Film Quarterly, Vol. 2016, Issue 2

Tags

Adaptations, Awards, Feminism, French Cinema, Pixar

@MerriamWebster on Twitter: “Trust us: the feminine form of ‘ghostbuster’ is ‘ghostbuster’.”

Yes, I’m late again. I was hoping to get this post up earlier in the month, but it just didn’t seem appropriate given current events; however, then I thought that perhaps people might be looking to add some escapism to their lives right about now. In any case, the delay means that Ghostbusters is among my selections below and really everyone should run out and see that first. And then, if you are so inclined, please rate it on IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes, where whiny man children have apparently been down-voting the film without even seeing it. Sigh.

My movie-watching was rather uneven this quarter, and I’m a few weeks behind on my 52 Films By Women project, but I nevertheless saw eleven films in the theater and thirty at home.* I continued catching up on the critical darlings of 2015 and also managed to rewatch the entire Star Wars saga.

The second quarter of the year is always a bit slow until the summer movies start rolling out, but this year it seemed slow all the way through since there weren’t many blockbusters I was interested in seeing. Last summer was so great I think we got a little spoiled. Of course, Ghostbusters is a fun summer popcorn flick, but I don’t think it quite reaches the heights of Spy. And where oh where is this year’s Mad Max? I swear, Jason Bourne had better be good. I need a smart thriller right about now.

Still, the 2016 films I saw in the theater between April 1 and now were—for the most part—better than what I saw last quarter. There were two that stood out above the crowd and that I suspect may still be on my Top Ten at the end of the year: Green Room, a locked-room horror thriller by Jeremy Saulnier, and Love & Friendship, a Whit Stillman adaptation of Jane Austen’s Lady Susan.

Love & Friendship really captured the spirit of Jane Austen.

2016 Top Ten (to Date)
Love & Friendship
Green Room
Ghostbusters
Zero Days
Zootopia
Finding Dory
Money Monster
The Nice Guys
Hail, Caesar!
The Man Who Knew Infinity

Best Film Seen in a Theater: Love & Friendship (2016)

With a pitch-perfect performance by Kate Beckinsale as Lady Susan, Whit Stillman really captures Jane Austen’s snarky spirit. The only weak link for me was Chloë Sevigny, who didn’t seem to fit in this world at all. I hope this at least gets an Oscar nod for Best Costume; the dresses were fabulous.

Best Theater Experience: Green Room (2016)

Though wary of the potential gore—and there was gore—I was really looking forward to this horror thriller by Jeremy Saulnier, the director of 2014 favorite Blue Ruin. The crowd of critics and other guests was obviously excited as well and there was even swag at the screening. Plus, it was my first visit to the new Alamo Drafthouse so that added to the fun. Terrific performances all around, including a Patrick Stewart like you’ve never seen him before and the late Anton Yelchin, gone far too soon.

TFW you just want to go home but you’re stuck hanging out in the green room.

I was hoping to present a definitive Top Ten for 2015 in this post, however, while I managed to watch six more critical darlings from last year (Appropriate Behavior, Creed, Eden, Grandma, Le meraviglie (The Wonders), and Slow West), I still have a bunch more I’d like to get to before I laminate that sucker. So I guess you’ll have to wait until next quarter for that.

As for my 52 Films By Women challenge, I only watched nine films that qualified: Appropriate Behavior (2015), Batkid Begins: The Wish Heard Around the World (2015), Dance, Girl, Dance (1940), Dear Frankie (2005), Eden (2015), Le meraviglie (The Wonders) (2015), Merrily We Go to Hell (1932), Money Monster (2016), and Suffragette (2015). So, I have some catching up to do to stay on track for the end of the year. Luckily, there are a couple films in the theaters now that fit the bill, including Rebecca Miller’s Maggie’s Plan and Anne Fontaine’s The Innocents, both of which I’ve been meaning to see. You can follow my progress on this challenge at Letterboxd.

Let’s just say I found the lead in Appropriate Behavior very relatable.

Best Film by a Female Director: Appropriate Behavior (2015)

In many ways, this film is just your typical indie about a young Brooklynite hooking up and finding themselves in the big city. Except the lead is the daughter of Iranian immigrants. And bisexual. The film goes back and forth in time as the main character remembers and re-examines her past relationship with her (now) ex-girlfriend.

Best Film by a Female Director (runner-up): Dear Frankie (2005)

This film shows up on a lot of “female director” lists but it never really stood out to me as particularly interesting. Well, I wish I had seen this earlier as it’s utterly delightful. Not quite a romantic comedy but it has that vibe. Bonus: Scotland!

Best Female Director Discovery: Dorothy Arzner, Merrily We Go to Hell (1932) and Dance, Girl, Dance (1940)

There are not many female directors to be found in classic Hollywood, but one is Dorothy Arzner. The two films I watched by her were real gems that you should seek out; I got my copies on DVD from Netflix. If you have never seen a pre-code film and want to go dark, try Merrily We Go to Hell, which shows how a quick movie courtship can go wrong. Bonus: a young Cary Grant pops up in one scene. If you like musicals and backstage antics and want to see Lucille Ball playing a “sexpot” role, then Dance, Girl, Dance is for you. Note: Dance, Girl, Dance was edited by Robert Wise, who later went on to direct West Side Story. [A special shout-out to @NitrateDiva on Twitter for turning me on to Arzner.]

