Hmm… here’s what I think about the subject.
One thing that has been noted about Pixar is the collaborative atmosphere. Everyone has ideas. However in light of that not everyone’s ideas, big or small, can be used. Its been discussed that when they get together to go over the story and ideas etc that they are brutally honest with each other. One thing that can happen is that you may have an idea that you think is groundbreaking, then get it totally shot down. The thing about being an executive creative officer is that sometimes he may have to be the bad guy and be the one to point blank reject an idea that does not work, even if the person pitching the idea thinks its the greatest thing since sliced bread. I remember in a panel some of the directors and animators were saying that when they first started working at Pixar they had an experience where they got some brutally honest feedback that in the long run benefited the film they were working on and they admitted it was a little off-putting at first (I can’t remember who exactly made this statement) but its something you have to get used to and move forward with. Its what makes it all work and its why Pixar films are what they are. I feel like maybe this happened with her, however she didn’t take it as well. I think that maybe John really had to put his foot down with her and that made her feel like he was “running the show”.
Now her basically saying that Dreamworks is more creative got me thinking about this subject even more. My impression is that yes, they do celebrate ideas and collaboration like Pixar however it sounds like they are a little more lenient. Perhaps they aren’t as honest and willing to force them to cut lose of ideas that aren’t working but the creators are attached to. It may give creators more peace of mind and freedom however this method is not as conducive to creating a cohesive film. Not every idea works so letting too many bad ideas through the cracks can result in mediocrity. Perhaps this is why Dreamworks does not seem to produce as many films that are the quality of Pixar, and why their ratio of hit vs miss are more towards miss. (they have produced some really great films over the years, however there are also a lot of duds).
Of course I don’t know all the facts and what exactly went on during the production of Brave, this is just me speculating based off of what I do know. I’m of the opinion that John is not this micromanaging control freak that Brenda makes him out to be, but that he is doing his job as a leader no matter what others happen to think. 
So someone finally decided to bring this up, huh? I was looking for a place to share my thoughts…
Actually, I pretty much agree with most of what you said Scarricature.
I understand DreamWorks is more diverse and everything, but that doesn’t make them better (or worse). I still don’t think DreamWorks has quite achieved Pixar or Disney level of goodness beyond 2 to 4 films. I think they care about making good or good enough films, but I don’t think their concern is to be great every time. I think Pixar tries to be great with every film on the other hand.
The loose structure gives the directors more freedom, but in turn, it could end up being not as great of a movie as it could be. I still think Pixar’s films are better. If making a top-notch or excellent film is not someone’s priority, that’s fine if you just want to do at least a decent job or as long as it’s personal to you. However, I think Pixar wants their workers to do more than that, and they also don’t want to make films that push to far away from the boundaries of what a Pixar film should be.
It doesn’t bother me that people like Chris Sanders and Brenda Chapman decide they like the working environment at DreamWorks better than at Disney or Pixar. However, I don’t think John Lasseter should be receiving such negative criticism just because Pixar functions a certain way (Sanders didn’t do this). I mean, why not just be happy where you’re at now and let Pixar be? I bet many people, including myself, would work very well in Pixar’s environment, and I don’t need to hear this resentment-talk just because someone who can’t stand that place anymore doesn’t like it. I love Chapman, and I love both films she has helped directed regardless. Not sure if that should let her to backlash Pixar and John like that, though.
Also, on Twitter, John Lasseter posted a link to this article and tweeted to Cartoon Brew, “Please stop posting negative things about me.” Yes, I agree! And he said please.
I think I read about this a while back and kinda forgot about it.
As much as I’d like to support John, one of my favourite directors and fellow Hawaiian-shirt fan, it is entirely within Brenda and Cartoon Brew’s rights to write what they feel under the First Amendment.
Having said that, though, it’s interesting to note Brenda’s bitterness after leaving the studio. We have to examine: Is there a grain of truth in her statement?
I’m inclined to believe that Pixar produces great movies, but at the expense of creative freedom and auteurship. If you become a director, your vision of the film is subject to the approval of the select few. In a real-world comparison, it reminds me of China’s politburro system in a way. You might be the leader, but you take orders from a committee.
Of course, I reckon there is give and take. And, of course, the studio is financing your film, so they have the right, in a sense, to dictate what can and cannot be done.
Also, this doesn’t mean Dreamworks doesn’t have the same weakness. Katzenberg has been well-known for being a shrewd producer, although he has lessened his hold somewhat (I read a recent NYT article on Turbo which leads me to believe Bill Damaschke might be the new Lasseter).
Is Pixar’s Brain Trust the right way? Some would say Pixar’s star has been on the wane. Does their system have something to do with it? Or are there other factors in play?
I do believe, though, that Lasseter has the studio’s best interests at heart. It is, after all, his goal to make it a successful company, not just financially but creatively. But good intentions are not enough.
At the end of the day, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. The million-dollar question is: Is Pixar broke, innovation-wise?
Ah, this was some time ago. She can still be a DreamWorks employee while still enjoying Pixar for who they are and liking the differences. That, and John never struck me as a mean guy. It’s not that automatically John’s right and the other person is wrong. It’s that he should be listened to at Pixar because he has proven himself worthy (like a professor, teacher, coach), and a director is there to work for him and prove they can make equally great films over time. But at DreamWorks, certain things are different, and Brenda happens to fit in better there. Just so long as she takes and respects Pixar for who they are, all is good.
I’m not sure what to think really. Perhaps there’s a grain of truth to what she says or perhaps she was lashing out because she was upset. On the other hand, whether you agree or not, she does have a right to express her opinion, and any website has the right to report on it.
Here’s where I sympathise with Brenda and Jan. These films were their ideas and creation. If the company wasn’t satisfied with it, they shouldn’t use it at all. Instead, they give someone else control over their stories and characters.