You're making me out to be the bad guy.
No, I'm not. Why would you say that?
Lasseter, on the other hand, has no reason to change the way he does things... at least not yet. He has done things his way from the very beginning... whether you or I consider that tyrannical is of no consequence. The mere fact that so far, Pixar has put out hit after hit after hit allows JL do keep doing things however he sees fit - because it's working.
One day, Pixar will put out a movie that doesn't do a ridiculous amount at the box office. When that day comes, people will look at Lasseter and say "why didn't this work? You've always made it work in the past? What happened?" And Lasseter will probably have to start changing the way he does things. But until that day comes, nothing will change. To think otherwise is just false hope. Again, it's the suits' mentality of if it's not broken, don't fix it.
About the overall working conditions, I absolutely agree. It's sad that things are the way we hear they are. I hope they change sooner than later. You're making me out to be the bad guy, when the only difference between the way we feel about the whole scenario is the fact that I'm looking at it through a realistic lens, and you're looking at it from a creative lens. Like I said, if I could have things different in my little perfect world, I would. But that's simply not going to happen.
SO to pull everything together... if Pixar is (let's just say arguably so that opinions don't get in the way here)... if Pixar is arguably the most successful animation studio of all time, why would the people in charge of said studio (aka Lasseter) change the way they have done things thus far?
They wouldn't. They'd be stupid to. In a perfect world, creativity would come first. But in this world, money comes first. It's unfortunate, but it's true.
I fully understand what you're saying and I agree with you. I know that the current situation makes good business sense and it would be idealistic to say that things will change any time soon as the current managerial strategies seem to be working. Besides, all businesses' primary (if not only) goal is to make money.
However, just because these tactics make financial sense doesn't make it OK or in some cases - should I even dare say "ethical". You certainly cannot blame artists for aspiring to something better or claiming their rights. Perhaps some exposure or critique of the way things are in the animation industry will help to improve or change some things. In any case, Glen's offer, whether he accepts it or not, and the buzz it has created, has been proven positive for the employees at Disney:
A: Glen is not the only current big league Disney animator who has had an offer from Jeffrey Katzenberg. Jeffery is wooing those guys like the stars of animation they are, while the present management team at Disney apparently doesn't want anyone to be thought of as "stars" and would very much like to level the playing field (i.e. bring down wages, for "stars" and everyone else) even more than it has been leveled already.
B: That's absolutely not true. If you were in the Hat Building, you'd know the studio is in the midst of a pay restructuring to get people MORE money.
A: The ONLY reason the Dis management might be making some noises now about raising people's pay is because of the moves Jeffery is putting on the A-list animators (like Glen). You probably weren't around to remember the last time anyone's pay went up was because of Jeffery hiring people away. If the Northern California anti-union contingent had their way they'd get everyone's wages down to on par with Emeryville and get rid of the union.
C: It sounds like wages will be raised at Disney, in an attempt to keep their employees from bolting to undeniably greener pastures elsewhere.
Glenn is merely the most visible and highest profile. This is all good news for animators. Finally, the free market will decide the value of our wages, rather than being artificially dampened by illegal collusion between the studios.
D: Lets do talk about wages at Disney. When I was there I was titled an "assistant animator" yet I was never doing any assistant work, I was animating sequences. All this was done to save themselves a measly $200 a week. Not only did I animate my own shots I also assisted and inbetweened them all myself as well. Many people did this and that is the way it is. Studios need to pay you for the job you do and not classify you as something lesser to then turn around and have you animate. Obviously they have enough faith in your skills yet are unwilling to pay for them 100%.
Source: http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com/ ... ng-on.html
These kind of practices that the last comment exposes are highly unethical and should not be happening at such a big studio as Disney which can clearly afford to pay their employees what they deserve.