There’s no doubt the thoroughly modern marriage of Merrily We Go to Hell was filmed pre-code.

One mini-project I managed to complete was rewatching all the Star Wars films. With all the excitement over The Force Awakens, I had been reading quite a bit about how, for younger generations, the prequels are similar in quality to the original trilogy. I found this hard to believe (as I thought the prequels were pretty god-awful) but I hadn’t seen the originals since they were re-released in theaters in 1997. Because I am very excited about the upcoming Rogue One and that film is set just before the action of the original Star Wars, I figured a rewatch and re-evaluation might be in order.

Ah, Star Wars… nothing but Star Wars… gimme those Star Wars… don’t let them end!

The Definitive Star Wars Ranking
Star Wars
The Empire Strikes Back
The Force Awakens
Return of the Jedi
Revenge of the Sith
The Phantom Menace
Attack of the Clones

I was more than a little surprised at these rankings, but I have to say that Empire just doesn’t hold up as well as I expected. The movie really suffers from the “gang” being separated, the timeline is somewhat hard to follow, and it just sort of wanders all over the place, from the lackluster opening to the cliffhanger ending. It’s just not a complete film unto itself. Still, it’s a solid follow-up to the original, which remains a masterpiece of story and character. Rewatching The Force Awakens I had to admire its pacing, as well as its straddling of old and new. I think the only weak link was the lame villain and can only hope that the character of Kylo Ren improves in the next episode. Finally, while I don’t dislike Return of the Jedi as much as some, it gets bogged down in the beginning on Tatooine. Thankfully, there was less of slave Leia than I remembered, but the fact that almost a quarter of the film’s running time is spent on Jabba the Hut is sort of ridiculous—and people complain about the Ewoks! As for the prequels, the less said the better, they were as awful as I remembered—the acting, directing, and writing (along with most of the CGI) are atrocious. Even if some of the lines in the original trilogy were cornball, they were at least delivered with flair.

With The Force Awakens, the torch has been successfully passed to a new generation.

And with that, let’s look at some of my other favorite (and not-so-favorite) selections from this quarter:

Best Classic Rewatch: Star Wars (1977)

I had forgotten how tight this story is. Also, how much of a bad-ass Leia was in the first film. She really loses agency and spark as they go on doesn’t she? Sigh. Despite Luke’s whining, I can easily watch this one over and over.

Best New-to-Me Classic: Experiment in Terror (1962)

I caught this with Sudden Fear in a San Francisco double feature at the Castro Theatre with the Math Greek. This Blake Edwards film has interesting cinematography, a terrific score by Henry Mancini, and, for you sports fans, an incredible finale that takes place at Candlestick Park.

Best Math Greek Selection: Jodorowsky’s Dune (2014)

I had meant to see this when it came out, despite my lack of interest in science fiction in general and Dune in particular. Regardless of your own stand on sci fi, this documentary is an interesting look at the pre-production process and the challenges artists face in bringing their vision to the screen.

Best Documentary: Zero Days (2016)

Zero Days is this year’s Citizenfour and it was just as fascinating and terrifying; however, I think the narrative structure is more effective in Zero Days. Furthermore, the film does a great job of explaining the tech involved so that even I could understand it.

Biggest Theater Disappointment: Finding Dory (2016)

If you are a regular reader of this blog, you may remember that Finding Nemo came out on top of my Pixar rankings, so naturally I had high hopes for its sequel. Finding Dory was perfectly fine, but, like Zootopia, is really more for kids than adults. In other words, it’s more of a Disney “message” movie than a visual stunner or creative concept. And the incredible animation of Piper, the Pixar short that ran before Dory, only highlighted this fact. [One reason Zootopia ranks higher than Dory in my 2016 top ten list above is its impressive animation.]

Best Opening Scene: Ghostbusters (2016)

The audience spontaneously burst into applause after this opening. It captures the spirit (hah!) of the original film’s library sequence but ups the ante by actually being scary. That’s something I really appreciated about the new Ghostbusters; I was genuinely scared at times. Much like an SNL sketch (and the original Ghostbusters), the finale goes on far too long, but I thought the writers modernized the story well and came up with an excellent origin story for the team.

Best Closing Scene: Creed (2015)

One thing I love about Creed is how it works very much within its sports film genre but takes it to another level by building on the Rocky legend in just the right way, staying true to its roots but expanding the vision. So it seems only fitting that the movie closes on the “Rocky Steps” overlooking Philadelphia. Creed (along with Niki Caro’s McFarland, USA) is an excellent argument for supporting more female and PoC directors whose unique viewpoints can help revitalize stale genres.

“One step at a time. One punch at a time. One round at a time.”

