Quantcast
Channel: Pixar
Viewing all 340 articles
Browse latest View live

Here's Why There's A Red Sombrero Icon On The Moto X Home Screen Today

$
0
0

Windy Day Moto X 2Motorola has set out to create a new platform called "Spotlight Stories" that uses contemporary technology to reinvent the age-old practice of storytelling. 

Wired has the story this morning. 

If you own a Moto X, you may have noticed something different about your phone today. There is a little red sombrero icon on the home screen. Give it a poke.

Here's what happens next: Moto X turns into a player for a new form of media, one that combines "computer animation and street theater with virtual reality", according to Wired's report. It's called 'Windy Day'. 

The phone’s screen becomes a looking-glass that peers into a stylized virtual forest. Music plays, with the Django-esque, jazzy feel of an old-time Paris bistro. Move the phone up, down, right, left, and you can see more and more of this colorful world — including that red chapeau, and an expressive mouse named Pepe, who is alternatively intrigued and stalked by a hat blown around by a stiff, persistent breeze.

If this sounds like the beginning of a Pixar movie, you're on the right track: Motorola hired actual Pixar movie makers to create it, including the co-director of Ratatouille.

Teaming up with Pixar, Motorola was able to combine the phone-savvy with the Hollywood-savvy and give users the ability to control and follow the narrative by moving their handset around in the physical world.

The Google Play Store describes 'Windy Day' as:

Unlike a conventional film, we’ve given you control of the camera so you can explore. Every viewing is a little different. Look around – there are surprises where you least expect them. It’s fluid and natural because we adapted the controls from those used for precision planetary landings.

This video was released a few weeks ago in anticipation of today's 'Windy Day' launch.

Join the conversation about this story »


Disney's Brilliant Strategy: Make Fewer Movies

$
0
0

"Follow Me" Disney landThe Mouse House is farming out moviemaking duties to Marvel, Lucasfilm and Pixar — and turning them into so much more

Disney has settled on a brilliant business strategy — make as few movies as possible.

Sure, it releases plenty of films made by Pixar, Marvel and DreamWorks. It makes nature movies through Disneynature and animated movies through Disney Animation and Disneytoon Studios. It will soon make “Star Wars” movies under the Lucasfilm banner.

But how many live-action movies has Walt Disney Pictures produced this year?

Two thus far — “Oz: The Great and Powerful” and “The Lone Ranger” — with “Saving Mr. Banks” on the Way. Compared that to the double-digital output at studios like Universal or Lionsgate.

Also read: Disney, Netflix Teaming on Marvel Comics Shows About Daredevil, Luke Cage

They’ll make a fantastical film such as “Oz” or “Alice in Wonderland” (next year it’s “Maleficent”) and throw in a comedy (next year its “The Muppets”).

Other than that? Not much.

“It’s a tough state of affairs,” one executive at a rival studio told TheWrap. “They are just not making many live-action movies anymore.”

He means it’s tough for producers and development executives – not the studio or the company (just ask Jerry Bruckheimer, who will leave his longtime Disney home at year’s end).

Here’s the thing: It’s all part of a very effective strategy.

Disney has deferred moviemaking responsibility to Marvel, Pixar and Lucasfilm because those subsidiaries don’t make movies. They make juggernauts. Their movies are also video games, theme park attractions and toys. They are brands, and those brands are why Disney reported record revenue on Thursday.

Disney CEO Bob Iger stated on the company’s earnings call that its financial results “underscore the value of two major acquisitions – Marvel and Lucasfilm.”

The fastest growing parts of Disney’s business are consumer products, theme parks and interactive. Disney has used, and will continue to use, Iron Man, Pixar and “Star Wars” to sell toys, video games and tickets.

Cars Land, an attraction based on Pixar’s “Cars,” drove record attendance at Disney’s California Adventure theme park, while “Star Wars” toys spurred revenue growth in Disney’s consumer products division.

Also read: Netflix’s Marvel Superhero Team-Up: All Part of Its Plan for Global Domination

And Disney is just getting going. A Marvel-themed attraction is coming to Hong Kong. Marvel shows will be made for Netflix. Star Wars toys will fly off the shelves as the new movies open in theaters. Disney will even make more money when Sony, a rival studio, releases its next “Amazing Spider-Man” movie based on the Marvel superhero through their licensing agreement.

Disney already had the infrastructure in place to license its top brands for consumer products, theme parks and TV shows. Now it’s able to plug even bigger brands into that pipeline, creating scale that few companies can match.

So when Iger noted about the studio’s monstrous slate of movies in 2015, he talked about Marvels’ Avengers, Star Wars and Pixar’s two films. Oddly, he didn’t talk about another of the big releases that year — “Tomorrowland,” the next movie from “The Incredibles” director Brad Bird.

Where does that title come from? Disney’s theme parks.

Join the conversation about this story »

See How Pixar Uses Apple's $3,000 Mac To Make Beautiful Movies

$
0
0

apple mac pro video editing

The first Mac Pro reviews are in, and it truly does deserve the title of "fastest Mac ever."

Of course, it's hard to express to average users why a computer that starts at $2,999, even with all of the fastest internals and a revolutionary form-factor, is worth it for anyone.

Your average person doesn't have any software that demands two dozen cores and two graphics cards. Most have no idea what it means to "edit and render 4K video."

What they do know is Pixar. Since the mid-90s, the animation studios has wowed audiences around the globe with its beautiful computer generated imagery, commonly referred to as CGI. 

When the Mac Pro was recently discussed on developer Marco Arment's Accidental Tech Podcast, the three hosts briefly discussed a presentation at Apple's 2013 Worldwide Developer Conference, in which an artist at Pixar demonstrated how the company uses Apple's powerful new computer to do work in real time that would have taken hours on a traditional computer.

Below, Business Insider has taken screenshots from Apple's official recording of the event (which developers can find on their site by searching for "Painting The Future") to demonstrate how the company's expensive desktop is being used in the real world.

Pixar's artists start with concept art that give the 3D modelers an idea of what a character should look like when showing different emotions.

pixar concept art

They give notes describing what different parts of the character were inspired by and any lighting details that should be worked into the creation of the character.

pixar concept art monsters university

Features that require more detail, like faces, get extra notes.

Pixar concept art Monsters University

That's when the work that demands real computing horsepower starts — and where the Mac Pro comes in.

pixar mac pro demo

Using a professional-grade app called MARI, Pixar artists take basic 3D models created by other team members and begin to "paint" details onto their characters.

pixar mac pro demo 3d model

Using a tablet and stylus, the artist is able to paint with much finer detail than he could with a mouse. He claims that the Mac Pro makes the experience so smooth, he forgets that he's painting on a computer: "It feels like I'm painting in real life."

pixar mac pro demo

Pixar's artists can use MARI to paint on details like shades of skin on different parts of the body and even little things like freckles.

pixar mac pro demo details

All of the detail he's drawing are saved to separate images for each part of the body. These images can be reduced in quality (so they can be used for games on comparatively weak consoles) or scaled up (for use in motion pictures on the big screen). The files the artist is working with on the Mac Pro are scaled for the latter.

pixar mac pro demo image files

After about thirty minutes with MARI and the Mac Pro, the artist has added enough detail to render a model that's this far along. Traditionally, rendering (which essentially means generating a model with all of the effects applied) would take anywhere from two minutes to twelve hours to complete — the Mac Pro does it instantly.

pixar mac pro demo render

The image data for the character above is a massive 10 GB, which is bigger than the total amount of RAM most computers have to hold this kind of stuff. The Mac Pro can render several of these characters with lighting applied and animate them, also in real time.

pixar mac pro demo animation

SEE ALSO: The startup Yahoo just bought turned my phone into the device I've always wanted

Join the conversation about this story »

This Company Has A New iPad App That Talks To Your Kids

$
0
0

about_the_winston_show_downscaled

Correction: An early version of this story said the co-founder of ToyTalk worked on the Siri project. He did not. We apologize for this error.

