That’s a neat idea. 
But I’m glad that they’re willing to throw away okay ideas if they can’t execute them properly or to give the little guy a chance. Reminds me of when Anthony Hopkins, after several weeks and some severe weight loss, decided not to play Gandhi. May have bothered Hop’s fans at the time, but now, looking back, he would have been very odd in that role. It’s very noble to pass up something like this because you don’t think you can do it well.
As cool as that is, at this point it’s highly unlikely. They’re not going to release concept art and go “Oh, wait oops! Never mind, let’s reuse it on another story, pretend you didn’t see it!”
Thanks for the link, Bryko!
I too have an issue with the article’s title. What is with Pixar elitists taking potshots at rival studios? 
It is common knowledge (among the film and animation community) that Pixar graciously acquiesced to Blue Sky when they heard Rio was in production. Blue Sky did not intentionally copy Pixar (unlike Dreamworks in the early '00s), it was a divine coincidence much like Animal Logic’s Happy Feet and Sony Animation’s Surf’s Up.
I for one, think Rio would be a more exciting and inspiring setting than West Virginia (and Rio’s story will in fact open in Minnesota, so there’s a bit of North America for you), but now that I’ve seen these new concept art, I’m beginning to think that the characters in Newt would be much more interesting.
So while I’m on the topic, lemme say a few thing about the characters. I love them. The female snake is my favourite, but the owl is pretty awesome, too. The cast concept is also pretty interesting, what’s with the marching band? It’s like Pixar had a peek in my brain and found out what kind of animals I like. And of course, I’m a huge, huge, HUGE fan of Jason Deamer after I saw his works in ‘The Art of Wall-E’.
Having said that, though, I agree with the author on this:
I really can’t fathom why Pixar didn’t just release Newt the next year or maybe a few months after Rio, once the hype for Rio has died down. They’ve done it before with Dreamworks (but maybe because it was due to the intense enmity, whereas Blue Sky is more of like a ‘friendly rival’ they can negotiate with).
Did Pixar back out because they wanted to give Blue Sky a chance like a gentleman? Or were they financially-motivated, and that they were worried about their ‘box-office success’, which is surprisingly insecure and selfish for a studio like Pixar?
Pixar has always listened to its fans (well, not always, but there’s a nice PR relationship with all the great autographs and Unkrich’s Tweets). There is an overwhelming desire for Newt to be continued. Why is Pixar scared of Blue Sky? If it has a promising film, it has nothing to be afraid of. If, however, they felt that the story wasn’t working out, I’ll accept that, and I won’t pressure them into it.
We have to learn to let go. Woody learnt that last year. I’ve moved on, and I firmly believe Rio will be an honourable substitute for Newt, and that it will do the movie it replaced justice. If Pixar so decides to release it a few years down the road, I’ll be happy. But if it doesn’t, there’s still many great movies (not just from Pixar) to look forward to.
I agree, it bothered me too. That title was just dripping in bias.
I believe that if they do have anything, they should put it as an extra on the Cars 2 DVD and put it up on their YouTube channel.