Watching Nemo

Major life event here: we went to a movie, with Katherine.

And she sat through the whole thing (well, she got up a few times and peered over the stadium seats, or between them, or crawled into Mommy’s lap or mine, but, basically, she managed to watch the whole movie.

Okay, so Finding Nemo is only about 90 minutes long. There’s a charming five minute short from early in Pixar’s history in front of it. And fifteen minutes of previews (Spy Kids 3 = Tron 2003). But, damn, she watched the whole thing.

(By the way, watch the end titles. You won’t regret it.)

Katherine’s review is as follows:

“So, Katherine, did you enjoy the movie?”
“No. It was scary.”
“What was your favorite part?”
“When his daddy said no, and he went and touched the boat anyway.”

Yeah, there’s a surprise.

Let’s start out my review on the technical side. Pixar and Disney have done it again. The underwater (and, hell, abovewater) scenes in Finding Nemo are frelling spectacular. With the needful concessions to (a) cartoon character features and (b) blocking characters in three dimensions, it’s almost hyper-realistic in appearance. Textures, subtle movements with the currents, all of that, the technical side of Finding Nemo is as huge an advance over Pixar’s previous works as they were over — well, Tron (the original). Major kudos to all concerned.

Just one example. One of my favorite scenes, technically, from Monsters, Inc., is when Sully has fashioned a sled and is racing down the mountain to the village, the dark blizzard pieced only by the lantern he’s mounted. The wind is blow, his fur is rippling, there’s an amazing texture of snow lit up by the lantern — it’s just incredible. There’s substance and depth and thereness to everything in the shot.

Finding Nemo pulls off the same thing, underwater, for most of the movie. Amazing.

From a story perspective? Thereby hangs a tale … or two.

First off, Katherine’s observation that it was scary is spot on. Take Bambi, and pump up the volume. Hell, the closest in brutality to this film that I recall coming from Disney was The Lion King, and even that paled. Katherine (and some of the other kids asking questions aloud in the audience) didn’t fully understand what was going on at the very beginning of the film, and that’s probably just as well, because … well, damn.

Nature red in tooth and claw, indeed. Not to mention fin. Nemo makes it clear that there’s a distinct food chain in the ocean (even with a few notable exceptions along the way, for comedy relief). That’s probably a good lesson for kids — eventually. But for kids 4-7, be prepared to answer some plaintive questions afterward (and even during).

(And SPOILERS BELOW.)

That bit aside, there’s a lot of good stuff in Nemo. In fact, there’s not nearly enough Nemo for all the good stuff. There are two distinct plot lines, and ultimately they get in each other’s way, to a less-than-satisfactory conclusion.

The A-plot is Marlin’s search for his son, Nemo, and coming to grips with how his own fears are both warranted (the ocean isn’t a safe place) and harmful, both to himself and his son. Problem is, it never pays off. We never get a good reason for Marlin to stop worrying — the dangers keep on coming, fast and furious. Maybe the lesson is to face your fears and plow through regardless. But the transformation of Marlin from a (justifiable) worry-wart to someone who has learned to let go somehow never quite rings true.

The B-plot is a much more straightforward adventure — Nemo gets abducted, and must fight to make his way to freedom and independence, overcoming his own fear and his “disability.” The latter part is handled rather subtly, and it’s not completely clear to me whether it was intentionally downplayed, or the narrative gambit simply didn’t work. But the overall adventure is classic Pixar/Disney — challenges, disappointments, a fun cast of supporting characters (better, dare I say it, than in the A-plot), and a final, great achievement that shows personal growth. Nemo has, ultimately, learned what to fear and what not to, and how to work through that fear to personal growth and confidence. Huzzah.

Either of these plots could have been an entire film. Cramming them together gives each short shrift. As a story, the whole ends up being less than the sum of the parts. Visually stunning, Finding Nemo holds up less well as a tale than my continuing Pixar fave, Monsters, Inc. (indeed, having seen all of the Disney/Pixar flicks except Toy Story 2, I’d rank it as the weakest, storywise).

That still puts it head and shoulders over most of the dreck out there.

A few more random thoughts:

• Little kids seemed to be having problems telling Marlin and Nemo apart, as we switched between plot lines.
• The sharks were great.

• The idea that Marlin, as a clown fish, is actually not at all funny, is amusing, but it never seems to quite gel — though the joke, once he finally tells it right, is damned hilarious.

• I will never see (or hear) sea gulls the same way again. Ever. Brilliant.

• Speaking of the sea gulls, there are some oddities about Nemo that don’t quite play true. I mean, these guys can read English (many of them, or most of them, or at least some of them). They can figure out advanced engineering. Yet sometimes they seem downright ignorant, stupid, or both — inconsistently, from character to character. I mean, why is it that fish have (literal) schools, but sea gulls are essentially brainless? Why is it that fish can speak to turtles, and pelicans, but not (perhaps) to whales? Why do fish understand human speech (at least written language), but not vice-versa? Why do some predators chit-chat, while others simply roar?

• I would love to hear how this movie affects tropical fish sales. I predict an explosion (followed by an implosion, as kids discover that actual fish in a tank are not nearly as interesting as the FN characters).

• Conversely, I wonder what will happen to sea food sales? Particularly to kids?

• I can’t wait until some kids, watching League of Extraordinary Gentlemen later this summer, wonder why that Indian submarine captain is named after a little clown fish.

• I can definitely wait before I hear some yahoos complain about Disney’s further corruption of our kids by having Ellen DeGeneres lend her voice in a prominent role (the marvelous Dory). What message are we sending our youth? they will ask. How about, It’s just a cartoon.

• Add another to the tally of Disney films about kids who are missing one (or both) parents. Though this is the first one I can think of where it’s also a father-son flick.

• A cautionary note: if you like the movie, and want the swag, buy it quickly. Disney is notorious (especially with properties that it doesn’t solely own) for only offering merchandise related to a particular film for a very short time.

• The trailer for the next Pixar flick, The Incredibles, have put it at the top of my 2004 list.

Finding Nemo was a good film — an A technically, no question, and, to be fair, a B- narratively. They can’t all be home runs, but this flick is an elegantly achieved double, and that’s a damned sight better than most of what’s being cranked out of Hollywood these days.