Toy Story 4

[Ben]

It won't be that kind of love story. It's an oblique reference...

[Dan]

Figured I'd post in this thread since it's Toy Story related. Did not realize until the last minute that they were doing a one-hour retrospective special celebrating the 20th anniversary of Toy Story on ABC tonight (12/10) and then followed by a broadcast of the film.

About ten minutes in and it's still a fascinating behind-the-scenes tale to listen to. One note of interest is that Joss Whedon gets to talk about being involved. Fun little bit about how he felt the first time he went up to the old studio building.

[Ben]

There's also a Snow White special either just been on or coming up (celebrating, er, what anniversary again...?) that doesn't look like it will be on the new Blu-ray early next year (celebrating, er, what anniversary again...!?).

Both look interesting, and nice they bother to still make these kinds of things.

[Dacey]

The Snow White "special," unfortunately, looks like it's being made for the intention of selling the Disney Movies Anywhere app, and nothing more. How much more can really be said about the movie at this point anyway?

[Dan]

The Snow White special will be on this Sunday. The impression I got from the commercial is that it's going to attempt in an hour explaining the development of the film along with the history of the fairy tale.

[Ben]

Hopefully it might turn up online somewhere...

[EricJ]

The Snow White special will be on this Sunday. The impression I got from the commercial is that it's going to attempt in an hour explaining the development of the film along with the history of the fairy tale.

Instead of going from Platinum Edition to Diamond Edition to Vibranium Edition, the new Blu-ray/DMA line for the archived ten on this go-round will be "Walt Disney Signature Editions" (for those Walt worked on, including 101D and Jungle but not Mermaid), hence the documentary selling Walt's "personal unique vision" of the story and building the studio.
Which will also be the focus of the new extras on the disk, and not have the Magic Mirror nagging at you because you haven't watched it for a month.

[ShyViolet]

Official release date finally out! (June 2019)


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/ar ... -2019.html


Can’t help but wonder if the recent claims of sexual harassment made against JL will have any effect on how this film does, or, for that matter, how much credit he’ll publicly receive for the film. (Especially if he winds up leaving Disney permanently.) Despite stepping down as director last July, Lassetter is still credited as executive producer as well as one of the main story people. If he’s no longer at Disney because of the accusations, the company might very well try to distance themselves from him to minimize damage. (Cutting his name from press materials/promos.) I doubt this would happen since I don’t think they did that with Coco (he had an exec producer credit for that one too)** but technically all he did was take a leave of absence, not lose his job or anything. Things might be different if he actually does leave.


**EDIT: Oh wait they did do that: https://www.cartoonbrew.com/artist-righ ... 55913.html


Plus, Toy Story was always very much Lassetter’s vision, especially since he directed both 1 and 2. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

[Dacey]

Not sure how the release date is news. It was announced last year! Guess Pixar has made it "official" recently.

[Randall]

The film's BO should not be affected UNLESS Disney starts to get lots of bad press over Lasseter. The story has fallen off the radar of the mainstream (non-animation) press, and the general public doesn't know much about Lasseter beyond maybe basic name recognition--- yet. Of course, what Disney decides to do with Lasseter next will determine which way things will go.

As Vi said, it's just a LOA so far. Maybe that will suffice? The question is: will this and a big apology from Lasseter satisfy his victims? Was he seen as a predator or just a creepy guy with no sense of boundaries (admittedly, that distinction may not even be there)? If Lasseter stays and employees revolt and yap at the press, then Disney may be in trouble. If Disney is smart, then they've been gauging the response of their employees to the LOA and asking the victims what will satisfy them.

[Dacey]

It sounds from what I've heard like it was a "boundaries thing" more than anything, in that he apparently liked hugging people who didn't want to be hugged.

But then there was that story about the Tinker Bell fairies, so I don't know. In any case, it didn't bode well for Pixar's already controversial reputation with the fairer sex (which is actually why the original screenwriter says she left).

[ShyViolet]

Here’s a pretty good rundown of all the details of this case from Variety (November issue). Not saying that they’re all true/not true but a good reference.


http://variety.com/2017/film/news/disne ... 202624219/

[Dacey]

Welp, they still have JL's name on this Incredibles 2 poster, for whatever that might be worth...

http://animatedviews.com/2018/new-incre ... -tomorrow/

[Ben]

Liking it, it has a bit of a Marvel feel. Big Hero Slicks?

Not unexpected that JL's name is there...those pesky contractual obligations...! Could be also that they’re testing the waters to see what kind of reaction having someone's name on a poster gets, if any. Does this signal a return...?

[ShyViolet]

Re: “King John” Lasseter story on the front page.

I’m still quite shocked about the allegations of sexual misconduct, but one thing I’m not a bit surprised about are the stories of his bulldozing others/taking credit/being contemptuous of underlings (although the Brad Bird thing was kind of a shocker too: I always assumed that his long-time friendship with Lasseter was what gave him free reign on Rat and Incredibles, not any orders from Jobs). When, ten years ago, Stephen Anderson was run roughshod by Lasseter, when Chris Sanders was fired, and when Alan Menken was taken off of Frog and replaced with Randy Newman, something just felt “off”.

I realize that none of us were actually there so up to this point it’s been mostly speculation, but I think one thing we should remember is that before Lassetter’s arrival in 2006, Anderson, Sanders and Musker/Clements (and definitely Glen Keane) were considered to be Disney’s “secret-weapon/Nine old men”. It was when Lassetter arrived that they were demoted to the status of “first-time animation students” who needed major guidance.


Not to bring up the extremely old Chris Sanders/American Dog issue, but AD being altered by Lassetter after firing Sanders because AD was a “bad” movie was somewhat ridiculous in my opinion. I know I wasn’t there and never saw Sanders’ work in progress, but the fact that he went on to make two amazing movies at DWA (Dragon 1 and Croods) speaks volumes. And in addition, even if AD had been a “bad movie”, it wasn’t even finished at that point. One thing that always stuck with me was Pixar’s oft-stated meme about how they’ve made many “bad movies” that they needed to re-do again and again until they became great ones. So why couldn’t they have given that same right to Sanders??

I don’t know. These are just my opinions, and I realize that Lasseter was under immense pressure to revitalize WDFA during that point in time. And no one can deny that he has, even if the very entertaining, extremely successful moneymakers that WDAS has released since Lassetter’s arrival don’t quite match up to the 90s Renaissance features. (Or breathtaking Pixar films like WALL-E and Inside Out). I think Ben once said on another thread that even with the enormous success of the “second Renaissance” under Lasseter’s guidance, WDAS is still “playing it safe” and not investing in the real creativity that was the main reason for the 90s Disney Feature Renaissance (and the success of Pixar’s more “risky”, wildly imaginative films like Up, Inside Out and Coco.)

Also, if it’s true, I’m especially upset about how Don Hahn was treated. That someone so unbelievably talented and respected as Hahn wasn’t given the respect he deserved is
more than disappointing, to say the very least.