I think if there was ever a Pixar film that floated somewhat under the radar, it would have to be this one. Surprisingly, when I talk about Pixar with some people, many either haven't heard about this one, or think it comes from another animation studio. It seems most often mistaken for Disney's 2000 release, 'Dinosaur!', which I always find interesting considering this was a 2015 release. The fact of the matter is, it's a pretty solid movie, but it was heavily overshadowed by 'Inside Out' that year, and admittedly, this just wasn't quite on the same level. The film opens, apparently, as an alternate history suggesting that the meteor that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs just passes Earth by instead. Millions of years later, this is ultimately how the world achieves an alternate reality wherein dinosaurs have adapted more humanistic traits, and human beings exist on a very animalistic level. Here, we meet a couple of Apatosaurus farmers, Henry and Ida (Jeffrey Wright and Frances McDormand, respectively) who have three children; Libby (Maleah Nipay-Padilla), Buck (Ryan Teeple/Marcus Scribner), and our story's hero, Arlo (Jack McGraw/Raymond Ochoa). While Libby and Buck are good at pulling their weight, Arlo can't quite seem to find his niche around the farm. One day, Henry sets Arlo up with the special task of trapping and killing whatever critter keeps stealing their darn corn. The critter in question is a human boy, eventually named Spot (Jack Bright), who Arlo can't bring himself to kill. Disappointed, Henry takes him out to look for the boy and finish the job, but along comes a storm followed closely by a tragedy of 'Lion King' proportions. A little while later, the Apatosaurus family struggles more with the workload following their loss. As a result, one day Arlo spots... Spot in their silo, and chases him out only to run into another bad accident, this time sweeping him far away from home. Eventually, as one can imagine, Arlo learns to befriend Spot (and give him his name) and together they help each other out on Arlo's long journey home. For me, this exists on a similar level as 'Brave' or 'Monsters University' in that it's all good and fun, but perhaps not the strongest Pixar pick in the library. Having said that, however, I can't really deny that there is at least a touch of that good old Pixar depth here. It's a film that teaches us about facing our fears and the fact that sometimes we just plain have to. It further dabbles in the idea of loss and coping, but also, perseverance through everything life throws at you. It's almost fascinating how bad Arlo gets it through this whole movie - it's like the epitome of "if it can go wrong, it probably will". With that, the film also shows us growth in Arlo's character that reaches as far as making your worst enemy your best friend - all due to a misunderstanding involving something as deep as the death of a loved one. This would mark the first year that Pixar would crank out two movies rather than just one for the summer or the Christmas season. Now, they were tackling both. But with 'Inside Out' coming first, and marking a sort of resurrection for Pixar, it heavily took this one over. It also does not help that the final 'Hunger Games' movie would be released just five days prior. I think this had its audience of children, but a lot of the older generation sort of let it pass by. Heck, even I watched 'Creed' that weekend instead, because between the two, I thought it would be far more interesting. The Academy would give Pixar an Oscar that year for Best Animated Feature, but it didn't go to this - in fact, the Academy didn't even give this one a chance - but the 'Globes' did! I still balance this film in my head as far as how much I like it. Just speaking for myself, I would probably consider this on the weakest end of the stronger side of Pixar, somewhat balanced with 'Brave' in that there's still heart, likable characters and solid animation with beautiful backgrounds. But it's not entirely original, and the thing that tugs on your heartstrings is a little more blunt. It doesn't quite reach me on that super special emotional level, but there's still something enjoyable about it, and the message it has to say is still a pretty positive one. This is a title that I would actually recommend checking out to anyone who may have skipped over it. On the whole, it's actually pretty good! 3/5
0 Comments
Whether or not anyone liked the last three Pixar films, they all still veered away from what made Pixar so very special, as we've come to know it. 'Cars 2' was a bit of a cash-grab, 'Brave' was a fairly average princess movie better suited to Disney (in the tradition of 'Tangled', 'Frozen', 'Moana', etc), and 'Monsters University' was just plain fun, and a bit of style over substance. They all lacked a certain depth we loved Pixar for. I'm not bashing these films by any means, and still appreciate 'Brave' and 'Monsters University' on a certain level ('Cars 2' is truly the bump in Pixar's road). But they were nothing like 'Up', 'Toy Story 3' or 'WALL-E' where they made you stop and think about things. Soon enough, however, this movie would come along and bring things back to the way they once were. But just to get a couple of elephants out of the room, allow me to fully admit two realizations with this movie. One - 'Inside Herman's Head' did this first, so I can say it's 100% original; and Two - there is a moment here that suggests the adventure didn't need to be all that it was; think of the eagles flying the Fellowship to Mount Doom instead of taking a death-defying hike. With that said, however, this movie still holds a certain power that a lot of people have felt missing from Pixar over the few years leading up to this - almost exactly five years from 'Toy Story 3'. 