I think I have been effectually spoiled by Disney and Pixar animated movies. While it's not unknown that Disney and Pixar both produce almost all of the most well-rounded, well-written, well-voiced, best animated movies around... what wasn't known is that almost everyone else is serving us crap on a Pixar-looking-platter. Disney gave us Zootopia earlier this year, arguably the best animated movie of the year or the last few years. Pixar gave us Finding Dory a month ago, arguably the best animated movie of the summer. Universal's Illumination company only holds a few animated films under their belt (Despicable Me 1&2, The Lorax, Minions), but it's becoming increasingly clear that they are no Disney. They are no Pixar. They do not care about providing the highest quality of family entertainment. They are mired in animated mediocrity and seem totally fine remaining there. While The Secret Life of Pets had so many chances and opportunities to be a wonderful family film, with lazy writing comes a very underwhelming film that I was hoping to love.
Max (Louis CK) a dog in New York lives happily with his owner Katie (Ellie Kemper). Every day she leaves for work and he sits and waits for her as the other pets around the apartment complex hang out with one another. There's wiener dog Buddy (Hannibal Burress), giant pug Mel (Bobby Moynahan), a fat cat Chloe (Lake Bell), and froofy Pomeranian who is also in love with Max, Gidget (Jenny Slate). They hang out and get into very minimal mischief while their owners are away and get unbelievably excited once they return. Max's world is turned upside-down when Katie brings home giant dog Duke (Eric Stonestreet) from the pound. The two immediately don't get along and try to sabotage one another's chances of getting to live comfortably with Katie. However, while trying to sabotage one another, they get lost in the city, nabbed by dog catchers, chased by a maniacal bunny rabbit (Kevin Hart), and thrown off the Brooklyn Bridge. Meanwhile, during their adventure, the two learn to accept one another and try to work together to get home.
I really really wanted to like this movie. The trailer had me hooked and the premise (which admittedly is just Toy Story with pets) seemed to be ripe for a perfect balance of humor and heart. I have wondered since leaving the theater why they went with the title The Secret Life of Pets. This, to me, infers that the film will be about the lives of pets when human's aren't looking (much like the lives of toys when humans aren't in the room). While the first ten minutes of the film (the best part of the film) are about that, the rest is just two dogs trying to get home. There's not really any 'secret lives' going on that we're getting a special window into seeing. The secret lives aren't all that interesting. Animals talk... they sneak our food sometimes... they hang out with one another... that's about it. What could've really been a fun and clever look into the question 'what does my dog do all day when I'm not home?' (the answer is sleep and tear up your shoes) is briefly shown to us and then dismissed.
I know it's not fair to compare all animated movies to a Disney or Pixar movie. That's like trying to compare all movies involving space to Star Wars-- it's not fair. But they have set the bar very high and there are reasons that they succeed when others fail or pale in comparison. One aspect that Pixar takes close care to make perfect is when they set up a world for us, they use everything they can in that world in the most clever way possible. Finding Nemo didn't just feature a fish looking for another fish with the help of a third fish. It featured an entirely populated ocean with specific nuance from every aquatic character. Toy Story uses every toy in a perfectly nuanced way-- potato head wasn't just there to make angry quips, he moved his face around, his back butt-cover opened dropping out replacement pieces, he takes his arm off to extend his other arm-- THAT is what makes great animation. Not just having a Mr. Potato Head in the film because he's recognizable, but utilizing him in a way that make sense he's in the movie. The Secret Life of Pets doesn't really do this. We've got a few dogs in the movie that are visually cute, but their nuance boils down to the dog likes the green ball, the dog slides his butt on the carpet, the cat likes to eat cake. There's nothing really all that clever about it. The one character I felt had this was a hawk named Tiberius (Albert Brooks) who had a predatory instinct to eat the cats and dogs, but so desperately wants friends he has to fight his instinctual urges. This was funny. A Kevin Hart-ed angry bunny rabbit yelling and screaming obnoxiously was not.
The other aspect that Pixar and Disney effectively nail is all of the action of the movie goes to serve a bigger picture in the plot. Characters don't just run around screaming and yelling and falling down for a cheap laugh. If there is a chase scene or an escape scene or anything involving action and conflict, it's quick-witted and competent. This film forewent the any actual subtlety and went straight for loud noises, goofy voices, and people getting hurt in comical ways. This, to me, is treating kids (and people) like they're stupid. This, to me, is showing that they believe kids will only laugh and understand something is funny if they've fallen down or gotten hurt. Pixar has never treated their audience this way. Instead of taking the surroundings of New York and a cast of pets acting in ways we've never seen because the only time they act this way is behind closed doors, they continuously have them chased by the same group of people the entire movie and get into more fall-downier-situations. It's cheap and lazy and completely disrespectful to kids.
Now, I realize that I don't have children and I may not completely "get it" until I do have kids, but from what I understand of others' kids and once being a child myself is that kids aren't as dumb as we think they are. So, I might be a little bit overly harsh, but it's because we've seen this movie made better fifty different times. It's almost unacceptable for a movie with a premise this solid to be this witless. And, seriously, Illumination Entertainment, you really have to let the Minions thing go. They USED to be cute in small doses. Then you gave them their entire movie and it was so blah that I'd hoped it was the end. Nope. We get numerous references to them in this film alone AND there's a five minute short before the movie begins that's all about Minions-- and it's unbearable. It's seriously the worst animated short I think I've seen-- and that shitty Lava one before Inside Out was really terrible too.
Look, the movie isn't all bad. There are some very cute moments and a couple of genuine laughs, but the missed opportunities are ample and obvious. Louis CK does a perfect job of voicing the dog Max. He actually sounds like what I assume most dogs would sound like if they could talk. But, the problem with his character and the character of Duke-- and this leads back into lazy writing-- is that we don't really care about them. Our introduction of Max is perfect. It's almost tear-worthy because it shows a person and a dog growing up together and if you've ever had a pet that you've loved more than yourself, you'll totally understand. But once Duke shows up, Max turns into a dick. So, when he's a dick we feel empathy for Duke right? Nope-- Duke is a dick too. So when they're lost-- we don't really care if they both get home. Now look at Toy Story-- we get Woody growing up with Andy. We like Woody a lot. Buzz Lightyear shows up and Woody turns into a dick because he's threatened and all the other toys like Buzz. But Buzz isn't a dick to Woody. So, when they're lost and they have to learn to work together and wind up becoming friends-- there's actual growth there and we're rooting for the toys to get home safely. There's no growth with Max and Duke. They hate each other and then over the course of the movie-- don't as much. I realize they shouldn't blatantly copy the idea of Toy Story, but it's already so close why skimp on the parts of the script that actually matter to a viewer?
If you have a little one-- yes, they're going to enjoy the movie. The one thing Illumination knows best it's how to make things bright and cute. The animals are cute. Some of the situations they get into are adorable. There's just not a lot of substance around the cute. While your child may be cheering, you'll be rolling your eyes. Or maybe you won't. Maybe it's not actually that bad of a movie and Disney and Pixar movies are just THAT good that it's unfair for me to judge this movie compared to one of those. I just know that I was really looking forward to this movie and left the theater with a very bland taste in my mouth. Disney and Pixar know how to combine flavors and spices and subtle tastes with rich zest-- Illumination knows how to make cottage cheese look cute.
D
No comments:
Post a Comment