{"id":200,"date":"2003-05-31T20:40:22","date_gmt":"2003-06-01T01:40:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp\/?p=200"},"modified":"2014-11-10T11:51:10","modified_gmt":"2014-11-10T18:51:10","slug":"watching_nemo","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/2003\/05\/31\/watching_nemo.html","title":{"rendered":"Watching Nemo<\/i>"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Finding
\nMajor life event here: we went to a movie, with Katherine.<\/i><\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

Okay, so Finding Nemo <\/i><\/a>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<\/i> = Tron 2003<\/i>). But, damn, she watched the whole thing.<\/p>\n

(By the way, watch the end titles. You won’t regret it.)<\/p>\n

Katherine’s review is as follows:<\/p>\n

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

Yeah, there’s a surprise.<\/p>\n

Let’s start out my <\/i>review on the technical side. Pixar and Disney have done it again. The underwater (and, hell, abovewater) scenes in Finding Nemo <\/i>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<\/i> (the original). Major kudos to all concerned.<\/p>\n

Just one example. One of my favorite scenes, technically, from Monsters, Inc.<\/i>, 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 there<\/i>ness to everything in the shot.<\/p>\n

Finding Nemo <\/i>pulls off the same thing, underwater, for most of the movie. Amazing.<\/p>\n

From a story perspective? Thereby hangs a tale … or two.<\/p>\n

First off, Katherine’s observation that it was scary is spot on. Take Bambi<\/i>, and pump up the volume. Hell, the closest in brutality to this film that I recall coming from Disney was The Lion King<\/i>, 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<\/i>.<\/p>\n

Nature red in tooth and claw, indeed. Not to mention fin. Nemo <\/i>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).<\/p>\n

(And SPOILERS BELOW.)<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

That bit aside, there’s a lot of good stuff in Nemo<\/i>. In fact, there’s not nearly enough Nemo <\/i>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.<\/p>\n

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 <\/i>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 <\/i>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.<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

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.<\/i> (indeed, having seen all of the Disney\/Pixar flicks except Toy Story 2<\/i>, I’d rank it as the weakest, storywise).<\/p>\n

That still puts it head and shoulders over most of the dreck out there.<\/p>\n

A few more random thoughts:<\/p>\n