'Inside Out' introduces us to a girl named Riley (Kaitlyn Dias), and the various emotions who, shall we say, "pilot" her brain; Joy (Amy Poehler), Sadness (Phyllis Smith), Anger (Lewis Black), Fear (Bill Hader) and Disgust (Mindy Kaling). They control Riley's emotions and create Riley's "memories"; coloured orbs that stack up to fuel various personality islands like "Hockey Island", "Friendship Island", etc. All is well, but Riley soon turns eleven, and things start to go downhill when the family moves away. Inside Riley's head, there is a squabble between Joy and Sadness, as Sadness keeps touching memories and making them sad. An accident sends the pair to the vast memory bank of the brain, far away from "headquarters", leaving Riley alone with Anger, Fear and Disgust to drive her around. Now it's up to Joy and Sadness to return to Headquarters with that of a "core memory", which came with them during the squabble. If they can get her happy core memory back into headquarters, Riley can be happy again. Meanwhile, in headquarters, Anger, Fear and Disgust do their best, but without Joy or Sadness in the picture, Riley starts to feel sort of numb. While I strongly enjoy the creativity behind this film when it comes to the inner workings of someone's head, the real draw for me is the relatability of Riley's situation and what the film has to say on the matter. Without spoiling it, I might suggest that the underlying message is that "it's okay to not be okay". Anyone who has ever faced depression understands this phrase, and this is a movie that does a great job at getting that message across. I have to appreciate a lot of the ideas they have throughout the movie, like the idea of Riley's imaginary friend, Bing Bong (Richard Kind) and what they end up doing with him. Or the idea of the mysterious realm of abstract thought, which brings with it some pretty interesting animation. They also get into things like how Riley dreams, what happens to memories we forget, how the imagination works and more. Pixar really took care here to think about the inner workings of the brain and how they might translate to a fun, animated movie. This one puts Pete Docter back in the director's chair as well, so I was fairly confident it was in good hands after his work on 'Monsters, Inc.' and 'Up'. Sure enough, I was right, and this is another Pixar title that hits me in the feels every time. This would ultimately become the film I consider "Pixar's resurrection" in that it brings back the heart, original concepts and not only enjoyable, but relatable characters. Sure enough, it would also pick up Pixar's eighth Oscar for Best Animated Feature, and would even get a nomination for Best Original Screenplay. With this movie, it really felt like Pixar had made a triumphant return (at least for me), and despite the two things I pointed out in the beginning of the review, it's still a rather beautiful movie that does what Pixar does best and pull on those heartstrings - and not in a cheap way, but a relatable way. This is easily one of my favourites in the Pixar library for what it has to say, and I find a deeper connection with this one than many others. It was so good to see Pixar back on top that year. 5/5 In Pixar's first (and so far only) prequel, they expand the Monster World (Monstropolis) we got a glimpse of in 'Monsters, Inc.' by showing us the educational process it takes to become a "Scarer". Just for a quick recap, it's a Scarer's job to go through doorways that lead to children's closets so they can collect the "Scream Energy" needed for what's basically their electricity. This is all learned from a young Mike Wazowski (Billy Crystal) while on a field trip to Monsters, Inc. He then takes a great interest in becoming a Scarer, and makes the choice to work very hard to get there. After a quick but thorough intro, we are taken eleven years later to the main stage of the film, Monsters University, where Mike is now a teenager. Here, he meets James P. Sullivan (John Goodman) - a cocky student who relies on his natural talent and family name to get through things easily. Sulley manages to join the most exclusive fraternity on campus as well, headed by the brutish Johnny (Nathan Fillion). Soon, however, it's all taken away when Dean Hardscrabble's (Helen Mirren) record-holding scream cannister is ruined during a fight between Mike and Sulley. The Dean fails them both, stating Mike isn't nearly scary enough, and Sully is too lazy and too dependent on his family name. This further prompts Roar Omega Roar (Sulley's new frat brothers) to kick him out. Wanting to prove himself, however, Mike enters the University "Scare Games" with underdog fraternity Oozma Kappa, which introduces new, friendly Monsters; the sensitive Squishy (Peter Sohn); mature student, Don (Joel Murray); Two-headed Terri and Terry (Sean Hayes and David Foley, respectively); and the fuzzy, almost Sesame Street-esque Art (Charlie Day). Being told they are one short, as the two-headed guy doesn't count, Sulley decides to step up and join, giving them a much better fighting chance. If they win, Sulley and Mike will be reinstated into the Scare Program, but if they lose, they have to leave school. Considering 'Monsters, Inc.' came before this, we all get that they eventually made it. But one thing this film does well is tell you how they made it in the end which, to the film's credit, was quite creative. This is one of Pixar's titles that doesn't necessarily hit on a deeper level, so there's not much to say for it as far as that goes. However, regardless of that, it's still a solid film for what it is. I enjoy seeing an expansion of the Monster World, furthering the overall lore, and it's interesting to have a Pixar prequel instead of a sequel in which they totally could have capitalized on Boo's potential return. It could have been a real money-maker. Instead, the film wanted to tell us the story of Mike and Sulley's history together. Honestly, I think they do a very good job of it here. Randall (Steve Buscemi) shows up as well, and we get to see why his eyes are constantly squinty - that kind of thing isn't for everyone, but it does it subtly enough that the movie doesn't make it a big deal - it's not like how we see Indiana Jones get his lucky hat. The one thing that may be missing for some here is the overall heart that 'Monsters, Inc.' had to it. This movie was done on a much more fun level. I like to say it's 'Animal House' as Pixar might see it. I wouldn't say it's aimed more at kids or adults so much as family, and it's actually an interesting follow-up to 'Monsters, Inc.' in that way. 