(Source:
www.o-meon.com)
(Writer's Note: click here to read Part #1 in this series)
Now, as I mentioned in the previous story, this
Tinker Bell movie was the first flick in a planned tetralogy (that's a four-movie cycle in case I'm losing ya). While Disney Toon Studios head Sharon Morrill was playing hide-the-movie with John Lasseter, Disney animators were putting together the three sequels to the original. Those sequels used script concepts from Morrill's
Tinker Bell film, the one Lasseter wasn't allowed to see.
The same week that Walt Disney Feature Animation announced a series of lay-offs, and Chris Williams took over as director of
American Dog, John Lasseter attended a screening of a rough cut of this trilogy. It did not go well.
“John Lasseter came out so angry, many feared he would use his influence to shut down Disney Toon Studios,” a source close to Disney studio operations told
O-Meon.
Ads by Google
Halloween Fairy Costumes
Deals that Will Make You Flutter Adorable Kids & Sexy Adult Fairies
Like.com/Fairy_Costumes</SPAN>
Ex-Disney Employee Talks
Use These Rare Insider Secrets to Save Hundreds at Disney World.
www.DW-Secrets.com</SPAN>
There are multiple explanations for why Lasseter exploded. One reason is that he realized Morrill had attempted an end-run around his authority with the first
Tinker Bell movie. She had essentially created two
Tinker Bell films: one which ignored Lasseter's script suggestions, and another to delude the WDFA head that she was listening to his advice.
When Lasseter was given Walt Disney Feature Animation in April of 2006, he was told to protect the integrity of Disney's classic characters. Tinker Bell has been one of the most important, ever since her debut in 1953's
Peter Pan. Her image had introduced many Disney movies, and countless episodes of
Disneyland and
The Wonderful World of Disney TV shows. Millions of Disneyland visitors have watched Tinker Bell fly over Cinderella's Castle during the nightly fireworks display. Many consider her almost as important to Disney as Mickey Mouse.
It's part of Lasseter's job to make sure that Tinker Bell's image is not sullied and, in his opinion, Sharon Morrill's actions threatened that.
Morrill, for her part, was a hold-over from the Michael Eisner administration. She was working closely with Disney Consumer Products to make a movie that would promote the
Disney Fairies line of merchandise. Billions of dollars' worth of potential revenue was riding on this movie to do well.
Tinker Bell was her baby, and she didn't want Lasseter's interference, even though she had gone to him for help in the first place.
Not only that, Morrill was even overruling
Tinker Bell director Bradley Raymond, mainly because Raymond agreed with Lasseter.
There was more. Lasseter even hated the trilogy's concept: Tinker Bell's best friend discovers that boy fairies live in another part of Neverland. That sets the stage for a Romeo and Juliet story, where two lovers are caught in a war between the boy and girl fairies. The first movie ends with the Romeo fairy sacrificing himself to save his love, and the Juliet fairy going with Tinker Bell to see a performance by an all-girl fairy group informally called "The Pixie Chicks."
In the second and third movies, Tinker Bell discovers that the Romeo fairy isn't actually dead, and the trilogy ends happily ever after. Think it sucks? So did John Lasseter.
The next day, both Raymond and Morrill had to come in and pitch their script ideas to a now-furious WDFA head. Not surprisingly, Lasseter loved Raymond's pitch. However, Raymond admitted that meant the animators would have to scrap 90% of the current film, which meant changing the Fall 2007 release date.
That's when Morrill said, “Okay, now here’s what we can really do.” Her pitch retained Peter Pan, the Lost Boys and London as a setting; all the things Lasseter objected to in the original script.
Lasseter told Morrill he "would not support a (
Tinker Bell) movie with Peter Pan in it.”
That's when a major power struggle developed within Disney. On one side was Morrill, Buena Vista Home Entertainment and Disney Consumer Products, all of whom were supporting an admittedly flawed
Tinker Bell. Despite the problems with the movie, they thought it should come out in the Fall of 2007 to support the massive marketing associated with
Disney Fairies.
Many considered Morrill's stance to be a fatal error.
“I was surprised,” said a former associate of Morrill’s. “That’s not what the Sharon I knew would do. She’s very smart and got to where she is today by siding with the most successful people at the company. To me, that meant joining Lasseter in pressing (Disney Features chairman ________ Cook) and (Disney CEO Robert Iger) for more time to make the movie.”
On the other side stood Lasseter, WDFA and
Tinker Bell director Raymond. They felt that 16 years of sub-standard product had ruined Disney's reputation and they didn't want to release what they considered to be a lousy movie.
Robert Iger and ________ Cook agreed with Lasseter.
Tinker Bell had tested badly with audiences and it needed serious revision before it could be released. Timing was also on Lasseter's side: his Pixar movie
Cars was making millions at the box office and even more in merchandising. So they called for
Tinker Bell to get pushed back to a later date, and supported Lasseter and Raymond's script changes.
If Iger and Cook hadn't agreed with Lasseter, many feel Lasseter would have petitioned to have Disney Toon Studios shut down and
Tinker Bell killed. Ironically, by losing to Lasseter and Raymond, Morrill may have saved her job.
Tinker Bell still has major problems. While Lasseter and Morrill were battling for control, the animation studio in India completed most of the animation. They will have to be paid for the work they've done, and retained in order to make the revised movie. That will drive
Tinker Bell's costs into the stratosphere.
Some have estimated that
Tinker Bell may end up costing Disney somewhere around $90 to $120 million, around what
Cars cost to produce. That's also three to four times the original budget for the film.
Most animation insiders (and bloggers) believe that John Lasseter's interference with
Tinker Bell is the best thing that could've happened to this flick. They're hoping that Lasseter is seriously willing and able to stop Disney from releasing movies that are nothing more than 90-minute toy advertisements.
Whether or not he's able to do so remains to be seen. But, based on his recent actions with
Tinker Bell,
Meet the Robinsons and WALL-E, John Lasseter appears to be Disney's best chance to return to its former glory as North America's premier animation studio.
:lol:
