This has been a long running debate in the industry and on this site.  The debate between the Pixar animation loyalists (similar to Apple brand loyalists) and DreamWorks Animation‘s (DWA) honks.  Basically the debate has always read that Pixar is the far superior studio, and DWA can never be as good.

Well, at least in terms of box office, there is going to be no debate.  The crown clearly sides with DreamWorks now, as this year for DWA will be the biggest in any animation studio’s history.  Their expanded release schedule includes three cartoons this year and two of which have soared at the box office already, with one more to come.  From Variety:

That was driven mostly by recent pics “How to Train Your Dragon” and “Shrek Forever After,” which have earned a strong $480 million and $603 million, respectively, at the box office, helping the company pass the $1 billion mark in worldwide sales this year.

“This year will be the biggest ever for a CG animation studio in the history of Hollywood,” DWA-topper Jeffrey Katzenberg told analysts during a conference call.

“Shrek Forever After” is on its way to become DreamWorks Animation’s third highest-grossing film ever. The company, which is releasing three pics in one year for the first time, will unspool the superhero comedy “Megamind” on Nov. 5.

DWA has used 3D to great effect and their year has taken off.  Pixar, on the other hand, continues to churn out “only” one film per year, and cannot match the box office clout generated by DreamWorks at this time.  Those siding with Pixar will still clearly say it is about quality, not quantity, and use their awards success as representative of that measure.  But alas, this is a money driven world and industry, and the money clearly counts for more than the awards at this point.  Ask James Cameron if he is feeling sorry for himself over Avatar losing Best Picture at the Oscars to his ex-wife’s vehicle.

As you know, animated movies are not my cup of tea.  Tried ‘em, can’t do ‘em.  Additionally, I think that there is no difference in the quality of animation to the naked eye.  I feel both studios likely have had some retreading of animators in both houses.  Therefore, how can one be so clearly superior to the other?  I don’t see it.

Nevertheless, the debate will surely rage on, but you can chalk one rather large point squarely on the side of DWA, which slowly but surely is winning over any doubters in their quest to out-muscle Pixar.  And since they have and are making more money this year, I am sure that could lead to more debate problems.  Somehow, I don’t think they are worried.  Thoughts?

As a kid, McDonalds pretty much has you pegged. When not involved in some sort of movie tie-in, their Happy Meal toys were always separated by gender. Hot Wheels were for boys, girls were given some sort of Barbie-related item, and as a child, you’re good with that. I wasn’t entirely obsessed with Hot Wheels or cars in general, but when recollecting playing with small plastic/metallic objects in a fantasyland, they spring to mind. Back then, it was always competition that drove me, so naturally I pitted the toy vehicles I owned in a head-to-head match for top-line speed. I propped up a flat board on a steep incline and held two vehicles at the top, releasing both at the same time in a single-elimination tournament, bracket style. However, I always favored one slightly over the other. It was the Batmobile I’d give it an unfair advantage. It dominated these tournaments. That favoritism resides throughout life. You have a favorite movie, a favorite book, a favorite child (you know you do). In Toy Story, that favorite toy for Andy was Woody, until Buzz Lightyear came along.

That’s what started it all for Pixar, a company born out of John Lasseter’s desire to use computers to help the process of animation. After finally securing financing from a technical visionary in Steve Jobs and producing a few short films, Toy Story was released in 1995, blending a heart-warming story to match the limitations their technology possessed. It was the first computer-animated feature of all-time, which certainly didn’t hurt its chances at success, but without an effective story, it could possibly have buried the medium forever. Story is what Pixar thrives on and remains as the reason they’re at the top of the hill, peering down at their competition.

