Every Movie’s a Circus

Whether it’s animation, television, or feature films, all such projects are the result of the collaborative efforts of dozens of creative professionals. “With that many talented egos in the same room, there’s bound to be some friction,” said A. B. DeLine, a pseudonym used by one of the entertainment industry executives who advises o-meon on industry matters. “But I can’t recall the last time I heard a story this wild.”

He was referring to the ongoing saga of the story behind the story of the making of Walt Disney Pictures’ all new CG-animated feature Tinker Bell.

It all started with a sequel, a bunch of sequels to be exact, known collectively both in and out of Disney animation as “Dreck-to-Video.” Some of these films are not without their share of fans. For the most part, however, they have set teeth on edge in a large portion of the Hollywood animation community and focused laser-like attention on DisneyToon Studios upcoming release of Tinker Bell, the movie.

“If this turkey [Cinderella III] is as bad as Cinderella II,” an animation insider told A. B. DeLine, “imagine what they’re going to do to Tinker Bell.”

Those remarks led to an investigation that resulted in last week’s o-meon feature story A Tale of Two Tinker Bells. Following publication of that story, we learned, in greater detail, more about the decision to push back the release of Tinker Bell from the fall of 2007 to the fall of 2008—independently of one another—from several highly credible sources.

Toon Studio Shutdown

“John Lasseter came out [of a Disney Fairies Trilogy screening] so angry, many feared he would use his influence to shut down DisneyToon Studios,” said a source close to Disney studio operations.

John Lasseter’s contract with the Walt Disney Company does not include creative oversight of DisneyToon Studios. According to sources familiar with Toon Studios operation following the release of The Little Mermaid 3, its sole purpose will be “to provide feature length commercials for toys.”

“Years ago, Michael Eisner told Sharon [Morrill] and feature animation that he no longer wanted to be beholden to animators. So he told them from then on all ‘creative decisions’ would be made by my managers and executives,” added another source.

According to these sources, there were two versions of Tinker Bell being made—three, if you counted the first version, a 2-D interactive DVD with separate stories for Tinker Bell and her friends. That version was up on development reels when Walt Disney Feature Animation (WDFA) president David Stainton and DisneyToon Studios head Sharon Morrill decided 2-D, or hand drawn animation, was dead.

All of the work on the 2-D version of Tinker Bell was tossed out. Over the objections of the animators who felt the movie would have been much better in 2-D, work began on a new CG version of Tinker Bell’s story.

Morrill and her creative executives reportedly burned through several directors and script drafts before she took over the writing, directing, and editing of the movie herself.

By the time Morrill came to the realization that the story wasn’t working, virtually the entire film had been shipped to India where the CG animation work was being done.

Following Disney’s acquisition of Pixar, David Stainton stepped down as head of WDFA. Even though Morrill was aware that John Lasseter’s new responsibilities as the creative head of WDFA did not include oversight of DisneyToon Studios, she also knew he was to be directly responsible for maintaining the integrity of Disney’s classic characters, which most definitely included Tinker Bell, Peter Pan, and the gang from Neverland.

Morrill then did what several of her former associates have said was a smart thing: reached out to Lasseter asking him for help. This was something Lasseter very much wanted to do ever since seeing—and being put off by—the first teaser trailers for Tinker Bell.

Following a screening of the current version of Tinker Bell for Disney, CEO Bob Iger, Disney Studios chairman Dick Cook, and Lasseter opinions on the film varied. After seeing the film, both Iger and Cook felt that it was about 80 to 90% complete and could still make its scheduled 2007 fall release. Like the film’s artists and director, Lasseter knew the production was a mess and strongly disagreed with the idea that it was on track for its planned release. Lasseter prevailed, gave notes on the film, and provided support in the form of story people from WDFA and Pixar.

It was at about this time that Toon Studios production executives determined that only about 50% of the movie could be changed and still stay on schedule.

Title card for the first CG version of Tinker Bell.
Image ©copyright Disney

Reportedly, despite reaching out to Lasseter for help, Morrill still had a strong desire to stick with the same basic story she had been working on. This version had Peter Pan, the Lost Boys, and the fairies responsible for providing children with the spark of imagination. Without this assistance, children would be dull automatons—read adults.

In his notes, Lasseter had stressed the need to keep London, Pan, and the Lost Boys out of the story. “Fairies don’t bring imagination.” He wanted to keep Tinker Bell in her own world of Pixie Hollow.

Lasseter didn't want audiences to see Peter Pan or London because of the inevitable comparisons they would invite between the familiar 2-D characters and scenes and their CG counterparts. As one animation expert said, seeing the classic characters this way runs the risk of making the CG look bad.

The same week that Ed Catmull, president of Disney/Pixar, and Lasseter had to announce a series of layoffs at WDFA, Lasseter was shown a screening and given a pitch for the follow-up to Tinker Bell, which is to be a trilogy of Disney Fairies films.

