Finding Nemo is officially the number one movie of 2003. Although I'm not a real fan of animation, a friend of mine (the same friend, as it happens, who convinced me to see Shrek which I loved) received the Finding Nemo DVD for Christmas. He told me that it wasn't as good as Shrek, but that I should still give it a look. I did, and he was certainly right about one thing: Finding Nemo is nowhere near as good as Shrek. The title character of the film is a young clown fish who is saddled with a very overprotective father by the name of Marlin (voiced by Albert Brooks). When the two get into a typical coming-of-age fight, Nemo swims off in a fit of pique and ends up being captured by a scuba diver. His father, who is afraid of almost everything, braves the open ocean and many dangers to track down his son and try to rescue him. Accompanied only by a forgetful blue fish named Dory (Ellen DeGeneres), Marlin ends up doing some growing up of his own as he searches for his boy. Finding Nemo is the latest effort from Pixar, the same company that brought us Toy Story and Monsters, Inc. (neither of which I've seen). The buzz about Pixar, however, was something I couldn't miss, and it all had much to do with the wonderful animation the studio was putting out. As a graphic designer, even though I don't care much for animated films I am a fan of well done animations. Unfortunately, Finding Nemo was a grave disappointment to me in that regard. The clown fish and some sea turtles are beautifully rendered and animated; a scary shark is also okay. Many of the backgrounds are detailed and perfectly three-dimensional. But other characters - including some who are prominent - are simplistic and flat. I actually found some of the renderings so poorly done that I was almost offended that they were in such a roundly hyped movie. The Finding Nemo storyline is simplistic, and the script goes with it. Although there are a few adult jokes (film trivia buffs, just wait until you hear the name of the Great White Shark in the film, and those as familiar with seagulls as I am will snicker every time they enter a scene), the movie is squarely aimed at the average five year-old and it looks it. I was delighted, however, by the performances given by Albert Brooks and Ellen DeGeneres. Brooks gives his character real angst, and DeGeneres was hysterical even when her lines were only a little funny. But if good performances and a couple of jokes aren't enough to keep you entertained for an hour and 40 minutes, you'll doubtless be happiest to leave the kids alone in front of this one while you get something else done. FAMILY SUITABILITY: Finding Nemo is rated G. Though there are a few tense moments, they're glossed over quite easily, and nothing objectionable is ever shown. The average 5 or 6 year-old will be enthralled, at least until they're 7 or 8. Your 13 year-old, however, will find this one a yawner, so be prepared to rent an alternative for the older kids. Me? I'm holding out for Shrek 2. ©2004 by Lady Liberty and ladylibrty.com, all rights reserved. |