Am I alone on this one? I liked “Ratatouille,” but not quite enough to recommend it. All of Brad Bird’s work seems a little stale and distant to me. Oh, well. Here’s an excerpt from my minority report.
A rodent in the kitchen may not be known as a sign of quality in the restaurant world, but Remy the Rat is out to change all that.
In Pixar’s “Ratatouille,” a film with functional, not quite mind-blowing art style, the talking, blue-haired vermin (voiced by Patton Oswalt) pursues the decidedly un-ratlike career path of a gourmet chef. He watches cooking shows, teaches himself to read recipes and rails against the way his compatriots wolf down food without pausing to appreciate its nuances. So dedicated is Remy that when a human destroys his colony and chases every rat away, Remy doubles back to snag a cookbook.
As luck and the anything-goes world of cartoon movie scripts have it, Remy floats through the sewers using his book as a raft, then surfaces at a restaurant created by his hero, Gusteau (Brad Garrett), who pops into Remy’s head as a chatty figment of his imagination. Gusteau dispenses helpful pointers on how to ingratiate himself into the rat-ist cooking world…
Food Network addicts of any age will get the most out of the movie, which is a love letter to the act of culinary creation.
The film is more of the same from director Brad Bird, who started in traditional animation with “The Iron Giant” (1999) and moved on to Pixar for “The Incredibles” (2004). Both films, as well as “Ratatouille,” are wildly praised, and although I enjoyed them well enough, I wasn’t among the worshippers.
I find Bird’s work entertaining yet too antiseptic and vacant to be truly inspiring. Give me something that packs an emotional whammy — “Toy Story,” “Finding Nemo,” any of the ancient Disney classics or works of Hayao Miyazaki — over a Bird film any day. The wild, devoted praise afforded his solid yet tepid films puzzles me. It’s as though society is playing a joke that everyone but me and a few others are in on. I smell a “Ratatouille.”
Read the full review here.
You “wouldn’t” recommend this? Seriously? You don’t have to gush, but I find it hard to believe that, given the current crop of films, the current STATE of films, that you would add this to your “don’t see” list, and that of the readers you serve.
Wow.
— Craig 06/27/2007 03:26 PM #
— brian 06/27/2007 03:41 PM #
— Frank F 06/27/2007 03:50 PM #
I have seen Ratatouille and am of the opinion that it is among Bird and Pixar’s best. You really don’t have to share this opinion, that would be a silly request, but name dropping Miyazaki does not a good review make.
You’re obviously a competent enough writer for this job so next time you’re sitting at your computer after enjoying or disliking a movie, try to ignore the pressure of the competitive industry you work in and just write what you think, not a reaction to what others do.
This type of vague and reactionary review won’t do much for you, I won’t remember your name tomorrow. Serve your readers, not your ego.
Good day sir!
— Scott Stapp 06/27/2007 03:51 PM #
— Clay 06/27/2007 03:52 PM #
And it worked. This is the first time I’ve ever seen this reviewer/website.
Congrats Phlem Guy.
— brett 06/27/2007 03:59 PM #
Anyway, sorry that you have to be stuck on the Brad Bird-hating island by bringing up his other flicks and telling us that they were also so very lacking. Enforcing this opinion by bringing up Miyazaki when you are so longing to be unique doesn’t really help your stance.
Next time you review a movie, don’t point out that you’re the only one who hates it. People would rather read why you didn’t like it without vague, confusing adjectives like “antiseptic” and “vacant.” What was antiseptic about it? When and where was it vacant?
I’ll give you props, though. This site has a pretty background.
— James 06/27/2007 04:05 PM #
You’re supposed to rate the movie. That’s what i came here to read – a movie review. Instead I I got a one-man refereundum on the career of Brad Bird. That’s not what your readers come here to read. You’ve presented only a plot synopsis of Ratatouille, followed by your opions regarding Brad Bird’s career – not a review of the elements that make up the film. As a result your review prooved unilluminating. I would have apreciated even one example of what you thought ‘worked’ or ‘did not work’ in the film (humor, plot, performances, story devices, etc.) Based on your review, I have no way of knowing wether or not you’ve actually even watched the film. You’ve only provided me with the same sort of plot synopsis I could have found on the back of an old DVD case. Isn’t it your job to be a little insiteful. Next time, please do your job and rate the movie; give your readers a reason to believe that you’ve actually watched the movie, and a reason to read any future articles by you. No more editorials on the careers of filmakers please (we can get those elsewhere).
