This one's a little heartwarming, folks, especially if you're predisposed (as I am) to admiring pretty much everything about the Pixar company.

Last fall, a young woman named Courtney saw the WALL-E teaser -- the one where Andrew Stanton talks about the meeting in 1994 where the story was first conceived -- and was reduced to a puddle of tears by its adorableness. Seems she has a soft spot for robots, and in particular for lonely, child-like, wide-eyed robots. So she videoed herself watching the trailer on her computer, knowing it would have the same effect on her again, and then she posted the video on her blog and on YouTube. (We've got it here after the jump.)

The video made its way around the Internets, as these things do, and Courtney began to get e-mails from people within the Pixar family who had seen it and appreciated her enthusiasm. Then one of the film's producers sent her a Pixar jacket as a Christmas gift, along with a note thanking her for the video.

And then they invited her to the film's wrap party in San Francisco.

The year was 1984: The first Apple Macintosh went on sale, Terms of Endearment won Best Picture, Ghost Busters was the year's top grossing film ... and a few guys over in the Graphics Group at Lucasfilm were about to change the world of animation forever. While The Adventures of André and Wally B. is not technically the first Pixar short film, it was animated by John Lasseter and it featured the first use of motion blur in CG animation. And if you thought the folks at Pixar forgot about this lost piece of coolness, think again: During the end credit montage in Wall-E, a small Wally B. can be spotted flying across the screen. Watching the video above is a lot of fun, if only to see how far we've come in the past 24 years since this short first freaked people out over at Lucasfilm. Also, if you like what you see above and are interested in watching more Pixar shorts, pick up the Pixar Short Films Collection, Volume I. It's a blast. Enjoy.

Oh, and speaking of: What did you all think of Presto?

The media is playing two pointless games of "gotcha" with Pixar's wonderful Wall-E at the moment. Eric Kohn addressed the first -- conservative critics griping about the film's "left-wing" message -- over here. The other, best articulated in this post by CHUD's Devin Faraci and this mind-boggling missive from the New York Post's Kyle Smith, but also showing up in Todd McCarthy's Variety review, is that Wall-E's supposed anti-consumerist bent is "hypocrisy" on account of it's released by Disney. I think that's a stupid and dishonest argument, and here's why.

In its latter half, Wall-E presents a vision of the future in which humanity is fat, lazy, basically immobile but for their hoverchairs, and in thrall to a mega-corporation called Buy 'N Large that tells everyone what to do, what to think, and what to buy. The rest of the film is dedicated to Wall-E, EVE, and the spaceship Axiom's human population defying the corporation and returning back to Earth to recolonize. This is disingenuous, the thinking goes, because the Disney empire bears more than a few similarities to Buy 'N Large and, in fact, cynically counts on unthinking, overweight masses, to see its movies, buy its merchandise, and ride the rides at Disney World.

What you'll notice from the folks making this argument is a coy ambiguity about who exactly is being hypocritical here. If the claim is that Disney is being hypocritical by releasing Wall-E, then that may well be right -- but it's also not surprising, newsworthy, or even worth mentioning. Is anyone really shocked that a large, profit-seeking corporation is being opportunistic and ideologically inconsistent? Where is all the outrage about Disney flicks that push the individuality and non-conformism message, when the Walt Disney Company is dependent on a herd mentality among its consumers?

The numbers are in, and both Wall·E ($62.5 million) and Wanted ($51.1 million) absolutely rocked the box office this weekend. We'll save the full report for tomorrow morning, but we here at Cinematical wanted to know what you thought of each film. A Cinematical poll last week -- asking which movie you planned on seeing over the weekend -- showed that 40% of you were interested in watching both flicks. Since these are two completely different movies, we're not asking which one you liked better (though feel free to offer up that info). Instead, what did you think of each?

How does Wall·E stack up against the previous Pixar efforts? Was it better than Toy Story or The Incredibles? (Speaking of, don't forget to vote in our Best Pixar film poll, which currently has The Incredibles kicking total ass.) What about Wanted? Did it rock your socks? Or did style get in the way of substance? Sound off below ...

A couple of people have been griping about Wall-E director Andrew Stanton's refusal to admit that his cute little movie about a robot in love actually contains some pretty upfront green politics, but there's a far more polarizing reference in the film than its harmless pro-environment agenda. It's no major plot spoiler to reveal that, about an hour or so into the story, Fred Willard appears in a recorded message as the mysterious president of Earth's corporate government and orders the ship's captain (Jeff Garlin) to "stay the course." Wait, we've heard this one before: It was the go-to statement used by the Bush administration for about three years or so when describing its modus operandi in Iraq (the term was abandoned when staying the course started to sound like a bad idea). In Wall-E, the context is quite different -- it's an order to not do something, rather than take action -- but hard to ignore nonetheless.

