# Dreamworks vs Pixar **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [October 3, 2004, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311 "2004-10-03T11:40:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/1 "2004-10-03T11:40:28Z")
So Pixar makes _Toy Story_ and it’s a runaway hit. It was distributed by Disney (which annoyingly claims ownership of it at every opportunity), whose Animation division was then headed by Jeffrey Katzenberg. Katzenberg leaves the ranks soon after and becomes a part of Dreamworks SKG, as head of their Animation division. Having inside knowledge of Pixar’s plans, he anticipates a few of their upcoming movies. A short time before Pixar’s _A Bug’s Life_ gets released, Dreamworks fast-tracks their own _Antz_. Many people expressed their suspicion that something sneaky was going on, but of course it was denied. The next Pixar film, after _Toy Story 2_, was _Monster’s Inc._ and Dreamworks matches that with _Shrek_ which, interestingly enough, is also about monsters. And now, after _Finding Nemo_, comes _Sharktale_. In my opinion, none of Dreamworks’s animated films are anywhere near as good as Disney (2D division) or Pixar (3D). Not even _Shrek_ (though I know it has many diehard fans who prefer it over _Monsters Inc_). I say boycott Dreamworks, and do not see this fishy movie of theirs. Not only do the reviews suggest it’s pretty awful, but they should not be encouraged in their stealing of ideas from their clear superiors (and completely cocking them up). Next from Pixar is _The Incredibles_ then _Cars_. Next from Dreamworks is _Madagascar_, a stylised story of Central Park Zoo animals escaping back to the jungle. At last, originality comes out of the Dreamworks camp. But don’t be surprised to see a clumsy superhero or anthropomorphic motorcycle film to be coming out of their studios one day soon. It’s almost a guarantee. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/2 "2004-10-03T12:06:00Z")
I don’t really think you can compare _Shrek_ and _Monsters, Inc._ I do agree, however, that Dreamworks looks like it’s basically repeating what Pixar does. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/3 "2004-10-03T12:18:20Z")
Don’t get me started on how dreadful Shrek was. Ok, you got me started. First of all “ugly” apparently only means “fat” - as it was agreed upon that she was pretty cute even as an ogre. It’s not OK to make fun of the big fat ugly ogre, but they make short jokes at every opportunity? Oh, and in the end, when the princess is “ugly” forever, it’s not until she recieves validation from her man that she even thinks about considering herself attractive? WTF??? And the fact that they did it so skillfully that millions of parents thought it was an enlightened tale of … I don’t know what, exactly. Got all my Gloria Steinheim hackles up, lemme tell ya. _breathing heavily_ I have to agree with you on the dubious ethics of the folks at Dreamworks, although I also have to point out that you left out a lot of their movies. There have been original works as well as the “let’s steal Disney’s ideas” movies. Which makes me sad, 'cause the original ones can be fantastic: Paycheck, House of Sand & Fog, Catch Me If You Can, The Ring, Road to Perdition, Minority Report, Spirit: Stallion of Cimarron, A Beautiful Mind, A.I. (shut up, I loved it, y’all who hated it are nuts!), The Mexican, Cast Away, Meet the Parents, Almost Famous, Chicken Run, Gladiator, Galaxy Quest , American Beauty, Saving Private Ryan, Amistad. This is obviously a production house with a lot of talented people working for them. I saw an ad for Shark Tale last week that said something about it being the “urban” Finding Nemo. (“Urban” now means African American in the US.) Followed by an ad in the next break showing all the punching, slapping, running into things, falling, violence and pain (a long commercial filled with this in pretty quick cuts, so they obviously have lots of this in the movie) - all playing off the idea that the movie was or will be a “hit.” So now we have “urban” = violence, or at least stupid slapstick humor, whereas Finding Nemo was a beautiful and sweet movie about a father’s (hello - FATHER’S - how often do we see that?) love for his son. I know, I know, y’all are going to say I’m taking this way too seriously, they’re just movies and I should chill out. And if they were adult movies, maybe you’d be right. But these are kids movies. They are what fairy tales used to be. These are stories forming the subconscious ways in which are children learn about and view the world. I think we need to be more careful with the underlying views and assumptions we let our kids watch. Kids don’t get irony. _stepping down off the soap box and going to watch Farscape instead_ ---
**Author:** ![Fern\_Forest](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/71c47a/32.png) [@Fern\_Forest](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fern_Forest)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/4 "2004-10-03T12:35:32Z")
You’re forgetting Road to Eldorado which was very reminiscent of Atlantis: The Lost Empire neither of which were all that great. Which is ok since although I’ve never seen the Japanese version Atlantis I kinda buy that it was the inspiration for Disney’s movie. Unless you can say other wise. Does that time measure up? Hmm, A:tLE came out in 2001 but R2E came out 15 months earlier. It even came out before The Emperor’s New Groove. Well it still sucked. And The Prince of Egypt which was their first animation and pretty orig… well actually not original at all but not trying to copy anything that Disney had put out at the time. ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/5 "2004-10-03T12:38:40Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > I don’t really think you can compare _Shrek_ and _Monsters, Inc._ Really? I think the inspiration is obvious - Katzenberg says “Find me a monster movie story” and they come back with Shrek (based on an existing book, extreeeeemely loosely). > [@WhyNot](#): > > I have to agree with you on the dubious ethics of the folks at Dreamworks, although I also have to point out that you left out a lot of their movies… This is obviously a production house with a lot of talented people working for them. This wasn’t so much about Dreamworks as Katzenberg’s division specifically, and their virtual plagiarism even more specifically. I don’t deny their live-action has had some gems, and they’re getting better every year. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/6 "2004-10-03T12:42:23Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Don’t get me started on how dreadful Shrek was. Ok, you got me started. First of all “ugly” apparently only means “fat” - as it was agreed upon that she was pretty cute even as an ogre. From our perspective Shrek himself was also pretty darn cute. From the perspective of the characters in the movie he wasn’t cute and was in fact kind of scary. > [@](#): > > Oh, and in the end, when the princess is “ugly” forever, it’s not until she recieves validation from her man that she even thinks about considering herself attractive? She was told all her life that her ogre form was hideous. > [@](#): > > I saw an ad for Shark Tale last week that said something about it being the “urban” Finding Nemo. (“Urban” now means African American in the US.) Now? It’s been like that for quite a number of years now. > [@](#): > > I know, I know, y’all are going to say I’m taking this way too seriously, they’re just movies and I should chill out. And if they were adult movies, maybe you’d be right. But these are kids movies. They are what fairy tales used to be. These are stories forming the subconscious ways in which are children learn about and view the world. I think we need to be more careful with the underlying views and assumptions we let our kids watch. Kids don’t get irony. You mean fairy tales filled with women hacking off their toes and heels in order to fit into glass slippers? I’m sure what kids view affect them but I’m not sure a few movies here and there will do the trick. Marc ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/7 "2004-10-03T12:59:50Z")
> [@MGibson](#): > > You mean fairy tales filled with women hacking off their toes and heels in order to fit into glass slippers? I’m sure what kids view affect them but I’m not sure a few movies here and there will do the trick. > Marc Yep, and the deception and violence didn’t work, did it? The girls were found out and didn’t get the prince. In fact, that version hasn’t been in children’s books for decades. The Disney version took over. The originals can still be found in adult books, but kids’ books are all mice and pumpkins now. I’m not against darkness and strife or even violence in the proper context. My kid’s watched Buffy with me since he was a wee one (except some of the Spike/Buffy eps, where I thought the mix of sex and violence was just way wrong for a kid.) But after every one, we had a great talk about what was right and wrong, how the story fit or didn’t fit reality and the nuances of storytelling. It was actually he who pointed out to me the hypocrisy of the short jokes in Shrek, during one of our post-film conversations. IF one could assume concientious parents who watch everything with their kids and can explain errors in judgement, then fine, film whatever brings in the bucks. But they can’t, and they know they can’t. The studios know full well that most kids watch these things with no adult supervision (they have marketing studies) and yet they still shill crap that’s way beyond the kids’ level of cognition. Should parents be responsible for their own kids? Hell, yeah. But should studios make better stuff with the knowledge that they’re impacting our brains? Of course. They should make better stuff just because they should take pride in their work, darn it! And at the very least, they shouldn’t be plagarizing material to make movies for children who are expected to do their own work at school! That’s some questionable ethics, there. ---
**Author:** ![Agrippina](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8797f3/32.png) [@Agrippina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Agrippina)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/8 "2004-10-03T13:34:14Z")
I mentioned this in my journal not too long ago 😃 : The problem I have with Dreamworks’s animated movies (and something I’m sure will end up happening to Pixar if they’re not careful) is that they seem to be more concerned with their celebrity voices and pop culture references than with the actual story or plot. This is why I detest “Shrek” (amongst other things). “Look, we have John Cleese in our movie!” “Look, we have Robert DeNiro playing, get this, A GANGSTER SHARK! Ha ha!” “Look, we’re parodying MC Hammer! We’re spoofing The Godfather! Ha ha ha!” “Look, we have Woody Allen playing, get this, a neurotic ant! That’s comedy!” These Dreamworks animated movies seem so full of themselves. Even the trailers repulse me. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/9 "2004-10-03T14:21:43Z")