Every episode of a kid's show follows a similar pattern where the main character will pause, turn to the screen and ask a question to the viewer.

Children are supposed to eagerly shout at the screen with the answer. Regardless of what someone says, the character on screen and continue on with the show.

If this is supposed to be educational, how are kids really learning anything if they're given the answer anyways?

ToyTalk, a company founded by veteran Pixar Animation execs Oren Jacob and Martin Reddy, have an app that literally answers this question.

The company's first project is called The Winston Show. Its a cartoon app starring Winston and Ellington, co-hosts of a digital talk show which makes kids become the special guests. The best part? It actually talks back to you.

Oren explained the big difference between ToyTalk's app and traditional kids shows is this: 'We believe that when conversation is entertaining, it fosters imagination and lets kids explore and grow.'

Voice recognition software harnesses the iPad's microphone makes it possible for Winston to ask questions, listen to the answer and respond to it. Children can actually have an immersive learning experience since the app is teaching them something instead of just giving them the answer. Despite that, Winston can occasionally provide a generic response if he can't understand the question.

Five sketches are built into the application for users to enjoy with over 12 hours of interactive content. Children can choose to compete against a multitude of colorful characters in a variety of quiz shows, create their own story in a segment called Writers Room or just have a fireside chat with Winston on any topic.

When I asked Oren what he feature he was most proud of on ToyTalk, he said, "Personally I am most proud that our writing never talks down to kids. We believe that kids always have something smart to say and deserve the same from their entertainment."

Instead of opting to premiere their new product on TV, ToyTalk decided to bring The Winston Show to the iPad since Oren considered it to be the most "advanced entertainment platform." Also, children were the ideal target for this program because the founders felt that they would be the most receptive audience. 

For now, ToyTalk is keeping The Winston Show just on the iPad. Season 2 will be coming out this year but the release date has yet to be announced. If parents are seeking a beneficial way to harness technology for their kids, you can download the app for free here. A demo of the app can be seen below.

Join the conversation about this story »

Here's What Happens When A Pixar Artist Storyboards His Favorite R-Rated Movies

$
0
0

Pixar Fight Club

As the makers of the most high-minded children's entertainment in the movie business, it would stand to reason some Pixar artists' taste runs more toward adult fare. (Also, obviously every single one of them is a geek. I mean they live in the Bay Area and draw cartoons for a living.)

Well it turns out some great things happen when you combine those kid-friendly artistic sensibilities with some geeky R-rated movie love. Josh Cooley is a Pixar storyboard artist whose new book, Movies R Fun!, finds him creating storybook-style vignettes from movies like The Big LebowskiDriveDie Hard, and much much more. In case you're in the market for, all the pics below are for sale as limited-edition prints on his site.

"No Country For Old Men":
Pixar No Country For Old Men
"Die Hard":
Pixar Die Hard
"Fight Club":
Pixar Fight Club
"Se7en":
Pixar Se7en
"The Silence of the Lambs":
Pixar The Silence of the Lambs
"The Professional":
Pixar The Professional
"The Graduate":
Pixar The Graduate
"The Godfather":
Pixar The Godfather
"The Big Lebowski":
Pixar The Big Lebowski
"American Beauty":
Pixar American Beauty
"The Terminator":
Pixar The Terminator
"Pulp Fiction":
Pixar Pulp Fiction
"Predator":
Pixar Predator
"Drive":
Pixar Drive
"The Road Warrior":
Pixar Mad Max
"Jaws":
Pixar Jaws

SEE ALSO: 22 Storytelling Tips For Writers From A Pixar Storyboard Artist

Join the conversation about this story »

This Theory About The True Identity Of Andy's Mom In 'Toy Story' Is Genius

$
0
0

toy story andy's mom

In July 2013, Jon Negroni published "The Pixar Theory," in which he dissected all 14 Pixar films and proposed that the characters from each movie live in the same world. Below, he unwraps the potential significance of Andy's cowboy hat and the identity of Andy's mom in "Toy Story."

It all started with a hat.

Several months ago, one of my anonymous Pixar Theory Interns (that’s a thing on a resume) came to me with a crazy proposition: Andy’s mom is Emily, Jessie’s previous owner.

I laughed. I then agreed.

For some time, I compiled all of the evidence and found some incredible support for this theory. For one thing, take a close look at Andy’s cowboy hat he frequently wears in the movies:

Andy's Hat

Here’s another close look:

Andy's Hat

As you can see, Andy’s hat is noticeably different from Woody’s. Why is this? Why wouldn’t Andy want to wear a hat that closely resembles the one worn by his favorite toy?

It’s no secret that Andy has a close connection with Woody. In Toy Story 2, his mom (who we only know as Ms. Davis) mentions that Woody is an old family toy.

Remember that Woody doesn’t even recall that he is a collector’s item – a toy made in the 1950s. This is a deviation from other toys who know full well where they come from. It’s possible that Woody doesn’t know because he’s been in Andy’s family for a long time, possibly belonging to his father.

But we need more evidence. Take a close look at Jessie’s hat:

Andy's Hat

Ah, this hat looks familiar. It’s the same red hat with white lace that Andy wears. The only difference is that Jessie’s hat has a white lace around the center. But look at Andy’s hat again.

Andy's Hat

There’s a faded mark where the white lace should be. Why do you think that is? And what does Jessie have to do with this?

(Bob Saget’s voice) Kids, you remember the story of Jessie. Her owner Emily grew up with her, much the same way as Andy. She was incredibly loved, but Emily eventually gave her away when she grew older. Jessie ended up in storage for a long time, as confirmed by her in the movie when she has a literal panic attack over having to go back.

Now, take a close look at what’s on this bed in Emily’s room:

Andy's Hat

That is a hat that looks extremely similar to, you guessed it, Andy’s. The room is also pretty old-fashioned, leaving room for this to take place years before Andy was born.

In fact, you can clearly tell that this isn’t modern day with shots like these:

Andy's Hat

The only difference between the hat that Emily wears throughout this sequence and Andy’s hat is an extra white lace around the center, which is visibly missing from Andy’s hat. Otherwise, the hats are identical.

Also, in the donation box that Emily puts Jessie in, we don’t see the hat. We do see other remnants of her connection with Jessie, but the hat is noticeably absent. The box isn’t even big enough to hold it. So Emily held onto that hat…and maybe passed it on to her child, who would grow to also love a cowboy doll.

We never get a closeup of Emily’s face, but we do see that she has light, auburn hair as a teenager. Also, it is very short.

