I am a bit of a Psychology 
freak and I just wanted to know what you guys think made Skinner the way he is…real reasons please nothing that sounds like it’s a fantasy world…if I get enough psychologic info I may write a story about it. So you may see it up here soon. Please tell me what you think made him…mean? 
If you think it’s a spoiler conceal it and I will read it…
Hmm, I never really thought about that. Perhaps he had family problems in the past, or most people just annoy him. Or maybe his mentor (if he had one) taught him to always be strict around others to get the job done.
That could be a possibility…please think of more…I would like to write something about it… 
I think it’s more of his egotistical complex than anything.
[spoil]He knows deep down he’s not half the chef that Gusteau was but of course won’t dare admit it. The restaurant is on the verge of failing and has only gone downhill now that it is in his hands and it’s increasingly harder for him to make excuses as to why it’s not his fault. I also wouldn’t be surprised that if, as sous chef, it was partially or perhaps even wholey his fault that the place got it’s first bad review from Ego. Add in this Linguini kid who could take the restaurant away (which has at least proved very proffitable in fast foods) and voila! So basically I believe it stems from a want to be the richest and best and, since he’s short and inferior to top it off, he builds himself up by tearing others down.[/spoil]
Thank you good!!! More please I want all of your opinions!!! 
I think it’s a combination of what Marie and Dash said.
I think because he’s short - really short - he got picked on and beaten growing up. As he developed a skill for cooking, he wasn’t just going to let anybody tell him what to do. 
Dash’s theory sounds good, as well…
This is all so good tell me more!!!
I haven’t seen the film yet, but he does seem to be quite the egomaniac. As Gasduude said, he probably got picked on because of his height, and if someone gets bullied, there are only two options- stay weak for the rest of your life, or fight back. Skinner, therefore, probably wants to be in charge of and ‘above’ as many people as possible, not only to confirm his status to them, but to himself.
Psychology to me is a little to nothing more than the classification of someone’s mental persona using the popular theories as an example.
Just because a person’s actions may seem wrong does not commit them to having the mind of an arrogant/irrational person.
In terms of Skinner, whom I know little about so forgive my slight unknowledge…
Being under the great chef himself, Skinner himself seems to be originally passive. In the beginning of the movie, he seems to care little about other situations
[spoil](Ex: Faintly displaying interest that Guesteau’s wife, right?, died).[/spoil]
Now, this can be fine, as some people are like that. But the fact he now owned a popular resturant gave him a relief of insurance, using Guesteau’s name to, literally, keep himself up in a pleasent job and lifestyle.
Being threatened by Linguni and Remy, and turning himself a bit mad from self-inflicted-though-not-exactly-paranoia, he simply wanted to keep what he had, though went about it the wrong way.
Edited. Please remember to use spoiler tags when necessary. – Mitch
Dash took the words right out of my mouth, but Marie and Gasduude’s theories also sound exceptionally adequate and plausible…
Yeah, some people say you need to be tough and strict to get to the top where there’s power and attention.
Don’t see much of a spoiler Mitch But I’ll deal with a simple forgetness 
Nexas - Eh – I re-edited your post. Turns out that there was
only one spoiler in there, which was this:
[spoil]You mentioned that Gusteau’s wife, Renata,
died, which is, indeed, a fact.[/spoil]
So yeah. Sorry about that. At least only one part of
your post has been “spoiler tagged” now.
– Mitch
My
apologies. When talking I usually do give out correct information and usually don’t use the spoilers…I’ll
try to be more diligent in the future so you won’t have to trouble yourself on my account
Nexas - No problem at all, dude.
I think that the restaurant was in financial trouble following
[spoil]Gusteau’s death[/spoil], so Skinner came up with the frozen food line as a way of
bringing in money, and then got carried away with it. Perhaps he was once dedicated to great food, but became
more financially motivated after seeing what ultimately happened to Gusteau.
I think the whole movie can
be seen as a metaphor for The Walt Disney Company:
[spoil]Gusteau = Walt Disney
Skinner =
Eisner
Frozen Dinners = Direct-to-video sequels
Gusteau’s Restaurant = Walt Disney Feature
Animation
Ratatouille Bistro = Pixar[/spoil]
So Eisner’s motivations, (whatever they were),
might be somewhat similar to Skinner’s.
I agree about the height thing. In that respect, he kind of
reminds me of Lord Farquaad from Dreamworks’ Shrek, who was supposed to be another
Eisner stand-in.
And on that
note…
[spoil]Linguini = Bob Iger
Remy = John Lasseter
Collette = Underappeciated
artists at Disney forced to work under thumb of executives but that can now flourish in the new
administration
Anton Ego = Movie Critics in general[/spoil]
Well played and kudos to you my
good man!
animagusurreal - Nice compilation there! All of the listed characters mentioned
seem to match their real-life counterparts perfectly…
Oh, and welcome to [i]Pixar
Planet[/i]!
Ha. Yes, so true…
– Mitch
Interesting tibit animagusurreal. Actually, I thought [spoil] M.I. was a half-hit toward Eisner’s overseeing of Disney and Pixar. The movie’s original plot was changed to it’s current form, most likely by Eisner’s vision of Disney movies. Of course I’m mostly speaking of how Randall’s original role of being “one of the good guys”, changed to being a “villain”. The connection I see is that Waternoose was shown as Eisner, CEO anyone?, and halfly Ran as Pixar. In a form, being forced into decisions and the like. I think ever since Eisner’s decisions, Pixar is getting fair and clever retort through some of it’s films.[/spoil]