'Monsters, Inc.' is the warm-hearted family movie whereas this is the family comedy. It's silly enough for the kids, but adults will appreciate the whole college fraternity side of it - especially when it comes to the games themselves. There's a few solid laugh-out-loud moments here, and to Pixar's credit, I had a lot of fun with it. It's a good movie to throw on if you need cheering up, but really don't feel like getting deep. Unlike 'Monsters, Inc.', this isn't really gonna make the eyes water. As far as those Oscars go, this didn't go on to receive any nominations, making it the second Pixar film on that list. But in all honesty, it never really was Oscar material. It's more or less just a frat movie for kids, and to see it win, much less get nominated, would have been a bit of a surprise. I do enjoy this movie, but it is still a part of the era when Pixar wasn't at its strongest. This would be the third film on that list, and while these films are all enjoyable in their own right, that Pixar name just wasn't glowing like it used to. The overall heart Pixar once showed was starting to feel like it might not come back. However, that would all soon be fixed with the release of another one of my Pixar favourites a couple of years later. 3/5 In my humble opinion, if Pixar ever had a release that I found incredibly average, it's got to be 'Brave'. There's a lot I really like about it, but it balances that out with a lot of pull back on truly original material. What 'Brave' gives us is a fairly average "princess wants to escape tradition" story, blended with hints of the already established and well-done Disney film, 'Brother Bear'. Don't forget, this is a Disney/Pixar film. In that regard, it's certainly far from my favourite Pixar movie. With that said, however, there actually is still a lot to like about it. When I first saw this in theaters (which was also the last time I watched it before this viewing), I remember leaving it feeling sort of lukewarm towards it. I liked it, but it seemed to lack that Pixar touch, and following a movie like 'Cars 2', that meant something; Pixar was getting weaker. As expected, the film came out to lukewarm reviews as well. While most enjoyed it, most agreed that Pixar had done much better. Much like 'Cars 2', this one lacks that deeper understanding I've found with many other titles in the library. It's really weird to admit that if this was just a Disney movie, it would have been awesome. But because it was a Pixar release, we focused a lot on the studio in question. While it was a fine movie, it just wasn't a proper Pixar movie. In fact, I feel this fits in far more with the modern Disney Princess movies than it does in the Pixar library. Taking place in Medieval Scotland, 'Brave' tells the story of Princess Merida (Kelly Macdonald). She lives with mother and father, Queen Elinor (Emma Thompson) and King Fergus (Billy Connolly), along with her three triplet brothers, Harris, Hubert and Hamish. While Fergus often plays role model to Merida, giving her a bow to practice archery with at an early age, Elinor has an opposing and stubborn frame of mind. According to her and tradition, Merida must follow certain rules and regulations to be a proper princess. Of course, Merida doesn't like this, and it all comes to a head when suiters for her marriage come into play. Merida would rather not get married yet, and starts to become desperate to escape her bonds, so runs off into the wilderness with her Shire horse, Angus. Here, Merida encounters a will-o'-the-wisp, leading her on a path of wisps towards a mysterious cottage where she meets a witch (Julie Walters). She implores the witch to give her a spell that could change her fate as the princess, and it's eventually given in the form of a cake to feed to Elinor. The thing is, it backfires, changing Elinor into a bear. This becomes a real problem considering the family clan is bets known for Fergus beating down a demon bear named Mor'du, losing his leg in the process. It all becomes a race-against-the-clock curse movie as, much like 'Shrek', but here, Merida has to find a way to change her mom back before the "second sunrise", and in the process, hide her from her family and the other clans. So really, the bad of this movie comes from a lack of originality. You've got the "traditional princess trap", a 'Brother Bear' character copy, and a race against the clock curse like 'Shrek' (it's even Scottish). However, I'll stick to my guns in suggesting that there's still a lot to like about it. I think the witch along with the triplet brothers make for a great dose of comedy, and I appreciate that the film isn't entirely hero vs villain, and Mor'du the demon bear plays such a small part here. One thing it does do well in proud Pixar tradition is keep it a family story. Much like 'The Incredibles' is about a superhero family more than it's a traditional superhero movie, this is about a medieval Scottish family more than it's a movie about knights on the battlefield. I would probably say the things I appreciate most from this include the sheer beauty of the settings throughout the film. It's a very green, very nature-filled and detailed movie, often taking time away from the family castle. The other being that it follows some somewhat unfamiliar folklore. The idea of the will-o'-the-wisps is intriguing to me, knowing that they exist in traditional folklore, but never remembering seeing them or hearing of them in film before. I remembered them from a card game called 'Magic: The Gathering', which I once played in my teens - perhaps you know it, as I understand it's still kind of a big deal. 