oscar.) I'm not dissing the fans of Pixar, I'm just stating my opinion.

qindarka wrote:

Sotiris wrote: Not only did they remove her from her own personal project but they didn't even have the courtesy to tell her why. That's the worst part of it all. I recall Chris Sanders having a similar experience. The issue here is not so much about a director replacement - this happens often in Hollywood studios - , but the way Disney/Pixar is handling situations like these and how they're treating their employees.

Regarding the Sanders affair, I've heard from someone from another forum who is, or at least claims to be, a personal friend of Sanders who said that the parting was very amicable.

Here it is:



"American/Hollywood Dog was changed because the story was too strange and lacked focus. Having talked to Chris, though, there were really no hard feelings, and Lasseter actually felt so bad that Chris was leaving that he did Chris a favor that has NEVER been done and likely never will again by Disney Studios.

"Sorry! Shit, I had to run out the door for work and hit post by mistake.

Lasseter invited Chris to lunch a week before his last day and asked if there was anything he could do to make up for the unfortunate circumstances leading up to Chris's departure. Chris said that her KNEW that Disney would NEVER use the cat with eye patch (Ogo) ever again, and asked if he could take Ogo with him. Lasseter asked why, and Chris told him about the stories he wished to tell. So John had Chris write up a contract and draw a picture of Ogo, and he gave the rights of him over to Chris. (Just the print rights, they said they'd do the animation rights at another time.) The Disney Lawer Initiative were FREAKING OUT over this. It's something that has NEVER happened before, (basically, whatever you draw at WDFA becomes THEIR property and they will sue the shit out of you if you ever use it anywhere else) and it will likely never happen again.

So, I thought that was pretty cool. I don't think this is NDA info because he told me and another person at ComiCon just off his cuff when I asked how he was able to continue to draw Ogo if he was the same cat from American Dog."

Source: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread. ... 588&page=2

If true, this could be another reason why all traces of American Dog were left out of The Art of Bolt book.

As for Brenda Chapman, the creative exodus continues.

qindarka wrote:Regarding the Sanders affair, I've heard from someone from another forum who is, or at least claims to be, a personal friend of Sanders who said that the parting was very amicable.

That would certainly explain how Sanders is allowed to use the character of Ogo in his web comic Kiskaloo. Sanders also attended the voice actors panel at the Destination D event this year so perhaps he may not be on such bad terms with Disney after all. That doesn't necessarily negate though other accounts that claim Sanders was angry and devastated when he was removed from his pet project which is quite understandable.

qindarka wrote:I've often heard of Stanton being described as arrogant and unpleasant.

I think this perception about Stanton grew stronger after the whole John Carter debacle and how badly Stanton handled the film's failure.

Lnds500 wrote:He and Lasseter sure have been playing that part well in recent years.

I'll have to agree. Have they always been this way or has the growing success and power changed them?

PatrickvD wrote:He came across as another broken Pixar record repeating empty words like 'story', 'heart' and 'character' as if Pixar invented those things.

I wouldn't blame just Andrews for that. Everyone at Pixar repeats the exact same thing. Whether it's Lasseter, a director or a producer, it's always the same self-righteous narrative. It has become part of the Pixar culture.

What I don't understand is, if the story didn't change all that much after Brenda left, why was it necessary to actually replace her, as opposed to just bringing on a co-director to help fix any issues that were happening.

SWillie! wrote:What I don't understand is, if the story didn't change all that much after Brenda left, why was it necessary to actually replace her, as opposed to just bringing on a co-director to help fix any issues that were happening.

According to Chapman, after she left they did change the story radically. She had watched a screening and was very displeased that the focus of the story had completely shifted. It was only much later in the process they decided to return to Chapman's original focus.

So they should've left well-enough alone.

Sotiris wrote:I'll have to agree. Have they always been this way or has the growing success and power changed them?

No idea. I've been getting this dictatorial vibe from Lasseter and Stanton for a while, they act like they are above reproach, like they are infallible (especially Stanton). I didn't want to say anything cause people are very passionate about Pixar (I get very defensive about Bird myself ) but how many times have you heard something like "Lasseter AND Stanton didn't warm up to the idea blah blah blah". I get Lasseter, but why Stanton? As for Lasseter, is he the only one who has a say in the studio (that goes for both Disney/Pixar)? We've heard it many times that "Lasseter found this or that distracting/didn't like the idea" etc..

I have also expressed my opinion on Stanton's Carter fiasco and his immediate turn to Finding Nemo 2 so yeah, I guess their success and power has changed them. We've seen the changes, we just refuse to acknowledge them most of the time.

BTW, who would have thought that animators and creative forces would be "running" towards Katzenberg, right? I guess he does something right.