Worst on Rewatch: Ghostbusters (1984)

Yup, I went there. It is hard for me to objectively judge this childhood favorite, but on rewatch the misogyny hit me like a ton of bricks. It’s creepy and sexist and simply not funny enough to overlook that. It may be “better” than the remake because of its originality and quotability, but it’s really not based on the quality of the comedy.

Most Overrated: Patton (1970)

This is a decent biopic but certainly not the must-see classic I was expecting given its reputation. Yes, it has an incredible performance by George C. Scott and a great opening shot, but not much more to recommend it. It mostly made me want to rewatch The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp.

John Wayne award for hyper-masculinity: Thief (1981)

After finally watching and enjoying Manhunter and Heat last year, I thought for sure I would love Thief, but this Mann film was a bit too “man’s man” for me. From the opening shots of heavy machinery, it was all toughness and tough dialogue, with no real heart (though that did make the Tangerine Dream soundtrack remarkably apropos).

Gloria Steinem award for proto-feminism: Suffragette (2015)

This film suffered from a tone-deaf marketing campaign which is unfortunate since it is a rather good (albeit overly earnest) period piece. I liked the choice to profile the real movement in Britain through main characters that are fictional, keeping real-life suffragettes in the background of the action and drama. Carey Mulligan is outstanding. I’m sorry to say it (not really), but if this movie was about a man and directed by someone like Spielberg, it would have been up for numerous Oscars.

Cutest Kitten: Keanu (2016)

I don’t even like pets but this kitten was adorable. And not just because he was named after my man Keanu.

Keanu “starring” in Point Break, aka January.

Best Dragon: Dragonslayer (1981)

While the story is a bit muddled and not really my thing, the dragon special effects used in this film are great even by today’s standards.

Worst Dragon: Pete’s Dragon (1977)

A childhood favorite of the Math Greek, I think the less I say about this rambling tale the better. I’ll simply note that the effects are not good and they really should have just committed to the invisibility gimmick.

Best Bees: Le meraviglie (The Wonders) (2015)

Best Use of a Dictaphone: Sudden Fear (1952)

The Rupert Giles Award (aka Mathiest): The Man Who Knew Infinity (2016)

Most Existential Ennui (aka Frenchiest): Eden (2015)

Best Worst Dancing: Ralph Fiennes dancing to “Emotional Rescue” in A Bigger Splash (2016)

Worst Geography: The Age of Adaline (2015)

This popped up on Hulu so I decided to rewatch what I remembered as a not-great selection from last year. The boyfriend is still too stalkery for my tastes, but it bothered me less on this second go-around and I found myself enjoying this romance fantasy more than I expected. On the other hand, the geography of San Francisco as presented in this movie bothered me just as much as in the theater. So much wrongness.

Five Films I Can’t Recommend
Attack of the Clones
Man of Steel
Oz the Great and Powerful
The Phantom Menace
Revenge of the Sith

Sure Oz was a hot mess, but it was very, very pretty.

Tune in next quarter when I tackle the Bourne filmography, more female directors, and make a final stand on the films of 2015!

For Vol. 2016, Issue 1, click here.
For Vol. 2016, Issue 3, click here.

*The movies I saw or rewatched this quarter include:
2016: A Bigger Splash, Demolition, Finding Dory, Ghostbusters, Green Room, Keanu, Love & Friendship, The Man Who Knew Infinity, Money Monster, The Nice Guys, Zero Days

2015: The Age of Adaline, Appropriate Behavior, Batkid Begins: The Wish Heard Around the World, Creed, Eden, The Force Awakens, Grandma, Le meraviglie (The Wonders), Slow West, Suffragette

Released prior to 2015: Attack of the Clones; The Cheat; Dance, Girl, Dance; Dear Frankie; Dragonslayer; The Empire Strikes Back; Experiment in Terror; Ghostbusters; Jodorowsky’s Dune; Man of Steel; Merrily We Go to Hell; Oz the Great and Powerful; Patton; Pete’s Dragon; The Phantom Menace; Return of the Jedi; Revenge of the Sith; Star Wars; Sudden Fear; Thief

Note: These posts are in no way affiliated with the Film Quarterly journal published by the University of California Press.

Ranking Pixar, or, Let the Arguments Begin

Tags

Pixar

A few weeks ago, I wrote about how disappointed I was in Inside Out, the latest motion picture from Pixar Studios. I’m not a huge fan of animation, but I feel like I’ve generally enjoyed Pixar movies. My visceral reaction to this one made me wonder if that assessment was really true, which got me thinking about the studio’s filmography in general and whether I was suffering from my own version of Pixar nostalgia. When I think of their fifteen features, where does Inside Out rank? So, off to the library I went to rewatch the classics.*

By the way, I recently stumbled across this takedown of Inside Out and, while I probably give the film a bit more credit than this reviewer, he makes many interesting points, especially as regards Pixar as a whole.

The ranking below is based on the following metrics, which are similar to the considerations I use for judging books. When assessing overall quality—whether a book “works” for me—I consider three basic elements: character, language (i.e., artistic presentation: visuals for movies, writing for books), and story. If you don’t have at least two of the three, you will fall way down on any list of mine. However, I knew actually ranking Pixar films would be hard, so I turned to math and developed my own PIXAR metrics.