— Flick Watcher 06/27/2007 04:06 PM #
When I realized how many people love Nemo, I decided to ask them what they thought of the subsequent Pixar films. Surprisingly, most of them think that Nemo is the crowning jewel and that The Incredibles is a majorly boring step in a new direction.
When I ask them what they think of The Iron Giant, I get lots of shrugs and head scratches (“It’s okay, I guess.”, “Whatever…nothing to write home about…”)
So, reading this review doesn’t surprise me. You’re not in the minority, Mr. Villareal. It’s just that most movie watchers aren’t movie reviewers. Step out of the world of esoteric film critics and hang out in “lowest-common-denominator-land”, and you’ll find that a LOT of people share your view.
— H.P. Mendoza 06/27/2007 04:13 PM #
How can you admit to liking the movie and still be the only party-wrecker on it’s critical acclaim? That’s just lame. If you like it, don’t rate it rotten. Sheesh.
— JM 06/27/2007 04:14 PM #
Another one of those joker reviews who strives to stick out.
“Wah wah wah. I hate Pixar, theyre sucessful and I’m not! Why does everyone like them! I shouldn’t right!”
Get the hell over yourself, I’m not even going to continue this rant, because of your 4/4 review of Happy Gilmore. Shows where youre coming from.
Have fun with your 7.50 an hour day job, hack.
— Danny 06/27/2007 04:18 PM #
— Tigerfan814 06/27/2007 04:19 PM #
— Leo Jackson 06/27/2007 04:24 PM #
Movie reviews are to review movies, not compare one’s opinion with the opinions of others and ponder why everyone else doesn’t see what you see, or rather, what everyone else sees that you don’t.
As James pointed out, there is little to look at here for one seeking honest criticism.
— Justin M. 06/27/2007 04:28 PM #
— Jeremy 06/27/2007 04:29 PM #
Hold on while I re-read the review to see what about the movie you didn’t like…. The director Brad Bird?
What a wash-out.
We should skip this movie because you weren’t “among the worshippers”!
Unless you can tell us what’s wrong the movie itself, you are not a critic and should not call yourself one.
-AR
— Alan R. 06/27/2007 04:30 PM #
Have you seen the other movies they put out these days? And you say you can’t even recommend this one? Now I know its a lie. Douchebag.
— Richard 06/27/2007 04:34 PM #
That’s what this review is. Mr. Villarreal doesn’t want Ratatouille to become the first movie ever to garner a 100% rating on Rottentomatoes, so he gave the movie a bad review…while admitting in the review that he enjoyed the movie.
It’s a sad. transparant play with baseball writers do it, and it’s equally sad and transparant when movie critics do it.
— Wrecktum 06/27/2007 04:37 PM #
— Adam 06/27/2007 04:39 PM #
— Marcus T. 06/27/2007 04:45 PM #
— Chris 06/27/2007 04:46 PM #
What about the movie, huh? Have you even seen the movie? From what I’ve read about the movie itself, seems more like you’re stating the synopsis than the movie.
Next time you decide to critique a movie make sure you do see the movie, than stating your hatred toward a director. Or just quit. By this review, you’re proving to the world that you’re not a critc, you’re just a person who wants attention.
-Rick
— Rick 06/27/2007 04:49 PM #
“Both films, (The Iron Giant, The Incredibles) as well as “Ratatouille,” are wildly praised, and although I enjoyed them well enough, I wasn’t among the worshippers.”
You are stating that you enjoyed the film, but are still not recommending it? Sounds like you made your mind up before walking in the theater, if you did at all.
Also from the review: “Am I alone on this one?”
Yup.
— Jason 06/27/2007 04:55 PM #
Toy Story 2 did as well, along with some other classics. I still think this guy was crying out for attention since he admits to liking the movie.
— Matt 06/27/2007 04:59 PM #
— frank 06/27/2007 05:05 PM #
— Wrecktum 06/27/2007 05:07 PM #
There. My opinion is more unjustifiably biased than yours. Maybe this will take some of the heat off of you. It’s okay to disent. It’s just a freaking movie. It frightens me that so many people like this type of mindless fluff, but it frightens me more that they freak out when you don’t rave about it too. Welcome to zombieville…I mean America.