'Brave' would go on to eventually receive more positive reviews than negative, and it would earn Pixar their seventh Oscar for Best Animated feature. This may have been right around the time we started realizing that Pixar might not necessarily always deserve the win. It was going up against 'Wreck-It Ralph', 'Frankenweenie' and 'ParaNorman' that year; all of which I would have picked over this. That's not to bash this movie by any means, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't get more out of all three of those other titles. Perhaps it's just me, but 'Wreck-It Ralph' had its originality, 'Frankenweenie' was like a Tim Burton dream come true, and 'ParaNorman'... well, I was just plain routing for it that year (I really love that movie). As far as my deep down personal opinion on 'Brave' goes nowadays, it's quite honestly still sitting where it was when I saw it in theaters nine years ago; it's average. The story is pretty unoriginal, sometimes providing a direct copy of something, but in the end, it's ultimately forgiven. The good of the film actually does outweigh the bad, as it carries a fun sense of humour, breathtaking backgrounds and animation, not-so-traditional movie folklore, and at the end of the day we could claim that it's simply Pixar's take on a princess movie - the fact that it takes so much from Disney isn't too much of a stretch considering their affiliation. I might recommend it to some while suggesting others leave it alone, and in the end, it's just something one has to see for themselves. 3/5 Up to this point, I have praised Pixar's quality again and again, offering a lot of great reviews for a lot of great movies. But in the summer of 2011, Pixar would release 'Cars 2'; a film that came out to some rather scathing reviews that suggested this animation company God has suddenly taken a turn for the worse. To this day, it's probably considered the biggest overall disappointment of the Pixar library, having lost that special touch of "deep" they have offered up until now. I completely overlooked it until only a few years ago, first reviewing it here as a 'Catching Up' review. Our hero from the previous film, Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson), heads to a race to compete against a new up-and-coming, trash-talking racer named Francesco Bernoulli (John Turturro). He allows his best friend, Tow Mater (Larry the Cable Guy), to come along with him, with the slight fear that he might mess things up. Meanwhile, however, Mater is mistaken as an American agent by an international spy named Finn McMissile (Michael Caine). He's then brought on a mission to help stop a group of "lemon" cars, who are plotting against Allinol; the fuel company keeping modern racers in business. The film is more about Mater than McQueen, and all in all, it ends up being pretty forgettable. I never really and truly thought this film was terrible, but it's easily on the weaker end of Pixar. This was a bit more of a merchandise-pusher than a good story with good characters, and most certainly aimed at a younger audience. On a personal level, I've always thought the 'Cars' series to be a little on the bland side, and more for others than myself. I was never really a gearhead or anything like that, and the most I've ever gotten from any of these was the first one's teachings on, shall we say, "slowing down and enjoying the view". This doesn't have a whole lot to teach other than a few basic friendship concepts that other Pixar films have frankly done better. This film pulls the whole thing where the sequel is based on the first film's comedic relief, thus knocking the quality down a notch or two. Comedy relief works in a movie because it's off to the side. It provides a laugh while other, more serious things are going on. Once that comedy becomes the plot, there's no comedy relief for that comedy relief, and it just ends up becoming lame. In this case, the comedy relief in question is Larry the Cable Guy, who feels like an incredibly dated act nowadays. But that's also speaking for myself. I think that while I criticize, the film is pretty much harmless for a young audience, and I wouldn't necessarily deter them from checking it out. It's not without its share of fun in that sense, but again, it's incredibly weak in the way of story, and feels very "straight-to-video", but it wasn't. It may not actually mean much to many, but this is the first Pixar film to earn no Oscar nominations at all. With that, it almost felt official that this was just a kids movie, lacking that typical Pixar magic we've really grown to love over the years. For my money, the company had reached its peak with 'Toy Story 3' and, in a way, this almost feels like them taking a breather from their typical touch. It's sort of as if they said "let's just throw our brains out the window for once." There's nothing about the movie I find insultingly stupid or anything, but I might suggest that this is what Pixar comes up with when they don't really try, and half-ass a project. Let's be fair enough and say we all do this, and no production company actually has a perfect track record. So, as far as this big, glamorous library of animated instant classics goes, I would probably go with this one being the overall weakest entry into the entire library. For yours truly, it's Pixar's answer to the MCU's 'Thor: The Dark World' - it's lame, it's forgettable, and basically every other title in the series is superior, even if only by a little tiny bit. This was the beginning of a strange dip in quality for Pixar, with more to follow. This was where one might suggest that Pixar officially lost its magic, and we started turning our attention to competing animation companies. In fact, if you can believe it, the Academy's Best Animated Feature category had no hint of Disney that year. Thankfully, we've since seen Pixar pic up the slack, but that was a heck of a time for us big-time Pixar fiends (me, truly joining the bandwagon with 'Up'). 