Skip to main content

Finding Dory...'s Parents

          Finding Nemo is one of Pixar’s very best films, it’s one of my two or three favourites; it also happens to be a film that never demanded a sequel. Nemo getting lost again? “The Return of Darla”? It seemed like a bad idea, and I was concerned when I heard Finding Dory was going to be released. Because making the comic relief foil of one film the star of the sequel is how Cars 2 happened? Thankfully, Finding Dory is no Cars 2.
          It’s revealed that Dory was born in a marine institute exhibit and that prior to the events of the first film she got lost. Because of her short-term memory disorder she could never remember her parents or where she came from, and so meandered the ocean until meeting Marlin. Now she’s beginning to recall things again and with Marlin and Nemo, journeys back to the aquarium in California in search of her family.
          Most of the film is set in this marine institute and though it doesn’t have the depth and wonder of the ocean, the filmmakers still have a lot of fun with the setting, sending up the complexity of such parks, whale aquariums, and in one hilarious sequence, touch tanks. Plot-wise there are a few points where it feels repetitive of the first film. Not only do they start from literally the same reef as before, but they encounter a dangerous creature not long after, albeit one who’s not nearly as fearful as Bruce the shark or an angler fish. Finding Dory’s also trying really hard to be cute with recurring flashbacks to Dory’s childhood where she’s big-eyed and tiny (the short in front of the film is overly cute too, but it’s actually not bad). The forced adorableness is distracting but these scenes do tie into the film okay, and reinforce that Dory though mostly comic relief is actually something of a tragic character. Her short-term memory loss is treated as a handicap. I admire the film for exploring that and for setting up her backstory in fragments so that we learn the details of how she got lost alongside her. There’s a sentimentality permeating her journey that isn’t ineffective by any means, but doesn’t feel earned like the first movie did. Perhaps it’s because the theme of the importance of family has by now become too commonplace in Pixar and this film didn’t do enough new with it. 
          Some of the cast of the last film return (though I did miss Bruce, Gill, and Nigel). Ellen DeGeneres is right in her element as Dory and Albert Brooks is back along for the ride as Marlin. The problem is Marlin doesn’t display much of the character development he’d undergone prior and is back to being a worrisome fussbudget. It’s also weird seeing Marlin having been the hero and heart of the last film, relegated to a side character in this one. Nemo’s along for the journey too. However the main focus is Dory and to the films’ credit she carries the movie very well. Among the new characters introduced, the best of them is Ed O’Neil as an octopus called Hank. He’s got a gruff likeability to him and his relationship with Dory is one of the film’s unexpected delights. The cast also features Kaitlin Olson as a near-sighted whale shark called Destiny, Ty Burrell as an echolocation-inept beluga called Bailey (I do like that every animal in this marine institute has an impairment like Dory), and Eugene Levy and Diane Keaton as Dory’s parents. There are also a pair of really funny seals and a park announcer who’s someone you won’t expect.
          There’s enough interesting material in the park and Dory’s quest is investing enough that most of the film is enjoyable. But the final act falters somewhat. There was one story choice they seemed to have made that really impressed me, but they backed out on it minutes later, and given the result, I would have preferred that former direction. The finale also gets really ridiculous, tonally inconsistent, and convoluted that it feels like it’s from a different film.
          Finding Dory is very clever and funny a lot of the time (which makes sense given it’s directed by Andrew Stanton), but unlike it’s predecessor it’s not one of Pixar’s strongest. That being said, it’s the best sequel Pixar’s done since Toy Story 3. The last act and finale really do hurt the film, as does the character inconsistency. But it’s interesting, visually terrific, even provoking at times, and introduces some great colourful characters and situations. It’s just not quite as the soundtrack would suggest, unforgettable.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Disney's Mulan, Cultural Appropriation, and Exploitation

I’m late on this one I know. I wasn’t willing to spend thirty bucks back in September for a movie experience I knew was going to be far poorer than if I had paid half that at a theatre. So I waited for it to hit streaming for free to give it a shot. In the meantime I heard that it wasn’t very good, but I remained determined not to skip it entirely, partly out of sympathy for director Niki Caro and partly out of morbid curiosity. Disney’s live-action Mulan  I was actually mildly looking forward to early in the year in spite of my well-documented distaste for this series of creative dead zones by the most powerful media conglomerate on earth. Mulan  was never one of Disney’s classics, a movie extremely of its time in its “girl power” gender politics and with a decidedly American take on ancient Chinese mythology. It got by on a couple good songs and a strong lead, but it was a movie that could be improved upon, and this new version looked like it had the potential to do that, emphasizing

The Hays Code was Bad, Sex in Movies is Good

Don't Look Now (1973) Will Hays, Who Knows About Sex In 1930, former Republican politician and chair of the Motion Picture Association of America Will Hayes introduced a series of self-censorship guidelines for the movie industry in response to a mixture of celebrity scandals and lobbying from the Catholic Church against various ‘immoralities’ creating a perception of Hollywood as corrupt and indecent. The Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was formally adopted in 1930, though not stringently enforced until 1934 under the auspices of Joseph Breen. It laid out a careful list of what was and wasn’t acceptable for a film expecting major distribution. It stipulated rules against profanity, the depiction of miscegenation, and offensive portrayals of the clergy, but a lot of it was based around sexual content: “sexual perversion” of any kind was disallowed, as were any opaquely textual or visual allusions to reproduction, and right near the top “No licentious or suggestiv

Pixar Sundays: The Incredibles (2004)

          Brad Bird was already a master by the time he came to Pixar. Not only did he hone his craft as an early director on The Simpsons , but he directed a little animated film for Warner Bros. in 1999, that though not a box office success was loved by critics and quickly grew a cult following. The Iron Giant is now among many people’s favourite animated movies. Likewise, Bird’s feature debut at Pixar, The Incredibles , his own variation of a superhero movie, is often considered one of the studio’s best. And for very good reason, as the most talented director at Pixar shows.            Superheroes were once the world’s greatest crime-fighting force until several lawsuits for collateral damage (and in the case of Mr. Incredible, a hilarious suicide prevention), outlawed their vigilantism. Fifteen years later Mr. Incredible, now living as Bob Parr, has a family with his wife Helen, the former Elastigirl. But Bob, in a combination of mid-life crisis and nostalgia for the old day