Welcome to Jim Hill Media - Entertainment News : Theme Parks Movies Television

The Pixar Way -- Part I: "What We Didn't Know" or "My Journey of Pain"

The Pixar Way -- Part I: "What We Didn't Know" or "My Journey of Pain"

Rate This
  • Comments 28

I've seen all the hubbub and groans lately over John Lasseter's musical decisions and while not everyone may be happy with what goes down, you gotta know that Lasseter and the gang at Pixar are all about change. In fact they embrace change and do everything in their power to stay fresh.

How do I know this, you ask? I got to listen to them tell me this first-hand just a few weeks ago. As many of you know, the folks at Pixar are legend when it comes to the success they have had in telling great stories in the feature film arena. So they agreed to come down to Southern California for a weekend and teach a group of screenwriters at the annual Screenwriting Expo (sponsored by Creative Screenwriting magazine) the secret of their success.

We're not just talking about one token Pixar employee, but almost their entire creative staff including: Andrew Stanton ("Toy Story" 1 & 2, "A Bugs Life," "Monsters, Inc.," "Finding Nemo"), Dave Reynolds ("The Emperor's New Groove," "Finding Nemo"), Lee Unkrich ("Toy Story 2," "Monsters, Inc.," "Finding Nemo"), Mike Arndt ("Little Miss Sunshine"), Brenda Chapman ("The Little Mermaid," "The Lion King," "The Prince of Egypt"), Dan Gerson ("Monsters, Inc.," "Cars"), Gary Rydstrom (artist & sound designer extraordinaire - everything from "Jurassic Park" to "Toy Story 2" and beyond ), Irene Mecchi ( "The Lion King," "The Hunchback of Notre Dame," "Hercules") and Kiel Murray ("Finding Nemo," "The Incredibles," "Cars") [Note: Pete Docter was also scheduled but was unable to attend].

As you can see from their credits (and many I have not listed) these guys and gals are a wealth of riches that Pixar draws on every time they go out to make a movie. Forgive me for not announcing the event to everyone here on Jim Hill Media. But they had already sold out the event several times over and had to send video feeds of the presentations to additional rooms just to cover those who had already bought tickets.

The bad news for the press (i.e. me), was that Pixar would not allow any video or audio recording of any kind, nor any still photography during the presentations. So … I took notes as fast as my hand would allow and took photos of the banners in the room prior to the show.


Copyright 2001 Disney/Pixar

Fans from all walks of life were there including the folks from Aardman Animation who were in town for the premiere of their new film "Flushed Away." I actually got to talk to Nick Park and ask him about his upcoming projects. Alas, he was fairly tight-lipped about the future but a really nice guy all around.

First up was writer-director Andrew Stanton, who led off with an insightful presentation entitled "Understanding Story." He began by stating that storytelling is joke telling and very quickly laid out the "Pixar Rules."

PIXAR RULES

1. No politics

I truly think they mean this. In all the interaction and panels I saw their team conduct, everyone seemed to a have a healthy sense of humor and not once did I detect an unhealthy ego lurking in the background.

2. No studio execs

By this, Andrew stated that Pixar is studio run by artists, in his words "film school without the teachers". There are no layers of middle managers, creative executives or corporate bureaucrats itching to put their thumbprint on every project that comes their way. Just artists striving to make the very best entertainment on planet earth.

I truly believe that most Hollywood misfires are a result of the multi-layered, ego-filled bureaucracy that is Hollywood. Just ask any credit administrator at a major studio and they'll tell you about all the bizarre things people do just to get their name in the credits of a movie … even if they had nothing to do with it. Ego often rules Hollywood, but not Pixar.

3. Director driven studio

Why does this matter? Someone needs to run the show and without studio execs and a host of producers or other actors to please, the director takes the reins. But these aren't just any director. Most of these people are WRITER - Directors. They are visual storytellers who work closely with another writer and/or director to develop and create their movies. Again, this is a team effort with the director(s) taking the lead. And it's amazing what a singular vision can create with a great supporting team.

4. In-house original ideas ONLY

Sorry folks. If you had some idea you wanted to submit to Pixar for their next film…you're out of luck. The only ideas the surface in Emeryville, CA come from the inside and not just from the writers or directors. Everyone, company-wide, is encouraged to submit ideas. And they are actually considered.

Of course upon hearing of these concepts, a film executive once asked Stanton, "What, do you live in fairyland?" to which Stanton proudly exclaimed, "Yes, I live in fairyland."

