Talk:Ratatouille (film)/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Sneak Preview/ Future film tag removed =

Due to the fact that there was a special sneak preview on Saturday, I removed the "future film" tag. It's been shown once. Many people have seen it. The tag states "The content may change dramatically..." The plot has been finalized, I'm sure. Jrdaigle1000 19:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Now that Disney owns Pixar...

What, if anything has changed about Ratatouille? Ratatouille.com points to http://disney.go.com/disneypictures/

Is there a new release date? Has a trailer been released yet?

Has Disney/Pixar announced anything after this film?

I watched the Ratatouille trailer yesterday at my Cars screening. I just wanted to comment on something: I didn't remember seeing in the trailer that Disney was participating along with Pixar, but I see the Disney logo on the Ratatouille logo on the Wikipedia page. I knew that Disney has bought Pixar, but I thought it was too late for Disney to be involved in Ratatouille. --QQQ (6-10-06)

Before the merger was complete, because talks were so good, they decided to add Ratatouille into their second agreement. They basically wanted to make sure that IF the talks ended badly, that at least Ratatouille would be under both of them, giving them time to make a new deal till 2007. However, because the talks turned into a merger . . . and now that PIXAR is now under Disney and in charge of both PIXAR and Disney films (with those made at PIXAR carrying the name "Disney-Pixar") it doesn't really matter now. But basically, they ARE a team again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.162.220.224 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Plot?

Well, all we know is that it is about a rat in a Parisan restaurant who is in love with Haute cuisine. But not enough is revealed, I mean, does the Chef know him? But it's like Pixar always did before the film's trailer came out, such as Cars- not much was revealed when it was first announced "Cars features a wide assortment of cars as characters who get their kicks on Route 66." I think more will be revealed.

If anyone finds any info, put it on the article. Corvette67

  • Saw a Lasseter interview in Paris on Canal+ for the European premiere of Cars. Says it is a story of a rat in a restaurant who wants to become a cook.Hektor 13:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
      • Okay, the trailer's been taken down now, but the plot seems to be: A kitchen boy who can't cook finds Remy (who can cook) and they team up to become "the greatest chef in Paris." Maybe someone who saw the trailer can write something up in the plot section about that...I think they might have shown some of the clip at an interveiw somewhere...?Catcher Block 00:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

In order to be consistent with WP's use (or non-use, as it were) of blogs as source/reference items, can we look into correcting/updating the JHM reference (footnote #1) that discusses the reported plot?SpikeJones 19:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Woah there...

Can anyone verify this? Willshepherdson 15:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

are you talking about the supposed cast names? If so, I think we definitely need some sort of proof... because it reads more like the cast for a Dreamworks feature than any of Pixar's. 7/8 named characters with (arguably) A-list celebrities? I have strong doubt. Kendall 14:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
agreed...what should we do for the time being? Willshepherdson 20:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Patton Oswalt

Can someone provide a source verifying that Patton Oswalt is actually doing a voice? It keeps getting added without any proof. —tregoweth (talk) 01:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

The blog at Jim Hill Media verifies that Patton Oswalt is voicing Remy. Mightyhog 14:24, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Poster

There is a new poster at [1]. I can't get it up, but someone else should try. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.63.18.184 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Art Style

The style of Ratatouille seems to borrow heavily from Quentin Blake's caricature of rats in his various illustrations. The nose, ears, belly, and posture of the rats shown in the trailer are nearly identical to those seen in 'The Witches', in particular. Could this be added as a reference? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TythosEternal (talk • contribs) .

Only if you find a reference for it. Powers T 00:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Non-standard pronounciation?

I've always pronounced the food as "rat-a-too-ee," what's non-standard about it? CrossEyed7 06:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't it normally be pronounced more like "rat-a-twee" (as in, "oui" with a "t" in front of it)? Esn 21:39, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Non-standard means without those crazy dictornary signs nobody understands. --Wack'd About Wiki 21:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Release date

"It is scheduled for release on June 29, 2007 by Walt Disney Pictures."


