I had occasion to be at the Hat Building this morning, and by accident I had a long talk with Glen Keane. (We bumped into each other in the first-floor hallway.) He said the following:
"My contract is up at Disney in May, and I'm doing due diligence, looking around, seeing what's out there. I'm 57 years old and I want to make the rest of my career count.
"I've known Jeffrey Katzenberg for a long time, and like him. And DreamWorks Animation is a dynamic studio. I also like what's happening at Disney. I think Tangled was one of our best features, and I did more drawings on it than I did working on Tarzan. It was great working with the animators on the crew, helping them take the work to the next level ..."
Glen didn't say whether he was moving on to another studio or not. He related that he likes the people he's working with at the Mouse House a lot, but said he's interested in "working without walls," which I took to mean he's going to look at his options and decide what he wants his next project(s) and/or studio(s) to be.
He informed me that he hadn't seen the Blue Sky piece regarding talks with DWA, hadn't seen the L.A. Times story, wasn't aware of them until I brought them up. And he was okay with me putting this post up, which is why you see it here now.
Posts
45 comments:
have you no decency or shame. who cares what glen says you can say about his personal life....you should be ashamed of yourself
Hahaha, yes, you shameless bastard! Glen sets the record straight, is perfectly fine with it being disseminated, and it's still the wrong thing to do according to the self-appointed TAG internet police.
How dare you post this info even with Glen's permission!
Don't you know this is a Union blog? ;)
How dare Glen try to dispel rumors and scuttlebut? Doesn't he understand that we care more about his career than our own? :0)
Glen who?!?
"Working without walls." I love this.
Tangled was a terrific film, but Glen's original Rapunzel was what I truly wanted to see.
Glen... If there are other stories you'd like to tell but can only do so effectively in a "working without walls" environment, then by all means, please leave Disney and go get it.
Do a TAG blog interview with him...
Do a TAG blog interview with him...
Good idea.
I am shamed for having read your post...I should have averted my eyes. I should have gone over to Cartoon Brew and watched another student short film.
Based on that little blurb, sounds like he's going off to Dreamworks to me.
Good for him.
Pretty soon Disney will be left with just John Lasseter and a bunch of cheaply paid interns.
Bravo, Glen! Wherever you go, I will still be fan of your work!
I think "working without walls" has more to do with his philosophy in general, traditional animation vs CG, etc. Not necessarily meaning jumping ship
But who knows.
From what some animators told me, Glen had developed a much darker version of Rapunzel, where she would have turned crazy to have stayed alone in the tower and where Flint was shy and not confident. When John Lasseter saw this, he decided to change it. Even if I liked the movie, I would have loved to watch this version.
It's a great quote because it can be read anyway you want it to be read.
The TAG comments section will continue to bang its head trying to figure out what it means.
Glen is slick, and knows what he's doing. Make no mistake.
Glen might also be pissed that he was removed from the Directors seat!
"Glen might also be pissed that he was removed from the Directors seat!"
anyone who writes that clearly knows nothing about Glen and who he is as a person.
Yeah, Jeffy or PJ might hold a grudge, but never Billy. He's too saintley
There so much talent everywhere, but Glen is an excellent human being, his spirit is his ultimate treasure.
And he's a great resource for Disney. When young animators are looking for places to go, how many take the job at Disney knowing that they may get to work with such a talent? What happens when he and so many others are down in Glendale working for DreamWorks?
I wish him well, but hope that he decides to stay in at Disney.
What happens is the studio that actually treats its employees well and has actual work in the pipeline deservedly gets a great mentor as a resource.
If Lasseter and friends think they are God's gift to animation, let them do all the animating themselves an on their own. Not like they'd listen to anyone else anyway.
Let Keane help where he's needed and respected.
**From what some animators told me, Glen had developed a much darker version of Rapunzel, where she would have turned crazy to have stayed alone in the tower and where Flint was shy and not confident. When John Lasseter saw this, he decided to change it. Even if I liked the movie, I would have loved to watch this version.**
That version sounds a hell of a lot better than what Tangled turned out to be. At least Rapunzel would have turned out less Barbie-like.
