Skip to main content

The wonder of Ratatouille

I have this fantasy. I imagine the day when US animators start treating their art like their Japanese brethren, as a means of making film that isn't limited to a kid's audience. Consider Paprika, a very R-rated animated film, or Akira or the entire Ghost in the Shell series. The mind boggles at what might result if a talent such as Brad Bird, backed by a studio like Pixar, took on a more adult project, like Roger Zelazny's Lord of Light. (An interesting story of a cancelled film version may be found here.)

Until then, we have Ratatouille. It might be an over-statement to call Ratatouille the best film of the year, but not by much. Certainly if Beauty and the Beast can get such a nomination, this film can because it is far more deserving. Ratatouille raises the bar in so many ways it's amazing to consider that it is "merely" an animated film. Brad Bird (The Iron Giant, The Incredibles) rules animation the same way that light and air rule your life; there really is no substitute.

Plot-wise, this is not a complex or subtle film. It's message is plainly stated: "Not everyone can be an artist, but an artist can come from anywhere." From that simple premise, Bird weaves a story that is only predictable in the sense that it will have a happy ending. Beyond that it is always inventive and visually rich beyond words. There are lovely touches everywhere and while we expect high standards from a Pixar film, this production goes even higher. In so many ways it makes Pixar's past triumphs, even Finding Nemo and Monsters Inc., look like little more than paint-by-numbers.

For instance, there is a moment near the end of the film that is pure and visual, making a point without a word being spoken. Yes, it's cliché, but it is "told" with such exuberance and joy that cliché is tossed into the trash and you laugh out loud at what you're seeing. It's clear in that moment, and throughout the production and in his past works, that Brad Bird doesn't just enjoy making animated films, he loves them. He revels in animation in ways no one else in the industry does. Other Pixar animators obviously enjoy the craft, but there is so much love and grace and beauty and talent in Bird's films that all others are left at the starting gate.

Yeah, I'm that big of a fan.

Peter O'Toole has a promising new career as voice talent for animated films. His performance as Anton Ego, lethal food critic, is priceless. He's backed up by a marvelous character design and a series of deft touches: When viewed from the back, parts of Ego's typewriter form the shape of a leering skull; when looked at from above, his room is shaped like a coffin. On and on, each visual cue adding to the personality that O'Toole's voice is building.

In comparison, everyone else is merely great, and this includes Patton Oswalt (who?), Lou Romano, Brian Dennehy, and Ian Holm. No one slacks and no one's character is completely predictable. Each takes a subtle turn or change and each turn or change is perfectly keeping in character. It's a lovely ensemble, spoiled only by one: Janeane Garofalo.

Including her risked ruining the film because she is humorless and vacuous in spectacular ways. Luckily for us, the film is saved by her putting on so thick a French accent that she's unrecognizable.

But back to the good stuff: Ratatouille is fantastic. It completely redeems Pixar for making Cars. (Of course, the included teaser for 2008's Wall-E fills me with dread. The teaser is so lacking spark, energy, or life that I cringed.) And Brad Bird is a national treasure. I loved the little credit at the end, declaring that the film is 100% animated, no motion capture used. Ladies and gentlemen, that is love and devotion to a cinematic art.

C'mon, Brad, Lord of Light calls.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Not the Hero We Deserve, But the Hero We Need

The Dark Knight is the best film I’ve seen in years. Not just the best “superhero” film, but the best film of any type. It’s not perfect, not quite a masterpiece, but it’s flaws are, to me, tiny and overwhelmed by the time the film ends. While relatively bloodless, it is consistently brutal, not just in what it depicts but in the themes that drive it. TDK is a film for adults, please leave the kids at home. Let’s deal with those “flaws” first, the largest being the character Rachel Dawes . In Batman Begins , I blamed Katie Holmes . Her acting was weak, to say the least, which is regrettable in that who she is and what she says and does are important to the film. Critics agreed and either for that or other reasons, Katie was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal , who is a better actress. Yet here she’s weak, real weak. Maybe it’s the character, not the actress, which is frustrating because Rachel is a pivotal character. The film,...

John Wick: Chapter 4

No sense in playing coy, this is a great film. I’ve seen it twice and while I don’t quite love it in the way I love the first, original John Wick , it’s my #2. It’s a little overlong, has some wasted space and time, has one absolutely pointless and useless character, and generally ignores the realities of firefights, falling, getting shot, hit, etc. All that notwithstanding, it’s a great action flick, has a genuine emotional core, and is well worth your time if you’re into that sort of thing. Like I am. Summary: John Wick (Keanu Reeves), last seen saying he was fed up with the High Table, goes to war to obtain his freedom. Some of the most incredible action scenes ever filmed ensue, culminating in a very satisfactory finale and a devastating post-credit scene. The first Wick film was a surprise hit. It was a simple, straight-forward tale of vengeance told in a simple, straight-forward manner. Where it stood out was its devotion to human stunt work, on exploiting long camera shots that ...

We pause now for a minor rant…

“My car has a flat tire.” “You should buy a new car.” Every time I hear President Obama and other Democrats talking about “health care reform,” that’s what the conversation sounds like. A health care crisis is declared and the only solution is to replace the entire system. At most, around 15% of the American population is without health care insurance. Ignoring the fact that for most of them, this is a matter of choice, it also means that 85% are insured. And of that 85%, something like 70+% like their current coverage and don’t want the government to touch it. So for the vast majority, the current system works and works great. Yet, because of the minority for whom it allegedly does not...toss it all, start again. Admittedly, regardless of insurance coverage, it all costs too much, but again, the only accepted approach to controlling costs are to throw out everything and turn it all over to the government. Tactics that are proposed to address specific cost issues are not consid...