PDA

View Full Version : Was 'Ratatouille' Ripped Off?



Ian
02-07-2008, 09:25 AM
NEW YORK (AP) -- Among the tales of depravity and violence that dominate this year's Academy Awards race sits the bright and shining "Ratatouille." A rat never seemed so sanitized.

The Pixar film landed five Oscar nominations and was ranked by many critics as one of the year's best, yet was never a serious contender for best picture. Instead, it was relegated to the relatively new category of best animated feature, which the academy began dolling out in 2002.

Directed by Brad Bird, "Ratatouille" has garnered an aggregate score of 96 on Metacritic.com, ranking it above "Pulp Fiction," let alone this year's best picture candidates: "No Country for Old Men," "There Will Be Blood," "Juno," "Atonement" and "Michael Clayton."

And its other nominations across three different disciplines -- best original screenplay, best score, best sound mixing and best sound editing -- suggests the kind of broad consensus that often results in bigger awards like best director or best picture.

Its five nominations rank as the most ever for a computer animated film, and rate second among all animated films, only surpassed by the six received by Disney's "Beauty and the Beast." That picture, done in the traditional Disney style in 1991, stands as the only animated film to ever be nominated for best picture.

If not for the best animated feature category, it's safe to say "Ratatouille" would have been strongly considered for best picture. Brad Lewis, the film's producer, is quick to point out that he has no sour grapes with the academy -- and that he's ecstatic about the five widespread nominations.

Still, he has to wonder.

"Ultimately, it makes it perhaps too convenient for people to look at an animated film from an isolated perspective," said Lewis. "Somebody can say, 'You know what? We have a place for that, so we don't necessarily have to give it broader consideration.' "

Tom O'Neil, a columnist specializing in awards coverage for the Los Angeles Times' "The Envelope" Web site, has pondered whether "Ratatouille" -- which he calls the best reviewed movie of the year -- is the equivalent of "Beauty and the Beast," only it had to deal with the specialized category.

"Is this a case where it's penalized and ghettoized because there's a separate category for animated fare?" O'Neill said. "It seems to have the same respect in the industry and among film critics as 'Beauty and the Beast.' "

"Ratatouille," made by Walt Disney Company and its Pixar Animations Studios, is also not a conventional animated movie. Its framing is largely based on the techniques of classic filmmaking, and the story of a rat who dreams to be a chef has been called a Joycean "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Rat."

"I don't think people when they walk out of 'Ratatouille' the first thing that they're thinking about is 'I went and saw an animated film today,' " said Lewis. "It's partly because we're telling more sophisticated stories and I think it's because we have a more sophisticated filmmaking tool."

"Ratatouille" also has the support of that great international critical body: the French. The film, which is set in Paris and imbued with French culture, was No. 1 at France's box office for six weeks in a row -- surpassing a record set by "Titanic." After making $206 million at the domestic box office, "Ratatouille" made $410 million internationally.

Those totals are much greater than any of the best picture nominees, which combined haven't grossed as much domestically as "Ratatouille."

New York Times film critic A.O. Scott listed "Ratatouille" as one of the five films that deserved to be nominated for best picture. He earlier called it "a nearly flawless piece of popular art, as well as one of the most persuasive portraits of an artist ever committed to film."

That judgment is notable in part because it doesn't make use of the word "animated."
Lewis, who's working on directing a film for Pixar, cited fellow nominee "Persepolis" -- an animated French language film about a girl coming of age during the Islamic Revolution -- as proof of the breadth to animation today. (The third Oscar nominee is the more standard family fare of "Surf's Up.")

"The type of filmmaking that's taking place in the animation category is very broad," said Lewis. "And it's perhaps traveling beyond what people felt the parentheses of the industry were before."

And considering the increasing role that digital animation and computer-generated imagery play in the making of nearly all movies today, it's becoming difficult to firmly say what is and isn't animated. Just as "Ratatouille" reflects live-action filmmaking, live-action films like "King Kong" and "Transformers" often reflect animated works.

"It's folly to have a separate animated category because it hurts the chances of a movie like 'Ratatouille' for being in the best picture race," said O'Neil. "But considering the academy history and the fact that only once did they have the guts to do it, at least the little rat is getting the chance to be a big cheese in one category."

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved

Jared
02-07-2008, 01:45 PM
Thanks for posting this story, Ian. It's a very interesting piece that definitely raises a series of questions.

Around September or October, I thought perhaps "Ratatouille" had a chance of earning an nomination, but that was before six or seven consecutive weekends with great new movies.

