Pixar Rewind #1 - Ratatouille: Finding Beauty Underneath Simplicity

Pixar Rewind #1 - Ratatouille:  Finding Beauty Underneath Simplicity

Release date (US): June 29th, 2007

Directed By: Brad Bird

Rating: PG

Starring: Patton Oswald, Lou Romano, Brad Garnett, Janeane Garolato, Ian Holm, Peter O'Toole 

**DISCLAIMER**: This is a subjective, opinionated article that does not have, nor should have any affect on your opinion on the given material. As such, my opinion is entitled to change over time and whatever is written here at this given point in time may not and should not be held to me in the future. You are not meant to agree with me 100 percent of the time, because the nature of subjectivity is we see everything differently. Please keep this in mind. 

The Review

Animation as a genre has grown and evolved. It is no longer a medium where children can play in and the parents can sit back and watch them for a couple hours. Animation now has grown to speak to generations across all at once. But it had to start somewhere, and in 1999 when Pixar released the first Toy Story, the world of animation changed forever.

As Pixar continued to grow itself and branch out, making films such as Finding Nemo and Toy Story 2, a little film came out in 2007 that snuck past everyone. It made a lot of money at the time, sure, and was definitely critically and financially successful, but when people look back upon their favorite Pixar films, seldom is Ratatouille ever mentioned. 

But it should be. No, there is no single moment in which the audience will burst into tears like a Toy Story 3. There isn’t a psychological exploration of the mind like Inside Out. But I think the beauty of this movie is the complexity that is hidden behind layers, and layers, and layers of simplicity. 

We follow our protagonist, Remy, as he journeys from the “dumps” of an old French woman’s house, dreaming of bigger things. Remy knows he’s destined for something great, but he just doesn’t know what it is. He knows it has to do with food and cooking, but he doesn’t get his chance until he is catapulted from his nest into the larger world of France, where he meets his counterpart, Linguini. 

The aesthetic of the film, firstly, is what catches your eye. It’s very stylized, and you could say realistic as well, but there some layer of photo-realism that lies in front of the lens. Something that makes the cooking seem so fluid, makes the animated food seem so delicious, and make the rats seem so relatable. That’s not easy; the first hurdle for the audience to get over was that their main protagonist was a rat, but the animators did a spectacular job and the audience immediately bypasses that.

The world that we ware introduced to is vibrant. Granted, it doesn’t deviate from more than a few locations, and you spend most of your time in the kitchens of Paris, specifically at Gusteau’s, but they are able to paint a picture of what France really is about, what a Paris culinary experience is like. These animators at Pixar spend years of hard work doing research before they render a single character, trying to figure out how to best convey their movie onto a screen. 

By the time you meet the side characters and the antagonists, the world feels so familiar and unique that you’re ready to dive in. And dive in you do. One of the first scenes is between Remy and an imaginary Gusteau who urges him into the kitchen. He falls fro this ledge and from here, we get to really see what a busy kitchen is like. And here we meet Linguini. Is Linguini the protagonist? Not exactly, no. But he is a vessel, a way inside this world of challenge and professional cooking through the eyes of someone who knows not a thing about cooking, just like us. 

The relationships that Brad Bird (director) crafts are remarkable as well. In a short two hours, he is able to  develop and fully flesh out these characters so that they don’t become living, breathing stereotypes. You can be forgiven for thinking that many of them are caricatures; Linguini is the “bumbling idiot”, Colette is the “stern, no-nonsense chef”, Skinner is the “horrible, mean boss”. But what Bird does is peel back the layers behind each of them, showing that, yes, these are distinguishing qualities among them, but that’s not what defines them. They are defined by the content of their heart. Linguini, despite all of his shortcomings, is kind, and that’s really what pushes him forward. 

But what drives these characters? Is there a villain? In a way, there really isn’t. You can argue that Skinner is the villain, and you can argue Anton Ego is the villain. I would argue that Skinner, though he is villainous, is not what drives thees characters towards a goal. He pushes them along, granted, but he is an antagonistic force. And for Anton Ego’s part, he is not a villain; rather he is the final hurdle that the characters need to get over in order to reach the conclusion. I think there is something admirable about making the antagonist pure circumstance. That all these vessels are really pointing Remy and Linguini in one direction.

Is there really anything negative about the film? I will say this; while animation is no longer purely a medium for children, the people over at Disney are not dull. They understand that in order to make money and attract a larger audience, they have to add elements in the film that are a little over-the-top, a little ham-fisted, that make the film appealing to the younger demographic. There are more than a few moments where you look at the film and go, “Well, this is a kid's movie”. But being as fair and objective as possible, when a cartoon rat is flying across the streets of Paris with a piece of paper in his mouth, and a chef is chasing after him on bike, on boat, and by foot, it does take you out of the semi-realistic tone that the film works to develop. 

It’s a little tonally dissonant because of this - the film opens with a French lady shooting at the ceiling with a shotgun at one rat. And then it goes to scenes in a kitchen that just feel so real and tangible. Almost like you can taste each drop of the soup. When watching the film with a filter of. “this is a kid’s movie”, these things don't bother you at all. But taking a step back and looking for flaws, it’s interesting to see how filmmakers try to strike a balance of “for children” and “for everyone”.

But Brad Bird is smart; he is one of the best animators out there and he completely understands what he’s working with. He knows that we aren’t here to be lectured to. So what he does with the thematic elements is brilliant; he hides it just under the surface. “Anyone can cook”. The words are spoken over, and over, and over again. And yet, we don’t get tired of it because we feel that it's important for the character to understand and learn. But in reality, the message is not for them; it’s for us.

Anyone can cook. Anyone can achieve their dreams if they so choose. Anyone can branch out and follow their dreams if its right for them. I think that’s the beautiful part of the movie. What you see if the integration of deeper themes mixed in under the disguise of child-like wonder. That’s the Pixar trademark.

In Conclusion: No, this is not the first film that everyone thinks about when they think about the Pixar brand. They think of the Toy Storys, the Finding Nemos, and even newer films like Inside Out. But this film has a heart that is beating inside its tiny protagonist. And underneath the seemingly simplistic imagery and story, lies a complicated morality that drives this movie forward. This movie is not Pixar in a traditional sense, but maybe that’s exactly what makes it so Pixar.