Compared to:

500full

The middle picture is closest to the strawberry blonde color we see when Emily is young. It’s perfectly reasonable to assume that her hair lightened as she aged, which is clearly the case in these photos (or she could have dyed it).

Here’s what we know for sure:

We don’t know the first name of Andy’s mom. We don’t know Emily’s last name. We know that Andy’s hat and Emily’s hat are the same. We know that Emily is old enough to be Andy’s mom. We definitely know that Pixar is perfectly capable of sneaking this in without being overt about it.

You may be wondering how the two characters could be the same if Emily was willing to give Jessie up so easily, while Andy was far more hesitant.

Actually, the scenarios are quite similar. Andy forgot about Woody as he grew up too, despite their strong connection. Andy even gave Woody away, albeit in a different manner than Emily.

In the end, it makes perfect sense that these two concurrent stories are so similar because they’re related by blood. It’s also a freak of destiny that Jessie would one day belong to her owner’s son, though we never get to see the mom’s reaction to seeing Jessie again.

She was probably indifferent and believed it to be a different version of the same toy. How would you respond if you saw your child with a toy that looked like one that you had as a kid? Your first assumption probably wouldn’t be that they’re the exact same toy.

What do you think? Do you believe that the two characters are the same and that Andy’s mom/Emily found redemption through the love her son had for the toy she left behind? Or, do you hate fun, love, and destiny? Let me know.

Images courtesy of Pixar.

Join the conversation about this story »

15 Things You Didn't Know About Pixar

$
0
0

toy story disney buzz lightyear

In the 28 years that Pixar has been around, the animation studio has raked in 27 Oscars and over $8 billion dollars in gross revenues — off of only 14 movies. 

That's more than $500 million per feature. 

How does a company reach such insane levels of excellence? 

In the new book "Creativity, Inc," long-time Pixar president Ed Catmull reveals the story behind the pixels, from the origin of the name to its wacky company perks and what really happened with Steve Jobs. 

Find the most surprising bits of Pixar's journey below. 

The main building on campus is called the Steve Jobs Building. 

The Pixar atriumIt's named for the Apple icon because he was the brain behind the building's collaboration-inducing structure. As Office Snapshots reports:

Pixar's campus design originally separated different employee disciplines into different buildings – one for computer scientists, another for animators, and a third building for everybody else. But because Jobs was fanatic about these unplanned collaborations, he envisioned a campus where these encounters could take place, and his design included a great atrium space that acts as a central hub for the campus.

The biography adds that Jobs believed that, "If a building doesn't encourage [collaboration], you'll lose a lot of innovation and the magic that's sparked by serendipity. So we designed the building to make people get out of their offices and mingle in the central atrium with people they might not otherwise see."

There's an annual event called "Pixarpalooza."

Since 2009, there's been an annual Battle of the Bands with Pixar employees. 

Animators can go wild decorating their workspaces. 

The Pixar team does much more than put up posters in their offices. The decoration gets a little maximal: 

"(Employees) spend their days inside pink dollhouses whose ceilings are hung with miniature chandeliers, tiki huts made of real bamboo, and castles whose meticulously painted, 15-foot-high Styrofoam turrets appear to be carved from stone," Catmull writes.

They have an ergonomist come in on a weekly basis.

Her name is Arlie Stern. She makes adjustments to the animators' workstations, so they don't get repetitive stress injury from years of hardcore mouse-clicking.

"The work (of animators) is precision intensive," she says. "Precision is a killer on the body, because in order to do something that requires precision with the body, you need to rest the arm, and if you don't give people a place to rest the arm, they're going to place the wrist on the desk right on the carpal tunnel," which can lead to carpal tunnel syndrome. 

Disney wanted the original "Toy Story" to be a musical. 

Since the conglomerate had so much success with musicals — "Lion King,""Beauty and the Beast," and "Aladdin" to name a few — its execs thought that "Toy Story" should have some musicality, too. But Pixar said no.

Pixar didn't (quite) start as a movie maker.

First it sold hardware, then software, and then it made animated short films and ads, Catmull shares. Its first big product was a high-end imaging computer with professional applications from meteorology to medicine. While the device never sold well, employee John Lasseter made computer-animated films to show off what it could do, like the groundbreaking "Luxo Jr." in 1986.

Pixar also did some animated sequences for films, with Disney being an important partner. In order to bring in some cash, Pixar started making commercials for brands like Listerine, Trident, and Lifesavers in the early '90s. Then, Pixar signed a three-movie deal with Disney, leading to "Toy Story" in 1995 — and everything changed. 

The name "Pixar" sprang out of a conversation between the co-founders.

Early in Pixar's life, co-founder Alvy Ray Smith thought the name should be "Pixer," since it sounded like a fake Spanish verb for "to make pictures." But another co-founder, Loren Carpenter,liked "Radar," since that sounded futuristic. So they combined the two: "Pixer + Radar = Pixar!" Catmull writes.

The Pixar Imaging Computer, in the fleshWhen Pixar started in 1986, its biggest product was the Pixar Imaging Computer.

"Who's going to buy a $125,000 image processor that requires a host computer and has software development tools but no applications software?"asked the June 1986 issue of Computer Graphics World

Before Pixar was its own thing, it was part of Lucasfilm.

In 1979, George Lucas recruited Catmull to helm the computer division of the rapidly growing film production company.

Pixar became its own company thanks to Steve Jobs.

In 1986, Jobs bought what was then Lucasfilm's Computer Graphics Division, then spun it off, turning it into an independent company.

"Toy Story 2" was originally supposed to be direct-to-video.

Disney didn't dig sequels for animated movies. They tried one, a rodent-filled romp called "Rescuers Down Under," and it promptly bombed upon release. Luckily, Pixar pushed back.

Movies at Pixar take forever to make.

"They are not beautiful, mature versions of the adults they will grow up to be," Catmull writes. "(The first mock-ups) are truly ugly: awkward and unformed, vulnerable and incomplete." And that's why they take forever to make: "Monsters University," for instance, took over four years to complete.

Pixar is guided by a "Brain Trust."

It's a tiny group of leaders — originally early employees like John Lasseter, Andrew StantonPete Docter, Lee Unkrich, and Joe Ranft — who give intensely candid critiques of films in progress.

Pixar has a school called Pixar University. 

Free classes include sculpting, painting, ballet, and live-action filmmaking.

"Simply by providing an excuse for us to all toil side by side, humbled by the challenge of sketching a self-portrait or writing computer code or taming a lump of clay," Catmull writes, "P.U. changed the culture for the better." 

Jobs wanted to sell Pixar to Microsoft.

The animation studio was bleeding money, so he thought to unload it. But then Pixar got Disney to distribute "Toy Story," which became an instant cash cow.

When a Pixar movie blows up at the box office, bonuses are handed out by hand. 

When Pixar produces a run-away hit, Catmull and the rest of the leadership team hand out checks to every person who worked on the movie. 

SEE ALSO: 22 Storytelling Tips For Writers From A Pixar Storyboard Artist

Join the conversation about this story »

12 Places In Pixar Movies That Actually Exist In Real Life

$
0
0

pixar

An Easter egg, as it relates to movies, is when the movie's creators hide something in the film that's an intentional inside joke. 