PIXAR Metrics

P: Premise + Plot. While it’s great when a book or a film has a creative or audacious premise, premise alone will not carry me through to the end. So, is the story interesting? Is it well paced? Is the world-building believable? Does it make sense?

I: Individual characters. Do I like the characters? Are they interesting and/or well rounded? Can I relate to them? Do I care about them? Are they believable?

X: Chromosomes. As noted in Pixar’s “Female” Problem, this score is based on passing the Bechdel Test, but also the general portrayal of female characters as well as the message or subject matter. And yes, I’m including this category because it is relevant to me (as well as, I presume, half the population) and my appreciation of this studio.

A: Artistic merit. Most Pixar pictures have very good production values. This score is for when films go above and beyond, whether visually or musically.

R: Reaction. Did I enjoy the overall film? Would I want to rewatch it?

[Side note: Crying is not a value. If a film manipulates me into crying, that is not necessarily considered a good in and of itself.]

For each category above, a film received a score from one to five upon rewatch, with a total possible score of thirty. Then, after watching all of them, I considered where I would place films relative to one another in each category to compare and confirm the scores I had assigned. In case of a tie in the total score, I ranked tied films based on an overall quality judgment. I was rather surprised how the math rankings worked out in certain cases, but, overall, I had to agree that it was pretty close to what I would have said on just a gut level.

To the rankings!

1. Finding Nemo (2003). Score: P=3/5, I=5, X=3, A=4, R=5  Total: 25
   Finding Nemo was the one movie I didn’t feel I needed to rewatch for this post because I had seen and enjoyed it so many times already. The depiction of Nemo’s underwater world is truly breathtaking and the film has a strong script with a great cast of characters. There’s a good blend of action, adventure, and humor. It’s one of the few Pixar films I hear people quote from. Yes, there an extra ending tacked on that we don’t really need, but that doesn’t detract from what a fun ride and touching film this is.

2. Ratatouille (2007). Score: P=5/4, I=2, X=1, A=5, R=5  Total: 22
   I’ve always liked Ratatouille (Paris! Cooking!), but it seems to divide people—for some Pixar fans it’s their favorite, and for others it’s a snooze. I think the visual depiction of Paris and the restaurant kitchen are glorious, and I love the story despite its inherent implausibility and the high amount of slapstick. I totally get that some people are squicked by the rats and can’t move beyond that (since that’s how I feel about the heights in Inside Out), but the premise shows just how daring and creative Pixar can be when they try. Anton Ego’s restaurant review is a high point of Pixar’s screenwriting.

3. Toy Story (1995). Score: P=5/5, I=4, X=1, A=2, R=4  Total: 21
   The first of Pixar’s films and, in many ways, their greatest. A simple homeward quest story where the various obstacles make sense given the world and characters presented. This buddy comedy deals with friendship, jealousy, and group dynamics in a relatable way. Great action, with just the right amount of melancholy, and the emotions are earned. Although the rendering of the people looks shockingly bad now, as the first computer-animated feature film, the animation was groundbreaking.

4. The Incredibles (2004). Score: P=1/3, I=4, X=4, A=3, R=4  Total: 19
   I liked this film more than I remembered. However, I really dislike the character of (epic-manchild) Mr. Incredible and so the initial set-up and exploration of his issues runs rather long for me, and this pacing as well as some troubling themes keeps The Incredibles from absolute greatness. It’s when the family comes together that the movie really takes off. As such, this is one of the few Pixar films where I really see the value of a sequel, especially since Edna Mode is one of my favorite characters in the Pixar universe. The James Bond–flavored score is a thing of beauty.

5. Toy Story 3 (2010). Score: P=2/3, I=4, X=3, A=1, R=5  Total: 18
   While Up is where Pixar really goes off the sentimental rails, Toy Story 3 also packs a tremendous emotional wallop. Its core themes of growing up and moving on are like Boyhood with toys. While I remembered enjoying it the first time around, I thought it suffered from multiple endings; however, on rewatch, the plot seemed far tighter than I imagined it. Perhaps it’s like how the way home always seems shorter somehow? Anyway, despite duplicating the framework of Toy Story 2, this edition works much better for me because we’ve come to know and love these characters over multiple films. And, while it gets quite dark in places (damn, Pixar can be nihilist), I found it far less tense than Inside Out.

6. A Bug’s Life (1998). Score: P=2/4, I=2, X=5 A=2, R=3  Total: 18
   I remembered liking this when I saw it, but was wary of a rewatch since it never seems to be high on anyone’s personal Pixar list. Yet it turned out to be one of the films that kept me the most engaged. The outcast-makes-good Seven Samurai plotline is something we’ve seen many times before, but it’s a classic for a reason. And to see it play out in this beautifully rendered world of tiny bugs is a delight. With a clear villain (not Pixar’s strong suit), A Bug’s Life makes for a great story of teaming up against bullies. The many secondary characters are rather one-note, but the voice cast, led by Dave Foley, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, and Kevin Spacey, is top-notch. Plus, Denis Leary as a ladybug is too awesome for words.

