Ratatouille (Brad Bird, 2007)

[justeleblanc]

The preview's up on apple.com/trailers.

Does anyone know anything about this? I noticed that Brad Bird was one of the directors, which of course sparked my interest.

[dekadetia]

The preview's up on apple.com/trailers.

Does anyone know anything about this? I noticed that Brad Bird was one of the directors, which of course sparked my interest.

Well, it sounds like the voice of the title character is Patton Oswalt, an interesting choice if that's the case. I think the animation looks lovely, as usual. I haven't seen Cars yet, but I have to say that I'm far more interested in this. And the fact that the film's title will teach America how to pronounce the French "ouille" suffix is a nifty bonus.

[Antoine Doinel]

Yeah, I have to agree and say I'm way more excited to see this. I will probably end up seeing Cars, but the overall premise doesn't thrill me that much. The teaser for Ratatouille on the other hand is funny, beautiful and the story has a great concept. Moreover, it doesn't have Larry The Cable Guy.

[Monsieur Verdoux]

This is going to be stiff compertition for Aradman Animations... seeing that they are doing a Rat movie also, called Flushed Away.

Although there is a years difference.

[Monsieur Verdoux]

The Trailer for Flushed away can be found here by the way:

http://imdb.com/title/tt0424095/trailer ... 27485-10-2

[Dear Catastrophe Totoro]

Cars is better than a movie with Larry the Cable Guy aught to be. Actually, it was the first movie of the year that I actually enjoyed. I love how Pixar makes going to the movies an event again, with teasers, short films, and entertaining end credits (which is the funniest part of Cars, sad to say).

Anyway, Ratatouille looks interesting, but the preview is more of a teaser than anything. I'm thinking that maybe the whole co-director deal is Pixar's way of promoting and training from within, especially since Lasseter is now in charge of Disney Animation, not to mention his lofty new position as head of Disney Imagineering (and lets face it, if our job was making up Disneyland rides all day, how much free time would we really have?). Then again, IMDB says that Lasseter is directing Toy Story 3, which sort of confuses me. I read a few months ago that the day Lasseter started work within Disney, he canceled the two sequels that were started as a negotiating tactic by Satan, er, Michael Eisner (the tactic being, renew your contract or we'll take your beloved characters and drag them through the mud). Anyone know anything about this?

Glad to see Bird stayed with Pixar. After watching the bonus features on The Incredibles, I got the impression that he missed hand-drawn animation a little.

[Matt]

I'm thinking that maybe the whole co-director deal is Pixar's way of promoting and training from within...

There's no co-director. Jan Pinkava was replaced by Brad Bird.

[Jeff]

I'm thinking that maybe the whole co-director deal is Pixar's way of promoting and training from within...

There's no co-director. Jan Pinkava was replaced by Brad Bird.

Pinkava does end up with a tiny co-director credit in the end credits only. He also receives the first of three "story by" credits in the main titles.

I saw this tonight, and thought it was sort of wonderful. It's more visually accomplished than anything Pixar's done before, and that's saying something. There are amazing "camera moves" that would be written up in American Cinematographer if this was a live-action film.

It has a more leisurely pace than typical animated fare, and I think it's a more sophisticated film for it. There is such attention to detail that I need to see it again to catch everything, and there's also a lot to love for foodies like me. There's a lot more here for adults than for children.

The coup de grâce is a logo just before the MPAA's in the end credits which has a cool cartoon man and says something like: "Genuine Animation! No motion capture or other shortcuts were used in the making of this film."

[justeleblanc]

I've been impressed with everything Pixar's done, especially when mixed with Brad Bird. I really look forward to seeing this.

The hand gestures of the rat are just brilliant. How he washes his hands in the water bubble in the sink before he starts cooking, how he modestly admits that he can cook (both from the previews).... when was the last time a studio had such a brand name that their new film was a happening? Was Disney still like this by the time of their 8th film?

[malcolm1980]

One of the things why I love PIXAR is their non-reliance on big-name stars to do voices. It really irritates me when certain other studios (*coughsDreamworksAnimationcoughs*) try to get big-named stars to do voices in their animated films and topbill their names above the title in big-bold letters.

The lead voice performers are Patton Oswalt and Lou Romano, a standup comic who's best known to general audiences for playing second-banana to Kevin James in The King of Queens and one of Brad Bird's key crew members (a character designer, I think). Far from being marquee names.

Early reviews of this film are raves, btw. Looking forward to it.

[lord_clyde]

I saw two full length clips on cable at work and I was really impressed. The rat washing his hands was a nice touch, I agree. And the whole sequence where he enters the kitchen to fix the sauce in the first place is a tour de force, sort of like the scene in The Little Mermaid when Sebastian is running through the kitchen to escape the chef, it's like that, only on steroids. Maybe not steroids, but it's great.
The second clip was where the dishwasher is about to toss the rat into the river and discovers the rat can cook ("Don't be so modest! You're a rat!) and they forge their alliance.
This'll be a good one, can't wait.