Unfortunately, animated films generally face prejudice in the best picture category. "Beauty and the Beast" is still the only one to actually garner a nomination for the top prize.

I can definitely make an argument for "Ratatouille" this year, but not a particularly strong one. Yes, it has the highest critical rating of any film this year, but that doesn't mean it's the one of the five best. Web sites like Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic are just guides, not gospel.

And if anybody cares, "Ratatouille" was my seventh-favorite picture of the year. Three of the actual nominations -- "No Country For Old Men, "There Will Be Blood" and "Michael Clayton" -- are in my top five. I also ranked "Once," "Into the Wild" and "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" ahead of it.

2Epcot
02-07-2008, 01:51 PM
"It's folly to have a separate animated category because it hurts the chances of a movie like 'Ratatouille' for being in the best picture race," said O'Neil. "But considering the academy history and the fact that only once did they have the guts to do it, at least the little rat is getting the chance to be a big cheese in one category."

This last statement is basically what it comes down to. You can have a wonderful animated film that should be considered for best picture, but most of the Motion Picture Academy is still going to see it just as an animated film. I don't think Ratatouille got ripped off ... it's just how things work.

The same thing happens to many fantastic comedies that never get considered for Best Picture ... Either they are not "serious" enough to be considered for an Oscar, or don't fit the ideal of what an Oscar winning film should be. I've long said there should be a comedy Oscar not because I don't think those film deserve a Best Picture nomination, but at least it gives these films a place when they are so often overlooked.

Ian
02-07-2008, 02:37 PM
I think the question I'd ask is, should anyone care?

I mean truthfully, I find the vast majority of films nominated for Academy Awards to be complete and total pretentious dreck anyway. I'm more likely to try and avoid an Academy Award nominated film than I am to go out of my way to see it.

The ones I have seen have been, for the most part, overwrought, pointless, self-indulgent snore-festivals. Gladiator is the only exception to that rule that comes immediately to mind.

Personally, I didn't even like Ratatouille all that much. It was probably my least favorite Pixar film to date, but still ... If I were the director I'd walk away with over 400 million reasons why my film was better than any of the ones that were nominated.

Jeff
02-07-2008, 04:10 PM
I mean truthfully, I find the vast majority of films nominated for Academy Awards to be complete and total pretentious dreck anyway. I'm more likely to try and avoid an Academy Award nominated film than I am to go out of my way to see it.

The ones I have seen have been, for the most part, overwrought, pointless, self-indulgent snore-festivals. Gladiator is the only exception to that rule that comes immediately to mind.


Very well said. :clappy::clappy::clappy:

IMHO the Academy Awards have lost all relevance with mainstream America. The critics and the Academy basically tell the masses, by not picking a blockbuster, that we are unsophisticated clods who don't know what we should like. Millions of of us speak with our dollars every year and the Academy continually says; "No, you're wrong. Here's what you should like."

As far as Ratatouille goes, I just never warmed to it. I wouldn't be shocked to see Kirk or Spock beam into my living room right now but I just couldn't suspend my disbelief that a Rat could cook. :sick:Yuck! I guess I saw too many rats in our horse barn when I was a kid.

Ian
02-07-2008, 04:13 PM
Very well said. :clappy::clappy::clappy:

IMHO the Academy Awards have lost all relevance with mainstream America. The critics and the Academy basically tell the masses, by not picking a blockbuster, that we are unsophisticated clods who don't know what we should like. Millions of of us speak with our dollars every year and the Academy continually says; "No, you're wrong. Here's what you should like."

As far as Ratatouille goes, I just never warmed to it. I wouldn't be shocked to see Kirk or Spock beam into my living room right now but I just couldn't suspend my disbelief that a Rat could cook. :sick:Yuck! I guess I saw too many rats in our horse barn when I was a kid.Jeff, you and I need to get together for some lowbrow activity one day.

Beer and football sounds about right. ;)

Jeff
02-07-2008, 04:21 PM
Jeff, you and I need to get together for some lowbrow activity one day.

Beer and football sounds about right. ;)


Sounds perfect. Someday, when I'm done coaching, I'll meet you at one of the Fall Intercot meets and, through hand gestures and grunts, we'll say hello!

Ian
02-07-2008, 05:59 PM
Sounds perfect. Someday, when I'm done coaching, I'll meet you at one of the Fall Intercot meets and, through hand gestures and grunts, we'll say hello!Hand gestures are too advanced for my kind. Grunting only.