> [@GuanoLad](#): > > The next Pixar film, after _Toy Story 2_, was _Monster’s Inc._ and Dreamworks matches that with _Shrek_ which, interestingly enough, is also about monsters. I question your assumption that _Shrek_ is a ripoff of _Monsters Inc._ I don’t know exactly when each film was conceived, but here is some evidence. Chris Farley originally recorded the dialogue for _Shrek_ and he died in 1997, so it was underway before then. Mary Gibbs recorded the dialogue for Boo in _Monsters Inc._ when she was 2 1/2 years old. She was born in 1996, so she must have recorded it in 1998 or 1999. Of course each film might have been started even earlier than these dates. Also, I don’t think that the two movies have _anything_ in common. Calling them both “monster movies” is a gross oversimplification. Calling one a ripoff of the other is a stretch at least. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/10 "2004-10-03T14:42:51Z")
> [@Agrippina](#): > > The problem I have with Dreamworks’s animated movies (and something I’m sure will end up happening to Pixar if they’re not careful) is that they seem to be more concerned with their celebrity voices and pop culture references than with the actual story or plot. This is why I detest “Shrek” (amongst other things). Thank God for Pixar, then, and its use of anonymous character actors. Who was it who did the lead voices for _Toy Story_? Ah, yes, the unknown actors Tom Hanks and Tim Allen. And given it was a movie about toys, it was swimming in pop culture references. You can dislike _Shrek_ if you want, but this is hardly fair. (To be honest, I’ve enjoyed the movies from both companies.) ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/11 "2004-10-03T23:09:18Z")
I liked both **Shrek** movies, but otherwise I agree with the bulk of the criticisms here – Dreamworks’ computer-animated movies are nought but pale imitations of Pixar’s stuff, and their over-reliance on big-name actors over storytelling is a pathetic attempt to cover up that effort. As noted above, the only Dreamworks’ CGI movies worth a damn IMO are the **Shrek** ones, but I think this was only because the first movie was based on a published title – and even then, the first movie undercut its “appearances aren’t important” theme with all the Prince Farquand short jokes. :smack: If Dreamworks had tried to do a “monster movie” on their own, it’d have stunk as bad as **AntZ** and **Shark Tale** have. Make mine Pixar! **The Incredibles** is going to KICK ASS! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2004, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/12 "2004-10-03T23:31:10Z")
> [@Dewey Finn](#): > > Thank God for Pixar, then, and its use of anonymous character actors. Who was it who did the lead voices for _Toy Story_? Ah, yes, the unknown actors Tom Hanks and Tim Allen. And given it was a movie about toys, it was swimming in pop culture references. > > You can dislike _Shrek_ if you want, but this is hardly fair. (To be honest, I’ve enjoyed the movies from both companies.) Pixar won’t shy away from using celebrity voices, but the difference is that they’ll do so only when they genuinely feel that the celebrity’s voice is the best for the character. When Hanks and Allen did their work for **Toy Story,** for instance, they still hadn’t peaked in their careers – that was the _only_ way Pixar could get them to do the job, since they were (at the time) affordable enough for the first movie from a then-unknown studio. In contrast, Dreamworks’ animated movies have always seemed to be more about the names on the marquee than anything else. This is evident in their trailers, their posters, and their movie promotions; the plot is incidental, and the only thing they care about is having enough big-name stars to entice grownups to see the movies. As for pop-culture references, I think you’re misunderstanding the term as **Agrippina** refers to it, which is the use of “trendy” music and expressions and then-current cultural references to carry the film. This is stuff like the \*Matrix-\*like fight scene from **Shrek,** or the use of hip-hop music in **Shark Tale.** Pixar’s movies are almost devoid of this stuff – the only example I can recall offhand is the “Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker’s dad” bit from **Toy Story 2.** ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2004, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/13 "2004-10-04T00:27:31Z")
Pixar’s movies are clearly going to be timeless. They will still be watched and enjoyed for decades. Only the technology will have improved, the storyline and humour will remain relevant. Dreamworks’s movies rely too much on pop culture. The stories are kind of meaningless, they don’t really have a clear moral you can hang on them. I have no idea what _Antz_ was really meant to be about, and I’m not even going to see _Sharktale_. _Shrek_’s really very funny, but that’s all you can say about it. _Shrek 2_ has superfluous characters (what does Puss In Boots really do?) and weird set pieces that go nowhere (a giant gingerbread man? What the hey?). They just don’t ‘get it’. > [@Dewey Finn](#): > > I question your assumption that Shrek is a ripoff of Monsters Inc. Not so much a ‘rip off’, as ‘inspired by’. For me, the basic similarity of them both being about large scary creatures, coupled with the other movies’ lack of originality, is fairly clear. ---