[davebert]

I caught a sneak preview of this last weekend and so far it is my second favorite movie of the year. Would have been my first pick, but my fiancee's wallet got stolen during the screening so it cost us a lot of money. Which is too bad, since we both initially left the theater absolutely buoyant.

It made it painfully clear to me how all this talk of Pixar getting stiffer competition from these other CGI animation studios is a load of crap. Yes, Shrek 3 may have sophisticated animation, and yes, kids probably can't tell --or dont care about--the difference between Malaysian outsourced rush work (Hoodwinked) and Pixar. But to me, Brad Bird has been an absolutely astounding writer/director, and their stories will always remain the key asset. Rather than bankrupt postmodern riffs on fairy tales (and seriously, I wonder if kids even know the tales these days enough to care about their spoofing, or if anyone really thinks fairy tales are a load of snot that ought to have some of their wind taken out through hee-larious mockery), Bird has again dealt with some of the same auteur themes, like growing up, accepting family and going through an identity crisis, and Pixar's produced yet another film that actually hit emotionally. Oh, and it's pretty to look at.

And though I agree about getting no-name actors, there is no doubt in my mind that the film is also helped through the presence of Peter O'Toole as the "villain" food critic Antone Ego. Not that we can really claim O'Toole in the same 'bring in the crowd' category as jamming Eddie Murphy and Sarah Jessica Parker together, but it was great to hear his voice. I think all film fans should get shivers when hearing O'Toole-as-Ego give a speech about the nature and importance of food criticism. Replace "food" with "film," and it's pretty much my exact take.

I hope this film makes a boatload of money, so as to reassure Disney they were right to spend a half billion dollars on Pixar. My guess is that a film about a rat and the finer points of French cooking won't have that same immediate pull as a movie about talking toys, but I really hope it does.

[patrick]

I think the most important thing about Pixar is the fact that not only do the parents want to see their films, but adults without kids do too. How many of us childless Criterion Forum posters saw Happily Never After, The Barnyard, Open Season or Hoodwinked?

Shrek is definitely the closest thing Pixar has to competition, and even there it doesn't seem like Dreamworks cares about keeping any sort of standards with that franchise, just cranking out more movies so they can make more tie-in products. However, I did think Over The Hedge was surprisingly good, mostly due to the voice cast and the fact that it took some digs at consumer culture.

If Pixar has anything to worry about, it's Disney's own crappy CGI animation division that churns out dreck like Valiant and The Wild. Since Pixar's name is so tied up with Disney, that's the most direct threat to the Pixar brand name, since I'm sure plenty of people thought that the people behind Finding Nemo were the same people who made Chicken Little.

[souvenir]

Shrek is definitely the closest thing Pixar has to competition...

The Aardman films are near Pixar's level as well, in my opinion. I even preferred Flushed Away to Cars last year, despite being less fun than their two stop-motion features.

[patrick]

I forgot about Aardman, their films are wonderful although Flushed Away felt somewhat compromised by pressure from Dreamworks to score a big US hit.

[Jeff]

I caught a sneak preview of this last weekend and so far it is my second favorite movie of the year.

It occupies the same spot on my list. I posted my take here a few days ago, and the more I think about the film, the more I like it. I can't wait to see it again.

I think all film fans should get shivers when hearing O'Toole-as-Ego give a speech about the nature and importance of food criticism. Replace "food" with "film," and it's pretty much my exact take.

This was one of my favorite scenes too, and without giving too much away, I also loved what happened when Ego tasted the ratataouille.

I hope this film makes a boatload of money, so as to reassure Disney they were right to spend a half billion dollars on Pixar. My guess is that a film about a rat and the finer points of French cooking won't have that same immediate pull as a movie about talking toys, but I really hope it does.

I certainly hope it does well too, but I am somewhat concerned that children won't like it nearly as much as I did. The pace and humor required a little more patience than the average eight-year-old can muster. Hopefully the bits of slapstick will be enough to keep them coming back. Oh, and Disney paid $7.4 billion to acquire Pixar. Go Steve Jobs!

[davebert]

I think the most important thing about Pixar is the fact that not only do the parents want to see their films, but adults without kids do too. How many of us childless Criterion Forum posters saw Happily Never After, The Barnyard, Open Season or Hoodwinked?

Well, unfortunately I've seen all the below, because I work at a video store and wanted to see what the kids were up to these days (turns out, they're up to no good). But I agree with that idea of Pixar, because the preview screening I went to was 80% older teens and adults, with only a few actual kids in attendance. I think it's important to support the creation of adult animation, not in the Fritz the Cat sense, but in terms of animated films that don't deliberately pander towards children with fart jokes and obnoxious pop music. I think that any child who actually watches Ratatouille will enjoy themselves immensely, my only worry is that actually going to these films requires the kind of extenseive cross-promotion and nagging/fit throwing-towards-parents that just might not be there for a "French" film. In this case, I hope it is the parents who drag their kids.

Besides, some culture would be good for the brats.