Some Easter eggs are more well known, like how Hitchock makes cameo appearances in his films, but some Easter eggs are a little harder to find, even for the well-trained eye.

Pixar is no stranger to the Easter egg world, and it includes dozens of Easter eggs in its movies. There's even something called the Pixar Theory, where all the Pixar characters live in the same universe. 

Some of the Pixar Easter eggs are based on real-world locations. There are obvious ones — in the beginning of the movie "Cars," the announcer says that the entire town of Emeryville will be closed for the race; Pixar Studios is in Emeryville, Calif. — but some aren't so obvious. 

Fenton's Creamery in 'Up' is located in Oakland, Calif.

At the end of the movie, Russell and Carl can be seen eating an ice cream cone on the sidewalk in front of Fenton's Creamery



The real Fenton's is a local favorite, located on Piedmont Avenue in Oakland. The ice cream shop opened in 1894, and moved to its current location in the 1960s. It also claims to be where Rocky Road ice cream was born.



The Grand Lake Theater in 'Up' can be found in Oakland, Calif.

During the credit sequence, we see a photo of Carl and Russell going to see "Star Wars." 

This Easter egg is two-fold: many speculate that this was foreshadowing a new "Star Wars" film. In 2012 — three years after "Up" came out — Disney announced it would release a new "Star Wars" movie in 2015.

The second part of the Easter egg ... 



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

How Napkin Sketches During A Pixar Lunch Meeting Led To Four Of The Studio's Greatest Movies

$
0
0

Pixar lunch

For the first time in 9 years a Pixar film will not be on the summer movie schedule.

Fans will have to wait until next year's "The Good Dinosaur" to enjoy the vibrant colors and heartfelt story that has helped make Pixar an animation giant for over a decade.

But how did Pixar come to dominate the industry in the first place?

Most will recall the studio taking off after 1995's "Toy Story," but that was only one film. Without a lineup of great films to follow, Pixar could have easily been one and done.

That is why one lunch meeting at the Hidden City Café in Point Richmond, California may be one of the most important moments in Pixar's history.

The Lunch

Pixar crew, John LasseterIn the summer of 1994, director John Lasseter, writers Andrew Stanton, Joe Ranft, and Pete Docter were putting the finishing touches on Pixar's first feature, "Toy Story" when, during a lunch meeting, a big question was raised: "What is Pixar going to do next?"

"'Toy Story' was almost complete and we thought, well geez, if we're going to make another movie we have to get started now,"Staton later recalled of the lunch conversation.

According to the New York Times, Lasseter, Staton, Ranft, and Docter then started a brainstorming session sketching the outlines and characters that would make up four of the studio's greatest films (1998's "A Bug's Life," 2001's "Monsters, Inc.," 2003's "Finding Nemo," and 2008's "WALL-E") on nothing more than the napkins on their table.

"There was something special that happened when John, Joe, Pete and I would get in a room," Stanton told the Post and Courier. "Whether it was furthering an idea or coming up with something, we just brought out the best in each other."

The story of the famed lunch became something of legend (the story even made it into the teaser trailer for "WALL-E"), but for Staton there was much more to the creation of those films than just a mythical lunch.

"Well, I'm trying to dispel a little bit of it, before it turns too mythical," Staton later told the Times-Picayune of the lunch. "The truth is, there are people who worked really hard at making things like 'Monsters' and 'Nemo' really turn into the great stories they were way after those lunches."

One Lunch, $1 Billion Box Office

Hidden City Cafe

Since that lunch, Pixar has gone on to be one of the biggest and most critically acclaimed studios in the history of animation.

Pixar's 14 films have brought in $3.5 billion at the domestic box office. Of that, the four films created at the table that day have brought in nearly $1 billion combined. Those four films have also spawned two sequels (2013's "Monsters University" and the upcoming "Finding Dory") and have been nominated for a combined 15 Academy Awards, winning 3.

Those at the lunch would go on to other great things themselves. Lassester went on to direct "A Bug's Life" before becoming the Chief Creative Officer at Disney. Docter would go on to direct "Monsters, Inc.," Staton would direct "Finding Nemo" and "WALL-E," and Joe Ranft would also go on to create other features at Pixar before dying in 2005.

As for the place where the fabled lunch took place, the Hidden City Café (which was actually included in "Monsters, Inc." as seen above) closed its doors in 2012.

SEE ALSO: 12 Places In Pixar Movies That Actually Exist In Real Life

MORE: How ‘Indiana Jones’ Finally Forced Hollywood To Create The PG-13 Rating

Join the conversation about this story »

Disney Has Been Hiding A Secret Message In Its Movies For Years

$
0
0

Woody, Toy Story, number

Pixar has been known for its Easter eggs — hidden messages in films — but one of its best has to do with A113.

A video on Disney Pixar's YouTube page shows A113 can be found in almost all of Pixar's films, from "Toy Story" to "Finding Nemo."

What does it mean?

Pixar's John Lasseter has explained A113 is the number of the animation classroom at the California Institute of the Arts.

Many animators like Lasseter attended school there, and by including the number they are giving a subtle shoutout to their alma mater.

The number has been used for many different things in Pixar films, such as Andy's mom's license plate in 1995's "Toy Story."

Woody, Toy Story, number

It was on a camera in 2003's "Finding Nemo."

finding nemo, number

A113 is the number of a train in 2006's "Cars."

train, cars, number

It can also be found on a box that Flik walks by in 1998's "A Bug's Life."

a bugs life, number

Here's Sully from 2013's "Monsters University" entering a classroom whose number is A113.

monsters university sulley

However, Pixar films aren't the only ones to hide the number in plain sight. Here's Tiana from Disney's 2009 "The Princess and the Frog" jumping on a trolley car marked A113.

Princess and the frog, number

"The Simpsons" used it for Bart Simpson's mug shot.

the simpsons, number

It even shows up on a door in 1987's "The Brave Little Toaster."Joe Ranft, who went on to work on Pixar movies including "Toy Story,""A Bug's Life," and "Monsters, Inc.," and Dan Haskett, a character designer on "Toy Story," worked on the film.

the brave little toaster

You can also notice the number on a chewed-up vehicle in Warner Bros.' 1999 movie "The Iron Giant." The director, Brad Bird, later made Pixar hit "The Incredibles."the iron giant a113

Even live-action films like 2012's "The Avengers" had a file labeled A113.

the avengers, number

Finally, here's a photo of Lasseter and Pixar animators Andrew Stanton and Pete Docter standing outside the famed classroom:

Pixar animators

SEE ALSO: How Napkin Sketches During A Pixar Lunch Meeting Led To Four Of The Studio's Greatest Movies

Join the conversation about this story »

Here's How Pixar Names Its Characters

$
0
0

toy story buzz lightyear

Editor's note: We recently came across the following intriguing question on Quora: "How do people at Pixar select the names for their characters?"

We've published the full answer of one Quora user Craig Good, who worked at Pixar, below.

The same way any other writer(s) might: It's a normal part of the story process.

Some names come easily, such as Woody Pride. Many go through many rewrites. After Tinny, the antique one-man-band windup toy became a space man we went through a few names.

One stand-in was Lunar Larry. I contributed the name Tempus from Morph for a short test.

