Tangled (formerly Rapunzel)

[Once Upon A Dream]

Obviously not but what they might also cut from the story? maybe the beginning of how the witch takes baby Rapunzel from her parents?.

[robster]

Rapunzel is now in the test animation phase!. I found the following online:

Ok, so Rapunzel does not actually begin production for a while but we are officially in rig testing mode. I did my first animation today on Rapunzel and it was so much fun. Call me a geek but I think it's so awesome to be working on this film. Fantasy is what Disney has always done best and it's so great to be a part of it. Why, I'm so happy about it that I'm even willing to endure California for at least another two years. Stupid state.

source: http://hyrumosmondanimation.blogspot.co ... begun.html

[Daniel]

Good news and welcome!

[CGIFanatic]

According to Cartoon Brew they're indicating that Glen Keane was kicked off Rapunzel yesterday.

www.cartoonbrew.com/disney/rumor-centra ... n-rapunzel

Also mentioned here.

micechat.com/forums/movies/105470-keane-taken-off-rapunzel.html

[Neal]

Glen Keane was kicked off Rapunzel yesterday by Lasseter. Word around the campfire is that Lasseter didn’t like the latest reel.

7 years, man. 7 years Glen’s been working on this. The skinny is that the directors of Bolt will be taking over. No word about if Glen is still involved in any way.

Truth or fiction?

UPDATE: Floyd Norman confirms in the comments that this rumor is indeed true.

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/disney/rumor ... l#comments

WHAT?!?!!?!?!?! Has Lasseter lost it? Chris Sanders was bad enough, but Glen Keane!? You don't boot Keane!

[EricJ]

J*m H*ll would (and, originally did) have a field day with this one--
But FWIH, Keane's "CGI Ink-and-paint" style is beautiful to look at, but progresing slooowly...That already was enough to get a co-director on the project a year or two ago, and no matter how good, Lasseter doesn't exactly let "house geniuses" slow the process of a group-effort.

And given the last two movies that Lasseter "didn't like the last reel of" were Meet the Robinsons and Bolt, I'm not exactly biting my nails in the corner.
(As to the Bolt director taking over the ending, THAT I'm worried about...But, hopefully there's still enough Keane-produced reels in there.)

[Dacey]

Worst. News. Ever. The end.

[Neal]

Here's the supposed in-house memo:

For nearly two years, Glen Keane and Dean Wellins have been
directing partners on Rapunzel. As Glen lessens his directorial
responsibilities to attend to some non-life threatening health
issues, their involvement on the project will shift. Glen will step
back as a Director but stay attached to Rapunzel as an Executive
Producer and Directing Animator. At the same time, Dean will move
into development to pitch three new ideas for one of our future
feature projects and focus on directing one of his CG shorts.

We are happy to announce that Nathan Greno and Byron Howard have
accepted to partner as directors on Rapunzel as we continue to hone
the story in anticipation of our Holiday 2010 release.

We want to welcome Nathan and Byron to the project and thank Glen
and Dean for their great contributions to date on Rapunzel.

Thanks
Ed

I'm not buying the health issues thing. I'm sorry, but Lasseter really doesn't strike me as a good guy. I was able to get over Chris Sanders' departure, despite feeling Bolt appeared to be a generic, saccharine replacement for Sander's edgy and interesting vision.

I was able to accept Newman might be able to make a decent soundtrack for Princess and the Frog, but felt that Menken/Slater would have been a great pair for the movie.

Lasseter touts the concept of a 'director-driven studio'. I've really only seen that it has been Lasseter's way or the highway. I know there's a lot more that goes on behind the scenes than we know, but can this many talented people have really been that misled in their visions?

Sanders was too quirky. Slater/Menken might have winded up to similar to Enchanted. Now Keane couldn't get it right?

Sheesh. Lasseter was already pulling this kind of stuff at Pixar. Like removing Jan Pinkava from Ratatouille. I think that the acquisition of Pixar gave Lasseter way too much power.

Lasseter's a genius in animation? I don't know if I believe that. To me, his films A Bug's Life and Cars were the weakest of the Pixar offerings. For the record, I think Andrew Stanton is the strongest link at Pixar.

If it's such a director-driven studio, then why do directors keep getting removed? I know this is nothing new for Disney, but this wasn't supposed to be the same Disney - Lasseter promised something new and different for management.

