Tezuka In English Discussion Forums

This could just as easily be put into our 'animation' thread, but the usage of the words rare and obscure have forced me into creating a new topic.

Well I went and saw this today and was very happy with it. General consensus from the critics is something in the B+/A- range, which feels about right. Story-wise this is probably not the best from Pixar and I doubt it will have the same appeal to children that Nemo did, but perhaps that's what's really great about it.

Ratatouille (I'm finally going to learn how to spell this word!) is the sort of film that I think most will enjoy and a few will take to heart. It is good to note at first (as others have) that this isn't exclusively a kids film (neither was the Incredibles, but this one is even less so.) Indeed, Ratatouille is very much story first, audience second (with a few moments of audience-service), such that if it is a family friendly film, it only feels so by coincidence.

As Pixar's first genuine stab at what I'm going to call 'traditional children's lit' (though that is an unfortunate name, since the best children's lit was never exclusively for children but instead--as suggested above--story first), Ratatouille is the story of a rat who realizes he is born to be a cook and who is guided by the ghost of a great chef who believed 'anyone can be a great cook!' It is hard not to think immediately of stories like 'cricket in time square' or 'mouse in the motorcycle', and this is sort of a mixed blessing, since 'tried and true' does not necessarily mean exceptional, and by the third act, one is wondering how long the film makers can suspend disbelief. Fortunately the final act pays off in spades and it is enough to make it a personal favorite if not one of pixar's best.

Plot aside though, the computer animation has really come a long ways and there are points when the team are clearly reveling in their own creation. This is sometimes a subtle thing to catch, but there are moments as a viewer one becomes aware that an animator (whether hand-made or computer) is really, truly in love with what they are doing, and their creation becomes a feast so-to-speak, a visual celebration of all that animation is capable of. There are moments of this in Tezuka's Phoenix 2772 where everything is put aside for the pure thrill of animation for its own sake. I feel a moment or two of the same in Ratatouille and it is enough to make me believe in the head's of pixar; that what has made their success story what it is isn't just good stories (or promotion for that matter), but a real love of animation.

Returning then to Ratatouille, I whole-heartedly recommend it for all those who still love a good fanciful tale about animals and still belief that animation can be transportational. Expect the occasional pacing problem and the lack of thrills from previous efforts, but in exchange, something a bit more personal, worn around the edges, etc.

I love this show

but I think Surf's Up is better.

Still, this was very fun show

I'm realizing, after a little reflection, that what is making this film great for me is that it is very much a film equivalent of something you'd read around 4th-6th grade (something like 8-11 years old for those of you non-USA folks). What's significant is that just about any of the disney/pixar/dreamworks/etc. films you can think of are really aimed at a younger crowd. Regardless of how much any of us happen to like finding nemo (I really enjoy it), the film is aimed (though not limited) to viewers as young as 5 or even younger possibly.

I think (much to their detriment) virtually all animated family films (trying to distinguish this from anime) are the film equivalent of picture books or very early readers. In this sense, I think Ratatouille has done something ambitious by pushing a film that is not for 5 year olds but 9 year olds. This is a distinction I think a LOT of people will miss (though the parents of 5 year olds seem to be complaining bitterly on IMDB--hahahahaha)

I agree. I thought that the film was aimed at older children as well. I really enjoyed the movie, but I don't know if the hordes of little children near me did. I also liked how it was enjoyable for older viewers without relying on pop culture references like, say, Shrek. But yeah, I think the movie's best for older children. An example of this was when (maybe spoilers) the food critic guy thinks of his childhood. I don't know if this was a Proust reference or not, but I found it funny, as did others, but not most of the little kids. A little boy behind me (younger than 8, I think) asked his mom why people were laughing.

I also liked the animation a lot. I usually prefer hand-drawn, but Pixar really knows how to use 3D and make it look nice, and their animation has a sort of soul (it's hard to describe) for me that other 3D animation does not.

The day I heard about it, I wasn't sure if it'll work. It sounded rather uninteresting, and I'm still not really sure after I've seen the trailer, but since I heard SO many great reviews I have to see it I guess. Since I love talkin animal-fantasys in general I really have to lol But it's not in cinemas yet here.