2/5 I still remember seeing the teaser for 'Toy Story 3' and thinking to myself something along the lines of surprise. At that point, we were in 2009, watching the trailer ten years after 'Toy Story 2'. It made me wonder what it was gonna be about, and of course, the eventual trailer would answer that. I was immediately fascinated because it looked like it was going to be a pretty deep movie, telling us whatever would happen to Andy's Toys. Andy (John Morris - and huge kudos to him reprising his role) is 17 now, and getting ready to go away to college. All of our favourite toys make one last effort towards playtime with Andy. Of course, it falls through, and soon every toy but Woody (Tom Hanks), who Andy decides to take with him, is put into a garbage bag, headed up to the attic. Mistaking the trash bag as actual garbage, Andy's Mom (Laurie Metcalf) takes them out to the curb, giving Buzz (Tim Allen), Jessie (Joan Cusack), Hamm (John Ratzenberger), Rex (Wallace Shawn), Slinky (Blake Clark, replacing the late Jim Varney), the Potato Heads (Don Rickles/Estelle Harris), the Pizza Planet Aliens (Jeff Pidgeon), and Barbie (Jodi Benson) the impression Andy thinks they're trash now. The toys escape, and Jessie suggests they climb into the donations box Andy's Mom is about to take over to Sunnyside Daycare. Woody, having seen everything and knowing they were destined for the attic tries to convince them not to go, and accidentally ends up in the box with them. The toys are donated, and find themselves amid what could be a paradise, however Woody remains loyal to Andy and tries to go his separate way, eventually meeting Bonnie (Emily Hahn) who finds him and takes him to her house to play with a whole new group of toys. Meanwhile the other toys are shown around the Daycare by Lotso-Huggin Bear (Ned Beatty), and are shown the Caterpillar Room where they'll be staying. Soon, the toys figure out just how much of a nightmare playtime can be when the room is flooded with toddlers, and just to cut down on more exposition, things eventually kinda-sorta turn into our third "escape and get back home" movie - but this one is so much more fun in my opinion. As for Woody, despite the idea that he could have a new home with Bonnie, he chooses to go back and help his friends and get back to Andy. The whole movie ends up being a fun parody of 'The Great Escape' (or at least that's how I take it), and parts of it have certainly grown up with the audience. My ages upon the release of each movie at this point were, respectively, 13, 17 and now, approaching 28; so I was certainly in the older area of the audience, but it's interesting how these films become a bit more reflective for me than watching them in more of a real-time situation, growing up with Andy. Still, this was a film that once again hit me right in the feels, and I was very pleasantly surprised by the combination of moods it had going through it. It's got dark fun, it's got cute fun, it's got joy, it's got sadness, it often has a sense of dread, adventure and dammit, it's got a Spanish-speaking Buzz Lightyear. Maybe it's just me, but dammit, Spanish Buzz Lightyear cracks me up. Anyway, of the three films, it was easy for me to see this one as the tip-top of the pile. The first two were always more on the fun level, but this had a certain "grown-up" style to it I couldn't help but appreciate, and at this point, Pixar was very high on a pedestal for yours truly. Their track record was just amazing at this point, and 'Toy Story 3' would be their sixth Best Animated Picture Oscar winner, and second nominated for the Best Picture category. I tote the Oscar history of these films more to keep track of the stereotype that says "Pixar will win the Oscar indefinitely". Up to this point, a fairly accurate assumption considering their track record since the Best Animated Picture category came into play. They have only lost the Oscar twice, first 'Monsters, Inc.' to 'Shrek' (which was the first year of the category, 2002), then 'Cars' to 'Happy Feet'. Otherwise, Pixar seemed untouchable, and with good reason. Watching Pixar meant watching a quality story that had humour, adventure, and above all else, a deeper meaning. They could be a kid's movie that any adult could still get a lot out of, but more than just something cute and fun... but then again... we have what Pixar cranked out next. But just to dwell on the wonderful movie that is 'Toy Story 3' a bit longer, and more on my personal take, it was fascinating to watch this now, with the knowledge of 'Toy Story 4'. At this point, I was convinced they were done with the way things end here, and I still think that it makes a very well-rounded, almost perfect trilogy. I really did love 'Toy Story 4', but in a way, its existence makes the ending of this a touch less impactful than it once was. They go out on a high note here, and I'm fairly convinced that when I saw this in theaters, there wasn't a dry eye in the audience. Regardless, I still hold this film close to my heart, and yet again, it makes for one of my all-time Pixar favourites - a category that now feels redundant but true. 5/5 Here we have another one of my all-time Pixar faves, and this one has a lot to do with the idea of how the elderly might put up with the younger generation. It manages to provide a movie one might say is made for "grandparent and grandchild" as opposed to just a standard family flick. In that sense, it's actually pretty unique, and I find myself hard-pressed to come up with other titles that do it quite like this. This is one of those Pixar films that really does get me deep in the feels every time I watch it. It's probably safe to say that it has that effect on many. When we all saw the trailer for this, it looked like a fun movie coming to us from a solid Pixar lineup, including director Pete Docter, who sincerely made a name for himself with this movie, forever implanting himself in my head as my fave Pixar director. The reason for this is that he's not afraid to get deep with his films and speak to his whole audience like adults, while maintaining a fun, childlike innocence. His films are sort of always fun on the surface, but have something deeper going on within them. This one would veer away from what the trailer showed us, looking very much like a children's fantasy adventure and punch us straight in the heart with its opening sequence. This sequence involves a boy who grows up with a girl, they eventually get married, she becomes ill, and eventually passes away. The