Rapunzel looks exactly as Keane has always drawn here. The main changes were a much more positive story that avoided pop culture references. This was the Eisner version.
Don't be delusional thinking that this version was better. Or that it was Keane's idea. His original take was a classical take on the character and the guys in Burbank were all wanting something like Shrek. It would have been another Disney disaster.. and then John Lasseter walked in.
Tangled is great except for the title. And that isn't a result of Keane or Lasseter.
Hopefully he's stay there, but lets not rewrite history the way some of you guys do with American Dog. That Chris Sanders version was a dog no matter how much talk-backers want to believe otherwise. Bolt was miles ahead being a likable, coherent story. The same goes for Tangled.
Sometimes reality gets in the way of what people wish, but that's reality for you.
"Don't be delusional thinking that this version was better. Or that it was Keane's idea. His original take was a classical take on the character and the guys in Burbank were all wanting something like Shrek. It would have been another Disney disaster.. and then John Lasseter walked in."
Wait a minute-Glen wasn't taken off the "Eisner version" nor was it anything at all like Shrek. He was taken off a darker, non musical, serious version of the story that was majorly overhauled when the other guys were put on. Glen was making his classical take right up to the end. The old wacky version was long gone.
I am not talking about the way Glen Keane draws the character but the story. And I can say that he was working on a darker version, more adult and apparently, John Lasseter thought they could not do that.
I have no idea what happened on "Bolt", but Tangled would have looked quite different. Glean Keane explained that he was interested by this character, who has been living in this tower her whole life and this is why he developed this half-crazy Rapunzel character.
Glen Keane has a great spirit, but he is a human being. How many years did he work on this project? And then finally not direct it? I know that he had some health problems but I also think he was frustrated by the way things went. But with his huge kindness, he respected the studio's decision. And maybe he is now looking for some artistic freedom. I think he deserved it, seeing the way they changed Tangled.
"Wait a minute-Glen wasn't taken off the "Eisner version" nor was it anything at all like Shrek."
No one said he was taken off the "Eisner version." He went to Eisner with the pitch. As the pitch developed, "Shrek" was a big hit with all it's pop-culture references. Eisner instructed that this was the route they should go. Hence, this is why the story was going to be about a modern couple of teenagers that got pulled into the fantasy world.
"He was taken off a darker, non musical, serious version of the story that was majorly overhauled when the other guys were put on."
He wasn't taken off. He had multiple attempts at getting the story right. He had a great first act, but the rest was kind of convoluted. His health was a primary factory in him not directing it, but it wasn't the only reason.
"Glen was making his classical take right up to the end. The old wacky version was long gone."
Lasseter is the one that suggested bringing it back to the classical take and if you think Tangled isn't classical then you should have seen the version Glen worked on for Eisner. It was beautiful, but filled with wretched goofy references and unlikeable, not well developed characters.
The reason it went from a strict tale in the tower and went on the road, was because Glen and his co-director could solve the story problems. Simply put, it fell apart after the first act.
Byron and Nathan came in and found a way to work the story and make the other acts fit together. They're going to make a great team, much better than Chris Williams team up. He's more of a loner.
I don't know if you're just a fanboy or someone that works in the industry, but you clearly don't know what you're talking about with this film.
Glen hasn't been screwed out of some brilliant, dark classic that we will never see. Tangled isn't what it was when the film began, but no animated film ever is. And the film you would have seen four or five years ago is not what you are imagining in your minds.
Let's just be happy that the studio has finally found it's footing after all these years in the wilderness. There are several films making their way down the pipeline. Not enough yet, but that is slowly changing. And it's thanks to Tangled. And it's thanks to Glen.
Hopefully, he won't leave the company, but if if does, then he's left them with a very nice going away gift.
Maybe they'll return the favor to him.
>Lasseter is the one that suggested bringing it back to the classical take<
“Walt Disney has announced that it is buying Pixar”
January 25, 2006
http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/24/news/companies/disney_pixar_deal/
“Keane also promises that he’s going back to Rapunzel’s literary origins to do a traditional, character-driven fairy tale that speaks to a modern audience.”
November 4, 2005
http://www.awn.com/articles/ichicken-littlei-beyond-disney-rediscovers-its-legacy-through-3d-animation/page/6%2C1
“When Michael D. Eisner leaves the Walt Disney Company for good on Friday...”