It wasn't until a later story session that some folks batting around names tossed out Buzz, as a nod to Buzz Aldrin, and someone else (as I recall, nobody remembers exactly who) called out "Lightyear".

Revisions can happen for many reasons. The protagonist of "A Bug's Life" was a merge of two characters from an earlier version, Flick and Grub. The Flick name survived, but the c was dropped when someone saw how it might look in certain fonts, or hand-written in all caps.

In early versions of "Monsters Inc."Sullivan was going to start as a nebbish screw-up named Johnson. Then someone pointed out that perhaps we already had our quota of character names which could be awkward euphemisms. He became James P. Sullivan, and also eventually lost the glasses.

Mustang McQueen became Lightning McQueen when the character became a pure race car not associated with a known model. Mater got his name from a character named Mater that John Lasseter met at a NASCAR race.

So the short answer (too late, I know) is that there's no one short answer. I'll bet most people reading this didn't know Woody had a last name, though. Quite understandable since it's never mentioned in any of the movies.

SEE ALSO: Disney Has Been Hiding A Secret Message In Its Movies For Years

Join the conversation about this story »

4 Tips On How To Be Wildly Creative From Pixar's President

$
0
0

13891687919_134eb1112f_o

Growing up, Ed Catmull was transfixed by two things: Disney films and computer science. He went on to earn his PhD in the latter, but he never forgot the magic he discovered in animation. Finally, a class gave him the permission to combine the two by writing software to bring shapes to life on screen — and to push the limits of what was possible.

"Only those of us who ignored the existing software and wrote our own stayed in graphics," he told the audience at a recent Stanford Entrepreneurship Corner event. "Looking back, that was sort of a diagnostic."

Now President of Pixar Animation Studios, Catmull has spent his professional life being creative: Building teams on new frontiers, astonishing audiences with new stories, new effects, new technological bounds. And in April, he came out with a new book, Creativity Inc., exploring how companies can ignite and sustain creativity at every size and stage. Below are the cliffs notes he shared at Stanford, relevant for any company that wants to break new ground.

Build and Empower Your Brain Trust

At Pixar, Catmull and his colleagues stumbled on the concept of a "Braintrust" somewhat by accident, but it's influenced their work tremendously. It started when John Lasseter, then director of a project called "Toy Story," noticed how often he was relying on four of his closest colleagues for guidance: Andrew Stanton, Pete Docter, Lee Unkrich and Joe Ranft. "He found himself surrounded by this group that was funny, focused and really driven and passionate about the film itself," says Catmull. "They would have these intense discussions, but it never got personal."

The Braintrust produced so many good ideas around how to craft and edit the story, that they started folding in more people with different types of expertise, including Catmull. "There was something about having colleagues you trusted so much giving notes to each other that worked really well," he says. Soon, the group became fluid, as people came and went or were more relevant to the process on a film. The key was that within the framework of the Braintrust, everyone could be extremely candid without anyone feeling attacked. It was an unwritten rule that became the foundation for the creative process on multiple films.

Observing this success, Pixar's leadership team attempted to create a similar Braintrust for individual groups within the company, including the technical teams. It didn't take. They didn't produce as many blue sky or constructive ideas, and Catmull says it took some dissecting to figure out why.

"One of the things we realized is that the Braintrust should have no authority. Our group could not tell the director what to do, and as a consequence, the person responsible for the production would never have to come into the room in a defensive posture knowing the group could undermine him."

"There are good reasons why people hold back and don't say what they think."

That's why you have to work so hard to defuse them. "People don't want to embarrass themselves. They don't want to embarrass other people. They want to look good," says Catmull. "There are all sorts of personal, emotional roadblocks that get in the way of the creative process and no one will admit that they are there."

Manage Dynamics, Not Ideas

Managers play an indispensable role in the creative process, but not how you might think. Instead of spending their time developing all of the original ideas themselves, they need to clear the way for lots of people to have and express lots of ideas.

"As a manager, you want to focus on the dynamics of your team, not the ideas they are producing," Catmull says. "Sit back, really look at what's going on in the room." A good manager identifies how and why ideas are getting blocked, why people aren't contributing, why some ideas are prioritized over others. Once you have a sense of what's going on, how people interact, and where sensitivities lie, you can optimize the number of ideas people produce. And it's a fundamental truth that more ideas yield better ideas.

"Rather than getting caught up in a problem, I always wanted to look to see if everyone is saying what they think. When these dynamics are working, you will solve your problem every time and do remarkable things," he says. "Every once in a while, the system collapses. That's when you need to sit up and start paying attention to the people."

"Know that you're more wrong than you think you are." 

This should be one of your first tenets of management. Otherwise, you're bound to get in the way of original thinking. "Looking back at when I first came to Pixar and had all these ideas about how to manage, at least one-third of them were an absolute crock, or just bad ideas or naive," he says. Today, he sees all kinds of theories like the 80/20 rule of management — basically, allocating your time strictly to maximize results. Catmull isn't a fan. "These kinds of rules delude you. They make you think you're better than you are."

When he was a manager himself, Catmull did everything he could to produce autonomous, self-sufficient employees. Part of this was validating their responsibility to share ideas. Part of it was giving them all the tools they needed to succeed on their own.

Expose People to the Creative Process of Others

This is one major way Catmull has equipped his colleagues throughout the years. He started with the approach early — while he was still in school — by encouraging open-source sharing of software and knowledge. And he's carried this tradition throughout his career.

"When I took my first animation course, I realized that the art and technology side could come together. The images were still very crude at the time, but there was potential there," he says. "I worked on solving all kind of problems so that images could look good enough for a feature film."

"I thought it would take 10 years for us to solve all of the problems. It took 20." 

It probably would have taken even longer if Catmull and his cohort hadn't been so committed to documenting and sharing what they were doing. "I knew that we were so far away from what we needed that we were likely to bypass a lot of good ideas," he says. "The rationale was also if we publish everything we are more likely to attract the best people. And we did. We began to accumulate people who were good not only because they shared our vision, but because they liked the idea of sharing what they were doing. We were able to create a bigger community that's still growing." Across industries, community means more people learning, debating, theorizing, creating.

Today, with Catmull at the helm, Pixar continues to publish its findings, experiments and techniques to push animation forward. This is one area where clinging to your competitive edge can hurt you more than it helps, he says. Despite hits emerging from studios like Dreamworks, Pixar has retained its lead in the eyes of consumers. At the same time, Catmull is the first to admit that his team has a lot to learn from what other people are putting out into the world too.

This free flow of ideas became very important and influential when Disney acquired Pixar nearly a decade ago. The executives at Disney asked Catmull and Lasseter to run the Disney animation unit in addition to Pixar. What they found was a completely different type of organization, dictated by process instead of inspiration. Suddenly, they were in a position to take what they had learned at Pixar and use it to liberate even more good ideas.

"We came into this group that was failing and demoralized. There had been all of these great films in the 1990s that changed culture: 'The Little Mermaid,' 'Aladdin,' 'Beauty and the Beast,' 'The Lion King'; then it all went downhill," he says. "Everyone was focused on how to lower costs and how to keep things running smoothly, and they made bad film after bad film. For us, it was like, how often do you get to take your principles and apply them to an entirely different group of people?"

