Advertisement
Oscar History
Welcome

The Film Experience™ was created by Nathaniel R. Gemini, Cinephile, Actressexual. All material herein is written and copyrighted by Nathaniel or a member of our team as noted.

Powered by Squarespace
Don't Miss This!
What'cha Looking For?
Comment Fun

Comment Du Jour
Drag Race Makeovers 

"Three lip syncs and done is pretty standard, but there are notable exceptions. " - Robert

"Trinity was initially set up as the villain... Seeing her have fun, be more loose and rise up to the challenge once more makes me like her more and more." -Steve

Interviews

James Ivory (Maurice) 4K Restoraton!
Betty Buckley (Split)

Melissa Leo (Most Hated Woman in America)
Ritesh Batra (Sense of an Ending)

Keep TFE Strong

We're looking for 500 Patron Saints!

IF YOU READ THE SITE DAILY, PLEASE BE ONE BY DONATING. 
Your suscription dimes make an enormous difference to The Film Experience in terms of stability and budget to dream bigger. Consider...

I ♥ The Film Experience

THANKS IN ADVANCE

Subscribe
« Things that happened on Nicole Kidman's Birthday over the years | Main | Finding Treasure (with Pixar's Dory) »
Sunday
Jun192016

Review: Finding Dory

This review was originally published in Nathaniel's column at Towleroad

One of the best things about breakout supporting characters is that the fandom surrounding them comes honestly. Scene-stealers aren't handed their movies, but earn them. So it went with Dory, Ellen DeGeneres's forgetful blue tang who swam circles around every other character in Finding Nemo (2003), figuratively speaking, though she did sometimes swim in actual circles since she couldn't remember where she was going.

Thirteen years later, though Finding Dory takes place just after Finding Nemo ends, we're swimming in circles again with Dory, via a suspiciously similar movie. Let us count the ways...

1. It begins with a loving parent fish worrying about the safety of their baby fish with a problem (last time it was Marlin's deformed fin, this time it's Dory's memory problems via baby Dory in flashback).
2. We have to cross the ocean because of the lost baby fish (that's Dory so we're technically Finding Dory's Parents this time around when she suddenly remembers them as a full grown fish.)
3. Our hero ends up trapped in an aquarium and has to hatch an elaborate escape plan.
4. Surfer turtles and other wacky sea creatures with big personalities show up in every other scene.
5. Dory speaking whale surprises other fish.
∞. Etcetera

We could be at this all day but why nitpick?

While it's true that Pixar has abandoned its throne as the most dependably original and perfect movie studio (with the brilliant Inside Out the exception to the new reality), at least they're regurgitating well. Take, for example, those very funny popular seagulls from the first movie who only cried "Mine! Mine! Mine!" (True story confession: they made T-shirts -- I bought one.) This time that possessive joke gets a sneaky encore via bantering sea lions (Idris Elba & Dominic West, reunited after The Wire) claiming total dominion over particular rocks to sunbathe on. They don't have a catch phrase but the joke is inherently the same and even funnier. 

Dory's perfect side dish from Nemo being served up as the entree for her own film, presents some problems. DeGeneres isn't as funny this time since she's busy propping up the soggy demands of the plot and themes (self-reliance, familial love, etcetera). And since she takes Nemo & Marlin with her we have essentially three "straight men" in comedy terms rather than one. There's a lot of slack to be picked up to keep it funny. Mostly Pixar manages well especially when it comes to a  superbly animated Octopus and two whales with self-esteem problems (they're all voiced by sitcom stars: Ed O'Neill, Kaitlin Olsson, and Ty Burrell).  

I regret to inform that the internet's obsession with a lesbian couple appearing in Finding Dory is much ado about literally nothing. This only goes to show how thirsty we all still are for LGBT inclusion in mainstream film -- even Disney films despite their otherwise gay friendly status as a company. Since we're in a franchise that argues for chosen/created families (Dory+ Marlin & Nemo) and regularly extolls the virtues of creatures of totally different kinds living in harmony and friendship, it's a shame that LGBT inclusion has to be forcibly imagined rather than delivered in this heternormative sequel that's all about a mom & dad and their cute little baby.