It seems fruitless to me to describe the plot or even critique either Toy Story or Toy Story 2. I’m sure most have seen the films multiple times and if not, still have a darn good idea about what they’re about and where critical consensus falls on either. The only thing I’ll say on those terms is Jessie’s song, “When She Loved Me,” always bothered me in Toy Story 2. I recognized it was a beautiful song, but was always upset at the filmmakers for choking me up in an adventure I hoped to enjoy from beginning to end. It still plays as sadly devastating as before, but I’ve since realized I wouldn’t want to do without it.

Instead of purely priming audiences for the June 18, 2010 release of Toy Story 3 with a couple of re-releases, Disney has at least been courteous enough to offer editions of the films remastered in 3D. That’s the way the industry is heading right now, certainly for computer animation, so it was a nice treat to see a couple of beloved Pixar classics infused with a hint of modern technology, or so I hoped.

Do those glasses actually protect or hurt your eyes?

You’d be hard-pressed to find a bigger Pixar honk than I, so it comes with great sorrow that I have to associate any negative criticism with the studio. It isn’t the films or the re-release that mars what’s come before, but does the 3D really add? I don’t think so. The films weren’t designed to be in 3D in the first place, so it’s almost like colorization in an additional dimension, but after being primed for a new version of 3D without paper red and blue cellophane optics, I remain underwhelmed.

There are a few times the third dimension offers visuals I could at least deem “inspiring,” and to be fair the first few minutes of Toy Story 2, which appear to possess great 3D potential was ruined by a faulty projector/projectionist at the showing I attended, but overall it seemed to add little. The most mesmerizing part of the process is during dissolving scene transitions, which truly offer a depth to the image. I don’t tend to blame the problem on this re-release specifically, but more on the 3D fad in general.

The only 3D film I’ve truly been amazed with so far was Robert Zemeckis’ Beowulf. Unfortunately, it was the type of film that I didn’t feel I’d need to see again at home once reverted back to standard 2D. Bolt, Monsters vs. Aliens and Up have all offered less than hoped for in my eyes in terms of 3D adding anything to the movie-going experience. With this release, I feel I’ll finally be siding with Roger Ebert regarding recommending audiences just opt for the 2D version instead. You’ll save money and be treated to a brighter saturation of colors.

I wouldn’t write the process off just yet, as I’m still willing to let James Cameron’s Avatar and Joe Dante’s The Hole (which won the Venice Film Festival prize for Best 3D Film over all other previous released films this year I’ve mentioned, but still hasn’t found a U.S. distributor as far as I know) persuade me. It’s just that the hope and enthusiasm I’ve maintained for the past couple of years is starting to dim.

It might also seem fruitless to be reading this the day the two-film re-release was supposed to end, but it has been announced the duo will stick around theaters for a bit longer, as long as it continues to haul in some cash at the box office. The whole purpose of this “3D Review” was more about letting you all know that if you’re planning on seeing it, it may not be worth your time and money and if you weren’t anyway, you have no reason to feel left out. Unless, of course, you just want to see the Toy Story 3 trailer in 3D, then by all means, go buy a ticket.

It’s usually either Cars or A Bug’s Life that Pixar fans list as their least favorite, as it’s always difficult to mill around with perfection every time and some movie has to be down at the bottom of every list. However, I still think Cars has a lot of glorious elements to it, especially the nighttime stroll through Radiator Springs. It’s a film that preaches “stop and smell the roses,” which is a theory I find impossible to subscribe to, but I understand the benefits. It’s always struck me as surprising that Pixar would want to do a sequel, but it’s been in the works and is as official as it can be as the plot has been revealed.

“Empire” Magazine was present at a Disney presentation in London, where John Lasseter revealed some of the plot surrounding Cars 2. They have a lot of good info, so I’ll just paste it all for your reading pleasure.

The story sees Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson), his pit team and new pit boss Mater head around the world for the Race of Champions, to take place in five different countries and involve the champions of different disciplines like Formula One and rally driving. First up is a race in Tokyo, starting at Mount Fuji and heading downtown; then there’s a German race through the Black Forest; then “Porto Corsa” in Italy, which is based partly on the Monte Carlo Grand Prix; then a 24-hour race around Paris (so somewhat like Le Mans then) and finally a thrilling climax in London, approaching Buckingham Palace (where the guards appear to be Land Rovers).