Shouldn't this be June 28? As it will be first released in Australia on June 28.

Do films' release dates written from when the film will be first released in the world, or when they are first released in the films' own countries (in the case, the US)? The former sounds more logical if you ask me. --211.26.48.123 07:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

It should be the date of the film's first release in the world, but other important release dates can also be mentioned. For example, if the film was first released in a film festival, you'd mention that but also mention the first wide release, and maybe the US release. It depends on the film. Esn 21:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Ok. Did you change the opening paragraph? If so, thanks. --211.26.122.77 03:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] merchandise

Not a fan of the merchandise-related "trivia" that had been added, so I separated it into its own section as the info wasn't exactly trivia about the movie at all. Anybody feel that it even needs to exist?SpikeJones 16:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Want to participate in a Pixar survey?

Please participate in my survey on Pixar characters. The results on the most likeable Pixar characters will be shown and updated on the first weekend of every month. We hope that you will comment and rate the characters. The survey is located at User:ANNAfoxlover/Pixar. Thanks for your comments and ratings. ANNAfoxlover 21:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] can someone coordinate footnotes

the Brad Garret pair of interview are contradictary to each other or are both poorly written. Can we come to an absolute consensus of what it is he's trying to say in each?SpikeJones 01:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi. My take on it is that we should go with Auguste Gusteau (as the character that Garrett actually voices). First of all, MTV, I would think, is generally considered to be more "official" than About.com. Secondly, no other source mentions "Rousseau" as a character in the film, whereas Auguste Gusteau is mentioned not only in numerous sources, but most importantly, in the official Ratatouille website [2] and the Ratatouille page in the official Pixar website [3]. S@lo 03:19, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] John Ratzenberger is in Ratatouille!

Some of you guys don't think John Ratzenberger is in the film, well Brad Bird says him self that Ratzenberger is in the film here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr8IgtVNAic User:71.123.3.238 04:42, 20 March 2007

Cite it then rather than wasting our time. See WP:ATT. WikiNew 21:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello there. Regarding the discussion-starter's concern, most of us here, including myself, believe that John Ratzenberger will be in the film. However, Wikipedia has a policy stating that facts such as these stated in articles must be attributable to a reliable source (which means that blogs, fansites, etc. are more or less excluded, unless they provide some very solid evidence that the information is true). I've seen the YouTube video that you posted, and had Brad Bird said, "John Ratzenberger will be in Ratatouille," in the video, then the John Ratzenberger info would have been added to the article, more likely than not (which is exactly why Peter O'Toole is already included in the cast list). Unfortunately, Brad Bird never explicitly stated whether Mr. Ratzenberger will in fact be in the film (he may have hinted that Ratzenberger will voice a character, but the fact of the matter is that the nature of his statement remains ambiguous). To sum up, most of us believe that Ratzenberger will be in the film, but that wouldn't suffice unless we have a reliable source to back up our claim. S@lo 00:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

(dang WP and its database issues, I tried to post this earlier). Agreed with S@lo. In the video at the 3:36 mark or so, Brad Bird specifically addresses the question of whether Ratz will be in the movie or not in an extremely vague manner -- words to the effect of "we've had seven hits with him... I may be tempting fate". By saying "tempting fate", the phrase can imply that Bird is tempting fate by *not* having Ratz in the movie just as much as it implies that Ratz IS in the movie. He never actually says "yes".SpikeJones 02:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I still question the "confirmation". All the cited article says is that "comingsoon has confirmed.... will be in R." They do not cite their sources, so how can we use that as a WP source? They should fall into the same WP:VERIFY rules that blogs do. SpikeJones 21:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC) (not saying he's NOT in it, but we need to be consistent in our confirmation source requirements SpikeJones 22:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC))
The ComingSoon article in question can be found by clicking on the following link -ComingSoon interview. I am a little surprised that we haven't found this article before, considering that it has been available since July 2006. With that said, John strongly hinted during this interview that he will voice a character in Ratatouille. However (and here's the big "however"), John also said, during the time of the interview (which was about a year ago), that he has not done any voice work for the film. Because of that, I'd like to keep this topic of discussion open to debate. S@lo 22:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
COME ON! HE IS GOING TO BE IN THE FILM! (SORRY FOR YELLING!) --58.179.224.128 08:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