[patrick]

Well, unfortunately I've seen all the below, because I work at a video store and wanted to see what the kids were up to these days (turns out, they're up to no good).

I work at a video store too, but luckily I have a boss with two young kids to tell me how horrible most movies geared towards kids are these days. I've gotten to the point where I just tune it out if it doesn't have the Pixar or Aardman name on it, since everything else seems to be variations on whatever's popular at the moment (penguins, escaped zoo animals, fractured fairy tales).

The most interesting thing my boss has told me about taking his kids to the movies is that they've never not liked a movie, which kind of sums up why kids have no problem watching a movie like Everyone's Hero. However, after seeing Finding Nemo and The Incredibles in a movie theater, no one else seems to be making movies that dazzle and enchant kids like Pixar does. It's an amazing thing to be in the middle of a theater filled with kids under 10 and see them be absolutely enraptured by a movie.

[toiletduck!]

A couple of years back I was left with the task of babysitting my roommate's girlfriend's seven or eight year old daughter while they took a much needed night out. Aware that TV is nature's nanny, I popped in Spirited Away to kill some time, but got caught up myself.

We sat in silence through the whole thing, the same look of glee plastered on our faces. I wish someone had been there to take a picture.

Kids'll dig on much more than we give them credit for. But they'll settle for less in a heartbeat. I'm with davebert -- hopefully some mums and pops out there start to take an interest in their children's good taste.

-Toilet Dcuk

[patrick]

I, for one, feel lucky that I was just young enough to see the late 80's renaissance in Disney animation in the theaters, as well as their theatrical reissues of Snow White, The Jungle Book and Fantasia. What happened to Disney trotting out their classics from time to time?

[Antoine Doinel]

I forgot about Aardman, their films are wonderful although Flushed Away felt somewhat compromised by pressure from Dreamworks to score a big US hit.

Speaking of Aardman, they have just announced their next projects. From IMDB:

Cat-Burglar Movie To Star Cats

Numerous movies about cat burglars have been produced in the past -- for example, the classic To Catch a Thief with Cary Grant in 1955 and the forgettable Burglar with Whoopi Goldberg in 1987 -- but Britain's Aardman Features announced Monday that it is planning a heist movie in which the burglars are actually cats. The claymation film from Wallace & Gromit director Steve Box is said to be a kind of take-off of Ocean's Eleven. Another feature, based on two books from Gideon Defoe's Pirates! series, will reportedly be directed by Aardman cofounder Peter Lord. Aardman recently signed a new deal with Sony Pictures after being dumped by DreamWorks Animation last year. In a statement, Sarah Smith, the newly appointed creative director of Aardman, said, "I think there's a great opportunity to excite audiences by raising the stakes in terms of the quality, intelligence and variety of stories our animated films tell and the genres they inhabit."

[patrick]

Since Disney's acquisition of Pixar and the installation of John Lasseter and Ed Catmull as heads of Disney animation, morale at the Burbank studio has tumbled and some employees are privately hoping that the upcoming Pixar-produced Ratatouille flops, an unnamed Disney executive has told Disney watcher Jim Hill. On his website, Hill today (Monday) posted an email from the exec that says, "There are a lot of people here who are now actively hoping for a Pixar backlash. The transition has not been handled well, due mostly to the great care & attention that's being lavished on Pixar. Every attempt has been made to make sure that that animation studio's creative culture have been kept intact. Meanwhile, Disney Studio's own unique traditions & operating systems are being plowed under." Meanwhile, Disney has confirmed an earlier Jim Hill report that it will no longer produce straight-to-DVD sequels of its animated features. (IMDB)

I, for one, am sad that the people behind Cinderella III: A Twist in Time are not getting enough respect.

[abuckley89]

I, for one, am sad that the people behind Cinderella III: A Twist in Time are not getting enough respect.

I'm a little out of it, but I don't know if that's sarcasm or not, because when you go to the store the DVD says "you will love this film or your money back."

So yeah... maybe it's secretly brilliant.

[davebert]

One of the things why I love PIXAR is their non-reliance on big-name stars to do voices. It really irritates me when certain other studios (*coughsDreamworksAnimationcoughs*) try to get big-named stars to do voices in their animated films and topbill their names above the title in big-bold letters.

See now, you're being a fool, and I'll let Owen Gleiberman from Entertainment Weekly's lukewarm review explain why:

As a story, however, "Ratatouille" is fun without very much surprise. It's like a fusty old Disney cartoon retrofitted with the Pixar sheen. The lack of celebrity voices is a major drawback, since Remy ends up with very little personality. Contrast him with, say, the bad-boy Owen Wilson speedster in "Cars," and you're seeing the difference between a hero with spice and a bland one who happens to know where the spice rack is.

Never has a "B" grade review ever made me boil quite as much.

[Kirkinson]

you're seeing the difference between a hero with spice and a bland one who happens to know where the spice rack is.

Is there a Bad Reviewers' University where all these writers go to learn how to construct such astonishing "puns"?