But all this racing is not the only focus. Mater, who we know from the series of cartoon shorts Mater’s Tall Tales is prone to exaggeration, gets involved in a “Hitchcockian” case of mistaken identity, saves the life of a British secret agent called Finn McMissile (who looks a heck of a lot like an Aston Martin) and becomes embroiled in a huge spy thriller. Only no-one believes him. That too comes to a head at Buckingham Palace.

Along the way there are towtruck-abroad pictures to be taken at the Oktoberfest in Germany (where Mater wears “Materhosen”) and harassing the aforementioned Palace Guards.

Cars 2 is being directed by Ratatouille producer Brad Lewis in his Pixar-directing debut. We’re told that all the familiar voices will be returning, but we weren’t told who would be voicing Finn McMissile.

Pixar and Hitchcock? You gotta love it. This sounds like a pretty sweet idea to me and seems like it’ll be a lot more adventurous than the original. I have a feeling Pixar will redeem themselves here and force you to look at the entire Cars franchise lovingly. What do you think of the new direction?

It was about a week and a half ago when Disney decided to buy Marvel and thus own the rights to all film properties based on Marvel characters. No new projects have been announced yet since the take over, but a line from the new “Entertainment Weekly” may give off some hint of a future project, involving Pixar.

“Marvel has thousands of characters to feed Disney’s film, TV, and animation business (Pixar is said to already be eyeballing an Ant-Man movie). As Iron Man proved, they don’t need to be iconic to become blockbusters.”

A while ago, a possible Ant-Man film was being looked at by Edgar Wright, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, but obviously that’s been put on the backburner, if not entirely scrapped. While the idea of Pixar doing another superhero film (they already did The Incredibles), but this time taking established characters, is somewhat intriguing, I’d probably prefer they stick to doing original content. Disney traditional animation has a hold of remaking fairy tales and I think the original stories Pixar has brought to life has only added to their magical run. I’d kind of prefer they keep it that way.

If Pixar did choose to adapt the Ant-Man character, what would you think?

The elderly aren’t seen as important in our country. They’re respected in other parts of the world because they’re supposed to be wiser. They’ve seen more sights, heard more noises and have had more experiences. Due to this, they’re looked up to for advice, guidance and tips on life. Not in America. The elderly are seen as enfeebled, cumbersome, wastes of space we’d rather not have to deal with. We pay people to deal them for us. That’s why nursing homes exist. Abuse of the elderly is continually spoken about because they’re more fragile. We see them as senile beings (no disrespect to Al Davis’ clear case) and not dispensers of wisdom. As keen as we are to sweep them under the rug, it’s necessary to have a reminder that our elders “although slow and dangerous behind the wheel, can still serve a purpose,” to quote Lloyd from Dumb & Dumber. We get a huge reminder of that, courtesy of Pixar’s Up.

Carl Fredrickson borders on obtaining octogenarian status. He’s just lost his wife of many years (in a tear evoking sequence) and he has no children to burden. The only thing he still owns is the home he and his wife moved into after tying the knot. Now, the neighborhood surrounding him his been uprooted by construction. His is the last house on the block and he faces continual torment from the construction company to sell his house only so they can mow it down. He tells them they can have it…when he’s dead, and although he lives a simple life of dressing up in his Sunday best only to move out onto the porch and stew, he shows no signs of slowing down.

One day, Russell, a junior Wilderness Explorer (think: Boy Scouts), knocks on Carl’s door and reading directly from his manual, offers to assist Carl across the street, lawn and porch. Carl turns him down all three times. Russell needs only one more badge, the “assisting the elderly” badge, to become a senior Wilderness Explorer. Carl decides to send Russell away in a way he thinks he’s helping. Carl tells Russell that a bird called a “snipe” always invades his property and asks Russell to hunt down the bird and return it once the bird is found. That ought to get rid of him for a while.

