Ya know, Pixar can really do no wrong. There hasn't really been one misstep yet! Even though I may not have liked "Monsters Inc." too incredibly much, I can't deny that it's a pretty well done movie. It is what it is. In my honest opinion, the problem with "Monsters Inc." is that it reaked of Disney and Michael Eisner. It suffered much of what "Lilo and Stitch" suffered from in that both movies were so desperate to reach both adults and kids, that what could have been a classic was instead just an "okay" movie. Whereas the "Toy Story" movies and "A Bugs Life" were just clever without putting up much effort, it almost seemed like some Disney and Pixar execs were sitting in some board room, making notes on how to make the most marketable movie that will have both the Happy Meal tie in AND the parental units laughing in the hysterics. Hence, they tiptoed through a really kick ass concept and didn't do anything all that new or revolutionary. "Monsters Inc" for me was quite a let down. More predictable than the answer of 2 + 2. I can just imagine some ad execs sitting in the Pixar office, constructing what "Boo" looked like. "No, no...maker her eyes bigger. We have to sell a million of these to turn a profit." or saying something like "No, we can't have monsters scaring little kids or else kids won't want to see the movie a gazillion times...How about we make the monsters turn into circus clowns at the end so that...hmm.....yeah...let's have kids laughter be the end all be all of Monster energy." I don't want to sound all crotchety but kids have it too easy these days. Monsters are scary. I remember being terrified of all the Poltergeist goblins. Why didn't they go that route? Why not have a scary movie that appeals to kids and adults instead of just selling out and making some Sesame Street monster meets jump the shark Simpsons bullshit that we got?

But on to "Finding Nemo"

I felt that in every way that "Monsters Inc" took the easy way out, "Finding Nemo" did not. wait......ya know....I'm going to break this review down into an easier format.

Voice work: The people at Pixar are geniuses in this area. Pixar understands that just because someone is a "star," it isn't going to necessarily mean that their voice work is all that good. That has reaped huge rewards for them. I think that it speaks volumes that the biggest star voice of "Finding Nemo" is Ellen Degeneres. I think that each of the voices that they chose for "Finding Nemo" fit their character to a 't.' No one does neurotic quite on the same level as Albert Brooks. He's perfect as the father of "Nemo." Ellen was pitch perfect as the "Memento-esque" short memoried blue fish. Probably the most inspired choice in regards to voice work was Willem Defoe. He brought an edge to the role of the scarred tropical fish that wouldn't have existed without his awesome voice. Film geek moment in five, four, three, two, one....Julie Louis Dreyfuss of "Seinfeld" fame did a voice for an ant on "A Bugs Life." She commented once that after seeing her voice attached to an ant on "A Bugs Life," she realized that if she were an animal, she'd be an ant. And I think therein lies the brilliance of Pixar's voice work casting. They perfectly match voices to their characters. I mean, Allison Janney of West Wing fame is the perfect starfish. Can anyone else imagine Geoffrey Rush doing any other character BUT a shark? The list is endless in their movies. John Goodman as "Sully" in "Monsters Inc." Tom Hanks as Woody. Get my point?

Computer effects: Um.....If ever there was a no brainer this is it. It's their best yet. Although at times, the water effect was almost so murky, it was hard to make out what was going on. Besides that, no complaints. Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.

Story: The "Finding Nemo" story really resonated with me. I really dug the theme of an uptight father "letting go" to both his own anxieties and to the ties between him and his son. I thought that it was a very real and poignant story that really should resonate between both kids and adults on both ends of the stick. In typical Disney fashion, they beat this into our heads on a daily basis. I don't find that as a fault per se, it just is what it is. Disney.

Perhaps my only complaint was the attempted double, triple, and quadruple climax at the end. Not only does Nemo escape but he has to go through a drain, a water treatment plant, pelicans, and a fish net. All the while, his father is stuck in a whale's mouth, almost eaten by seagulls, and almost captured by a fish net. I like adventure as much as the next guy, but sometimes it gets a bit tiring when movie peeps add climax after climax after climax. It's as if they knew that they would never do another underwater movie, so they blew their load as much as humanly possible.

Perhaps another complaint that can be made is that it suffers a bit from Christopher Guest syndrome in that the Pixar movies have gotten a bit formulaic, thusly making it slightly predictable at times. Just like I could almost guess which joke was coming up next in "A Mighty Wind," I could almost tell what was going to happen next in "Finding Nemo." That's not necessarily a bad thing because if it works, it works. But I think that I'd like to see Pixar attempt something completely opposite of anything that they've done before. Maybe an adult oriented animated movie. Maybe an experimental movie with an awesome rock band or two. I don't know. If I had the answer, I wouldn't be here in the College of Education Student Advising Office writing you this review.

In many ways, "Finding Nemo" is very much an epic on the same level that "The Lion King" is. What can be more epic that a little tiny clown fish having to search the entire ocean of three trillion fish for ONE fish? What can be more epic and adventurous for a little clown fish than to have to face both deep sea creatures as well as fish eating sharks in recovery? haha And of course, in typical mythological epic fashion, our protagonist meets some Han Solo and Chewbaccas along the way in shape of some surfer dude turtles and some sympathetic Pelicans. I think that "The Lion King" is a classic and achieved more on a grand scale than "Finding Nemo" did, but I think it's a suitable comparison. Both deal with the loss of a parent (a theme that is recurrent in Disney--from Bambi to Snow White to Lion King). Both deal with a vast area from the Serengetti to the Pacific Ocean! Both encounter friends that accompany them on their life journey.

I found myself in tears at the end of "Finding Nemo." It was really touching for me to see a movie where a father and son connect at the end of the movie and learn from each other. It reminded me of the relationship that I had with my own dad. He was very much into letting me go out and experience things on my own and letting me learn my own lessons instead of him living vicariously through me. He didn't want me to live the life that he lived, he wanted me to live my own life and make my own mistakes. You don't see that much in movies. I'm thankful for any movie that is able to move me so much, that it produces tears at the end. For that, "Finding Nemo" will always resonate with me I think.

Oh......and thankfully there was no Randy Newman song halfway through the movie.

There. Although a bit disjointed, that's my review for "Finding Nemo." It's a movie that's very solid in what it attempted to do. Very few pitfalls.

matt out