The Original Pitch For Monsters Inc.

sully_reacts

One of the many things that sets Pixar apart from other animation studios (less so Disney these days, you might imagine) is their dedication to nurture and cultivation. This applies both to the talent, the animators and directors, but also to their projects. As such, many of their films begin with a pitch that’s rather different than the film we finally end up with in cinemas.

On the recent publicity rounds to support Up, Pete Docter was given a chance to recount his original pitch for Monsters Inc. You can read a transcript of what he said after the break.

Here’s Docter speaking to Jeff Goldsmith’s Creative Screenwriting podcast, courtesy of Kashif Pasta:

Well, my idea was that what it was about was about a 30 year old man who is like an accountant or something, he hates his job, and one day he gets a book with some drawings in it that he did when he was a kid from his mom, and he doesn’t think anything of it and he puts it on the shelf and that night, monsters show up. And nobody else can see them. He thinks he’s starting to go crazy, they follow him to his job, and on his dates, and all this— and it turns out these monsters are fears that he never dealt with as a kid.

And each one of them represents a different kind of fear. As he conquers those fears, the guys who he slowly becomes kind of friends with, they disappear as he conquers those fears. It’s this bittersweet kinda ending where they go away, and so not much of that stayed.

Indeed, all one can really recognise is the idea of monsters that scare children. That’s obviously the hook, anyway, and it’s not much wonder it survived while the rest twisted and turned into something new.

The Monsters Inc. IMDB trivia page has a version of this pitch, though they have a box of monster toys and not drawings. There’s also reference to this original idea on the Monsters Inc. DVD. All the same, the inner workings of Pixar picture are endlessly fascinating to me.

Elsewhere in the podcast, Docter and Bob Peterson confirm that they were working together on a new film, the one we know isn’t a Monsters sequel. How long until we find out just what it is they’re up to?

  • dukeoffearl
    Is this guy sure he isn't just confusing this with the script to "Harvey"?
  • theinsomniac
    You clearly havent seen Harvey in a while. Anyway id kill to see this movie! They should make the sequel like this and id go see it
  • really? that plot is totally unoriginal, especially when compared to the story they went with
  • chromey
    "Their dedication to nurture and cultivation" eh. If that same story were told about any other studio people would be lambasting them for brutally watering down the guys original idea. But when Pixar does it it's loving, nurturing and cultivation. I know their reputation is good, but it's still possible they had commercial interests in mind when they "gently guided him" towards the more family friendly version of the story.
  • You conveniently ignore the fact that Monsters, Inc. ended up being a great film. Who cares if they have commercial interests in mind so long as they're producing something of quality?

    If this was a post about, say, a great original idea behind Cars that was eventually discarded in favor of what we ended up getting, I'm sure there would be no lack of comments expressing dismay that Pixar dropped the ball.
  • iec
    great for a kid's movie. this sounds like a much more mature film.
  • chromey
    Don't think I ignored that, conveniently or otherwise. It's open to interpretation how good a movie it is and it's also besides the point. What I was trying to get at is that more often than not Pixars golden reputation seems to negate any critical thinking or impartial analysis when it comes to their movies and their process. I was snarky about it, yes, but thats what I was getting at.
  • JKW3000
    Thinking that Pixar's golden reputation negates a person's ability to think critically or analyze impartially, while a valid concern, is just as equally open to interpretation as the question of how good a movie is. At any rate, I think the topic of "their dedication to nurture and cultivation" is a little more valid due to the number of positive accounts out there regarding Pixar as a workplace...like that video of their Halloween party "Thriller" performance, or even the lunches that helped spur some of their best films.
  • BrendonConnelly
    It was Pete Docter's decision to change the storyline.
  • Shombo
    I do have a problem when greedy companies twist a story simply appeal to a younger audience, but I am under the impression that Pixar cares a lot more about the films they put than just to use them to make money off kids. Every film STARTS somewhere, but when you make a film with a company you work with a very talented group and have to open to other peoples ideas. Pete Doctor knows this, and stood behind the film which leads me to believe that he accepted that the story they ended up with would make a more enjoyable film.
  • thepwnyexpress
    This actually sounds like a wonderful movie. I'd like to see something of this original version.
  • A comic book or animated storyboards would be awesome!
  • Hey, thanks for the mention, Brendon!!

    Who knows what other stories they've come up with over the years - I asked TS3 director Lee Unkrich about this specific one, but I unfortunately worded it in a way that let him get away with a simple confirmation that this was once the story. My journalistic skills need a lot of work :D

    ps. I prefer hearing Pete give the pitch to reading it - the clip is 22 mins into the podcast for those wondering, and the 1 minute clip is on my site (which you an get to by clicking my name)
  • huh, I guess clicking on my name *doesn't* work. Oh well - http://tumblr.com/xpy40s28w
  • BrendonConnelly
    Is working fine for me.
  • iec
    would've made a much better film, just not a children's movie.
  • Because as we all know children's movies are the scurge of the underworld, right?
  • Tercotta
    Frankly there is more Up in that pitch than Monsters Inc with all the ignored feelings.
  • Michael
    I remember hearing about this on the creative screen writing Q & A podcast. If you have any interest in Pixar at all I highly recommend listening to the whole thing. It's on itunes.
  • That's a really interesting concept, and I think it would be cool to see how Pixar would have handled it.It also sounds like at least a *little* of that concept got turned into Up, if you think about it. Sure it doesn't have monsters only Carl can see, but it is sort of about a man re-discovering a book from his youth (Ellie's adventure book) and then going on a journey that changes him into someone else--a lot of it by dealing with fears/pet peeves that he has (i.e. having to learn to deal with Russell, Dug, and Kevin; his disappointment with who Muntz turns out to be; and learning to let go). I mean it's not totally the same as the pitch, obviously, but it seems like the same themes at the very least were used for Up.
  • keesvd
    in the roundtable feature on the bluray they say that they would like to 'do the whole thing again' and theres this awkward silence when one of them says 'well...' . No doubt in my mind theres a sequel on the way.
  • jaewoo
    The pitch reminds me of Where the Wild Things are. I though Wild Things represented Max's fear.
  • Freakazoidberg
    really?
    unoriginal...
    i don't know i've never heard or seen this one before
    although feel free to correct me
  • aford88
    The original premise for "Monsters, Inc." sounds like "Heart and Souls" - you remember, the one from 1993? With Robert Downey, Jr.? From the director of "City Slickers" and "Tremors?" "And The Adventures of Pluto Nash?" Ron Underwood? Anybody?
  • Weyland_Yutani
    Shifting the main emphasis to the monster characters was a great move. It opened up an entire world for the animators and artists to play with - pretty much why certain stories should be told in animation. The artists probably loved the creativity possible (it shows in the concepts) and it certainly was a no-brainer from any marketing standpoint.
  • L.L. Kool-Jaid
    It's almost like "Where the Wild Things Are"
  • disneycars
    The main purpose is to create a sequel and make money . Don't get me wrong i love these movies but it seems like they had to come up with a story and that's what came out.
    However , i'm sure it would turn out great
blog comments powered by Disqus