While Russell is out doing his darnedest to assist Carl’s need, a construction vehicle parks in front of Carl’s home. The driver is unable to corral the massive machine and he runs over the mailbox Carl and his recently deceased wife, Ellie, had painted long ago. Carl is heartbroken by the misdeed and when the driver tries to pry it from Carl’s hand to fix it, Carl bops him on the head with his tennis ball-footed walker. Carl is taken to court and forced into moving to a retirement home. When he’s to be picked up the next day, he instead launches a force of balloons out his chimney, lifting his entire home into the air where the destination is a childhood fantasy Ellie was never able to see happen – at the top of Paradise Falls in South America. Russell has stowed away on the property and Carl is forced to ask for help in a way that would make Ellie proud and lead Russell to earning that “assisting the elderly” badge.

Pixar's tribute to 'Pearl Harbor.'

I was instantly reminded of my favorite film from last year, Gran Torino, during the first ten minutes of Up. The former film also contains an elderly male protagonist, Walt, recently widowed. Unlike Carl, he has children, but they and their children are so far removed physically and value-wise they might as well not exist. Whereas Carl’s home is literally the last on the block, Walt’s is the last from the neighborhood he moved into as to his dissatisfaction it’s been overtaken by Hmong immigrants. Lastly, there is the common element of the younger male available to help. Walt had Thao, who was shamed into helping, but would soon develop a father-son relationship. Carl has the eager Russell at his disposal. Where the similar set-ups differentiate, could be the very difference between animation and live-action. Clint Eastwood keeps Gran Torino firmly grounded in reality, whereas Pixar using the medium of computer animation is able to take things in a fantastical direction with a balloon-floating house. The two films employ a similar set-up yet take different approaches, but still end up making a similar point.

Up is Pixar’s first foray into the newest old fad in filmmaking: 3-D. I went against Roger Ebert’s advice to save money and see the film in 2-D, as I feel the need to experience the film the way it was intended to be seen. Perhaps that makes me a tool to Hollywood’s marketing plans for 3-D and if that’s the case, so be it. Director Pete Docter stated there wouldn’t be any visual tricks created solely to exploit the additional dimension, unlike DreamWorks’ Monsters vs. Aliens. Like everything Pixar, story comes first. The 3-D effect didn’t truly add a lot to the film, except during the aerial scenes. The spatial difference between an object and long-range blue sky depicts a wondrous sight and you can’t help but thing maybe this was the perfect opportunity for the animation titan to debut a 3-D effect.

Up is almost certainly Pixar’s saddest film to-date. Finding Nemo had the death of Nemo’s mother at the beginning, but there are at least three tear-inducing moments following Carl and Russell. Unfortunately, I don’t think there’s as much humor as expected to offset it. Dug, the dog who speaks English through the use of a manufactured collar is certainly a brilliant creation and Carl and Russell’s relationship grows exactly as hoped, but you never feel the stakes are all too high, as well as they may have been set-up and crafted.

When you expect perfection, you’re bound for disappointment. Unfortunately, Pixar has set the bar so high for themselves, it’s difficult to continue to achieve that level of success. I’m being overly hard on the film, to be sure. It’s a very good movie that I think could have used a bit more refinement to make it perfect. Up teaches a lesson all viewers should learn. Although bones deteriorate and hunches develop, the childlike sense of adventure and wonderment is never lost, no matter how old you get. As we all age, perhaps we’ll be lucky enough to run into someone who genuinely wants to help.

Although it’s pretty much a year-round thing for me, Pixar hype is never more prominent than when a new film is to be released. Up is that film and its release date is now just eleven days away. We’ve pretty much covered everything we can for you up to this point. We’ve brought you posters, trailers and a preview. We’ve even covered the short that’ll be playing in front of it, Partly Cloudy, with some character art, plot synopsis and a clip. The only thing remaining is to bring you a review of the film, which rest-assured will be coming right around its release.