The first thing Catmull and Lasseter did was work with film directors. "We told them, 'You don't have to listen to anyone's notes, not even ours,' and that was rather shocking to them," Catmull says. "We brought them up to watch Pixar idea sessions, then we took our Braintrust over there and gave them notes."

"Changing behavior starts with trust." 

The Pixar team realized that Disney wouldn't alter its path unless they trusted the people who were sharing these new ideas and strategies. "The thing is, trust is something that takes a while to earn. You have to go through some screw ups together and some failures and still be there for each other." It took time and several messes for the Disney team to restructure, but in the end, they came to trust in the less process-driven approach that had worked so well for Pixar.

"They've made six films since we've been there and all six have been critical successes — and it's the same people who were there when everything was failing," Catmull says. "Before, they couldn't do things like be honest and candid with each other. When they altered their behavior, they became a different group of people altogether. "Frozen" just came out and became the highest grossing animated film in history."

Argue Productively

Confrontation is a critical part of being creative. Catmull encountered it constantly during the Disney transition, and perhaps most famously with Pixar Chairman Steve Jobs. The key is to learn how to argue in a way that produces and doesn't detract, he says. This clearly depends on who is involved, but it often boils down to persistence and patience.

When Jobs first became involved with the company, Catmull asked him how he worked with people who didn't agree with him. Jobs' response was something to the effect of: "I just explain it to them until they understand," Catmull says. On many occasions, this was the nature of their interaction, but he figured out a way to stand his ground.

"In 26 years, Steve and I never had one of these loud verbal arguments — it's just not in my nature to do that — but we did disagree fairly frequently," he says. "I would say something and he would immediately shoot it down because he could think faster than I could. But then I would wait a week and call him on the phone. I'd call and give my counter argument, and he'd shoot it down again. So I'd wait another week, and sometimes this would go on for months. In the end, he would say, 'Oh I get it, you're right,' or I would realize he was right. And the rest of the time we didn't reach consensus, he'd just let me do it my way and wouldn't say anything more about it."

This was Jobs' way of providing the autonomy that Catmull values so much to allow creativity to thrive. But at the heart of these exchanges was the ability to argue constructively. No one ever took anything personally or allowed the conversation to derail future ideas. The team, including Jobs, knew that as soon as authority was only traveling in one direction, they were one stop away from turning into their stalemated competitors.

"A lot of people believe they know what's right and can't listen to advice." 

Confirmation bias is the opposite of constructive argument, Catmull says. "Confirmation bias isn't even a strong enough term for what it describes. So many of us have filters that take the words we hear and turn them into something that is wrong." Our natural tendency is to validate what we already think or believe.

He uses an example that is extremely relevant to his work at Pixar: "Just because we say, 'Story is king,' doesn't make it true. Every studio says that whether or not they're producing works of art or pieces of dreck. It's easy to miss the deeper point that things that are true don't necessarily alter behavior."

You have to keep questioning what you and others are doing. You have to keep mixing things up to encourage a culture where ruffled feathers don't dampen creative thinking. "First conclusions are almost always wrong, and so are the second and the third," Catmull says. "To this day, we are still finding things that we had concluded long ago actually are incorrect or they are no longer correct."

Unless people feel comfortable surfacing these issues, even years later, there will be no evolution. The key is to lessen the impact of failure when it comes to argument. If you can do that, you'll not only learn, you'll foster creative resilience.

"The reality is new ideas are fragile. They don't look good." 

In Catmull's words, brand new ideas "require protection." And up until a certain point, it's critical that you reserve judgment to see how they grow, how they change, what they yield. "The best thing you can do is see how well your team is working together. Don't judge the ideas until you have to." 

Click here to watch the original video of Ed Catmull's Stanford Entrepreneurship Corner talk.

SEE ALSO: How Pixar Names Its Characters

Join the conversation about this story »

Steve Jobs Taught This Man How To Win Arguments With Really Stubborn People

$
0
0

Ed Catmull

Have you got any stubborn people in your life? Well, here's a brilliant life lesson shared by Pixar cofounder and Walt Disney President Ed Catmull.

He spent 26 years working with the notoriously stubborn Steve Jobs, one of Pixar's other cofounders. Jobs once told him that his method of working things out when people disagreed with him was to "just explain it to them until they understand."

So Catmull discovered a way to work with that without letting a conversation ever devolve into a heated argument, he said during a recent Stanford Entrepreneurship Corner event, first spotted by Upstart Business Journal.

Catmull was promoting his new book, "Creativity Inc.," which is loaded with anecdotes about Jobs, the famous late Apple CEO.

This is how Catmull dealt with Jobs:

"In all the 26 years with Steve, Steve and I never had one of these loud verbal arguments and it's not my nature to do that. ...  but we did disagree fairly frequently about things. ... I would say something to him and he would immediately shoot it down because he could think faster than I could. ... I would then wait a week ... I'd call him up and I give my counter argument to what he had said and he'd immediately shoot it down. So I had to wait another week, and sometimes this went on for months. But in the end one of three things happened. About a third of the time he said, 'Oh, I get it, you're right.' And that was the end of it. And it was another third of the time in which [I'd] say, 'Actually I think he is right.' The other third of the time, where we didn't reach consensus, he just let me do it my way, never said anything more about it."

So that's an interesting strategy: patience; an open mind; a willingness to be wrong; and a willingness to plow ahead when, after a fair effort, agreement didn't happen.

Join the conversation about this story »

A Guy With No Engineering Experience Invented A Wheelchair That Can Go Anywhere, Even Through Water

$
0
0

tankchair

Brad Soden makes go-anywhere, do-anything wheelchairs under the well-chosen company name of Tankchair, and we learned all about his business in this excellent write-up on Bloomberg Businessweek.

Tankchairs sit on treads, enabling them to cross all kinds of terrain that would leave a conventional wheelchair stuck and useless. They can travel up to 30 miles per hour, and Soden is happy to customize them however his customers want — he's outfitted them with everything from gun racks to roll cages to lawnmower attachments.

He kicked off his efforts to build a better wheelchair after a car accident left his wife paralyzed from the waist down. Rather than leave her behind on family camping trips, he set about figuring out how to bring her along. "It just tore me up,"he told Bloomberg. "I didn’t want her being stuck anymore, not anywhere. I resolved to make her something. If we go out camping and she wants to come, dammit, she’s gonna be able to come. That’s when I started."

Despite having no formal engineering training or college degree, Soden got busy right away — "It took me two years and a bunch of beer in my garage to figure out the first model, but since then, with my applied science, we've been making leaps and bounds. A bunch of engineers told me it couldn't be done, still, we went ahead and did it."

Jun 06, 2014 13:15

Tankchair operates out of a garage in Phoenix, Arizona and has sold some 200 chairs to customers around the world. Prices start at $15,000 and go up from there depending on customizations. "The most expensive one I put out there is $53,000," said Soden. "That one can almost do your dishes."

Believe it or not, Soden's treaded creation got the attention of a producer at Pixar, who invited him out to the company's studios. "They put a s-‍-‍- ton of cameras and sound equipment out there and filmed me a bunch of times running over trash," said Soden. They had him wearing a cardboard box over his head while doing so, and he quite literally became the inspiration for WALL-E, the trash-collecting robot starring in the movie of the same name.