In regards to SpikeJones recent edit regarding John Ratzenberger: Just out of curiosity, did Dancing with the Stars actually show a clip of John Ratzenberger's character in the film (hence the word visually)? I don't watch the show so I wouldn't know. :) S@lo 02:08, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The show had a behind-the-scenes clip of Ratz doing voice recording (looping, perhaps), along with a clip of the character being voiced with the track that Ratz had done. From what I could tell, the scene was where the maitre'd (played by Ratz) was telling Skinner that the critic liked the soup that Remy made. SpikeJones 03:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Is the character name "Maitre’D"? or is that what he play? Pixar is 09:43, 24 April 2007

It's the character he plays, as far as one could tell from the clip shown on ABC. Obviously, we'll know more closer to movie release time. SpikeJones 14:40, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
You mean the French Waiter? User:71.123.1.209 (16:18, 24 April 2007)
Please sign your posts, and remember to phrase your question in a manner that gives people reference to what you're talking about. I'll assume that you mean my original edit where I was the first to state the Ratz/Dancing With Stars/Ratatouille connection? SpikeJones 21:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem

To Pixar is, uploading images without copyright information is in violation of a free encyclopedia. Please change those images' copyright status to "some website" to film-screenshot or Disney character instead. Also, those character descriptions sound copyrighted. Alientraveller 14:50, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you change the copyright info.? Because I don’t know how. User:Pixar is 09:51, 30 March 2007

I did so myself, but remember, you did not find those images on "some website". They are copyrighted film screenshots. I also removed the copyrighted bios. Alientraveller 14:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I did not know what to list them as so I put them as "some website". User:Pixar is 10:00, 30 March 2007

When you upload an image, you've got a list to select from. Pick movie screenshot instead. Alientraveller 15:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay! Will do. User:Pixar is 10:20, 30 March 2007

Pixar is, we need to know where you found the images. The missing copyright information is in violation of a "free encyclopedia". A•N•N•Afoxlover hello! 15:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IMDb as a source?

Just a question, why is IMDb not a valid source for information in Wikipedia as per this revision? --clpo13 22:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Although providing less freedom in editing than does Wikipedia, IMDb is a site that can be edited by its members, most of whom are not affiliated with the movie industry. IMDb is therefore an unreliable source of information when it comes to upcoming movies (and perhaps movies that have already come out, although not usually). To give you an example, IMDb once listed David Schwimmer as the voice of Emile in Ratatouille, which is obviously false. In fact, I will even go so far as saying that IMDb used the Ratatouille article in Wikipedia as a source; when Wikipedia then used IMDb as a source, a kind of "circular effect" in citing took place, if you will.
There are, of course, Wikipedia articles in which IMDb can be used as a source. For example, you can use IMDb as a source in the article entitled "Films considered the greatest ever", as IMDb's Top 250 list is more or less an accepted form of movie popularity polling/voting. Also, note that IMDb cannot be used as a source, but it is common practice for Wikipedia editors to link to the IMDb entry of movies for which articles have been written (which is different from using it as a source). The reason is that, in a sense, IMDb is an alternative "Wikipedia of movies" considering that it gives curious Internet-surfers and movie aficionados a fair bit of information (which isn't necessarily official) regarding films, upcoming or otherwise. (The fact that IMDb is more or less a complete database of films, which makes it one of the leading and most popular movie sites in the net, is another reason that we link to a movie's IMDb entry.) S@lo 01:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I wasn't aware IMDb was editable. Thanks for clearing that up. --clpo13 04:00, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cast

Just wanted to let you know that I added most of the Ratatouille cast. User:Pixar is 10:50, 11 April 2007