7. WALL*E (2008). Score: P=3/2, I=3, X=2, A=4, R=3  Total: 17
   Like Up, this is a film that many people rank very highly. Normally I’m a sucker for a post-apocalyptic tale and the first ten minutes or so are very cool, but then EVE arrives. Rewatching this today I realize what a frightening depiction of women she is and that WALL*E is not much more than a “nice guy” stalker for most of the film. Combine that with the fact that the second half is a mess that gets bogged down in preachy, heavy-handed commentary on consumerism and socialism, and yeah, I have an even lower opinion of this one than I started (even though I actually liked the EVE–WALL*E couple more this time around). Note: The sound design is absolutely f*cking brilliant in this film.

8. Brave (2012). Score: P=1/2, I=1, X=5, A=5, R=2  Total: 16
   Brave inevitably gets placed very low on many “best of” Pixar lists; however, I think that may be because its story structure resembles standard animated fare more than some of Pixar’s other recent creative leaps. And, it must be said, most of the lists I found were written by men, so that may play a role as well. While Pixar seems not to have known quite what to do with its first female protagonist, the narrative is actually pretty tight. Rather than the usual action/humor mix, this was more of an old-fashioned swashbuckler adventure, like The Adventures of Robin Hood or The Court Jester. And the visuals are gorgeous: Brave is really right up there with Ratatouille and the opening of WALL*E for the richness and texture of its animated world.

9. Toy Story 2 (1999). Score: P=2/3, I=3, X=2, A=1, R=3  Total: 14
   This is where Pixar starts to lean a bit too heavily on the fleeting innocence of childhood theme that it introduced in the original Toy Story. The second time around, I was remarkably underwhelmed during “When She Loved Me.” It really stops the movie in its tracks and is not necessary to the plot. Of course, the plots of the Toy Story films are all fairly similar—the toys have to make it back home—but this builds nicely on the world set out in the original. However, I think the film suffers somewhat from having the toys separated for so long. There are probably more obvious laughs here than in the original, but it doesn’t seem as cohesive. As happens with many Pixar films, it sort of falls apart in the third act.

10. Up (2009). Score: P=2/2, I=2, X=1, A=3, R=2  Total: 12
    Up is an odd film. For many it’s Pixar’s best, but I’m really at a loss to see why. The first ten minutes is manipulative filmmaking at its worst. And, even if you think it’s a masterpiece montage, it’s a very small part of the film. Is there any other movie whose quality we judge based on so little? The rest is disparate pieces that don’t fit together. Why is the adventurer the villain? If he’s smart enough to invent talking dog collars, how can he not find that damn bird himself? And don’t even get me started on the inconsistency of the cluster balloon physics. I like Russell and Carl well enough, and Dug is sweet and idiotic, but there’s just not enough humor here to offset the fact that every character is more poorly developed than the one who died ten minutes in.

11. Inside Out (2015). Score: P=4/1, I=1, X=3, A=2, R=1  Total: 12
    Did I say Up was manipulative filmmaking at its worst? No, this is. There are lots of jokes, but nothing holding this one together for me. The underlying premise could be really interesting, but once it gets going the plot is completely predictable and the world-building is all over the map. Joy is annoying and Riley is a blank slate so it was hard for me to connect with either one. The most appealing character is probably Bing Bong, but he is a complete retread of the cheap sentimentality and nostalgia that Pixar has already overused. Also, for a film centered on a young girl, it has plenty of gender issues. And for those of us with a fear of heights, it is terrifying at times. Maybe it’s director Pete Docter, whose previous outings were Monsters, Inc. and Up, which both fall near the bottom of this list; I think I just don’t connect with his films.

12. Cars (2006). Score: P=1/3, I=2, X=2, A=1, R=3  Total: 12
    I remembered liking this when I saw it, but, like A Bug’s Life, it never seems to be high on anyone’s list. The film is actually very sweet (a fish-out-of-water rom com combined with a sports movie) and I’d be happier to rewatch this than many other films above, but it’s just average on a creative level. As someone who loves a good road trip through the West, I did appreciate the visuals and the Route 66 nostalgia, but the film takes twenty-five minutes to get to Radiator Springs and that was about fifteen minutes too long for me. The closing credits were very clever (the cars watching “car” versions of Toy Story and Monsters, Inc.). Also, I love that they included the Car Talk guys.

13. Monsters, Inc. (2001). Score: P=4/2, I=2, X=1, A=1, R=2  Total: 12
    This Baby Boom–Three Men and a Baby mashup was never one of my favorites. I appreciate the premise more on rewatch but it’s just not as funny as it should be. And the action scene with the door chase goes on far too long. Definitely the most “for kids” of all of the films on this list. Plus, as with Toy Story, this is primarily a male buddy picture and the attitude towards the female characters is retrograde at best. At least it ends on a more hopeful, less melancholy note than other Pixar childhood innocence movies, which is nice. I did tear up a bit when Sulley says bye to Boo.