While we can't be sure which video it was that got the Pixar producer's attention, here's an early video in which Soden gives a quick demo:

And as one last demonstration of how robust these things are, here's a video in which a Tankchair crosses and operates in a shallow river:

Join the conversation about this story »

Pixar's Next Movie 'Inside Out' Is About The Inner-Workings Of The Brain

$
0
0

WALL-E

From "Toy Story" to "Wall-E," Pixar has brought us some of the most emotional and thought-provoking animated pictures.

One of the reasons the studio's movies continue to win Academy Awards year after year is not only because they take risks and innovate, but because they offer something which we all can relate to — whether its our incessant reliance on technology in "Wall-E" or letting go of a favorite toy in the "Toy Story" trilogy.  

When the studio's next movie comes out, it's going to try and outdo itself again.

Pixar's 15th animated picture, "Inside Out," will take us inside the mind of an 11-year-old girl and introduce us to the different emotions that make up the brain.inside out pixar

Sound like a hard sell?

A little bit — but we thought the same initially when Pixar said there was nearly no dialogue in the first half hour of "Wall-E." It ended up being amazing.

During a one-hour presentation at the Animation Film Festival in France this week, "Inside Out" director Pete Docter gave an overview of the new film that explores the change that happens in a child's brain from adolescence into adulthood.

According to Variety's Peter Debruge, it will change the way people think about the very way we think.

The film will personify five different emotions — Fear (Bill Hader), Sadness (Phyllis Smith), Joy (Amy Poehler), Disgust (Mindy Kaling), and Anger (Lewis Black) — and show how they interact with each other to help an individual process new experiences and form memories. 

Docter said the film was inspired by his daughter to show "there is something that is lost when you grow up." 

Here's how Debruge described a scene shown from the film:

Docter explained that Riley and her parents relocate from a quiet rural home to San Francisco at a particularly impressionable age, resulting in a new-school trauma that forces Joy and Sadness out of the control panel and into the far, unfamiliar reaches of her mind.

While Fear, Disgust and Anger awkwardly try to keep things under control — as illustrated in a second clip set around the family dinner table which Pixar unveiled at CinemaCon in March — Joy and Sadness put aside their differences and take audiences through a tour of Riley’s thinking process. 

So far, the film has received very positive reception during screenings at both Disney's D23 Expo and CinemaCon.

Docter said after test screenings, there were already audiences who were analyzing their behaviors.

All together, Pixar's catalog of movies have generated more than $8 billion at the box office worldwide.

We'll have to wait until June 2015 to see if Pixar can pull it off again.

SEE ALSO: This unknown 22-year-old actor is rumored to be the lead in "Star Wars: Episode VII"

Join the conversation about this story »


11 Movie Sequels That Came Out More Than 10 Years After The Original

$
0
0

Jim Carey Jeff Daniels Dumb and Dumber To

With so many sequels over the last couple of years, it's easy to forget that some follow-ups take a long time to get made.

Take, for example, "Dumb and Dumber To." The film, whose trailer was just released, took 20 years to get Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels to reprise their roles.

Other series like "Toy Story" and "Terminator" have also had belated installments, and while some have been successful, just as many have been flops. 

"Star Wars: Episode VII" (2015; 32 years)

The biggest sequel time gap on our list is also one of the most anticipated, the next film in the "Star Wars" saga "Star Wars: Episode VII."

With the return of fan favorites like Harrison Ford, Mark Hamil, and Carrie Fisher along with a bunch of talented newcomers, "Episode VII" is bound to be the biggest "Star Wars" film since 1984's "Return of the Jedi."

Sure, the film is only 10 years off from "Episode III: Revenge of the Sith" but considering that director JJ Abrams may be going back to the original trilogy's practical style (and many fans would like to just forget the prequels outright) we'll consider this a true sequel.



“Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps” (2010; 23 Years)

After an Oscar-winning performance for “Wall Street,” the announcement of a sequel with Michael Douglas more than two decades after the original was extremely exciting. 

"Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps" was met with decidedly mixed reviews. Some adored the references to the original film and loved the return of Douglas’ Gordon Gekko, while others were totally bored.

Shia LaBeouf, who was also in "Crystal Skull," also starred in the film.



“Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” (2008; 19 Years)

Everything seemed in place for the globe-trotting archaeologist to have another hit on his hands almost 20 years after 1989's “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade." Harrison Ford was back in the fedora and Steven Spielberg returned to the director’s chair. 

However, "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" was a total letdown.

The story veered into alien territory (literally) and disappointed many fans of the series. There's always talk of another sequel, but if it’s anything like “Crystal Skull” we’d be afraid to see what they come up with next.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

The Chinese Version Of Pixar Raised $20M While Making Its First 3D Movie

$
0
0

Light Chaser Animation ChinaLight Chaser Animation Studios, a Beijing-based developer of animated films, raised $20 million in a Series B investment round led by GGV Capital and Chengwei Capital while working on its first 3D feature.

Other investors in the round include Hillhouse Capital and IDG, which provided Light Chaser’s Series A funding. China Renaissance was the financial advisor for the investment.

“Light Chaser is still an early stage venture. We much appreciate the attention and support from all of our friends,” Gary Wang, the founder of Light Chaser, said in a June 20 statement on the funding. “We aim to create highest quality works that are truly original and would fuse both art and technology.”

Wang previously founded Tudou.com, which is the Chinese version of Youtube. Tudou launched in 2005 and within two years had more than 55 million video views per day. In March 2013, Wang founded Light Chaser to create animated films that show Chinese culture and already it has attracted talent from around the world. The company is working on its first 3D animated feature film called Little Door Spirits, which it intends to complete by July 2015 with a $12 million budget.

The Chinese Pixar

Sha Ye, managing director at Chengwei Capital, read Little Door Spirits’ script and saw the full story reel and said, “the film tells a novel and interesting story. You will laugh and you will be touched. I will definitely bring my kids to see this film in cinema. Light Chaser’s second film project has also been started. It’s a different style from the first one, and yet equally enthralling. We are really looking forward to them.”

Light Chaser’s first short film is called “Little Yeyos,” which means “Little Night Wanderers.” It is a three and a half minute video of several winged children fighting over a pin that reflects light.

“The movie market in China is booming, and certainly there is a very significant growth space for Chinese animated feature films,” Jixun Foo, managing partner at GGV Capital, said in the statement. “We are impressed by the vision and execution capability of Light Chaser. Within a very short period of time, they have built up an excellent team and a world-class animation production pipeline. It’s very exciting that Light Chaser’s animation and CG capabilities are already at a level close to Hollywood.”

SEE ALSO: Pixar's Next Movie 'Inside Out' Is About The Inner-Workings Of The Brain

Join the conversation about this story »

Pixar's President On The 1 Question Successful People Should Never Ask Themselves

$
0
0

ed catmull

Pixar cofounder Ed Catmull's life changed in 1995. His company went public a week before its first movie, "Toy Story," became an instant hit.

But after achieving the biggest goal he had ever set for himself, creating a revered and successful film, he was filled with doubt.

In the latest episode of business guru Tim Ferriss' podcast, Catmull — who is now the president of Pixar, Walt Disney Animation Studios, and DisneyToon Studios — tells Ferriss that he now realizes the question he was asking himself at that time is a common but dangerous one for those who become successful.