But all is not exactly lost on the queer pleasure front. Finding Dory's greatest gift to the LGBT community is not some random lesbian couple you'd have to freeze frame to see, but something more subtle and much much funnier. Finding Dory is really just Finding Nemo Redux (it's no Zootopia if you've been playing along this year) but within its casual recycling we get at least one genius new joke. Once the fish reach their destination (not too long into the film) Finding Dory launches a delicious recurring comic monument to butch queen Sigourney Weaver herself, the Myth if not the Woman. She's the voice of the marine institute where most of the film's silly adventure takes place. It's a joke that just keeps on delivering, not unlike Pixar itself.

 

Grade: B-
Oscar Chances: Very good as it's likely to be beloved by fans and a massive success at the box office. Finding Nemo was nominated for four Oscars (Sound Editing, Screenplay, Animated Feature, Score) winning for Best Animated Feature. Though that much success seems unlikely (animated films aren't what they used to be in terms of Oscar nods) it's looking at a near certain nomination. Still, Zootopia is better and we haven't even seen all the competition yet, so we hope it's not already on course to win the Oscar. 

 

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

References (1)

References allow you to track sources for this article, as well as articles that were written in response to this article.

Reader Comments (4)

I bought a Gerald shirt and plush before the movie came out and was not disappointed by him. Only sad that I missed the post-credits scene wherein he features even more prominently (so I've heard). The pleasant surprise to me was Becky. There is some awesome back story with her, Gerald, and the bucket and I desperately want to know what it is.

June 19, 2016 | Unregistered Commentercatbaskets

Here's the biggest problem I had with the movie (and this isn't a knock on the typically excellent review, or anything like that--you just mentioned something that really irked me about the movie, so here goes): the writing was just...lazy. And I don't think it would've bothered me if it wasn't Pixar. But there were just so many...marine-factual-inaccuracies. Octopi (even septopi) do, actually, need water. Saltwater fish can't survive in random supplies of water (like, for instance, a mop bucket). And (though certainly not the only thing, but a thing that irritates me irrationally because I love the creatures), WHALE SHARKS ARE SHARKS, NOT WHALES. I get that they wanted to repeat the "whale speak" gag from the first movie, but maybe use a whale for that? Everything I mentioned, and more, just seemed to happen because the movie needed it to happen, either to advance the plot or for the sake of a gag. I still enjoyed the movie (I gave it a C+ on my personal scale, for what it's worth), I still am glad I saw it. It just felt like lazy writing.

June 19, 2016 | Unregistered CommenterOptramark

I agree with the above comment. The movie wasn't nearly as good as Nemo, but the whale shark thing was really annoying. My partner and I are involved with trying to educate people about marine life, and the whale shark is our absolute favourite subject. The movie repeatedly refers to it as a whale, and they also feed it the wrong food. This will make our job so much harder, and even the reviewer on this page referred to it as a whale ("two whales with self-esteem problems"), so clearly the damage to our public education of marine life is taking effect. Why didn't they use a whale instead of a whale shark? I find it difficult to believe that the writers are not aware of this fact, as so much of the Nemo movies is clearly made by people who love the subject matter. Thsi movie was very disappointing on multiple levels.

July 2, 2016 | Unregistered CommenterJeff

Yes, the shocking inaccuracies of a biological nature were cringe-worthy and, at times, conflicting. On one hand there were biologically accurate facets (octopus has three hearts, echo sounding in some marine species) then on the other hand there were the absolute rubbish scenarios like marine fish surviving in fresh or stagnant water; the whale shark stuff up and the list goes on. The octopus regenerates damaged limbs so would never be a septopus. I don't mind the octopus driving the truck (bit of a contradiction on my behalf) because it is obviously creative writing. I just hate the biologically inaccurate representations which give people, especially children, the wrong idea. Who knows, some kid may decide to take their pet fish to school in a drink container and wonder why it suddenly 'falls asleep'. It's a very long movie with many repetitions of gags and punchlines. You can tell they are writing to a formula in an effort to pull a few heart strings, but that tired method is old now and well overused. On the most part it was beautifully animated and coloured; absolutely astounding! Marlin and Nemo looked a little 'plastic' in close-ups but apart from that......very appealing. The script was found wanting; giving the actors little to work with or develop. All up, it was OK....bordering on pretty good.

July 3, 2016 | Unregistered CommenterLuke

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>