I’m just being honest. I realiz hat movies like Finding Nemo and Monsters Inc. are now technologically outdated, but I never notice. They still seem fresh and top-of-the-line to me.
The great thing about Pixar is that the films are timeless. The story lines are so superior, that they can overpower the rendering work to the point you have to look for the software works to really let it affect the graphic surroundings and presentation.
Although when I was first watching Monsters Inc, I was marveling at the rendered hair effect on Sulley as he road the sled down the mountain. That was definitely a computer geek moment that overrode the story for a moment with me. I have found myself with the new films critiquing the animation the first time I watch now as well. I am always impressed both on the storyline and technical issues and I really take a close look at lighting effects and scene placement and direction now. Something I never really do with other films. Just out of expectation of what goodness that Pixar films produces and thinking of how well they accomplish such.
I have almost all of the “Art of” books, which give s a further perspective of what they wanted translated from the beginning to the final product. I admire how Pixar’s process as it evolves and works into their final films. As a management student as well, I have studied their corporate culture and written papers on such, which goes along as well how the process it self evolves and reworks itself constantly to create a superior product. Definitely a Pixar geek when it comes to such.
They pretty much are top of the line really. They still look a lot better than some more recent CGI features (ones like Happily N’ever After). I think a lot of it comes down to whether the studio makes its own software or gets it off-the-shelf, because the ones that create their own systems seem to produce much prettier films. Also, Pixar has a lot longer to work on their films than most studios, which must help.
Finding Nemo has some gorgeous moments 
And in Monsters Inc., I think that apart from 1 very short moment in the film, it still looks pretty good today.
I agree entirely.
I think the level of detail you notice in Pixar’s newer movies is more intricate, but yes, movies like Finding Nemo and Monsters, Inc. still look pretty up-to-date. Amazing, considering they’re both close to 10 years old.
In their older films all the charcters have very skinny arms.
The ones that really stand out to me are Toy Story and Monsters Inc. Sully’s fur REALLY stands out among the otherwise smooth surfaces. Everything else Pixar has done still looks great, though.
Which older films?
Films like Toy Story, it’s mainly the humans.
Andy’s arms do freak me out.
They didi improve as the years passed. You can tell they had trouble with humans.
Totally. I think Ratatouille, The Incredibles, and Up easily avoid uncanny valley.
Yes. I think the more toon-ish approach definitely helps. Even if Uncanny Valley is slightly present in the first two Toy Storys, it’s not unbearably bad since there’s not too much emphasis on their appearance, mostly just the toys. It was intentional, as far as I’m concerned, because Pixar knew they couldn’t make them look amazing with technology at its current state of development.
I agree. Really, the only parts that really freak me out is their hair, eyes, and arms.
Everyone is also kinda pale.
I like the paleness, though.
It’s crazy to watch Toy Story, and then right after watch Up or Toy Story 3.
Yeah, it is. 
