Did anyone else notice how much little Andy in Toy Story 3 doesn’t look like little Andi in the first two? College Andy looked more like the original Andy for crying out loud!
Don’t forget, since 1999, animation has improved drastically and now most humans are very lifelike in Pixar films.
I know, but I mainly mean the shape of his head, his nose, etc.
Plus, usually when kids grow up, their faces change somewhat too.
Yeah Lee already addressed why Andy looks so different in TS3. Pixar has gotten better technology and wanted to make Andy more lifelike. It was for the better to give him this change, it would look too weird for him to have his old face when even the toys look more lifelike.
Yeah, I think they could have done a better job matching the older design. improving animation is one thing, but they actually changed his design in a way that I don’t really recognize him as young Andy anymore. Not to mention I think he looks younger than he did in the first movie.
For that matter, they even changed the mom’s design. I get changing her older self, making her look more aged, but couldn’t they have made her look more like he old self in the home video footage? even giving her a similar hair do would have helped there. making her skinnier would have helped too.
They did a good job with Molly though. though she was mostly curly hair anyway, heh.
Hmm… I didn’t really notice anything myself. I guess he did look much more life like though; definitely like a real child! I’ll have to look at two images to really compare and see the changes though.
I’m not talking about how realistic it was. He didn’t look like the same kid. Adult Andy looked more like Andy from the first 2.
Since I haven’t seen much of young Andy prior to Toy Story 3, and there’s not that many scenes, I didn’t really notice. But once you mention it, he does look VERY different. In the flashbacks, he looked identical to the way he did in Toy Story 2, but now, but now he looks different. It seems as though adults and kids are made differently, as kids are more unproportional, and more like caricatures, but adults are made to look more realistic. I guess that’s the only way to explain it.
Perhaps you’d like to change your thread title to something more specific, like “Andy’s appearance in TS3 vs TS2”, Incredigirl? 
Pixar humans where very unrealistic in the first one, because the technology wasn’t that good yet, but the proportions were very human-like.
In the second one, the new humans characters (Al, Geri), look much better and realistic, even if the proportions aren’t as faithful as in the first movie.
I think they seem better when they aren human-proportioned (The Incredibles, Up), because the uncanny valley isn’t as present.
P.S: I know my grammar is all messed up in this message. Sorry for my poor english.
Its because the original designs rested way too far into, excuse my TV Tropes, the Uncanny Vally. Watching TS1, I saw how huge Andy’s forehead was, how his arms were skinny little sticks moving in a very limited and stiff way, and how his little beady eyes barely moved like a normal human’s would. They took away those issues by redesigning him.
I wouldn’t say he looks too drastically different, since we can all still recognize him as Andy, but I see what you mean. I personally like how Andy looks both young and older in TS3. He’s a lot cuter.
Well, don’t worry, the uncanny valley isn’t a TV Trope, but a recognized term. I actually used it in the previous post 
Andy looked different in each movie.
That’s true, but in the first two, he looked like the same kid at least.
The only difference i noticed between the first two was the hair and cloth sim. Any other changes were just subtle things to age him slightly.
I actually think the technical gap between the first and the second is as wide as the one between the second and the third, despite it’s not as long in terms of years.
The evolution in the animation between TS and TS2 was amazing.