**Author:** ![Kythereia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e8c25b/32.png) [@Kythereia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kythereia)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2004, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/14 "2004-10-04T01:10:51Z")
> [@GuanoLad](#): > > So Pixar makes _Toy Story_ and it’s a runaway hit. It was distributed by Disney (which annoyingly claims ownership of it at every opportunity), whose Animation division was then headed by Jeffrey Katzenberg. > > Katzenberg leaves the ranks soon after and becomes a part of Dreamworks SKG, as head of their Animation division. Having inside knowledge of Pixar’s plans, he anticipates a few of their upcoming movies. > > A short time before Pixar’s _A Bug’s Life_ gets released, Dreamworks fast-tracks their own _Antz_. Many people expressed their suspicion that something sneaky was going on, but of course it was denied. > > The next Pixar film, after _Toy Story 2_, was _Monster’s Inc._ and Dreamworks matches that with _Shrek_ which, interestingly enough, is also about monsters. > > And now, after _Finding Nemo_, comes _Sharktale_. > > In my opinion, none of Dreamworks’s animated films are anywhere near as good as Disney (2D division) or Pixar (3D). Not even _Shrek_ (though I know it has many diehard fans who prefer it over _Monsters Inc_). > > I say boycott Dreamworks, and do not see this fishy movie of theirs. Not only do the reviews suggest it’s pretty awful, but they should not be encouraged in their stealing of ideas from their clear superiors (and completely cocking them up). > > Next from Pixar is _The Incredibles_ then _Cars_. Next from Dreamworks is _Madagascar_, a stylised story of Central Park Zoo animals escaping back to the jungle. At last, originality comes out of the Dreamworks camp. But don’t be surprised to see a clumsy superhero or anthropomorphic motorcycle film to be coming out of their studios one day soon. It’s almost a guarantee. Just have to say, I’m a die-hard _Shrek_ and _Shrek 2_ fan–but I see the coincidences you’re talking about. Personally, I think people will tell the difference between a good movie and a bad movie, no matter which studio makes it, and flock to that one instead of the other. ---
**Author:** ![drm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a88e57/32.png) [@drm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drm)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2004, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/15 "2004-10-04T01:21:27Z")
I pick dreamworks. I haven’t enjoyed anything Pixar has ever done and I have at least enjoyed Shrek and Shrek 2 from dreamworks (didn’t enjoy much else though). I know I will be in an incredibly small minority here but I’m okay with that. I still haven’t met anyone else that hated Monsters Inc and Finding Nemo as much as I did. Pixar movies just aren’t my cup of tea. I will grant people that Finding Nemo was a very pretty movie. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2004, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/16 "2004-10-04T04:14:58Z")
I just want to take another opportunity to say in a public forum how much I loathe _Shrek_. It’s a visual trainwreck – the characters all look like they’ve been dragged in from different movies. And its particular combination of snarkiness and smarminess makes me want to gag. It takes a lot of balls to sneer at Disney while simutaneously serving up a bowl of saccarine glurge that makes Dumbo look like Becket. ---
**Author:** ![MusicJunkie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df788c/32.png) [@MusicJunkie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MusicJunkie)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2004, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/17 "2004-10-04T04:59:05Z")
I didn’t really like Toy Story so I didn’t even bother to see Toy Story 2. Bug’s Life was incredibly awful. Monster’s Inc. was very funny and I just loved Nemo. So that’s 2+ and 2-. I liked Prince of Egypt a lot and thought Antz was fantastic. Shrek was ok, Shrek 2 less so and Shark’s Tale looks too awful for words. 3+ and 1-. Dreamworks wins. ---
**Author:** ![furlibusea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aca169/32.png) [@furlibusea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furlibusea)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2004, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/18 "2004-10-04T05:18:30Z")
We saw _Shark’s Tale_ last night, and it was horrid… well that isn’t quite true. There was so much potential. I really loved the idea of the Rasta Jellyfish, and the godfather shark idea was pretty cool. The real problem was that they didn’t have a movie. I hated _Antz_. _Bug’s Life_ was ok. _Monsters Inc_ was fun. I loved Toy Story 1&2 and Shrek 1&2 and _Finding Nemo_ I don’t really see that I have to choose, but it does seem that Dreamworks does better when they don’t feel they have to directly answer any success that Pixar has, but rather find their own story. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2004, 6:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/19 "2004-10-04T06:37:40Z")
I think people are being too hard on Dreamworks. Theier films arefine, enjoyable Hollywood fare, better than most other movies out there. It’s not their fault that they’re being compared to Pixar, who are making the best feature length children’s animation EVER - better than Disney did at their peak in the 1940’s. Who can compete with that? ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2004, 7:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311/20 "2004-10-04T07:32:53Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > It’s not their fault that they’re being compared to Pixar It is if they’re stealing ideas. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dreamworks-vs-pixar/267311.md?page=2)