With the Up circle almost coming to completion, we now set our sights on next Pixar film, Toy Story 3. There are rumors being bandied about that the teaser trailer will show in front of Up, even though that had originally been thought to not be happening. Now, the net is abuzz with the knowledge that Pixar usually inserts a character for their new project into their current one. Nemo was in Monsters Inc. A kid is seen reading an Incredibles comic book in Finding Nemo. Wall-E is in the short film titled, Your Friend, the Rat, on the Ratatouille Blu-ray/DVD.

With the detective help from MTV Movies Blog, we take a look at the Up teaser trailer, in search of a new Toy Story 3 character.

And here it is. This pink bear.

At least, that’s word on the street right now. We’re guaranteed to find out next year when Toy Story 3 is released, but I’m sure we’ll find out a lot sooner than that.

It seems like we’ve had almost as much news about the Pixar short, Partly Cloudy, which is set to play in front of Up next month, as we have about the feature film as of late. Perhaps, though, it’s because we’re all Up‘d out. May 29th just needs to come in a hurry. We brought you some pics and even a bit of plot synopsis over the past few days for Partly Cloudy via our Film News Daily posts. Today, we bring you a clip of the short. It’s only 32 seconds long, and I’d imagine that’s not even 10% of the shorts’ entire length.

Partly Cloudy is about clouds which create cute babies that are then delivered by storks. Gus, however, can’t create babies. He creates nasty things like porcupines and alligators. Can he learn to change his luck?

I was afraid of the clip spoiling some of the film for me, but it doesn’t touch on much. It basically shows storks delivering babies. Always good to see.

The best movie magazine still going, [Empire] has an exclusive first look at Steven Speilberg’s Tin-Tin. Pardon me while I yawn for a moment. Premiere would have done it better. *a single tear drops*

[The Bad & Ugly] reports on The Little Shop of Horrors re-dux. Hollywood rejoices in their collective creativity through summoning such a brilliant idea. Will it be a musical or black comedy? Anticipation heightens…to nearly an inch tall!

Matthew McConaughey is developing Exchange Student for his own company. It’s about two college students, but CrackConaughey could possibly star in one of the non-lead roles. This I wonder…doesn’t he live like a college student anyway? Why not rehash his “Dazed” role and just play himself like he does in every other film? [The Moving Picture]

What Was I Thinking? That is the question Elizabeth Banks and Leslie Mann will be trying to answer in their new comedy. [Net Glimpse] reveals a story about a woman who gets dumped during her engagement party, resulting in a ski trip that heals. I assume “Chippendales” or a new love will help heal as well.

[Rama's Screen] has more info on More Than A Game, an upcoming film chronicling LeBron James rise to basketball fame. The film talks of his tight knit group of friends in his high school era. If it has any of Hoop Dreams‘ elements to it, then this is one I am really looking forward to.

You like movie quotes? You like Arnold? In anticipation of another Terminator movie, [How Well Do You Know] has a quiz of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s movie quotes if you dare.

Pixar’s upcoming short film Partly Cloudy has a new pic and [Film School Rejects] has the goods. I am the farthest thing from an animation “movie” fan you can find, but I will say, I am impressed by that cloud dude, so I attached the pic below. Enjoy.

Hallelujah! Pixar fans can rejoice in this recent Andrew Stanton video interview. More than 35-minutes from the director of Wall-E, where he takes you into the process of the creation of Wall-E and Finding Nemo. He talks about some of the things that set Pixar apart from other animation studios as well. There is a lot of good insight for those that are into Pixar animation in any way, shape, or form. If my senses are correct, I can tell you right now, Machinegunrap will be all over this. To others, enjoy and let us know what you think if you watch it.