NotaGeek
02-07-2008, 07:02 PM
Maybe one day Blockbuster films like Rambo will be nominated so you guys can say "Great,a film I support is part of the Academy's list." :D

Ian -- maybe your opinion of nominated films has more to do with your personal likes/dislikes then the Academy being out of touch with "mainstream America.' The Oscars doesn't try to be about big name movies with huge budgets, it is supposed to be about acting and the actual process of movie making. The MTV Movie awards, however, is solely based on public appeal.

I personally believe that Transformers should have been nominated, but I understand why it wasn't.

Ian
02-07-2008, 09:28 PM
Ian -- maybe your opinion of nominated films has more to do with your personal likes/dislikes then the Academy being out of touch with "mainstream America.' The words "mainstream America" never left my lips ... err ... fingers.

I simply said I don't like most films the Academy nominates. Obviously yes ... that would be based on my personal likes/dislikes.

What else could it be based on? :confused:

Jeff G
02-07-2008, 10:12 PM
I think the question I'd ask is, should anyone care?

I mean truthfully, I find the vast majority of films nominated for Academy Awards to be complete and total pretentious dreck anyway. I'm more likely to try and avoid an Academy Award nominated film than I am to go out of my way to see it.

The ones I have seen have been, for the most part, overwrought, pointless, self-indulgent snore-festivals. Gladiator is the only exception to that rule that comes immediately to mind.

Personally, I didn't even like Ratatouille all that much. It was probably my least favorite Pixar film to date, but still ... If I were the director I'd walk away with over 400 million reasons why my film was better than any of the ones that were nominated.


Very well said. :clappy::clappy::clappy:

IMHO the Academy Awards have lost all relevance with mainstream America. The critics and the Academy basically tell the masses, by not picking a blockbuster, that we are unsophisticated clods who don't know what we should like. Millions of of us speak with our dollars every year and the Academy continually says; "No, you're wrong. Here's what you should like."



I agree completely with both f these statements. Generally speaking if the critics smash it I like it and vice versa. I agree with Ian that Gladiator, which is one of my all time fav's, is the last movie that I enjoyed that won. I don't always remember this being the case. Forrest Gump, The God Father & Rocky are just a few of the past nominations that I enjoyed. It seems the critics today are becoming more pretentious and try to act like they know more than the average movie goer.

As for Ratatouille, it was OK but not great and would put it with A Bugs Life as my least favorite of the Pixar movies. That said I probably would enjoy it more than the nominated movies.

Jeff
02-08-2008, 08:50 AM
Ian -- maybe your opinion of nominated films has more to do with your personal likes/dislikes then the Academy being out of touch with "mainstream America.'

That was me. My point is, over the last couple of years it seems as though the academy, and many film critics, won't nominate a movie that is popular. A movie that many people actually enjoy and go see. It wasn't always this way. There have been many past nominees and winners that I really liked. I'm not talking about "Rambo" films but movies like Forrest Gump, Lord of the Rings, even Titanic (which I didn't like but obviously a lot of people did). Nominating those kind of films will keep the Academy relevant to most Americans.

By the way, I loved Transformers. Innovative techniques, emotional pull, engaging story, with even some "character growth" thrown in. Why shouldn't such a film be nominated?

Sorry for "hijacking" your thread Ian.

Mufasa
02-08-2008, 09:13 AM
I'm not sure which is the worst- the members of the Academy with the Oscars (4 hours of industry/studio-influenced congratulations), the recording industry and the Grammys (uh, Jethro Tull being best hard rock/metal performance? Obviously it was those killer lead flute solos) or the Coaches Poll in College Football.

BelleCiavo
02-08-2008, 10:41 AM
the recording industry and the Grammys (uh, Jethro Tull being best hard rock/metal performance? Obviously it was those killer lead flute solos)

Funny you mention this, my ds14 was just ranting about this yesterday. :)

Ian
02-08-2008, 10:52 AM
I'm not sure which is the worst- the members of the Academy with the Oscars (4 hours of industry/studio-influenced congratulations), the recording industry and the Grammys (uh, Jethro Tull being best hard rock/metal performance? Obviously it was those killer lead flute solos) or the Coaches Poll in College Football.:rotfl:

Disney-lovin' Dutchman
02-08-2008, 06:37 PM
Ratatouille was a piece of art, it was one of the most original, beautiful, inspirational movies of the last decade and I think history will show it to be the Bambi of the 21st century, just a timeless classic that will slowly be loved by more and more people. It has done superbly well worldwide already but I have never heard anyone say they didn't like the movie.

2007 did see some amazing movies, but most of the movies were and are...well, awful really :D That makes the fact that a true gem like Ratatouille was made in the same year extra special.

Movies are like wine, they are often judged by years and this will be a classics for generations to come