Certain critics with (surprise!) conservative slants have taken issue with this. At Dirty Harry's Place, John Nolte expresses his disappointment in the first paragraph of his review: "Have we lost the wonderful studio who brought us The Incredibles and Ratatouille to Bush Derangement Syndrome?" he asks. New York Post critic Kyle Smith picked up the rant and decided to write his own, even though he hadn't seen the film yet: "This kind of crack, lame as it is, also breaks the spell of the movie by hurling you out of the theater and back into reality."

" ... and some Hunter may express
Wonder like ours, when thro' the wilderness
Where London stood, holding the Wolf in chace,
He meets some fragments huge, and stops to guess
What powerful but unrecorded race
Once dwelt in that annihilated place."

-- Horace Smith, Ozymandias

WALL-E, from Pixar studios, shows us a ruined city, centuries from now, where a single (and singular) robot toils to cube trash and, it seems, will never lack for work. WALL-E (Waste Allocation Load Lifter (Earth-Class)), a two-treaded solitary worker robot, spends his days cubing trash and his nights shut in safe from the cataclysmic garbage-gales that sweep the planet, inside a repair truck he's filled with things that have fascinated him; garden gnomes, butane lighters, a copy of Hello, Dolly! And in WALL-E's nearly-silent opening minutes, we get a sense of the world he lives in. Everything is ruined; there are no signs of life but for cockroaches; the only voices you hear come when the motion-activated Buy 'n' Large holo-billboards go off. WALL-E strips his broken-down brethren for parts and recharges by the sun's rays and stacks trash-cubes to imitate the skyscrapers decaying all around him, garbage as a pale reflection of glory.

It's hundreds of years from now, practically no life (save for a cockroach) remains on the giant garbage dump that's become Earth, and, funnily enough, the only remaining sign of humanity can be found inside the planet's last functional robot: a trash collector (and compactor) named WALL·E (Waste Allocation Load Lifter Earth-Class). It's been roughly 700 years since humans last populated Earth, and in that time WALL·E has wasted away doing what he was originally programmed for: collect, compact and pile trash so that it's out of the way.

However, over the years WALL·E has managed to develop a bit of OCD, collecting certain items and methodically storing them in the large metal container he calls home. One day, while out searching for more trash (and knickknacks), a spaceship arrives to drop off another robot -- one whose mission it is to scour the area and search for life. And it's a girl ... named EVE (Extra-terrestrial Vegetation Evaluator).

Thus begins what is perhaps Pixar's most romantic film yet -- a beautiful sci-fi tale complete with all the feel-good vibes and fantastic, cutting-edge visuals we've come to expect from a film wearing the Pixar name. Despite a few small bumps in the galaxy, WALL·E can easily claim a spot up top on a list featuring the best films of the year so far, and it will surely go down as one of Pixar's most memorable -- because it's also one of their most personal.

Two weeks ago, we learned that Paul Newman has lung cancer (or may have lung cancer). And my first reaction was: will he still be able to do A Walk in the Woods with Robert Redford? Or whatever that long-ago confirmed final film is, if not that Bill Bryson adaptation? A couple years back the Oscar-winning actor said he's retiring after one "last hurrah," and it was speculated that he'd be re-teaming with Redford (his partner in both Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and The Sting). Unfortunately, the last we heard about A Walk in the Woods, there was no mention of Newman being involved.

Over at MTV Movies Blog, meanwhile, Shawn Adler's first thought was more like: "Is Cars really going to be his last acting role?" And thanks to MTV News, he somewhat received the answer. Apparently, the fine folks at Pixar (who are releasing their latest, Wall-E, this Friday) are including Newman's character, "Doc Hudson", in the script for Cars 2, which is set to hit theaters in 2012. Cars co-writer/director John Lasseter says they're "just waiting to see" if Newman will be able to reprise the role. If Newman can't do it, though, the sequel will be doubly sad, since it will also be missing Joe Ranft, who co-wrote, co-directed and voiced two characters in the first movie. The longtime Pixar collaborator died tragically in a car accident the year before Cars came out.

Would you still want Doc to appear in Cars 2 if not voiced by Newman?

Well, the time has finally come for another funtastic Pixar film to hit the big screen. This Friday, Wall·E touches down on earth, and naturally its impending arrival has got us thinking about those nutty dudes over at Pixar who took giant risks, worked their asses off and revolutionized the world of animation. I'm fully aware that naming your favorite Pixar film is kinda like naming your favorite child, but it's fun to look back over the years and attempt to come up with the one Pixar flick that entertained us the most.

Which do you hold closest to your heart? I'm sure everyone has a soft spot for the original Toy Story, but most folks I've spoken with feel The Incredibles was the best all-around Pixar film. Me? I'm a Monsters, Inc. guy. Yup, that's my favorite Pixar film. I just remember having so much fun watching Monsters, Inc. for the first time -- more fun than I had watching any other Pixar flick (with Toy Story and The Incredibles following closely behind). My least favorite is Cars, though I was sick the one time I watched it and have been meaning to give it another chance. Should I? Which is your favorite Pixar film (feature, not short)? Feel free to tell us why in the comments below ...