Pixar Animation vs. Dreamworks Animation

Let's agree for the purposes of this discussion that the undisputed bronze medalist these days when it comes to feature film animation is 20th Century Fox. We'll stipulate that Robots was something of a charming mess and Ice Age was fun.

But the heavyweights - the George Foreman and the Muhammad Ali of CGI animation - are Pixar and Dreamworks.

So which one's Ali (the flashy, charismatic pretty boy) and which one's Foreman (the dependable, low-key workhorse)?

Let's look at the tale of the tape.

1. BOX OFFICE

Pixar Animation
Wall-E (2008, $171 million in grosses worldwide to date)
Ratatouille (2007, $621m)
Cars (2006, $461m)
The Incredibles (2005, $631m)
Finding Nemo (2003, $864m)
Monsters, Inc. (2001, $525m)
Toy Story 2 (1999, $485m)
A Bug's Life (1998, $363m)
Toy Story (1995, $361m)
* Nine releases, $4.48b - an average of $498m per release

Dreamworks Animation
Kung Fu Panda (2008, $357m to date)
Shrek the Third (2007, $798)
Flushed Away (2006, $177)
Over the Hedge (2006, $336m)
Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005, $192m)
Madagascar (2005, $532m)
Shark Tale (2004, $367m)
Shrek 2 (2004, $919m)
Shrek (2001, $484m)
* Nine releases, $4.33b - an average of $482m per release

At first glance, it seems close though Kung Fu Panda has about a three-week head start on Wall-E. Who knows how that head-to-head race will end up? Even so, one cannot overlook the muscle that is the Shrek franchise. A fourth one's on the way, of course. But what ultimately tips the balance in Dreamworks' favor is the mulligan that was its ill-fated venture with Aardman Animations. If you rightfully discount the Flushed Away and Curse of the Were-Rabbit flops (which forced Dreamworks to embrace Aardman's cutesy claymation look and dry British humor), then Dreamworks' seven releases average out to $567m per release. That's almost $100 million more per release than Pixar.

Advantage: Dreamworks.

2. ACADEMY AWARDS

Pixar Animation
Wall-E (2008) - nomination practically a foregone conclusion
Ratatouille (2007) - nomination
Cars (2006) - nomination
The Incredibles (2005) - winner
Finding Nemo (2003) - winner
Monsters, Inc. (2001) - nomination
* two wins, three nominations

Dreamworks Animation
Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005) - winner
Shark Tale (2004) - nomination
Shrek 2 (2004) - nomination
Shrek (2001) - winner
* two wins, two nominations

Dreamworks can lay claim to the first ever Oscar for animated feature with Shrek, but every one of Pixar's releases since the category was created in 2001 has been nominated or won. That's an impressive streak.

Advantage: Pixar.

3. ARTISTIC MERIT

Here's where things start to get subjective. It's tempting to look down your nose at Dreamworks Animation, especially in light of the painterly beauty of Pixar films like Ratatouille or Wall-E. But don't forget the detailed whimsy of Shrek or the kinetic energy of Kung Fu Panda. Every release, including those from the show horse 20th Century Fox, pushes the envelope and finds new ways to play with the CG toolbox. But, you say, what about how Pixar practically invented the whole medium with Toy Story? Good point, but don't forget the way Dreamworks' Shrek single-handedly created a subgenre - right or wrong - of animation with nudge-nudge self-awareness, droll irony, and winking pop-culture jokes.

Advantage: Draw.

4. PRODUCTION SYSTEM

Dreamworks Animation, it seems, works like old Hollywood. CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg is the boss and everyone else jumps through hoops to keep him satisfied and curry his favor. The scripts and storyboards are written and rewritten again and again, endlessly tweaked by a parade of interchangeable directors and writers. The important element in this system is the gag, the sequence, the payoff.

Pixar, on the other hand, seems to work more like a Wall Street firm. There are no freelancers at Pixar coming and going like Dreamworks' hired guns. There's a continuity there, a family atmosphere. The same artists and technicians and writers and directors work together for years at a time on several projects. The important element for Pixar seems more holistic as a result: it's all about the big picture, the story.

Advantage: Draw. It's hard to argue with the results of either system.

5. COMMERCIALISM

This is the big one. Dreamworks makes no effort to hide the fact that its animated films are conceived with an eye towards sequels. The name of the game is launching franchises - a long chain of DVDs, toys, TV shows, theme park rides, and breafast cereals. The studio found a goldmine with Shrek and will milk it for as long as it can. Dreamworks' only other big hit is Madagascar - and guess what? A sequel is coming to a theater near you very soon. Though all companies exist to make a profit, there is something dispiriting about the way Dreamworks seems so solely interested in big tentpole franchises. It seems like they make Shrek movies and little else. And even the movies that aren't Shrek feel like Shrek: overblown characters, snarky gags and one-liners, broad humor and slapstick. It's a formula.

Pixar has its Toy Story franchise, true, but it mostly seems curiously determined to not go back to the same well twice. Every movie is different. They may, like any story geared at least in part to kids, explore the same morals of Be Yourself, but they all have their own feel. Paris of Ratatouille feels wholly unlike the flat desert of Cars or the future world of Wall-E. This interest in exploring different looks and genres and characters give Pixar films an artistry. With few exceptions, Pixar films are masterpieces. Dreamworks films are, well, they're entertaining movies.

Advantage: Pixar.

It's close one, but for now, it's Pixar taking Dreamworks the distance, winning by a TKO in the final round, using finesse and footwork (a love of the game) to counter Dreamworks' powerful-but-limited combinations. But that's okay - Dreamworks didn't really want to win. It just wanted the big purse.

Tweet