The cast has yet to be confirmed by 3rd parties on either of those websites. One site is a self-published fan site and therefore ineligible to be used as a WP reference (plus, WP:NOT a link exchange). And ComingSoon does not contain any of the cast information that was posted, nor do they publish their sources. SpikeJones 16:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] the latest added image by Pixar is

You said "don't remove it" in your comment. Why is the image there in the first place, as it doesn't add anything to the encyclopedic article? We already have images of all three characters depicted. Remember, WP:NOT a fan site. Can you defend needing the image in the article? If not, it will be removed as being unnecessary. SpikeJones 15:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay we can take off the image of Paris a put the new image there. User:Pixae is 11:48, 23 April 2007

[edit] Synopsis

204.128.192.8 just posted a synopsis of the movie taken directly from the official Ratatouille website. I reverted the edits for fear that the synopsis may be copyrighted. Even if it weren't copyrighted, I'd say it'd be more appropriate to put quotation marks around it and specifically state the source from which it came. Any thoughts on this matter? S@lo 17:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Everything on the internet is copyrighted automatically by the original author. The synopsis must be rewritten for an encyclopedia article. While we're on the topic, remember that we DO need to find a replacement for the JHM ref currently on the synopsis, as JHM is not a valid WP source. SpikeJones 17:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh wow, I didn't even realize that we were using JHM as a source after all this time. I think the movie synopsis in the official Ratatouille website should replace the JHM reference. The synopsis written specifically for the article follows the official synopsis rather closely (albeit not a word-for-word transcription of it). By the way, thanks for clearing up the copyright issue. S@lo 18:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citations for use

Some interesting stuff on rendering food. Alientraveller 20:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

They even set up their own cafe. Alientraveller 20:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Alientraveller 16:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Neat stuff on how Bird came on and Oswalt's casting. Alientraveller 13:14, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Should we add the rest of the cast?

Since this site (http://www.ratatouillemovie.net/) was right about Jake Steinfeld voiceing Git, should we add the rest of the cast that the site gives? User:Pixar is 08:25, 27 April 2007

ratatouillemovie.net is a self-published blog that does not provide their sources or other external confirmation on information. They -- and sites like it -- cannot be used as a WP resource at all. Please see WP's policy on citations and resources for full explanation as to why WP can't use any of their information. SpikeJones 14:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dissapeared writing

I added some info on the characters in my own words but it was taken off. It might have been taken off because I forgot to sign in but I saw the edited version as soon as I finished. Ideas? Can I try again? Arthritix 14:12, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I added some more info on the characters- not taken from other sites but I did use some ideas from trailers and podcasts. Arthritix 15:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your edits. They were reverted because the edits you made contained plot elements and weren't limited to info on just the character themselves. When the movie comes out, you will see that the descriptions of some of the characters that may change dramatically from what's listed here if we were to include plot elements in the character descriptions. We're just trying to keep it simple for now. SpikeJones 16:08, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. 64.222.60.237 21:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I get your point now that I saw the movie. 64.222.60.237 15:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Waiter

In the latest Ratatouille podcast entitled Parlez Vous Francais, John Ratzenberger is interviewed and while he speaks, under his name (where the name of his character is shown) it reads "Mustafa" which is presumably the name of the Waiter so I have changed it. Download it off of iTunes to see it. Martini833 00:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I knew this a long time ago, but people kept changing it back to "Waiter". (23:11, 19 May 2007) 71.114.227.28
A lot of us knew this a long time ago, but we have to wait for official announcements to reference, not random blog entries. While we appreciate enthusiasm in editing, all edits in Wikipedia -- especially edits regarding future items -- need to be properly documented and cited. WP:NOT a fan site, and WP:NOT a crystal ball. If you are unsure of how to document, edit, and cite properly, please review the Wikipedia style guide and how to cite sources. SpikeJones 11:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Movie plot