September 26, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/26/business/media/26eisner.html
Thank you Roy Disney
What happens is the studio that actually treats its employees well and has actual work in the pipeline deservedly gets a great mentor as a resource.
I am SO SICK of hearing crap like this from people who dont work at Disney.
I'm treated very well and extremely busy on the next lineup of films, thanks.
Clearly Disney holds you in higher esteem than Glen. How fortunate for you.
I'm sorry, are people on here crazy?! Can you honestly see Glen Keane being able to make a dark film at Dreamworks of all places? And regardless of what may have been, the fact is we've yet to see a full length feature from Glen Keane and the fact that John Lasseter, one of the most important people in animation - period, felt it necessary to alter the story suggests to me that Keane simply doesn't have the skills you all appear to think he has.
He may be a fantastic animator, but when it comes to great filmmaking, I'd listen to the advice of Lasseter any day.
>> He may be a fantastic animator, but when it comes to great filmmaking, I'd listen to the advice of Lasseter any day. <<
I'm sure Katzenberg hopes Lasseter keeps dispensing that advice. Dreamworks sure is benefiting from all those people coming over after getting "advice" from John.
Here's hoping Keane got enough of an earful of advice from Lasseter. I'd love to see how he does under Dreamworks.
Animated Response is 100% correct in everything he said.
Glenn's version of Rapunzel was darker and more serious. That doesn't make it better. I actually found it to be quite dull and uninteresting. If you take Tangled, then remove most of the action and humor, make Flynn serious and emotionally conflicted over being a thief, and make Rapunzel a frightened, closed up individual who doesn't really want to leave the tower, then you have Glenn and Dean's version of Rapunzel before Glenn stepped down.
When I was chatting with Glen, I said that this is a business, and most artists working in it move around all the time.
I said I didn't really get why anybody was knotted up about whether he was going to move to another studio or not.
He said: "Well, you sort of have a bird's eye view of the studios, you're not caught up in one of them."
Honestly folks. The guy is going to make a judgment and do what he believes best for his future career. He didn't seem uptight at all over whether or not he stays at Disney.
Rapunzel is Kelly from Cheers.Not only in appearance but also in personality.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_25o-ccDxY&feature=related
"Tangled" was quite predictable as well.
Methinks Glen leaving Disney would be a good thing.
Steve Hulett, great comment at 11:00. Most people here will gloss over it, or not really understand what you're saying, but that's their problem. Well said.
Clearly Disney holds you in higher esteem than Glen. How fortunate for you.
Thats not what I said at all. But you hear what you want to hear...
^^ No sense of humor, eh? Probably another thing wrong with Disney these days.
It wasnt funny, maybe that was the problem.
You think Disney has a problem with it's sense of humor? Did you even SEE Tangled?
Some people say things just to be assholes, I swear. Probably a jaded ex-employee...
Steve - what is this whole deal about John Lasseter being a hated man anyway? Does he really have this bad a reputation in the animation community? i.e. is he one of the reasons people are flocking out of Disney/Pixar (aside from the crappy salary and benefits, of course)?
What 'whole deal' are you talking about? You think Glen Keane considering leaving Disney means John Lasseter is a hated man? Or are you just trying to put words in other people's mouths, and stir the pot?
Get out of your basement and breathe some fresh air.
Steve - what is this whole deal about John Lasseter being a hated man anyway?
What hate? Don't know much about stuff like that. (I address it in a longer-winded way up above.)
I've never seen this many disjointed comments on a blog before. And I'm counting Fox News. Someone makes an assertion, someone asks why you're making that assertion, someone else jumps in and insists he never made that assertion. It's like an argument with the cast of Toy Story 3. Only without the charm.
You guys are being childish. Appreciate what each group has accomplished, and let Glen Keane alone. It's not a fault if he wants to consider all his options, and, just because he is, it doesn't mean there must automatically be something wrong with Disney or John Lasseter. For that matter, I doubt any of you have personal experience with glen's original direction for Tangled, so any judgments you make on the matter, or the people involved, are without solid foundation.
Post a Comment