Semaj wrote:As for Brenda Chapman, the creative exodus continues. Sad

And the likes of Rich Moore and Jennifer Lee come into the studio and people like Nathan Greno and Byron Howard get promotions. It's the cyclical nature of the industry and Disney and Pixar will always attract new talent because of who they are.

Lnds500 wrote:As for Lasseter, is he the only one who has a say in the studio (that goes for both Disney/Pixar)? We've heard it many times that "Lasseter found this or that distracting/didn't like the idea" etc..

As he's the Chief Creative Office he gets the final say.

Lnds500 wrote:I get Lasseter, but why Stanton?

Probably because they're close friends and Stanton has pretty much an exemplary track record in animation. Every studio has an inner circle at the top of the hierarchy, Walt had one and John Lasseter has one too.

qindarka wrote:

Sotiris wrote: Not only did they remove her from her own personal project but they didn't even have the courtesy to tell her why. That's the worst part of it all. I recall Chris Sanders having a similar experience. The issue here is not so much about a director replacement - this happens often in Hollywood studios - , but the way Disney/Pixar is handling situations like these and how they're treating their employees.

Regarding the Sanders affair, I've heard from someone from another forum who is, or at least claims to be, a personal friend of Sanders who said that the parting was very amicable.

Here it is:



"American/Hollywood Dog was changed because the story was too strange and lacked focus. Having talked to Chris, though, there were really no hard feelings, and Lasseter actually felt so bad that Chris was leaving that he did Chris a favor that has NEVER been done and likely never will again by Disney Studios.

"Sorry! Shit, I had to run out the door for work and hit post by mistake.

Lasseter invited Chris to lunch a week before his last day and asked if there was anything he could do to make up for the unfortunate circumstances leading up to Chris's departure. Chris said that her KNEW that Disney would NEVER use the cat with eye patch (Ogo) ever again, and asked if he could take Ogo with him. Lasseter asked why, and Chris told him about the stories he wished to tell. So John had Chris write up a contract and draw a picture of Ogo, and he gave the rights of him over to Chris. (Just the print rights, they said they'd do the animation rights at another time.) The Disney Lawer Initiative were FREAKING OUT over this. It's something that has NEVER happened before, (basically, whatever you draw at WDFA becomes THEIR property and they will sue the shit out of you if you ever use it anywhere else) and it will likely never happen again.

So, I thought that was pretty cool. I don't think this is NDA info because he told me and another person at ComiCon just off his cuff when I asked how he was able to continue to draw Ogo if he was the same cat from American Dog."

Source: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread. ... 588&page=2

Lasseter did that?! I've been ticked off at Lasseter for years for him alienating Sanders for his quirky storytelling till Sanders thought "screw it" and decided to leave. All the while Lasseter worshiped Miyazaki who put all sorts of off-the-wall things in his films' stories but Lasseter couldn't handle Sanders' radioactive rabbit. Anyway, I'm glad Lasseter gave Sanders permission to use Ogo. It's been a long time since I looked at Sanders' website and I must have so many Ogo adventures to catch up on!

Semaj wrote:As for Brenda Chapman, the creative exodus continues. Sad.

Interesting. How many people have migrated to Dreamworks, in particular? I know there's also Alan Menken and Glen Keane. I suppose it doesn't matter much since Lasseter is the only name that really matters anymore.

Glen Keane is not at Dreamworks. That was a rumor a while back, but as of a few weeks ago at CTN, he wasn't affiliated with any studio, and mentioned that he wa taking the time to work on personal projects and spend time with his family.

I'm a massive Pixar fan, but I can be objective.

Princess and the Frog deserved to win nothing in 2009.

Fantastic Mr. Fox should've won.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand, I agree re: Mark Andrews.

I only listened to the director's roundtable for 10 minutes before shutting it off, having not seen Ralph or Paranorman. However, in that time, it didn't take long for me to feel Andrews was a douchebag.

It also seemed that they were all lesser directors than live action ones, except perhaps the Paranorman director. All of them seemed kind of daft.

Maybe they improved later on, but Andrews comes off as insufferable and I'm sad that they kicked Chapman off and instated that mitten. A yes man if I ever saw one.

Thing is, I really did like Brave. In my mind I have no doubt that Chapman 's version would have been better from just reading an insider once said that her version was more aligned with the "revolutionary" we expect from Pixar. But, I can't say Brave was ruined or I didn't like it. I guess it's good that largely what she contributed remained. I wish they would flesh everything out though. To be epic, you need to increase the running time, explore the world more. Brave needed at least 10 more minutes of screentime in the woods between Merida and her mother.

Anyway, that's my two cents.