We need to be careful in the next coming weeks regarding posting the plot of the film. Reviews are starting to come in ("pixar's best work to date", is one that stuck out to me), and the full plot is available for those who know where to look. I propose waiting until the film is actually released before posting the full story as there are some plot points that are particularly spoiler-ific and could also slightly change the movie summary that's posted in the article. SpikeJones 12:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Is this consistent with the updated WP:SPOIL? I'm still trying to wrap my head around that policy. 24.61.47.65 11:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I see your point, as the policy states Concerns about spoilers should play no role in decisions about the structure or content of an article. The next thought regarding this is: when *should* the full plot for a future movie/book/etc be posted? Obviously, information shouldn't be added without proper citations ("someone on the set told me this was the plot" isn't valid), and advance press screenings are done with the caveat that the press attendees can't talk about the film ahead of specific dates (a projectionist in Memphis, for example, was fired last week for discussing Fantastic Four on Aint It Cool News). Some of us do have access to advance or inside information, but wait until a "proper" time to add that info to WP. Others may not have the same restraint, deciding to post information regardless of whether they have the correct info or citations available. Obviously, once tomorrow's sneak preview hits all bets are off, as that would be considered the final print of the film shown in an publicly-available setting. SpikeJones 12:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
However, the WP guidelines do say that the spoiler tag can be used temporarily for movies released in the past 6 months. This movie as of now is not even released in the US, and "Plot" isnt so much a few spoilers as a roadmap of every single surprise in the movie. I almost added the tag myself but decided with a bit of judgement to check the policy and the talk page. 70.246.193.20 03:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC) (correction 70.246.193.20 03:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC))

Is this why we can't add character profiles to cast then? OK. Just remember, that's always the best way to keep the plot compact. Alientraveller 16:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Just giving a heads up, all those character images fail non-free image criteria. I.E. they need to be removed. If you can find 1 image, that encompasses the whole cast, or at least the primary cast, those usually tend to hold up better to scrutiny.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:16, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

What if I ask Disney / Pixar if they would be willing to give a free license to some images for Wikipedia to use? Anyone have any thoughts or experience with this? Wikidemo 23:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Likely not. See User:Durin/Fair use overuse explanation. At this point, one or two screengrabs might be all that can be done as noted above. --Masem 23:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
I've read that several times. The policy is uncertain to begin with, and beyond that he is making up his own policies. If you get unrestricted permission from the copyright holder then it's a free image and outside the fair use policy. However, I don't really think a film article needs pictures of every character like rottentomatoes or imdb has.. If you want the full-on audiovisual experience you can go to the official website. The beauty of the Wikipedia version is that it's got all the links, and when you come here you know it's going to load fast, be readable and fair, and won't crash your browser. Wikidemo 00:25, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images_and_media item #3, as in the FAQ on the forelinked page, basically says that even if you get and say "used with permission" the image can be speedily deleted. However, as long as the appropriate fair-use rational is added, it should be ok. But, don't make the page a screenshot gallery of every single character. --Masem 02:05, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the pointer. The policy suggestion is good and I'll save my thoughts on the policy for elsewhere. Wikidemo 05:22, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I've put up *one* image from the trailer, where Remy is controlling Linguini (a key plot element AND shows the two major characters) which was in the online trailer. Without other sources (eg the actual movie on DVD), eg a cast shot, I don't think there's much else that can be put up. And yes, it's got a fair use explanation. --Masem 02:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Remy vs Rémy

The official Disney site lists Remy as "Remy", not as "Rémy". Which is correct? SpikeJones 23:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Looks like Disney is using "Remy" consistently. Any objections to this change? SpikeJones 05:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Running Time

I'm pretty sure that the running time is 100 minutes (1 hour 40 minutes) but the page shows it as 110 minutes. Is it too hard to believe that a Pixar film can be less than 115 minutes? (Dorgana 12:17, 17 June 2007 (UTC))

The running time is 110min. As for your second sentence, quality vs quantity wins every time.

Actually, I saw the movie last night(June 16th) at a sneak preview and it WAS actually 115 min.

It's officially 116 minutes. I saw it on Saturday and I asked. 116. Really. I'm Kinda Awesome... 22:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Michael J. Fox?