Stanton then went on to give a brief history of Pixar which he humorously entitled ...

"What We Didn't Know" or "My Journey of Pain"

When Pixar first began in the early '90s, they already knew that their success lay in audience participation. For them, a good story is an equation of 2 + 2 where the audience comes up with 4 (the answer). And they felt they could make a better movie. Note that Stanton did not say a better animated movie, but a better movie. As Brad Bird put it, "Animation is a medium, not a genre." Animation just happened to be the easiest way for Pixar to tell their stories.

The Oscar-winning short "Tin Toy" was actually the test launch for what would be "Toy Story." Of course in charting this course into feature film territory, Pixar came up with a few rules to differentiate themselves from other animated fare. In fact when Tom Hanks was approached to be part of the film, he probably summed it up nicely when he asked, "You don't want me to sing, do you?"

Of course Pixar calmed his fears early on since they had already determined that in their films there would be:

  • No songs
  • No happy village song
  • No love story
  • No villain
  • No "I want" moment / song

Interestingly enough, when the folks at Disney reviewed Pixar's "Toy Story" script, they were a bit concerned. So some guy named Tim Rice ( I believe it's Sir Tim Rice now) suggested they should add:

  • Songs
  • A happy village song
  • A love story
  • A villain
  • An "I want" moment / song

It was at this point that Pixar knew they were on the right track and had effectively broken the mold. Of course there was much they still had to do.


Copyright 1995 Disney/Pixar

Take the character of Woody, for instance. In the early drafts of the script, Woody came off as a very unlikable character. He was very guarded, negative, and plain selfish and it was killing the movie. But the guys & gals at Pixar realized that real people are much more complicated and layered. So they decided that Woody could disguise his truly self-serving nature by being self-less. Or at least that was the way it would seem to others until the moment Woody found himself under a crate in Sid's room. In this beautifully executed scene, Woody plays his own self-therapist.


INT. SID'S ROOM

Sid is in bed fast asleep.

Woody struggles to move his milkcrate jail, but with the weight of the toolbox on top it won't budge.

Woody looks across the desktop at Buzz sitting dejectedly with the rocket strapped to his back.

WOODY
Ps-s-s-s-t! Psst! Hey, Buzz!

No reaction from Buzz.

Woody picks up a stray washer from the desktop and flings it at Buzz, striking his helmet.

Buzz lifts his head and turns lifelessly to look at Woody.

WOODY
Hey! Get over here and see if you
can get this tool box off me.

Buzz just looks away from Woody and bows his head.

WOODY
Oh, come on, Buzz. I...Buzz, I
can't do this without you. I need
your help.

BUZZ
I can't help. I can't help anyone.

WOODY
Why, sure you can, Buzz. You can
get me out of here and then I'll
get that rocket off you, and we'll
make a break for Andy's house.

BUZZ
Andy's house. Sid's house. What's
the difference.

WOODY
Oh, Buzz, you've had a big fall.
You must not be thinking clearly.

BUZZ
No, Woody, for the first time I am
thinking clearly. (looking at himself)
You were right all along. I'm not
a Space Ranger. I'm just a toy. A
stupid little insignificant toy.

WOODY
Whoa, hey -- wait a minute. Being
a toy is a lot better than being a
Space Ranger.

BUZZ
Yeah, right.

WOODY
No, it is. Look, over in that
house is a kid who thinks you are
the greatest, and it's not because
you're a Space Ranger, pal, it's
because you're a TOY! You are HIS
toy.

BUZZ
But why would Andy want me?

WOODY
Why would Andy want you?! Look at
you! You're a Buzz Lightyear. Any
other toy would give up his moving
parts just to be you. You've got
wings, you glow in the dark, you
talk, your helmet does that -- that
whoosh thing -- you are a COOL toy.

Woody pauses and looks at himself.

WOODY
(continued; depressed)
As a matter of fact you're too cool.
I mean -- I mean what chance does a
toy like me have against a Buzz
Lightyear action figure? All I can
do is...

Woody pulls his own pull-string.

WOODY (VOICE BOX)
There's a snake in my boots!

Woody bows his head.

WOODY
Why would Andy ever want to play
with me, when he's got you? (pause)
I'm the one that should be strapped
to that rocket.

He begins by building up Buzz in hope of escaping, and then breaks himself down, finally exposing Woody's true weakness - a lack of self-worth.