Honorable Mentions

Best Ensemble: Finding Nemo

Best Visuals: Ratatouille

Best Score: The Incredibles

Favorite Character: Edna Mode, The Incredibles

Scariest Character: Baby from Toy Story 3

Most Overrated Film: Inside Out

Most Underrated Film: A Bug’s Life

Most Feminist: Brave

Most Tear-Inducing Rewatch: Toy Story 3

Most Conflicting Rewatch: WALL*E

Most Surprising Detail: Sally’s tramp stamp in Cars

Best Pixar Callback: Boo’s toys in Monsters, Inc., which include Cowgirl Jessie and Nemo

Best Closing Credits: The original fake outtakes from A Bug’s Life

In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little, yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face, is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. But there are times when a critic truly risks something, and that is in the discovery and defense of the new.

—Anton Ego in Ratatouille

My rankings above are just that, my rankings. Please feel free to add your own in the comments below.

For my discussion of sexism and gender issues in Pixar films, see Pixar’s “Female” Problem.

*I have never seen either Monsters University or Cars 2 but, given that the originals didn’t rank very high on my list, and everything I’ve read about them leads me to believe that I haven’t missed anything, I didn’t include them in my Pixar lineup.

Pixar’s “Female” Problem

Tags

Feminism, Pixar

When I set out to rewatch and rank Pixar’s filmography in the wake of my disappointment with their latest release, Inside Out, I already knew that female characters weren’t Pixar’s strong suit. However, I didn’t realize quite how bad the situation was until I watched these films in quick succession. Almost two-thirds of Pixar films don’t even pass the Bechdel Test*—a sad state of affairs for movies geared towards children, especially films where it would be relatively easy to gender characters female rather than male. Really, would it be so hard to make a toy pig or toy dinosaur female?

But it was with the one-two punch of WALL*E and Up (more on these below) that my feminist rage really kicked in, and I knew I would have to address the issue of women and girls in the Pixar universe before finalizing any rankings of their films. Because Pixar’s problem goes beyond the simple absence of women; at times, Pixar’s representation of all things female is downright frightening. And I’m not just talking about “button-nose syndrome” here.

Below is a feminist look at the thirteen Pixar films I rewatched, as well as the score that will be used in that category in my forthcoming rankings. This score is based on a combination of Bechdel results, overall number and presentation of female characters, how closely characters adhere to the gender binary, and the film’s underlying messages and themes.

Toy Story (1995). While the narrative is not sexist per se, Toy Story is very boy-centric and a major Bechdel Test fail since just one voiced toy is female (Bo Peep) and her role is very minor, serving primarily as a romantic interest for Woody. What is particularly grating about Pixar’s character choices is that so many of the toys could have easily been given female voices—among the main toy sidekicks are a pig, a dinosaur, and a dog. In reading about Pixar, I saw that Joss Whedon’s original script idea called for Barbie to be the toy to save Buzz and Woody from Sid’s house, but there was some issue with Mattel. While I liked the ultimate choice to use the mutant toys, having Barbie in that role would have greatly improved the female presence here.
X Chromosome Score: 1

A Bug’s Life (1998). Perhaps in order to make up for the very boy-centric Toy Story, this second outing by Pixar has a whole host of great female characters, with three female ants taking a leadership role: Phyllis Diller as the Queen, Julia Louis-Dreyfus as next-in-line Princess Atta, and a young Hayden Panettiere as Dot, Princess Atta’s younger sister and de facto leader of the Blueberries. Two members of the circus troupe are also female, the gypsy moth (Madeline Kahn) and the black widow spider (Bonnie Hunt). The film’s underlying message of working and standing together against a common enemy supports this matriarchal bent.
X Chromosome Score: 5

Females rule in A Bug’s Life. Of course, they are ants.

Toy Story 2 (1999). The introduction of new toys in this sequel gives us a few more female characters (Cowgirl Jessie, Mrs. Potato Head, Barbie), but this film still fails the Bechdel test easily since neither Bo Peep (the one female toy from the original Toy Story) nor Mrs. Potato Head go along when the other toys leave to save Woody. Furthermore, Barbie as presented here is no feminist icon. As for Jessie, she whines about just wanting to be loved, tries to guilt Woody into staying with them, and needs to be rescued in the final chase sequence—I kinda sorta hated her in this movie. Luckily, all three new characters will redeem themselves in Toy Story 3.
X Chromosome Score: 2

Monsters, Inc. (2001). On its surface, this is an innocuous male buddy picture similar to Toy Story. However, on closer inspection, the plot and presentation of the female characters is somewhat concerning. Basically, we see two men who can’t handle it when a little girl invades their very masculine world. Boo barely speaks, but is viewed as toxic and a danger. The two most prominent women at the factory are Celia Mae (Jennifer Tilly), who manages to fill both the stereotypical role of “receptionist” and “clueless girlfriend” and is literally a Gorgon, and Roz, a raspy bureaucratic slug who, on top of everything, is voiced by a man (Bob Peterson)! So, although most of the characters are monsters, not human, and could have been voiced by anyone, even one of the female voices isn’t a female actor. Sigh.
X Chromosome Score: 1