— Andrew 06/27/2007 05:09 PM #
Oh, I certainly agree. The fact is that our buddy Andrew up top doesn’t get it either—you have to review a film based on itself, not by who’s directing. So no, the heat ain’t coming off him. He enjoyed the movie, yet he submitted the review as rotten just to be different. It’s not that the reviewer isn’t “raving” on it—it’s that his review doesn’t address anything about the movie besides that he wasn’t blown away by how it looked.
— Matt 06/27/2007 05:12 PM #
The whole review seems like you have some anger towards a director. Ratatouille makes movies like Shrek III and Spiderman 3 look like a joke.
At least Ratatouille is trying to tell an interesting story.
— Tal 06/27/2007 05:18 PM #
— Jim88 06/27/2007 05:18 PM #
To add to my confusion the reviewer says “I liked “Ratatouille,”
Would you care to clarify your position Phil? Maybe try again and actually review the movie. Thanks!
— william 06/27/2007 05:25 PM #
Everyone has said it. You are just trying to get people to read your review.
You’ve succeeded. Now every knows that you do have an opinion. You have ensured no one will read your opinion again.
It is amazing that you are considered “cream of the crop” by rotten tomatoes. Change the “o” in the last word and make it and “a”.
— Tom 06/27/2007 05:26 PM #
You can certainly disagree about not recommending a movie, but to say you “liked” it seems quite hypocritical, and to comprise your review of only your self-consciousness and a plot summary certainly doesn’t support why you wouldn’t recommend it, let alone an actual REVIEW.
Stop talking about yourself and how you’re a misunderstood elitist in the minority for the sake of being different. Guess your motives did work after all…bet your site got a hella lot more bandwidth recently.
— Will 06/27/2007 05:41 PM #
It seems that it’s Mr. Villarreal that’s fresh out of perspective this time. I can’t say that I anxiously await his “full review” tomorrow, but I do hope, for his own sake, that it bears a closer resemblance to an actual review than the his thinly-veiled self-promoting diatribe tonight.
— Morgan 06/27/2007 05:58 PM #
Anyway, that is the only way I would respect most of this criticism from angry people. Yet, I myself am someone who holds Brad Bird and Pixar highly, as I do his two movies, especially The Incredibles. The fact that I appreciate them so much gives me the typical human urge to speak for them or show what I see in them. So I guess I’ll do just that. I think Brad Bird soars above other family oriented filmmakers, and particularly family oriented animation filmmakers, because of his very unusual “solidity”, coherence and quality. Yes, he uses simple stories, simple characters, he doesn’t aim extremely high in that respect; but he uses them almost faultlessly, something that is very rare in both commercial and independent American filmmaking. His characters are full and graceful if not iconic (None of his characters is a Shrek or a Buzz Lightyear or a Sully who together with Boo, is my favorite animated character for its grace, power of expression, subtlety and amazing realism combined with its inherent fantasy). Yet, all his characters are very likeable, easy to familiarize with, and complex enough to be able to deal with whatever trifle the movie presents in a complete way which at the same time make repeated experiences enjoyable. The stories make sense in the context that is created for them, which is a lot to boast about (just this last year we had commercial and independent films that showed this is not easy, including Shrek the Third, Pirates III, and Spiderman 3 in one side, and Stranger than Fiction to mention one on the on the other side; all of which were decently fun if not all of them that good).
Now, I want to talk particularly about The Iron Giant and The Incredibles, as those are the only ones I’ve seen. To tell you the truth, the over exaltation that Iron Giant received was a bit confusing for me. I saw it and did not find anything so impressive. I preferred the classic animated musicals that Disney had been offering for almost a decade, thinking they were in the same level just for being animated. Yet, I did like the movie and find with time a lot more subtleties to appreciate in it: from the fine humor that seemed to me could be funny more than once and which wasn’t that common at the time; to the carefully created characters that were not spectacular but were startlingly solid. I have not seen the movie again, I don’t know if I would get to appreciate more in it if I did or not, so I’ll leave it at that.