pair were adventure-seekers, and their goal was to visit Paradise Falls, Venezuela, but life kept getting in the way. After she passes, he becomes a bit of a recluse - the now grumpy and stubborn Carl Fredrickson (Ed Asner). Even though he's surrounded by construction, Carl refuses to relocate to any sort of retirement community, holding a close connection to the house he and Ellie spent their lives in. After a bit of a scuffle, Carl is court-ordered to move into a retirement community to live out his last days. Remembering his promise to make it to Paradise Falls, however, Carl creates an elaborate set-up of balloons that lift his house into the sky, and allow him to float away from all of his problems. Accidentally joining Carl on his adventure, is Russell (Jordan Nagai), a kid in the "Wilderness Explorers" (basically Boy Scouts) who just wants to help Carl so he can get his "Assisting the Elderly" badge. He provides much of the comic relief here as the curious and kind kid, and his contrast to Carl is often hilarious. I find myself with a big grin on my face when I listen to a lot of their interaction. Of course, a lot of their interaction is also kind of deep, and the film tackles some complex issues that sort of boil down to what it is to deal with love and loss, and interestingly enough, 'Up' does it in three very different ways. So fair warning, but the following could contain spoilers. The first is the obvious; Carl loses Ellie, his beloved wife, in death. The second has to do with Russell losing his father to a woman who isn't his mother. The third, and probably most overlooked, is when Carl meeting his hero, Charles Muntz (Christopher Plummer) who ultimately ends up being the villain of the film. Through all of this, however, Carl and Russell persevere, and it's as though the film is out to tell us that even though we all experience our own losses in our own ways (and we all have to, as a part of life), there's always going to be that light at the end of the tunnel for us. Russell makes a friendship with Carl who becomes a father figure to him. As for Carl, he stands up to his former hero, ultimately learning he wasn't necessary for inspiration all this time. However, Ellie always was, and her inspiration to him continues even in death. The photo album scene might be one of the most touching moments in film, let alone Pixar's library. The film isn't without its fair share of over the top, and even pretty childish antics. This is seen mostly with that exotic bird, and dogs that have the ability to talk through their collars. At one point, these dogs even fly little airplanes. But because of the deeper moments of this film, for some reason, we can look past all that and just deem it "cute". Things don't have to make sense here (to some degree, anyway) because you still manage to walk away from it thinking about your own life, yet almost with a guarantee of a smile. This would go on to win the 5th Best Animated Picture Oscar of Pixar's library, making 'Cars' the only real speedbump in their track record since 'Finding Nemo'. This would also get nominated for Best Picture that year, making it only the second animated film in history to make it into the category. Funnily enough, the third and last to make it into the 'Best Picture' category is next up on the list! 5/5 This may prove to be a bit of a lengthy review, but one must understand that this movie carries a certain powerful magic with it that puts me in a trance every time I watch it. On one hand, it's like looking into a societal mirror, centuries into the future, and it really looks like we humans have caused the end of the world. There's something sort of heavy-hitting about that. On the other hand, the appreciation this movie gives me for the simple things in life we take for granted actually somewhat changed my lifestyle. Not a lot of movies can open my eyes that much! But more on that soon. Far into the future, we see the Earth of 2805 and what has become of it; a vast wasteland of trash and neglect left behind by the human race. Nowadays, humankind has relocated to "starliners" - essentially gigantic cruise ships but in space - to keep on living. On this deserted Earth, we meet a left-over Waste Allocation Load-Lifter, WALL-E (Ben Burtt). He does his job, hangs out with a cockroach friend, forms various collections of trinkets and has a connection to a video recording of 'Hello Dolly', specifically with the song 'It Only Takes a Moment'. One day, things take a turn when WALL-E happens across an Extraterrestrial Vegetation Evaluator robot, EVE (Elissa Knight). She was sent to Earth to search for some form of living vegetation, but WALL-E becomes interested. With a few complications at first, the two robots hit it off, but everything comes to an abrupt halt when WALL-E shows her his latest collector's item; a live plant. EVE collects the plant and sits in standby mode for a while until she's eventually picked up by a probe, and starts heading back to a starliner called the Axiom - with WALL-E hanging on for the ride. Centuries have passed since the Axiom left Earth (2105, so to us now, it would be like looking at the year 1321) and humankind has become overweight, mindless drones who do nothing but sit, eat, have their faces in their computer screens, and can do it all on the go on account of hover chairs. The ship's captain, McCrea (Jeff Garlin), receives the positive response from EVE and the notion that it could allow them to go back home to Earth - a place he had never heard of. However, upon inspecting EVE, the plant turns up missing. At first, it's registered as a false alarm, but EVE and WALL-E set about the ship looking for it, running into trouble along the way which includes, above all else, a nasty ship's computer. What really makes this movie stand out for me is that it's a film that really makes you look at the way you're living. Most who know me know how much I like going for long walks in nature these days, and honestly, this film is responsible. I've always enjoyed walking, but it wasn't until I saw this that I learned to appreciate all of the