Of course this was just the first step on the road not taken. In Part 2 of this series, we'll get into more of the history of Pixar and Andrew Stanton reveals more of Pixar's filmmaking philosophies.

Blog - Post Feedback Form
Your comment has been posted.   Close
Thank you, your comment requires moderation so it may take a while to appear.   Close
Leave a Comment
  • * Please enter your name
  • * Please enter a comment
  • Post
  • TweedlDum9 said:
    "The only ones who come close (at least in a "Disney" sense) are Syndrome and Hopper because they are around throughout the movie... but Sid and Al both have minor roles and Darla is around for ONE scene."
    ---
    Most Pixar movies are about a "message" (Toys are fun!  Old highway stops are fun!), and "obstacles" like Sid, Al and Chick are just greedy people who never learned what our good characters know...

    But yes, when Pixar does have villains, they're bad, BAD baddies:
    Katzenberg gave us six years of the exact same sniffy-gay Jafar/Scar/Ratcliffe/Frollo/Clayton/etc. clones plugged in, whiny Dr. Smiths who seemed to act more out of inadequacy/self-insecurity than evil, and ooh, just -hated- those good guys getting more attention, time to frame them!...
    While the villains in Pixar were the engines of their stories--Syndrome, Randall and Hopper wanted what they wanted, and they didn't care -who- they had to step on to get it, just so long as whoever was stepped on knew it...As Mrs. Incredible said, these were NOT your safe, corny Saturday-morning villains.
    Which's a little thing that comes out of investing some emotional appeal into what happens in the story, and not just plugging in a formula...Disney could do it too (Shan Yu from "Mulan" was a change of pace), but Pixar doesn't happen to own the monopoly on it.
  • Even if you argue that all of the other bad guys in Pixar films are "obstacles", there's no way that you could say that Hopper or Syndrome aren't villains, because they just are.  I'd put Randal up there.  

    Bald Melon Tim said:
    "Andy Stanton's Rules were particularly for Toy Story, and how they wanted to make their first feature different from the mold (not about hard and fast rules for Pixar forever)."

    That makes sense...Pixar has evolutioninzed (??) and have worked with some of those previous no-nos and have had some great success.  The singing thing has mainly stayed, though: I can think of Weezy singing "You've Got a Friend in Me", and Mike and Sully singing "Put That Thing Back Where You Found it or So Help Me", and that's it.  
  • I think Pixar was defining "villian" as a single character who battles the hero at the end of the story. (Scar, Hopper, Gaston, etc.) Every story must have conflict for the plot to progress. But the negative force doesn't have to be embodied in a single entity.

    Take "Dumbo" for instance. Dumbo didn't battle another character, he was simply fighting against intolerance and ignorance (from others and his own ignorance of himself). The Matriarchal Elephants, the clowns, the cruel kids were all obstacles and various facets of the larger conflict.

    Similarly, "Toy Story", like most buddy movies, is a story about self discovery, and two unlikely people who become friends (yeah, it's a love story). Woody's villian was his own insecurity. Buzz's was self ignorance. It's the same as a cop buddy movie like "Lethal Weapon" - there's a bad guy, but the story is about Mel & Danny learning to trust each other.

    And after all, the title of the Pixar talk was "What We Didn't Know", which should tell us all that Pixar folks are always learning... sometimes that they can't write rules in stone.

    What I took away from the lecture was not to try and follow the Pixar rules, but to find out what will allow me to be the best artist I can be, and to create that environment, not sit around and wait for it to happen.
  • "weedlDum9 said:

    Dude, the "No songs" rule just means that they never have the CHARACTERS singing the songs. Jessie wasn't the one singing "When She Loved Me," it was Sarah MacLachlan. Similarly, neither Sally nor Mater sang "Our Town," because it was James Taylor's narrative singing that made the impact so much greater."

    That's true ... you do make a good point. I can't think of a single Pixar film where one of the characters actually sings a song (although I'll admit I may just be missing one).

    "When She Loved Me" is probably the closest they've ever gotten. It may have been Sarah MacLachlan's voice, but it was clear to me it was sung very much from Jessie's POV.
  • Characters singing songs is what made Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Lion King, etc...