Now, for the Incredibles I have the utmost respect when it comes to animated movies. For some time it had been hard for me to decide which is my favorite between this one, Finding Nemo, and Monsters Inc. At some point I held Finding Nemo highest, but that was purely for its hilarious humor that was somehow beyond other movies that are joke oriented and which was combined with a careful simplicity that is to love. Monsters seemed a lot of the time better for me because of its deceptively simple story and characters which at the same time are extremely original and creative (not because it is a Monster World and that in itself is original, but because of the small choices, e.g., not using an older girl and rather having one that barely speaks a word with an important full role; not making the girl a brat who doesn’t get scared to criticize modern cynicism and idealizing being scared; not using as a main character a monster that either is the number one and is full of pride so that he can humble himself and learn a lesson by the end, or one that is a failure because he can’t scare but in the end, through his integrity, he becomes the number one; all these among others would be the most expected creative choices for a kids film following this premise. I think the fact that in ALL their movies the filmmakers from Pixar try go beyond simply focusing on a premise to manufacture a product from, is a lot of what has made Pixar what it is.). However, assessing it more objectively, I think The Incredibles ends up being their best accomplishment as a movie. The Incredibles has great humor even if it doesn’t reach the peaks from Nemo; like Monsters and all other Pixar movies, it is not limited by formula as all and yet, it has more to offer. You mentioned emotional aspects of Nemo over The Incredibles, but the Incredibles has them, though deceptively simpler, in a much deeper and complex way. The whole father/son emotional aspect in Nemo is very expected and approached quite simplistically; while in The Incredibles, the family dynamics and the conflicts among them are portrayed much more deeply and hence carry an actual statement and value through repeated watches. They prove to you specific things about the family instead of just showing you how nice it is that the family is together again and more healthily so.
Now, apart form all this, The Incredibles manages to put together all these characters, family subtleties, and different particular message, with an impressive animated world, with good comedy, and with engaging action scenes that are not necessarily thrilling but that are better and more engaging than those in Fantastic Four, X-Men 3, Spy Kids, and many others. The sound effects with the music with the specific graphic style, and with the dynamic cameras and movements come all together with deceptive ease to give the audience a great extended experience (the movie is long, yet entertaining all throughout)
Finally, and something that makes it very special, is that it is a homage to the history of similarly themed movies. I don’t know if you like Kill Bill, but it is not a complex or new story, what is praised about this movie, and which I also praise, is that its characters are solid which is nice in itself, but are put in an incredibly well developed pseudo world that gives homage to certain movie genres, puts them all together, and does it so right. The Incredibles does something similar with the superhero/action genre; not necessarily copying, but bringing to mind many different movies, styles, and genres related to superhero and spy movies, comics, books and shows. Give that movie an extra watch and there are always details to enjoy. Its quality also has the power to bring the family comic drama at least alive and will also allow you to laugh again with the same jokes. That is what a good movie in itself does, but this one also brings about a cool homage concept that is so enjoyable. So, I guess I could say as to try to answer the why people value so much what Bird does, that he is genius when it comes to creating great rounded stories and characters and put them together in a movie in a deceptively simple manner. I don’t know if this is going to allow you to find a certain favor or respect towards Bird’s job but I obviously hope so. In a similar way, if you can show me reasons to come to respect highly Eastwoods latest works or Pan’s Labyrinth, I hope I can see what people seem so crazy about. Especially in Eastwood who makes me wonder if he’s involved in some type of witchcraft to make his manipulative sappy dramas be praised and respected both critically and commercially.
— Alex 06/28/2007 07:23 PM #
Get real people, not everyone’s the same. Phil’s a critic not a sheep.
— Kim 06/29/2007 10:53 AM #
— Jered 06/29/2007 03:59 PM #
Go watch your Special Edition DVD of Yu-Gi-Oh for the 20th time, Phil. Leave the good movies to others.
— JasonM 06/29/2007 04:21 PM #
Looking back through all his other reviews I see that one review had 4 comments, a couple others had 3, and all the rest had nearly no response at all.
I am writing the 39th comment on this review, which is almost an order of magnitude higher than the number of comments on the next most-commented-on review.
hmm…
— Dave 06/29/2007 05:04 PM #
Pathetic call for attention and some weird personal reaction to a family film.
— james 06/30/2007 09:52 PM #