Finding Dory (Andrew Stanton, Angus MacLane)

[TGM]

FINDING DORY

Directors: Andrew Stanton, Angus MacLane

imdb

[TGM]

So I thought this was fine. Not as good as the first movie, but certainly better than I was expecting, nor was it nearly as pointless as I figured it'd be, and it was entertaining enough throughout. And it wasn't a movie that necessarily impacted me on an emotional level, but it's one where I can definitely understand if it does for anyone else.

Honestly though, probably my least favorite aspect of these movies is when the fish are trying to navigate their way through the human world, as I find their way of trying to survive their own natural environment in the ocean to be far more interesting, and things tend to get perhaps a bit too cartoony whenever they're trying to make their way around in the human environment. And seeing as how the majority of this movie is set primarily in a Sea World type theme park, there's a lot more of that this time around, and it can get a bit much at times.

But yeah, that would probably be my biggest gripe, but otherwise, I actually enjoyed this one. And Dory surprisingly enough wasn't nearly as annoying as I was expecting to follow along as the lead this time around, and she ends up being a pretty damn deep character by the end of it (though the sheer amount of sudden flashbacking did grow just a bit tiresome after a while).

So yeah, not necessarily top tier Pixar, but still a fun, decent outing. But speaking of top tier Pixar, in terms of animation, the short that accompanied it, Piper, was just stunningly, almost freakishly photo-realistic. Like, it may well be the most photo-realistic animation I've seen to date. It was a cute little film beyond that, but damn was the animation impressive! Insane to think that we've reached that point, but by the same token, it does also leave me wondering, at what point does animation look so real that it's not just worth actually filming in live action instead? o.O

[Fezzik]

Honestly though, probably my least favorite aspect of these movies is when the fish are trying to navigate their way through the human world, as I find their way of trying to survive their own natural environment in the ocean to be far more interesting, and things tend to get perhaps a bittoo cartoony whenever they're trying to make their way around in the human environment. And seeing as how the majority of this movie is set primarily in a Sea World type theme park, there's a lot more of that this time around, and it can get a bit much at times.

Easily my biggest gripe. They broke the rules of internal consistency. I was floored. The second time it happened, when [

Show Spoiler

Hank started to drive the truck

], I became so angry that I was pulled out of the film.

Also, the emotional beats, for the most part, didn't land. And in retrospect, its for the same reason they didn't land in Brave - the moments that came before felt rushed. Nothing was given time to marinate. The viewer wasnt allowed to absorb anything at all, so when the emotional moments happened, they didnt feel earned at ALL.

Its easily the most cartoony of Pixar's films since maybe Cars 2 (though much better than that), but the best I can give it is a mild yay. It WAS entertaining, and it featured an octopus that could've been the reincarnation of Mark Rothko himself, but overall, it was a HUGE missed opportunity.

(Piper was stunning, though)

[Henry Gale]

Yeah, "fine" is the best word to describe it. It just doesn't feel like anything worthy of expanding the universe of something so beloved after so long. It more felt like a nice sort of comic book sequel or other diverting not-necessarily-canon thing Disney would come up with that simply went "What if we learned about Dory's family?!" instead of the same sort of weight in the production it's given as the original. All the Toy Story sequels and Monsters University did so much to provide completely new perspectives on their worlds from different periods of time in the characters' lives, here, we're "One Year Later" with a happenstance wave of new memories to push us to a nice place, but not a necessary one.

That said, I was into it as it went along, and it still managed to get a noticeable stream of tears out of me towards the end. I completely agree that the "escaping the human world" elements of both movies are the least effective to me, so to have most of this set under those circumstances was fairly disappointing. And yeah, what Fezzik said.. that particular bit being just jarring, especially considering its importance to the ending.

So, considering it's on track to be the biggest movie of the summer (year?) you'll be bound to see it anyway simply out of relevance, and you'll very likely enjoy it, but even though I did, this is now easily my second least favourite Pixar sequel above Cars 2. Not sure that bodes very well with how many more we're getting in the years to come.

**½ to *** / low-to-mid 6 range

[dreamdead]

This is serviceable but not much better. The core cast remains engaged, but the script and overall design is so much less. For me it comes down to what feels like a rookie mistake. Stanton and MacLane accentuate every line of Dory's from the first film and treat it as though it's a prophetic axiom from on high, so that each triggers a callback of memories. And while we can all acknowledge that it's basically a vehicle to get into Dory's story here, it deprives the film of its necessary energy and transforms the plot into a "wait for the next Dory line" while other characters wait around for something to do.