Finding Nemo (2003). While Finding Nemo doesn’t technically pass the Bechdel test, it does at least have a number of memorable female characters, notably Dory (Ellen DeGeneres), who accompanies Marlin on his quest to find Nemo, as well as Peach (Allison Janney) and Deb (Vicki Lewis), who live in the dentist’s fish tank. It also features two male caregivers, with Marlin the clownfish and Crush the sea turtle, which is all too rare in Hollywood. While one might argue that Dory’s character is somewhat problematic, she is the heart and soul of this film. The non-traditional heroine and non-traditional families bump this one slightly up the X chromosome scale.
X Chromosome Score: 3

The Incredibles (2004). Although The Incredibles relies on plenty of gendered stereotypes, all four (!!) main female characters—Elastigirl (Holly Hunter), Edna (Brad Bird), Violet (Sarah Vowell), and Mirage (Elizabeth Peña)—are portrayed as very capable and able to hold their own. Despite subtly, and sometimes not so subtly, reinforcing patriarchal roles throughout the film, this movie gets mucho points for finally giving some kick-ass women equal time. And I love Edna, even though she is voiced by a man, instead of Lily Tomlin as planned.
X Chromosome Score: 4

“My God, PULL YOURSELF TOGETHER!!!” Preach, Edna.

Cars (2006). Like the original Toy Story, Cars is not particularly sexist, but very much a “boy” story and a boy’s world. Sally Carrera (Bonnie Hunt)  is really only here as a love interest for Lightning McQueen, but, hey, at least she’s a lawyer. And, unlike Toy Story, Cars does pass the Bechdel test, but only by a hair, in the courtroom scene. In short, another male friendship movie from Pixar. Yawn.
X Chromosome Score: 2

Ratatouille (2007). Despite a great speech from Colette (Janeane Garofalo) about sexism in the restaurant industry, this movie fails the Bechdel Test in a big way. Even taking into consideration that a restaurant kitchen is a very masculine world, couldn’t they at least have made Émile be Rémy’s sister instead of brother? Or, say, featured the woman critic shown early on in the film, instead of the male Anton Ego? Heck, make Rémy the rat female—now that would have been truly groundbreaking and a great allegory for the difficulties female chefs have had trying to break into the industry.
X Chromosome Score: 1

WALL*E (2008). Rewatching WALL*E, I realized what a frightening depiction of women it presents. It’s every tech bro’s nightmare about women come to life. The first section on Earth, which is generally the only part of this film people praise, shows us a lonely collector guy whose world is turned upside down when a women arrives. WALL*E falls in love with the cold, virginal white EVE at first sight, and then basically stalks her while she does her job. When he finally gets her to his home, she proceeds to destroy his things just by being herself and reacting as programmed, then, once he gives her what she wants (the plant), she shuts down completely and eventually leaves him. He doesn’t even say her name right! Still, there is no arguing that EVE is capable, strong, and takes charge, which is somewhat redeeming.
X Chromosome Score: 2

No, WALL*E‘s portrayal of women isn’t problematic at all.

Up (2009). Let’s see, death of female partner or relation as plot device? Check. Almost complete absence of female voice actors? Check. Needless to say, Up fails Bechdel in a major way. How telling is it that young Russell doesn’t even realize the bird is female! And I hate, hate, hate the miscarriage. It’s totally not related to the plot and makes me feel like they had to explain why they didn’t have kids. Ugh.
X Chromosome Score: 1

Toy Story 3 (2010). Yay, finally a Toy Story movie that passes the Bechdel Test! Well, barely. But there are far more female characters in this outing, so that was a refreshing change. Also, the characters of Jessie, Barbie, and even Mrs. Potato Head, somewhat redeem themselves after Toy Story 2. I can’t quite decide how I feel about Ken’s representation. On the one hand, he helps break the gender binary, but on the other hand, how much are we supposed to be laughing at him and what he represents? Still, he’s an extremely progressive character for a Pixar film. Also, notice that both children who “cruelly” abandoned their toys in Toy Story 2 and Toy Story 3 are girls.
X Chromosome Score: 3

Brave (2012). While I thought the characters in Brave were rather flat, it is great to finally see Pixar put women front and center. Sure, one of them turns into a “godless killing machine” (™ Stephen Colbert), but this film deals fairly well with the expectations and constraints put upon women, by both society and family. I also liked the all-too-rare depiction of the mother-daughter relationship and that, although Merida is shown to be courageous and an excellent archer, ultimately it is diplomacy and repairing what is broken that wins the day, not violence or might.
X Chromosome Score: 5

Merida takes aim at the patriarchy in Brave.

Inside Out (2015). I’ve already expressed my thoughts on the sexism of Inside Out, especially the fact that Pixar tries to make Riley’s character as boy-friendly as possible. (Really, you could make Riley a male character with hardly any changes.) Furthermore, the protagonist, Joy, is like a manic bridezilla. I’ve seen commentary to the effect that Inside Out represents the societal pressures on women to be happy all the time and, well, okay, but then perhaps as long as they were making some of Riley’s emotions male they should have chosen Joy, the alpha control freak, to be a man. That could have turned this film into a great statement on the patriarchy. But, instead we get another frightening Pixar view of women—empty vessels guided by emotions they can’t control and don’t even understand.
X Chromosome Score:  2

For my complete Pixar rankings, see Ranking Pixar, or, Let the Arguments Begin.