The right-hand side bar lists Michael J. Fox as the lead character. Doesn't that role belong to Patton Oswalt? Deadbeat 007 06:22, 18 June 2007

Indeed it does. Someone must have thought it would be clever to make that change. --clpo13 07:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plot

What the hell happened to the plot section?

I think someone removed it since it was too long. I recommend that someone post the plot in a subpage and we'll work on cleaning it up. --hello,gadren 15:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
My current draft of the plot, which is unfinished and contains 676 words, can be found at Ratatouille (film)/Plot. - MajorB <talk> <contribs> - 16:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Okay, it's finished now but is at 866 words, so 166 words have to be shaved out. - MajorB <talk> <contribs> - 16:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Completed! Down to 700 words exactly. Of course, any further edits are welcome. Thanks so much for writing the draft, MajorB! --hello,gadren 00:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

OMG!!! There's no spoiler warning. I'll try to add one. Jrdaigle1000 21:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

A section titled "plot" doesn't need a spoiler warning - this is an encyclopedia after all, so if someone comes here to read about the plot they had better expect to find it. — Carl (CBM · talk) 21:12, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spoiler Warning

The film doesn't come out for another week. At least put a spoiler warning on the plot page. (Dorgana 19:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC))

It says "Plot". Readers aren't stupid. Alientraveller 15:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

People should know the difference between plot and plot summary. Plot is the basic background but not the whole story. Plot summary is the whole story. (Dorgana 19:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC))

*Sigh.* Please see the official policy. Thanks, and Happy Editing... Goldfritter 09:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Co-director Jan Pinkava?

I removed "Jan Pinkava(Credited as co-director)" from the info box because I could find no official source that listed him as "co-director" or "director". See, for example, IMDb or the film's official site. I saw the movie yesterday and do not remember seeing Pinkava in the screen credits either -- although I wasn't specifically looking for it. --Jeremy Butler 14:58, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Jan is listed in the closing credits specifically as co-director. SpikeJones 15:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
You've got sharper eyes than me! Yes, Pinkava did get a co-director credit. It's interesting to see how the L.A. Times reported this:
"As has been widely reported, the Pixar-produced Ratatouille was begun by another director (Jan Pinkava, who receives a somewhat nebulous “co-director” credit in the film’s end titles) and then taken over by Bird well into the development process."[4]
--Jeremy Butler 11:43, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Production" section

"Production" section reads like a promo piece. It needs to be cleaned up and toned down. The insert with a quote by the producer alone is completely ridiculous. Alex Pankratov 20:28, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, and don't want to mess with a quote. Alientraveller 20:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Can you explain how is the heavily POV'd quote "it's a wonderful story" from the most biased source is related to the "Production" section ? Alex Pankratov 20:36, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
It's how the production staff sees their work; it's a fair inclusion in the Production section as it explains how and why this story even got made. It's not a WP editor POV that's being introduced here. --Masem 20:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Are we talking about the same quote ? It is a wonderful story about following your passions when all the world is against you. A rat to a kitchen is death; a kitchen to a rat is death by the movie producer is NOT "how the production staff sees their work". Moreover this quote is completely out of place in the context of the production of the movie. Furthermore, the inset focusing on a certain fact is a very uncommon formatting element in WP articles. Having an inset that actually features POV'd quote is a plain violation of WP:NPOV#Undue_weight. Alex Pankratov 21:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
First, calling it out as an inset is probably biasing the quote, so that should be nixed. On the quote itself, if the quote was from Lassetar specifically about why Pixar was eager to pick up this script, and thus influencing Pixar's decision to make this film, it would be appropriate to keep in the article as a direct quote cited to Lassetar; if it was a post-production type hype, it should be deleted However I checked the referenced source, and that quote, as is, does not appear like that; it's been bastardized from the source. I would say checking closer that it should be nixed, unless someone can find something equivalent about why Pixar was eager to do the film. --Masem 22:21, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the edit. Alex Pankratov 04:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)