little subtleties of a good nature walk; birds chirping, the warm sun on my face, the beauty of plants in bloom, hell, even Winter has its moments. The cool thing is, 'WALL-E' does it in more ways than one. There's the notion that we're killing our planet and the whole thing probably will look similar to this, centuries from now, but I also really enjoy the lifestyle message here. This was 2008, so we haven't entirely improved our situation - but all of the right "be careful, human race" messages are here. I have to appreciate that even though this is very much an environmental movie, and the message certainly looks like it's highlighted and bolded, it still doesn't slap you across the face with it. You get the film's point, but there's not really that (what I like to call) "Lisa Simpson voice" in your face telling you how it is. This movie gets its whole message across without the use of hardly any speech at all. Part of the brilliance of this movie is that it shows and doesn't tell, and you have no problem understanding everything going on throughout its entirety. The message almost becomes tenfold with how exactly the execute things. Often using classic material (like 'Hello Dolly' along with various old songs) you get this sense of a planet Earth that humankind has all but left behind entirely. The brilliance of that is that it's something you can feel that way about now. Ever since the advent of internet in homes, we, as a human race, have somewhat lost touch with a lot of things that this movie shows we take completely for granted. One character here is so engaged with her computer that WALL-E bumps into her and she suddenly realizes the starliner has a massive pool. Better than that is a scene that I find truly touching where McCrea is having the computer define all of these Earth terms, right down to the word "dance". The idea that the film has this character fall in love with Earth the way we remember it now is somewhat heart-breaking when you know from the beginning of the film what Earth has actually become. 'WALL-E' would yet again pull in another Best Animated Picture Oscar for Pixar, bringing their count up to four. It would also become the Pixar film to earn the most nominations in the library, and I daresay, it certainly could have been nominated for Best Picture. I believe that due to opinions like this, the academy would soon loosen up enough to allow animated films back into the Best Picture category ('Beauty and the Beast' was the only one ever nominated at this point). For me, it is easily one of the best in the Pixar library if you just look at the way it's crafted. It makes you appreciate the little things in life, it opens your eyes to the state of the world and where we're going, and it's somehow still a lot of fun while taking you through all of its heavy stuff. 5/5 There was a long, drawn out time frame between the release of this film and when I finally saw it only just a couple of years prior to this review. If I ever brought up not seeing 'Ratatouille', I may as well have been saying I never saw 'Toy Story' with the way most people would react. It was somehow shocking, but in all honesty, 'Ratatouille' was just a movie I didn't think was up my alley. This wasn't like 'Cars' where I initially thought it looked dumb. It just looked like it wasn't really for me. I'm no kitchen connoisseur, nothing popped out as particularly special, and I guess I just didn't feel like I got it. However, I got much more out of it this time upon realizing that the message it's trying to convey doesn't necessarily have anything to do with kitchen skills. In fact, I really regret not paying closer attention to what the film had to say before. It didn't pass me by completely the first time, but this time it actually sunk in. Anyone who has seen this gets it - basically, those potentially considered insignificant can make all the difference if only given the opportunity, and it shows the lesson here with both of its main characters. Starting with Remy (Patton Oswalt), he's a rat who has been gifted with highly developed senses of taste and smell. He has dreams of following in the footsteps of his personal hero, Auguste Gusteau (Brad Garrett), and becoming a well-renowned cook. The fact that he's a rat holds him back a little bit though. After an adventurous series of events leaves Remy alone and separated from his family, he eventually happens upon Alfredo Linguini (Lou Romano); a clumsy garbage boy who is made to attempt to remake someone's soup after spilling it. Remy sees him screwing it up, fixes his mistakes, and soon Linguini is praised for his skills and promoted. With the help of Remy, Linguini creates and recreates various dishes from the menu (did I mention this was Gusteau's restaurant?) and receives more and more praise. Tension is formed as Linguini steals Remy's thunder, taking the credit for his newfound friend's work. So there's also that common underlying "don't screw your friends over" lesson we've seen a lot of before as well. But I would suggest the first lesson I mentioned is the main point of the film. Certain things I appreciated about the film have a lot to do with its overall inviting atmosphere. Here, we have a beautifully animated rendition of Paris, France, that's almost enough to make you wanna just up and travel. But on a more mindful note, the film has a lot to do with the powers of creativity, following your dreams, and the idea that, indeed, "anyone can cook". However, it doesn't fail in providing the message that to be successful in pursuing that dream (whatever it may be), it's still hard work. I think that's what's truly to be appreciated here, and Pixar tends to have this way with about 90% of their films. They simply don't treat anyone like their kids, not even the kids. There's usually an underlying cleverness and reality to what they create, no matter how fantastical it can get. Once again, this is one of the more fun films in Pixar's library, and I'd suggest that it's one if their best all-around feel-good films. It's cute, it's funny, but it's also inspiring, and it kind of does make one think "I want to try something new next time I'm in the kitchen". This manages to hit that middle ground for Pixar in that you can take what it's trying to say seriously, but you also know that the film isn't one that's gonna make you misty-eyed. This makes for a fun flick that leaves you with a smile on your face, and perhaps an increase in appetite because, as I saw, a lot of this is inviting, both as far as the environment and the food go. I think a lot of people get a lot more out of it than I do, but I certainly enjoy it as something to tune into when I might need cheering up, inspiration for creativity, or just to escape to the streets of Paris France for a short time. 