That mentality takes an unmoored character and locks her into a device that undercuts so much of what made her special in the first film. It's gorgeously rendered, but lacks a lot of the special energy from the first film.

[transmogrifier]

Not as completely pointless as Monsters University but close to it, this is just a bunch of "And this happens..." scenes with no dramatic interest (except the one scene near the end featuring shells) or any new, funny characters. Seriously, would it have killed them to introduce the octopus in a more organic way than it just sort of being there at the right time and place? Why make the whale shark have poor eyesight when nothing of interest or amusement comes from it? Why even have Nemo and his father there at all? Why take a story that was somewhat "realistic" in terms of fish behavior and biology (somewhat, I said!) and then pretty much make them alien creatures that can do anything at any time for any plot purpose (driving a truck? Seriously? Surviving in a cup of freshwater... bloody hell, so lazy...)

Finding Nemo - 82
Wall-E - 77
Toy Story 3 - 71
Up - 70
Monsters Inc. - 67
Toy Story - 67
A Bug's Life - 65
Inside Out - 63
The Incredibles - 56
Cars - 56
Toy Story 2 - 55
Finding Dory - 54
Brave - 53
Ratatouille - 52
Monsters University - 49

[Watashi]

Oof. This is not good. This is lazy lazy storytelling. Very disappointed from a studio that champions their storytelling artistry above all else. This rehashes emotional beats from the first film and other Pixar films (this shares a lot of set-pieces from Toy Story 2). The first film showed that the ocean is this huge, scary, foreign place, but Finding Dory shows that you can cross the Pacific Ocean in a simple supercut. The journey is missing and is replaced by shenanigans escaping from a marina facility. The new characters suck (outside a fun Wire reunion). Dory's conclusion to find her parents is a total Deus Ex Machina and does not feel earned at all.

I'm actually worried about The Incredibles II now.

[Lazlo]

"Fine" is definitely the right word for this. It's enjoyable but feels long and isn't very funny. The animation is stunning and some of the emotional beats really work (seashells, the final scene). I was also really entertained by the truck sequence y'all are complaining about.

My bigger issue is a repetitiveness in Pixar's storytelling. Too often (and back-to-back-to-back in their most recent three films) the story is about the protagonists getting lost or separated from where they belong or their friends and the conflict is in getting home or back together. I mean, I know those are classic storytelling elements, but there are other stories available.

[Dukefrukem]

Oof. This may be worse than Cars.

[Henry Gale]

Well the first Cars is probably better than a bunch of their films at this point, so I can't really disagree.

Cars 2 on the other hand... That's the low point.

[Philip J. Fry]

[TGM]

[Dead & Messed Up]

You know, what Finding Nemo could've used was a high-octane freeway escape.

:|

This was diverting in the same way The Secret Life of Pets was for me yesterday. Just good enough to offset the half-assed character work (as Watashi asks, why is Marlin in this movie? Why is Nemo in this movie?), with some moments of relative wit, and a quick enough runtime and lovely enough animation.

Sidebar: this film and The Secret Life of Pets have the exact same second-act-low, where an orphan must come to grips with the loss of parents. This film does it better; it gives Dory more time to feel lost in the moment and despair, even though, go figure, it wraps up sooner than it needs to, and, like TSLoP (T-slop?), sorts it out just in time for a high-speed car chase.

In a kids film about animals.

Christ, screenwriters need to get some new ideas.

[Dukefrukem]

This is now a staple in our daily regiment as my daughter is obsessed with the fish.

So, are we to believe the fish swam from the coast of Australia to California?

[Skitch]

This is now a staple in our daily regiment as my daughter is obsessed with the fish.

I watched Finding Nemo roughly TWELVE THOUSAND TIMES.

So, are we to believe the fish swam from the coast of Australia to California?

Do I have to say it? Are you gonna make me say it?

[Dukefrukem]

I watched Finding Nemo roughly TWELVE THOUSAND TIMES.

Do I have to say it? Are you gonna make me say it?

I calculated how far Apocalypses fell in the X-Men's open scene... so yes.

[Skitch]

Just keep swimming.