That question is: "How much of it was me?" That is to say, how much of this achievement was I directly responsible for, as opposed to the efforts of my teammates or the effects of external factors?

In Catmull's case, he was comparing his contributions with those of his highly talented team, which included Steve Jobs and John Lasseter.

Years later, he says, he "realized that the question was not a useful question. And that in somehow trying to do that, I was actually misleading myself."

Catmull tells Ferriss that successful people should dismiss this question if it pops into their heads because it becomes isolating and distracting.

"This desire to separate oneself out is like asking for a clean answer to a question when there is no clean answer,"he says. "It is true of most of the things in our lives, whether it's personal or business. The inner connection between them and the way they're all mixed together is inherently messy, confusing, and there aren't clear boundaries. And the desire for complete clarity actually leads one away from addressing the mess that's in the middle."

So the next time you achieve something that you have been working tirelessly for, don't slow yourself down by second-guessing your abilities and contributions. Leaders know how to accept both success and failure without letting either keep them from moving forward or overly swaying their emotions.

Catmull, the author of "Creativity, Inc.: Overcoming the Unseen Forces That Stand in the Way of True Inspiration," shares plenty more wisdom in the podcast, which you can find on Ferriss' site.

SEE ALSO: 15 Things You Didn't Know About Pixar

Join the conversation about this story »

This Chart Shows How Disney Will Dominate Theaters For The Next Two Years

$
0
0

Disney's upcoming movie release schedule should have rival studios worrying. 

Variety senior editor Marc Graser tweeted out this photo showing Walt Disney Studios' film plans for the next two years and, as he notes, it is quite impressive.

disney movie schedule 2015 2016

The main reason Disney's film schedule is so strong is not only due to films being made in house, but also the company's dependence on movies from acquisitions over the last decade.

As a reminder, Disney purchased Pixar in 2006 for roughly $7.4 billion, Marvel in 2009 for $4 billion, and Lucasfilm in 2012 for $4 billion.

Here's a breakdown of those future releases.

Future Pixar movies

finding dory

"Inside Out" (Release: 6/9/2015)
"The Good Dinosaur" (Release: 11/25/2015)
"Finding Dory" (Release: 6/17/2016)

Pixar's track record is incredible and "Finding Dory" will be the follow-up to 2005 hit "Finding Nemo" which is reportedly the top-selling DVD ever.

Future Marvel Studios' films

hulk tony stark mark ruffalo robert downey jr. avengers sequel age of ultron

"Avengers: Age of Ultron" (release: 5/1/2015)
"Ant-Man" (release: 7/17/2015)
"Captain America 3" (release: 5/6/2016)
Untitled Marvel project rumored to be Doctor Strange (release: 7/8/2016)

Disney's Marvel Cinematic Universe is currently the envy of every other studio as they scramble to replicate Marvel's success on screen with other superhero franchises (Sony has rebooted its Spider-Man franchise while Warner Bros. is bringing new Batman and Superman films to screen. Fox has the X-Men and Fantastic Four.)

"The Avengers" holds the record for the highest-grossing opening weekend at theaters making $207 million upon release in 2012. The sequel will look to break that record early next summer.

Future Lucasfilm projects

star wars

"Star Wars: Episode VII" (release: 12/18/2015)

Disney has plans for multiple "Star Wars" films. In addition to "Star Wars" episodes VII, VIII, and IX, CEO Bob Iger has already said there will be at least three spin-off films.

Other films

Following the success of Disney's "Maleficent" earlier this year, the studio has also announced several live-action films. "Cinderella" and "Jungle Book" will come out next year.

There is also a sequel to "Alice in Wonderland" set for release in May 2016. The first film, released in 2010, starring Mia Wasikowska and Johnny Depp made more than $1 billion worldwide in theaters.

A steady cash flow from Marvel and Pixar movies would allow the studio to take some risks with other projects including Marvel's first animated picture "Big Hero 6" in theaters this fall and long-awaited film "Tomorrowland."

SEE ALSO: 2 reasons why Disney movies often don't have moms

Join the conversation about this story »

How The 'Avengers' Director Saved 'Toy Story' From An Unwatchable Early Script

$
0
0

toy story disney buzz lightyear

Pixar's iconic "Toy Story" might never have happened if not for help from future "Avengers" writer and director Joss Whedon.

Based on original Pixar short "Tin Toy," an early rough draft of "Toy Story" was a disaster.

Here's how it was described by Amy Pascale in the recent "Joss Whedon: The Biography": [T]he movie was unwatchable. The story had lost the heart that Tin Toy had; the leads, Woody the cowboy and Buzz Lightyear the astronaut, were sarcastic and unlikeable—not exactly ideal heroes for a children’s movie." Notably, the lead character of cowboy Woody was "a bitter toy who berated and insulted all the other toys and was bound and determined to destroy Buzz."

It wasn’t until Whedon, who had recently created "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," was asked to step in and help refocus the entire script that the film started to look more like the version of "Toy Story" we know.

"They sent me the script and it was a shambles," Whedon recalled in "Joss Whedon: Conversations.""But the story that [John] Lasseter had come up with was, you know, the toys are alive and they conflict. The concept was gold."

What was originally planned to be a three-week job turned into more than six months of working with Pixar. 

One big decision was whether or not the movie should be a musical like recent Disney hits such as  "The Little Mermaid,""The Lion King," and "Beauty and the Beast." Whedon, like Pixar head John Lasseter, decided that wasn’t a good idea.

“It would have been a really bad musical, because it’s a buddy movie,” Whedon told Entertainment Weekly. “It’s about people who won’t admit what they want, much less sing about it. Woody can't do an 'I want' number--he's cynical and selfish, he doesn't know himself. Buddy movies are about sublimating, punching an arm, 'I hate you.' It's not about open emotion."

One of Whedon's biggest contributions was an insight about astronaut Buzz, according to Pascale:

Joss worked closely with Pixar’s team as everyone got their heads around the idea of Toy Story as a buddy picture. Buzz Lightyear had always been conceived as a Dudley Do-Right: dim-witted but cheerful and self-aware. Joss helped them reenvision the character as an action figure who isn’t aware that he’s a toy, and who therefore takes his job as an Intergalactic Space Ranger quite seriously. It was a huge epiphany that turned the whole movie around and created the chemistry in Toy Story.

toy story buzz lightyear

One Whedon change that didn't make the final cut involved Mattel's Barbie. According to EW, the writer, known for strong female characters, wanted the doll to swoop in and save both Woody and Buzz from the film's antagonist, Sid. However, Mattel wouldn't give permission for Barbie to appear.

The animated movie was finally given the greenlight to be filmed in April 1994 and after several more rewrites with Whedon, the film became the first full-length computer animated movie, ushering in a new age for other animated pictures.

"Toy Story" went on to make $361.9 million at the box office and was nominated for three Oscars.

Subsequent sequels performed even better at theaters, with 2010’s “Toy Story 3” grossing over $1 billion worldwide.

SEE ALSO: 2 reasons Disney movies often don't have moms

AND: Tom Hiddleston sent an amazing email to Joss Whedon after reading "The Avengers" script for the first time

Join the conversation about this story »

Viewing all 340 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>