'Ratatouille' would go on to win Pixar's third Best Animated Picture Oscar (after 'Finding Nemo' and 'The Incredibles'), this time beating out hardly any competition between 'Surfs Up' and 'Persepolis' (remember those movies?). More importantly, however, the film would enter the hearts of many, and would become one of the more popular titles in the library if only just because it's a feel-good film. This is one of those cases where it doesn't really feel like things have to make sense, because the underdog story it tells is just good enough to look past such nonsense - like a rat controlling someone's limbs with their hair. It's silly, but hey, for some reason, it works! 4/5 So far, Pixar has given personality to toys, bugs, monsters and fish who, as far as we can tell, live in a sort of "real-world" setting. For this reason, when the idea of these anthropomorphic cars and trucks came along for Pixar's next movie, I turned my nose up at it. I didn't have a problem with it, per se, but it was very clear-cut this time that it was gonna be for kids (in other words, I still hadn't learned my lesson when it came to Pixar's storytelling quality). What I thought this film was going to be was what 'Cars 2' became, but more on that with that review. 'Cars' tells a story that takes place in an alternate world where vehicles take on human qualities while maintaining most aspects of cars we know about. Here, we meet racing rookie, Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) who goes up against retiring legend, Strip "The King" Weathers (Richard Petty) and pro racer, Chick Hicks (Michael Keaton) in the final race of the Piston Cup. The race ends un a three-way tie, however, and a tie-breaking race is scheduled for one week later at the Los Angeles International Speedway. McQueen maintains a cocky attitude about his skills, and doesn't seem to want or need anyone's help to become a new racing legend. He becomes desperate to get to LA quickly to shmooze with Dinoco; the oil company representing Hicks, in the hopes to switch to them over his less glamorous Rust-Eze sponsors. McQueen insists that his transport truck, Mac (John Ratzenberger again) drive straight to LA through the night, which results in Mac dozing off and a near-accident that sends McQueen falling out of the trailer, finding himself lost, and soon in trouble with the small town of Radiator Springs after accidentally ruining their main road. McQueen is tasked with fixing the road before they allow him to leave, making him stress about the big race. However, McQueen also meets a group of locals, primarily featuring a Porsche named Sally (Bonnie Hunt), a tow truck named Mater (Larry the Cable Guy) and an experienced Hudson Hornet known as Doc (Paul Newman), who might collectively be able to teach him that winning and fame aren't all there is to life. My opinion on the 'Cars' series has been more or less the same throughout the trilogy (so far) in that these movies are nothing special, and Pixar doesn't exactly strike the same chord here as with other films. For my money, however, I would lean towards the first film probably being the best of the three (at least easily over 'Cars 2'). When the location of Radiator Springs is seen as an aged and forgotten place that once looked awesome in its heyday, it does provoke a certain nostalgia. I think it's safe to say that many of us live fairly close to an area that would have been a lot of fun in a certain time, but now it's old and forgotten just because people have moved on. That aspect of the film is actually pretty moving, and does tug at the heartstrings a little. So it was good to see that the film certainly still had that Pixar heart behind it. The film's overall emotional impact hits a touch harder when we see that it is dedicated to the late Joe Ranft, who ironically died tragically in a car crash during the filming of 'Cars'. He has several credits to his name in the Pixar collection up to this point - where he would get his credit for co-directing. One has to appreciate that 'Cars' brings the name to the viewer's attention, as if to say "this guy had a hand in everything we've done" (quite literally). He may be best known as a voice actor, but the man worked in the art department and penning scripts as well. Because of this memorial, I end up liking the film more; not just because an important person passed away, but because it makes you take a second look at the film's message of enjoying more of life's simple pleasures and not constantly focusing on one thing, and heading in one direction, as you could be missing something great. I enjoy 'Cars', but it's unfortunate that it's responsible for launching a whole somewhat failed universe of both Cars and Planes. This series has three movies, and Disney (without Pixar) saw some money to be made by spinning off of the universe with 'Planes' (1 and 2). This was one of those cases where it didn't quite work out in their favour due to rough reviews and poor box office returns, and I'm glad they didn't draw it all out by coming up with something like 'Boats' or 'Trains' next. But if I were to recommend any of the titles from this world, it would easily be this one (followed somewhat closely by 'Cars 3', but again, more on that later). It's a film that teaches us about the highway of life and the idea that every once in a while, you've just got to pull over and enjoy the view. 4/5 |
Writers and Directors
All
|