URI: 
        _______               __                   _______
       |   |   |.---.-..----.|  |--..-----..----. |    |  |.-----..--.--.--..-----.
       |       ||  _  ||  __||    < |  -__||   _| |       ||  -__||  |  |  ||__ --|
       |___|___||___._||____||__|__||_____||__|   |__|____||_____||________||_____|
                                                             on Gopher (inofficial)
  HTML Visit Hacker News on the Web
       
       
       COMMENT PAGE FOR:
  HTML   Pixar's True Story
       
       
        IndySun wrote 4 hours 15 min ago:
        I couldn't find the word 'Lasseter' in that post.
       
          andrehacker wrote 2 hours 19 min ago:
          After the MeToo allegations, his contributions have been removed—or
          at least significantly downplayed—in Disney and Pixar’s accounts
          of Pixar’s origins.
       
            pfannkuchen wrote 50 min ago:
            With guys who are in prestigious/powerful corporate positions, I
            wonder if there is a fundamental issue where everybody tends to
            brown nose them, but female brown nosing sometimes gets
            misinterpreted as flirtation and interest.
            
            And because guys in these sorts of positions actually do get an
            overpowered amount of real interest from women, they may have a
            harder time detecting inauthentic interest-alias 
             than say a random janitor guy who a woman is being artificially
            nice to for some reason.
            
            And then if the guy mistakenly thinks the woman is interested and
            makes a move, the woman may then in the moment feel unsure about
            what to do, because an abrupt rejection that contradicts their
            earlier outward behavior may make them feel not good, they might
            feel like they caused it, etc (which I think lines up with accounts
            I’ve read, except they don’t mention the brown nosing part of
            the theorized pattern).
            
            This doesn’t excuse anything, necessarily, I just wonder if there
            are some complex dynamics at play. This setup we have where sexual
            relations are at will, subject only to consent, is not that old, so
            it wouldn’t be surprising if the system as-is still produces very
            bad outcomes at times even if the parties involved are all behaving
            in a non-psychopathic way.
       
            dagmx wrote 2 hours 11 min ago:
            This is demonstrably not true.
            
            He has fairly equal representation as the other founders on their
            history page [1] He also is directly mentioned in the Disney+
            docuseries on ILM, and was part of Catmul’s retrospective on Toy
            Story as recently as this year [2] Pixar and Disney haven’t been
            shying away from his involvement in their history
            
  HTML      [1]: https://www.pixar.com/our-story
  HTML      [2]: https://youtu.be/q1Uq8b2ooVk?si=zjHSHjGHtymH-kKy
       
              andrehacker wrote 1 hour 8 min ago:
              Hm, the fact that he was mentioned or referenced does not prove
              that his role was downplayed, a quick search of the interwebs
              shows:
              
              - 2018 Oscars: Despite his massive influence on Coco, none of the
              filmmakers mentioned him by name in their acceptance speeches for
              Best Animated Feature.
              
              - Film Premieres: Lasseter did not attend the 2018 premiere of
              Incredibles 2, a film he was heavily involved in, further
              signaling his detachment from official company events.
       
          davvid wrote 3 hours 22 min ago:
          Nor Catmull, unfortunately. FWIW, the article is centered around the
          financing and IPO side of the story.
       
            MangoToupe wrote 1 hour 8 min ago:
            This explains today's Pixar better than any anomaly like
            "expertise", "talent", or "insight". Investors should never be
            regarded as retarded, but it's a label they should aspire to. As it
            stands it looks like disney enjoys heating the home by burning
            pixar stock.
            
            Zootopia 2 was pretty good tho, ngl
            
            Edit: no, zootopia is not pixar.
       
              seanmcdirmid wrote 1 hour 2 min ago:
              Zootopia isn't a Pixar property right?
       
       
   DIR <- back to front page