
John Lasseter has a firm handshake. You see a guy in a Hawaiian shirt and shorts and your first thought is this must be one of those free thinking who cares what the world thinks? I’m gonna wear what I want and dance to my own drum type people. But the handshake says differently. It sizes you up, puts you in your place. Tells you it belongs to a man who knows what he wants, who’s in complete and total control. This is what makes John Lasseter such a compelling figure: at once one of the leading creative minds in animation (Toy Story, A Bugs Life, Cars, Luxo Jr.), whilst at the same time the shrewdest of businessmen (Lasseter is the largest shareholder in Disney; Pixar is valued upward of 7.4 billion).
In the third of five interviews running this week (in conjunction with the release of Cars 2 on Blu-ray/DVD today), I speak ever so briefly with the big man himself – John Lasseter (I was only allotted two questions). Click through to watch as Lasseter explicates on the fish-out-of-water dynamics of the Cars series and what he finds so darn fascinating about inanimate talking objects.
Some Brief Thoughts on Pixar headquarters (in Emeryville, CA):
Upon entering forth into the hallowed halls of Pixar, I was struck by a smudge of disappointment. Perhaps this was due to impossibly raised expectations – promises of the greatest wonder in the world, where people scurry around on roller-skates pegging each other with gumdrops. The reality that Pixar’s just a two-story office building was, well, …disappointing. Not until I began to look around at the details of my surrounding(s), did I appreciate the environment. The second floor walls are decked in Pixar related artwork, storyboards, lighting tests, co-worker memorabilia. In effect – becoming it’s own private art gallery. It’s the smartest means of employee motivation I’ve yet seen. The thought extends to the very design of the building – as originally Steve Jobs intended there to be only two bathrooms on the first floor. The intent was to force people out of their desks to interact with employees on either end of the building. Bathroom lines could then become a Mecca of thought sharing. Personally the idea of only two bathrooms split between over three hundred employees seems more like a macabre nightmare than product-producing ingenuity. Thankfully (for the employees) the two-bathroom-only thought was scrapped; but Job’s central thesis (i.e. a central hub for employee congregation/interaction) remains intact. In the middle of the first floor is a large atrium for employee mingling and such. But the true selling point of Pixar – to the right of the atrium: a small coffee stand where I could buy a large Chai Tea Latte for only a buck-fifty. That’s right – Pixar bought me off with a cup of tea. Did I mention it’s the most wonderful place on earth?
John Lasseter Interview Index
- Lasseter discusses what it is about “the Cars verse that gives itself to fish-out-of-water stories”
- Lasseter discloses what it is about personifying inanimate objects with humanity – be it cars, toys, lamps – that appeals to him. He also reminisces on his earliest animated Pixar short Luxo Jr.


Cars 2 is the begining of Pixar’s descent into mediocrity thanks to the Disney-fication of a once truly unique and innovative group of people.
Their focus at this point is to create 2 hour theatrical toy commercials – nothing more.
Oh god – is this line of thought tiresome. One film – and everybody’s all “Pixar sells out” and “This is their descent into ‘mediocrity’” (or “Disney-fication” – whatever-the-hell that means. You realize Disney is pretty much the pioneer in animated cinema and their output far exceeds even Pixar’s admittedly rich catalog. I have no understanding why you use “Disney-fication” pejoratively.)
It seems your issue is with Pixar making movies as a means for merchandise selling (as if this is some new thing) – but might I remind you that Pixar’s very first theatrical film was a movie called TOY STORY – about TOYS – that could then be SOLD as MERCHANDISE.
Listen – if you don’t like Cars 2 that’s fine and dandy (I have more than enough issues with the flick) – but to use the film as a turning point when Pixar stopped caring about story and decided they just wanted to make a profit is absurd. They’ve always been about making a profit. And by the by – there’s NOTHING wrong with that.
Don’t get Disney of the past confused with Disney of the present, Sparky.
And for God’s sakes put the the Thesaurus away. Who the h#ll writes “pejoratively” to say “negatively”? Talk about pompous.
The one thing M&M seems to forget is that while Disney DOES own Pixar now, John Lasseter is the guy running the Creative Division of Disney. This includes the themeparks and the film studio, so the guy in charge of Pixar’s films…
…is the guy who has ALWAYS been in charge of Pixar’s films. Cars 2 was made for profit. It allows them to be more daring with their other stuff.
Its like a well-respected actor making a big blockbuster (that might suck) for a good pay-day so that they can afford to continue making the small, thoughtful films they like to do.
if thats the case then Brave will be the return to splendor. What a short trip!
If you think Brave is going to put Pixar back on track your horribly mistaken. A weak story plot like Brave deserve to be in a studio like Blue Sky. It’s going to be mediocre at best. Then ANOTHEr sequel in Monsters university that we didn’t need directed by a first time director that will probably botch the thing. Pixar is becoming a normal studio. The only film i really looking forward to is Pete Doctors next film
Quick couple of questions. Where the hell do you get your information? What is a “story plot”? And are you really comparing a relatively serious adventure film that takes a trip into Scottish folklore with the likes of Ice Age and Robots? Does anybody really “know” the story behind Brave? Have you personally seen brave? Remember when the trailer for Ratatouille came out and everybody was sure it was going to be Pixar’s first dip into mediocrity? What happened with that again? Oh yeah, Brad Bird churned out a multiple-Academy Award nominated gem about the nature of art and criticism. Brave looks beautiful, scary, and fittingly elegant. A stark contrast to Cars 2.
Tomy,
Wasn’t Steve Jobs Dineys largest shareholder, when did Lasseter become a billionaire?
@jymmymack Yes I am saying Brave belongs at Blue Sky level. Brave isn’t even f*ckin clever. A girl makes a boo boo and her kingdom goes into the brink of chaos and she must save it. How very original. And comparing BRAD F*CKING BIRD to this no man who is directing Brave who ISNT EVEN APART OF THE BRAIN TRUST AT PIXAR and is JUST A PRODUCER is absurd. Pixar is using the same formula over and over again in their film and it’s getting OLD. This new dinosaur movie in 2013 doesn’t sound promising either. But why are we going back and forth? Its just animation. no one gives a sh*t about animation kiddie movies lmao.
That “no man” who is directing Brave is the story supervisor and head of story on Incredibles and Ratatouille, hand chosen by the director of those movies. Who directed those again? OH YEAH! BRAD F*CKING BIRD, as you would say. He is literally labeled as Brad Bird’s “right-hand man” for over 12 years. So, nice try, get some general knowledge before you act like you know everything. Again, you haven’t even seen Brave. You’ve seen a one-minute teaser. How do you know it’s “not clever”? And let’s address that statement that Pixar is doing the same thing over and over. Let’s look at the last four films. Cars 2 is a horrible Saturday morning cartoon. Toy Story 3, the most acclaimed Pixar film of all-time. Up, an action-adventure story revolving around a 80-something year old man and a young boy flying a house to South America. Wall-E, set hundreds years int he future about an artificially intelligent robot who wants to be human. Ratatouille is about a rat who wants to become a great chef (artist). Plots are different, fomulas are VERY different. One is about letting go of a dead loved one, one is about what it means to be human, one is about the nature of art and art criticism, and one is about Mater. How are those the same over and over?
I do know everything. I know Pixar has a formula that wins Oscars everytime. As far as Brave is concerned all i need to see is a teaser to know its going to be mediocre. But like i said before why are we going back and forth about animated movies? I said my opinion that Pixar is getting stale and you said yours. Let’s leave it to the kids.