What I fear is that Lasseter wants every movie to be his own, and he's choosing his friends and would-be puppets for positions so that he can make each movie how he wants it. It doesn't feel communal. One comment from an AICN preview of Bolt supported my belief:

This was the sequence that just shrieked of Lasseter and you could clearly see his fingerprints all over it.

... Lasseter really has his fingers in everything. Creative support or creative control?

What's sad is Keane's vision was finally being realized under the new management. For years they wanted him to make that 'teens forced to live in a fairy tale' story against his wishes. He got to focus his vision again with the new management but rumors always had it that he and Lasseter butted heads over the project (Lasseter wanted it 2D, for one). Maybe Lasseter was looking for a reason to boot Keane and using his health was the perfect scapegoat.

Sorry to sound so conspiratorial, but I mean Wellins wasn't sick, so why'd he get removed, too?

All this just disappoints me! Sure, Keane was an animator - but I don't think his directorial skills could have been THAT bad. Just not what Lasseter wanted.

[Whippet Angel]

I know this is nothing new for Disney, but this wasn't supposed to be the same Disney - Lasseter promised something new and different for management.

It actually seems like he's trying to get back to the old way of managing the studio(the same way it was in Walt's era I suppose). He may or may not be going about this the right way. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Rather disappointing news though....

[GeorgeC]

Wow,

We're all jumping to conclusion now, aren't we?

Before you get all hyper, remember a few things --

A) the entertainment press likes to hype the heck out of things and occasionally bends the truth for its own agenda and to boost ratings -- Nothing gets attention moore than bad news or fights!

A) 1) ALWAYS question what the media reports... It considers itself a part of the government and you have to be naive to believe everything you read or hear from either the government or media WITHOUT TRIPLE-CHECKING YOUR FACTS! The Internet is a particularly bad place to do rumor-checking. It's much better to check from the direct source => the people involved in the story;

B) you have to consider the reliability of the source; a lot of reporters are nothing more than gossips and rumor-mongers;

C) NONE of us work for the Disney Company or know the principals involved personally or have talked to them -- in other words, don't take this news so personally because it doesn't directly affect you!

D) Replacing or reassigning people on movies is nothing new... Sometimes people don't get along with others, or just aren't right for the project;

E) Not everybody is cut out to be a producer or director; it takes a lot of patience to deal with other people and a certain mentality/arrogance to be a higher-level person in a film... some people are better off in lower-tier jobs;

F) Everybody has been having a field day dumping on Disney and its executives for the better part of at least ten years now. I don't know about you, but I've gotten tired of it even though I've been guilty of it at times myself.

The fact is that Disney is Hollywood, like it or not. People have their own agendas in the entertainment industry. Sometimes those agendas are malevolent or just about money, other times they are just about art at the expense of commerce. The best films usually are produced when those agendas meet in the middle. It was like that before Eisner, during Walt Disney's time, and after the respective eras of each men.

Sometimes it's better, sometimes it's worse to work at Disney than other companies. Otherwise, it's no different. You decide you want to play in the sandbox and play by its rules, or don't get in the sandbox at all...

[Neal]

A1) If I wrote to Disney, I don't think they'd tell me the truth about what happened if it was political.

B) Floyd Norman would seem to be reliable.

C)

I know there's a lot more that goes on behind the scenes than we know, but can this many talented people have really been that misled in their visions?

D)

I know this is nothing new for Disney, but this wasn't supposed to be the same Disney - Lasseter promised something new and different for management.

E)

Sure, Keane was an animator - but I don't think his directorial skills could have been THAT bad.

F) I'm sorry, but when Lasseter came in he was lauded as the hero who'd save Disney. He had so many golden promises of making the studio director-driven and the like. If he was fulfilling all that, or even a good part of it, I'd say nothing. However, he seems to have fallen prey to the greed of power. I've tried to get over his decisions and see the silver linings. I thought the removal of Sanders was terrible but it let two newer-directors try their hand at animation, too. I was outraged when Menken was shown the door but thought maybe Newman was better suited to the project. I feel bad for Pinkava but decided I still like Ratatouille so why the fuss.

This, however, is like the straw that broke the camel's back. It has finally gone too far.

If Lasseter had just come in with no pre-conditions, no grandiose promises, then we wouldn't be having this problem. He wouldn't be turning his back to his own statements. But he promised something fresh and new and it seems as if he's gone against that.