In the first film, one of Tinker Bell’s best friends discovers that there are “boy fairies” in the world. Heretofore, all the fairies in Neverland’s Pixie Hollow were female. Turns out the boy fairies had previously been banished to another part of Neverland.

Tink’s friend and a boy fairy fall in love, somehow a war ensues, and the boy sacrifices his life for the girl. Then, for reasons that still aren’t clear, the girl goes off to a concert by an all-girl fairy band, occasionally referred to in house as “The Pixie Chicks.”

Of course in the second of the three films, we discover the boy is not dead and by the end of the third film, all is well and happy in Neverland once again.

Lasseter became so angered by what he’d just seen and heard that that’s when staffers began to fear he might seriously consider using his influence at Disney to shut down DisneyToon Studios.

Timing Is Everything

The day after the disastrous trilogy pitch and screening, current Tinker Bell director Brad Raymond and Toon Studio head Morrill were unfortunate enough to be scheduled to present their ideas for a new Tinker Bell story to Lasseter.

Raymond went first and Lasseter loved his ideas. When he’d finished his presentation, Raymond was forced to admit that his new story line represented a nearly 90% change in the film and not the 50% change production executives said could be made and still make Tinker Bell’s 2007 fall release.

Then Morrill followed up by saying, “Okay, now here’s what we can really do….” She pitched her ideas, which hewed closer to her original story and retained Peter Pan, the Lost Boys, and London as a setting.

Lasseter insisted he "would not support a movie with Peter Pan in it.”

Reportedly, that’s when “a major struggle” for control of the project broke out between Morrill, Buena Vista Home Entertainment (BVHE) and Disney Consumer Products (DCP) marketing, and Lasseter.

Morrill wasn’t in love with the old version of the story. She knew the production could only sustain so many changes and still make its scheduled release. According to a former associate, she did something “very unlike Sharon.”

Because Tinker Bell was so directly connected to the 2007 fall Disney Fairies marketing campaign, Morrill decided to side with DCP and BVHE and push for fewer changes being made in the film.

“I was surprised,” said Morrill’s former associate. “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 Dick and Bob for more time to make the movie.”

Eventually, Iger and Cook agreed to push Tinker Bell’s release back one year to the fall of 2008.

Had they not agreed to do this, sources close to studio operations say they are convinced Lasseter would have petitioned the pair to close down DisneyToon Studios. Former Disney artists and animators agree that had it not been for Raymond’s Tinker Bell pitch, there soon might not be a Toon Studio or Sharon Morrill at the Walt Disney Company!

Budgets? We Don’t Need No Stinking Budgets!

Despite the involvement of Iger, Cook, and Lasseter, problems still remain on Tinker Bell.

There was still the matter of all the initial CG work shipped overseas to India. By all indications, the work returning from the studio in India was reportedly pretty good. If Disney halted production on that version of the film, it would still be contractually bound to pay the animation studio. Additionally, they would also run the risk of losing them for the continuing project.

The decision was made to keep them working on the old movie, hoping that some parts could be used in the new production, or that parts could be used as promotional animation to accompany toys or other DVDs.

“At this point, I would guess that they’ve spent at least twice what was originally budgeted for the film,” said a source familiar with the project. Still others equally knowledgeable about Tinker Bell’s troubles estimate that when all is said and done, the studio will have paid three to four times more than what it projected the film to cost.

“The cost on this [Tinker Bell] will probably equal that of any of their recent theatrical animated films.”

Money and production delays aren’t the only things making news about Tinker Bell. Earlier this year, the Los Angeles Times (LAT) and several Internet outlets ran stories suggesting that testing indicated the movie was skewing toward a much younger audience than DCP wanted.

“This is hardly the case for a film in which virtually all the fairies died (including Tink),” one source said of the pre-Lasseter/Raymond version of Tinker Bell. “Neverland disappeared, Peter and the Lost Boys were enslaved in the boiler room of a real-world barge, and children all over London lost joy and imagination. I would expect young children to run screaming from the theater! Of course everyone and everything is restored in the end—this is Disney, after all.”

“If anything, it’s way too complex for younger kids,” said another person familiar with the earlier version of the film. “They had books of rules for everything—rules for Neverland, rules for the Fairies, rules for the kids, rules for London. The whole thing was so complex, they [the animators] couldn’t keep track of it. I don’t know how they expected kids to.”

“I won't even begin to get into the fairy fart jokes or the strong lesbian tones of the original story.”

Everyone connected with this story, all of whom spoke on condition of anonymity, shared one common hope. They all believe Lasseter’s continued involvement is a very positive thing for the final outcome of Tinker Bell. Additionally, they all want the film to be a good story and a movie worth watching again and again, “just like it used to be with Disney animation."