* To pass the Bechdel Test, a movie needs to have 1) at least two women in it, 2) who talk to each other, 3) about something besides a man.

Inside Out: Killjoy Edition

Tags

Pixar

So, I’ve been mulling over Inside Out, the latest offering from Pixar Studios, which I saw a couple of weeks ago. The short version is: I really didn’t like it. It seems every critic has been going out of their way to praise this admittedly high-concept film and I’m just not seeing it. In fact, the more I’ve thought about it, the more problems I find. I know I can be hard to impress, but I’ve loved plenty of other Pixar films, so why not this one? Here are some of the reasons I’ve come up with.

Attention: Spoilers ahead!

1) Poor Storytelling. The world-building is all over the map. There is a lot that is not explained and/or completely falls apart when examined closely. Just one example is when Riley doesn’t just lose interest in hockey, she forgets how to play. What? That makes no sense given the parameters about core memories and emotions set out at the beginning. Some of the set pieces, such as abstract thought and how dreams are created, are very well done, but South Park already did a three-episode “Imaginationland” arc and here it would have been nice to see Pixar go for thoughtful rather than clever.

2) Disgust. While I love the basic premise of this film, I think it really fails by including Disgust as one of the five emotions in charge of Headquarters. Joy, Sadness, Anger, Fear—these are all primal emotions that make sense to me. I realize that there is all sorts of disagreement about how many basic emotions we have, but if you are going to include another one beyond these four, why not something more “positive”? Where is love? or surprise? Since the emotions have such clichéd reactions, it’s hard to connect with them as it is. At the very least, including something like trust, pride, or even guilt might have resulted in more balance and made Joy seem less manic.

3) Negativity. Besides portraying mostly “negative” emotions, the film’s quest is a dark and negative one. They are not simply striving to get back to hearth and home; rather, for every delay or failure, there are severe negative consequences. Like, really severe. Our reward for this extreme tension? In the end, we’re right back where we started. Nothing is gained, except the knowledge that “sadness is okay” (Really? Our protagonist control freak learns that maybe some of the other emotions can contribute? Shouldn’t that be inherent in this system? See above re world-building problems.)

4) Sentimentality. The film hits the audience over the head with cheap sentimentality. Because Riley seems to be completely controlled by her emotions and the protagonist is actually Joy, the film can’t be the coming-of-age story it seems to be shooting for. And, by definition, the core emotions are very one-sided, so ironically, they provide very little emotional weight. Enter the über-sentimental Bing-Bong. Bing-Bong is a good character, and actually fleshed out far better than the core emotions, but his arc goes on for far too long and, if you’ve seen numerous other Pixar films, is extremely predictable. Pixar needs to stop going to the old-plaything nostalgia well.

4) Phobias. If the basic quest narrative isn’t darkly intense enough for you, this film may also be difficult to watch if you have a fear of heights or clowns. If you found the trailer for The Walk terrifying, as I did, this movie will have you squirming in your seat more than once. At many points, watching this movie was simply not a pleasant experience for me.

5) Sexism. There has been a lot of ballyhoo about this being the story of a young girl. However, it’s like Pixar bent over backwards to make Riley’s character as boy-friendly as possible. In addition to her unisex name and her emotions being both genders (which is not true of her parents’ emotions, or, say, the boy’s mind we see inside later in the film), one of her five personality islands is hockey. Now, there could have been a plot-related reason for this that made sense—for example, if she couldn’t play in San Francisco because the sport is not that popular in California—but there isn’t any reason this couldn’t have been soccer or any other sport or activity. I’m not saying girls can’t want to play hockey, but it seems like an odd, deliberately “masculine” choice. Furthermore, much regarding the depiction of the parents is very gendered and the “cool girl” moment of the wife loving the face-painting made me think Pixar is going backwards in this regard.

Don’t get me wrong, Inside Out is gorgeous to look at. And the voice work is top notch. The problem is with the plot, not the presentation, the execution, not the concept. Some things I really liked:

1) Sadness. A great character and a terrific performance. (ETA: Since this review, I have seen it pointed out that the image of sadness as a dumpy woman with glasses is problematic at best. And, yes, how did I not notice that? See above re sexism.)

2) The running gag with the newspapers. I would have liked to see more about the inner workings of Headquarters and their interactions with other divisions like Dream Productions. However, because a lot of it didn’t make much sense, maybe this would have been difficult.

3) The end credits: I wish I had seen that movie.

The premise for this film was stellar, but, by having the major storyline combine the gut-wrenching heartbreak of the opening of Up and the anxiety of the finale of Toy Story 3, Pixar failed this viewer. The film was intense and heartbreaking, but not in a good way. I can’t imagine kids liking this at all so I look forward to seeing the audience reception of this one. Myself, well, I mostly just want to rewatch the Pixar films that did it better (ETA: So I did).