[Whippet Angel]

George makes a rather good point. None of us work there, thus we have no real idea of what's going on (despite what the media says).

Not to mention that Lasseter has been there for such a short amount of time. Seems kinda early for us to be passing judgment.

[GeorgeC]

Look,

I'm not a fan of everything Pixar and DO believe that Pixar and some of its people are overrated, but they have the best track record in Hollywood right now ($$$) and that's what gives people clout in the entertainment business.

Furthermore, like any other film, Rapunzel is being funded by the Company's money and not the personal money of the director or producers. The Disney Board expects a solid return on that money within a sensible amount of time. There is only so long they are going to allow anybody to work on a project before they pull the plug or assign that project to somebody else! That's reasonable.

Seven years is a heck of a long time to be working on a project spending somebody else's money and not having a finished project to show!

This is by no means the record for animation gestation, either. The Thief and the Cobbler was in production on-and-off for the better part of three decades!

Sometimes the artistic folks screw up and just don't finish their assignments in the time they agreed to. It's been a problem with more than one "animation messiah" trying to invent the next great thing.

The problem with a lot of the critics of animation is they're only looking at the artistic side of things... Heaven knows if the Cartoon Brew guys or half the people that post here or at Animation Nation ever got in charge of a company they'd plow it straight into the ground!

[droosan]

Yeah; I dunno if anyone's noticed (or would even really care), but I don't post on Animation Nation or Cartoon Brew anymore .. and I used to be fairly prolific on both sites (well over 1600 posts on AN). Negativity gets pretty 'tiresome', after a while.

I think people had gotten so used to thinking of Disney as an 'evil empire' in the tail-end of the Eisner years, that they simply don't know when (or may not want) to stop.

-------------

Actually, Neal, 'health reasons' could certainly be a valid cause (though, perhaps only one 'aspect') of this decision; Glen Keane is no 'spring chicken' -- he's closing in on 30 years with the Disney studio.

Further, everything I've read thus far seems to indicate that Keane will remain very involved with the film -- as Animation Director. So, the final form of Rapunzel should still retain the signature Glen Keane 'look' and 'feel' (unlike what seems to have happened with American Dog / Bolt). He simply won't be 'top dog' on the film, anymore. I would remind you that Keane wasn't 'top dog' on The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Tarzan, or Treasure Planet -- and those movies turned out okay. :idea:

-------------

Glen Keane is a master Character Animator, as well as a consummate fine-artist. But the job of 'Director' on an animated feature is a very different one .. which (IMO) may have proven frustrating to Keane.

A Director has to juggle many hundreds (if not thousands) of decisions per day; not simply his own, but those of each of the few hundred artists on the project. It is very nearly a thankless task -- and essentially requires that the Director be separated completely from the 'hands-on' artistic side of the process; by the time a feature is in full production, his entire workday consists of an endless series of meetings and reviews.

Personally, I have avoided any sort of supervisory role throughout my own Hollywood career. I much prefer to actually sit at my desk and create. A Supervisor takes on the problems of all the artists on his team, and spends much of his time in meetings. A Director (as I pointed out above) is even more 'slammed'. Certainly, those positions pay more -- and can bring notoriety and (a small amount of) fame -- but, for my part, I'm content to stay 'in the trenches'.

That's not to say this may be a factor with Keane; but there is every chance he might be more 'useful' to the production -- and, indeed, may even be happier -- in the lesser role. :idea:

[EricJ]

This, however, is like the straw that broke the camel's back. It has finally gone too far..

I'll throw in a G):
YOU HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN THE DANGED FILM YET!

All I've seen was the test footage from a year or two ago, and as much as I'm looking forward to the "renaissance", frankly I wasn't exactly thrilled about the saccharine bits of Rapunzel I did see.
In a "Oh, please tell me this isn't the real movie, or that the plot gets more complex in rewrites..." sort of way.

Nostalgically live for those Roy Disney days and call Lasseter Machavellian all you like, but like King Walt, he also has an uncanny mutant instinct for knowing what story-session ideas of a movie are accidents waiting to happen, by audience standards....AND, more to the Walt 2.0 point, how to fix them.
(Even if, like "Robinsons", it means turning it into a Pixar movie--Don't think that'll happen, but when it's studio head vs. animator brainfart, my banner's with the professional audience-panicker every time. Being a member of said audience, you see, and preferring someone to sympathize with my best interests.)