    All about change, then find someone else besides Randy Newman....
  • Ptindy: true, true, true about the Newman case.. But I think Lasseter has a good and familiar feeling when it comes to scores written by Newman, and I think that's the point, and the feeling where "change" gets shifted in second place. He likes working with Newman, and never change a winning team. But I'm all for a change of composer when it comes to Lasseter movies. (maybe he'll use Menken for Toy Story 3.. yeah right, like that's ever going to happen...)
  •  Pinocchio is another classic Disney film that's full of bad guys, characters that act as obstacles to the protaganists original goals, but no single villian with an evil plot that has to be stopped. Notice how in Pinocchio none of the bad guys are even punished for their bad behavior. I always thought that this made Pinocchio one of Disney's most complex storylines, it's so easy for a writer to just kill off a bad guy and then make everything okay, in Pinocchio the message was that the bad guys are everywhere, you have to learn how to identify them and avoid them.
  • Basically, the other Pixar Rules beyond ("no management") weren't saying "We don't want to make Disney films"--
    They were saying "We don't want to make those exact same cheap, cynical fairytale-formula wannabe knockoffs that Fox and Warner are[/were] already making too many of, otherwise we'll just be part of the problem, and real-Disney will still eat us for breakfast."
    Ie., not that they didn't want songs or villains, they just didn't want to make "Swan Princess" and "Quest for Camelot".  Unfortunately, like everyone else at the time, they were blaming it on Disney.

    Which's one of the problems with trying to "punish" someone in the past with a wide brush of New Rules (certain world politics from history comes to mind), rather than try to adopt What Worked and cure What Didn't--
    Pixar's people had good instincts for what a story appealing, but that doesn't come from "Not doing what the Bad People are doing"...
  • I just wanted to thank BrerArtist for the nice comment on Pinnochio.  I had never thought of it that way, but it really is a good life lesson movie.  Evil is around and doesn't always die at the denoument - sometimes we have to identify and learn to avoid it ourselves, even when it's Pleasure Island.  :)
  • I guess I am the odd man out here, but I LOVE the fact that the Disney films in the 90's were musicals that had the characters singing. Yes, over time the films had elements that got too similar and repeatitive, but overall, from mermaid to Tarzan, I think they were all great films. And they truly hold a very special place in my heart. I enjoy Pixar, but their films don't give me the same 'feeling' I get from those disney musicals. For me, Monsters Inc. was the one that gave me that good ole' Disney animation feeling, but none of the other Pixar films do. I still enjoy all of them though and think that they are some of the best animated films ever made.  I just miss the days of the real good old 'Disney musical'.  I know Pixar doesn't quite want to do that for themselves, but I really hope they can bring that back to the Disney side- not for every film, of course, but for some.
  • Tcsnwhite: the upcoming film, The Frog Princess ;)
  • Pixar wasn't (although they maybe didn't realize it) balking at Disney-musical songs, they were objecting to the 90's-musical songs that "had" to be in the script--
    They mention the "I Want" song, and the "Happy Village" song (what ARE those, anyway?--"Belle"-style establishing opening numbers, or what?)...And, if their finger-pointing had bothered to do a little more homework about Katzenberg-Formula, they'd have probably also made cheap jokes about the "Villain's Plan" song and the "We're Buddies" sidekick song, which also got to sound more and more time-killer forced into their movies by the time of Hunchback and Hercules.

    Yes, TS2 and Cars had their Sniffly-Moment songs (although I thought they looked like the exact same one)--But what -did- get us all sniffly about them was that they were used to cover backstory montages that explained large portions of the script...
    In other words, "The song was used to propel the story", which was something we also heard during the "good" early-90's Disney musicals, back when the musical ideas were more fun and intuitive and less forced.
    As we kept saying all along, there are No Bad Fairytale Musicals, only Bad Producers who think it's too easy to fake if you follow some pre-programmed written agenda.
  • Great article, Sean! Looking forward to future parts in the series.

    > no layers of middle managers, creative executives or corporate bureaucrats itching to put their thumbprint on every project that comes their way

    Of course, this is what we know happened with Michael Eisner's micromanagement of 'Treasure Planet' -- a good movie that could've been great.

    I'll be curious to see how John L treats Ron n John now that he's boss -- I can see why some are worried by Lasseter's move of switching music composers on the new film.

    > If you had some idea you wanted to submit to Pixar for their next film…you're out of luck.

    That's too bad. There are a few established family entertainment brands that it'd be cool if Pixar would look at -- 'Adventures in Odyssey' for one.

    Thanks for the insight,

    -joshMshep

Page 2 of 2 (28 items) 12