Finding Nemo (2003) and Pirates of the Caribbean (2003)

This is the first of (hopefully) a series of two-for-one reviews. The films in question are Finding Nemo and Pirates of the Caribbean, both released by Walt Disney Studios. Most of the people reading this review have probably seen both of these films at least once, but even from the vantage point of August 2004, it’s obvious that the Nemo-Pirates pairing is a turning point in Disney’s history.

It’s both amazing and ironic that Disney released the two highest-grossing films in the United States in 2003. The films’ successes are amazing because Disney has never enjoyed a stranglehold on mainstream movies’ box office performances. The irony comes from the fact that neither film is a "true" Disney movie. The Magic Kingdom is as bereft of new ideas now as it was in the early 1970s, and the bulk of Disney’s current product consists of ill-conceived sequels and direct-to-video cheapies. Yet both Finding Nemo and Pirates of the Caribbean point towards an exciting potential future that we may unfortunately never see.

Finding Nemo is 2003’s animation success story. Not only is Finding Nemo the highest grossing animated-film of all time (at least until Shrek 2) and an Academy Award winner, but also finds its success during the declining popularity of animated feature films. Multiple Disney features have bombed at the box office over the past five years, and the adult audience for animated features seems to have vanished, yet Finding Nemo defies all current trends. What on earth could be Finding Nemo’s secret?

The answer is simple – Pixar Entertainment. I freely admit that when it comes to Pixar, I come dangerously close to gushing nonstop praise. Pixar long ago cast aside the novelty status that came from "only" working within computer animation to becoming the most innovative and challenging mainstream animation studio inside the USA. This is the sort of studio that Walt Disney himself once ran, decades before his death – a studio that makes the onscreen depiction of fantasy seem as simple and believable as making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Of course, it takes a tremendous amount of work to make the final product seem natural and easy, but that is exactly what Pixar do with each feature film.

Once again, Pixar combines truly cutting-edge technology and stellar voice talent and puts both to work supporting a simple yet strong narrative. The plot seems simple on paper, perhaps to the point of banality – two fish search the ocean for a lost baby fish. Yet unlike even the best voice talent, the actors in Nemo are frequently and beautifully subtle. The blossoming friendship between the fish portrayed by Albert Brooks and Ellen Degeneres immediately saves the film from being as sterile and artificial as a dentist’s aquarium. Similarly, the underwater visuals are both breathtaking and understated. The beauty of those scenes is easier to appreciate if Nemo is compared to what real submarine footage looks like; most underwater film crews usually return with somewhat blurry, hazy obscure footage. Nemo, on the other hand, presents an underwater paradise that will seem incredibly correct to any scuba diver. This is the sort of film parents can enjoy with their children without the intrusion of brash, obnoxious, overloud buffoonery.

Pirates of the Caribbean

While not a pure animated film like Nemo, Pirates contains extensive and tasteful doses of computer animation. In addition, it stars the charismatic Johnny Depp, an actor who has starred in multiple fantasy movies courtesy of frequent collaborator Tim Burton. It’s also based on a Disneyworld theme ride inspired by Disney’s animated version of Peter Pan. That’s ample justification to include it here. I refuse to spoil any of the film’s surprises by giving even the briefest of plot outlines. However, virtually everyone already knows that the film features a crew of cursed undead pirates who periodically reveal themselves to be magically animated skeletons. As this is an animation website, I am focusing on this aspect of the film.

Some reviewers have compared the animated supernatural elements in Pirates to Harryhausens’ swashbucking skeletons in Jason and the Argonauts; truth be told, there is very little Harryhausen in Pirates’ animated skeletons. Harryhausen’s skeletons were swift, insectoid and stripped to the bone; Pirates’ skeletons are slow-moving, individualistic, and walk the thin line between macabre and fascinating. Harryhausen’s skeletons aren’t scary. The cursed crew of the Black Pearl is almost like an old horror comic book brought to life. They are also far more convincing than similar zombies in most recent horror and fantasy films, including Disney’s own Haunted Mansion.

Yet while successful, this isn’t an upswing in Disney’s history. Pirates’ success came despite a modest and indifferent ad campaign, with Disney distancing itself from the film until it was a box office triumph. Indeed, several scenes that made the connection between the Disneyland attraction and the movie explicit were actually deleted prior to Pirates’s theatrical release. Johnny Depp’s masterful Keith Richards-inspired characterization of a pirate captain flies in the face of the scrubbed, matinee idol that Disney wanted for the role. Please note that George Lucas’ Industrial Light and Magic unit animated the pirates, instead of Disney’s house staff. Once, Disney’s animators were not just the best in the business but were also capable of some truly terrifying creations. The dragon in Sleeping Beauty, the whale in Pinocchio, and the demons in the "Night on Bald Mountain" sequence in Fantasia are all proof of that. Yet the modern Disney machine seems intent only upon creating simplified, saccharine retreads of past glories. Lucas’ ILM, on the other hand, has boldly embraced new technologies in every sense of the word and truly reflect the state of the art in modern special effects.

In essence, then, while Finding Nemo and Pirates seem to show signs of Disney’s excellent health, the truth is quite different. Disney is committed to creating a series of ill-planned flops ala Treasure Planet and Home on the Range while more successfully marketing beautifully crafted DVD reissues of its past glories. Yet the glory days of the Disney Renaissance are not far behind us! It’s only been about 10 years since The Lion King (the last of Disney’s unquestioned animated triumphs). The limits of animation, to paraphrase Uncle Walt himself, are only the limits to our imaginations. One does not have to fully plunge into the CGI revolution to appreciate that computer animation can provide a useful adjunct to traditional methodology. Can Disney bounce back from its current creative slump? I’m trying to remain optimistic.

Other NonAnime Reviews Hulk Review Shrek 2 Review Island of Misfit Toys Review Kangaroo Jack Review Mystery of the Batwoman Review

This page hosted byGet your ownFree Home Page