dose anyone like having real bad guys in a pixar movies 
If you can present a good conflict with two opposing sides, (protagonist and antagonist) then there is no need for a bad guy.
pixart-
no becuase then the good guys are forced to defeat him in some way.
Hopper-eaten by birds (kids in shock)
Auto-turned off (not as bad)
Syndrome-killed by cape
all of the big bad guys are removed by the end of the movie in some Killing or Destruction way.
Alright so here i go for the villains and bad guys !
martini833:
Well i agree with everything you said 
except for Al McWhighin i’m not
gonna say that he’s EVIL but he stole Woody and he meant a lot to Andy so he still stole a toy from his lovely owner just for his collection. 
Pixar.rocks:
Think about my categories like this.
Bad Guy (Antagonist who makes the story go forward by causing conflict, intentionally or not for most of the film, or key parts)
Villain (Pure evil, and it’s blatantly shown and purposeful, makes their story arc more good vs. evil)
I think Pixar used the right antagonists for the right movies.
So Al fits into the Bad Guy category pretty well, I mean he’s greedy, but as you said, not evil, how was he supposed to know toys had lives?
Anyways I updated my list!
That’s true so i agree with you !
martini: I saw the updated list. I think you are missing the Underminer in the Incredibles.
Oh yeah, I totally forgot!! Thanks, TSS.
Here’s the new entry:
The Underminer
Villain
C’mon, it’s obvious, he’s a supervillain!!
I also added The Anglerfish (Bad Guy) from Finding Nemo and Thumper (Bad Guy) from A Bug’s Life.
Edit: I added Stinky Pete, Fungus, the Omnidroid and [b]Scud[b]!
Zurg(toy) rocks!!! 
I always took the Underminer as a joke, not as a villain. 
I don’t find the anglerfish really a villain. An enemy, yes, but not really a bad guy, if you know what I mean. Deep down in the ocean, food is scarce for them, and all it wante was to grasp the chance to eat. Neither bad guy or good guy- just trying to get a meal in the dark.
now of course we think muntz is a villian right or wrong
No, Pixart, I myself don’t. I don’t feel that the “Good Guys vs. Bad Guys” formula is at all necessary to have a great story and strong characters. You can, and SHOULD, have some sort of conflict, but conflict doesn’t necessarily have to be all-out war between individuals. One of the things that I’ve always believed sets Pixar apart from most animation studios is that they are able to “think outside the box”, and take risks with regards to storylines( I mean, how many “kiddie movies” would have touched on the topic of an illegitimate child, as was done in Ratatouille?), and that means, or SHOULD mean, passing up the standard Saturday morning kiddie 'toon formula, where there’s ALWAYS a villain or Bad Guy or whatever who is out to get the Good Guys, and of course, the Bad Guys are ALWAYS bad, have no redeeming features at all, while the Good Guys are always good, and therefore anything they do is good. Pixar DOES NOT NEED TO DO THAT in order to have a great story. To ME, if they wanted to show a conflict of Good vs. Evil, why not show a character who has to do battle with, and ultimately defeat, his own “inner demons”, and show that no one is perfect. I don’t think anyone would find it boring to see a gradual, plausible character arc; it didn’t turn fans away from Lilo and Stitch, after all. You just don’t need to have a villain, nor a Good Guy who can only win by beating up the Bad Guy. Real life isn’t “black and white” in terms of good or bad, after all, and getting even is seldom a valid means of solving problems.
I would also love to see Pixar drop the negative stereotypes. One of the underlying themes of Ratatouille was just how detrimental those negative stereotypes are, with rats generally being perceived as filthy, disgusting, disease-ridden thieves. Remy had to overcome that image, and he did so successfully. The negative stereotype thing was one of my biggest gripes with Monsters, Inc.; WHY did Peter Docter just HAVE to make the ONE scaly reptilian character the main “Bad Guy”? If he felt he just had to have a Bad Guy, why not go with some furry character, or better yet, stick with one of the original storylines, and have no real Bad Guy, only a perceived threat in the form of a human child, and have the monsters discover that this really was no threat at all? Why, again, did he just HAVE to make the “bad” dogs belonging to Charles Muntz a bunch of Rottweilers and Dobermans, while the one “good” dog is a Golden Retriever? Why not make ALL the dogs of one breed, Dug included? When you’ve heard personal recounts from heart-broken people whose beloved family pets, dogs that had never hurt anyone, were taken away and KILLED simply because their breed was banned due to that negative stereotyping, it does become a personal issue. The last thing I want to see is a highly-respected studio like Pixar reinforce that.
pitbulllady
I agree with pitbullday that there doesn’t have to be a bad guy to have a good story. In essence, a good story has a strong conflict. THere are three kinds of conflict: Man vs Man, Man vs Nature, Man vs Self. Pixar has explored all of these conflicts and has produced wonderful stories.
Exactly, I think that a movie has to have a good “villain” but not exactly in a literal sense. Being a huge villain fan, I am slightly upset at the lack of conventional villains. Luckily the conventional ones are awesome enough to keep me satisfied
So guys how about that villain in Up? wink wink
In response to what Pixar.Rocks said about Al McWhiggin, it can’t very well be said that stealing Woody was villianous because of how it affected Andy, because Al wasn’t privy to how important Woody was to Andy. Now, if he knew that and still stole woody, that would be different.
And money is still a legitimate motive for villianous actions; albeit, a very weak one to include in a movie, but a viable motive nonetheless.
I’d say that Muntz is sort of a villain. UP SPOILER ALERT!!! SPOILERS AHEAD!!! SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS!!!
AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!
Muntz just wanted to clear his name, and prove that a “monster” did exist. But, to go as far as trying to kill Carl and Russel is a bit much. He was also mean to Kevin. Alpha was a villain, and tried to kill Dug! But he ended UP being good, I suppose (dodges tomatoes). Dogs can switch loyalties very quickly.
How about the Evil Emperor Zerg? Not sure how he was in Toy Story, but I guess he’s not really a villain. He was like jokingly evil in Toy Story 2.
zurg was not even seen in toy store and i don’t think he is a villain
Sorry, I don’t remember a lot about Toy Story. But I guess Zerg is like a villain just used for comic relief.