Let's go swimming!

Rating: Null/10 (15 October 2003)

Rating: **** (out of *****)
If Pixar can continue to deliver the goods like they have done once more, with Finding Nemo, then we can be assured that the future of computer animation is in safe hands.
Finding Nemo arrives here following massive success stateside, yet its success has, quite possibly, led to nit picking among some. Certain journalists (Toy Story purists, no doubt) have called it such things as "formulaic" and "strictly for kids". Well, would you call Pixar as original if they approached all their films' storylines in the same way as Toy Story's?
True, it is admittedly hard to expect anything to astound you as much as the film that signalled their arrival in the world of full-length animated motion pictures. But this film sits quite nicely among their other efforts. I'd put it on pretty much the same level as Monsters, Inc. and just ahead of Toy Story 2.
Finding Nemo is more of a straightforward adventure tale than any other Pixar film (the title character's name could be a nod to Captain Nemo, of 20,000 Leagues under the Sea). Our setting is the Pacific Ocean, where Nemo, a young clown fish (voiced by Alexander Gould), is captured by some scuba divers. His father, Marlin (voiced by Albert Brooks) immediately begins searching for his son, but finding him will take much longer than he thought, as Nemo has ended up in the fish tank of an Australian dentist.

Along the way, Marlin hooks up (no pun intended) with a forgetful tang named Dory (voiced by Ellen DeGeneres), and they both proceed to meet all kinds of colourful and interesting characters, including three sharks (one of whom is voiced by Barry Humphries) and a surfer turtle (voiced by the film's co-writer/director, Andrew Stanton). All the while, the other fish in the tank (including a butterfly fish named Gill, voiced by Willem Dafoe) are trying to help Nemo get out. From looking at the animation, I could see that Pixar have made some truly innovative strides forward with each of their films, at least on the technical side. Their typical `trademarks' are visible here, such as the main characters' wide eyes and the obviously artificial humans (the makers are obviously aware of how out of place Final Fantasy-style techniques would look here). But everything on view is smoother, more colourful, and significantly more detailed than any of their previous major efforts. This makes Finding Nemo more pleasing to the eye than Pixar's other films.
The film's generally linear storyline prevents it from scaling (again, no pun intended) the heights of the original Toy Story. There aren't too many real surprises as such. But by no means have Pixar gone soft in the story department, despite what some believe. In fact, I could argue that this is probably the most consistently funny script they have come up with. It's not short on background gags either, examples being some product placement satire and a possible reference to Monty Python. You'll even find some nods to Pixar's past efforts (some more subtle than others  I'll let you look for them).
Pixar have always struck gold on their vocal pairings for their leads (Tom Hanks & Tim Allen, John Goodman & Billy Crystal...) and they've found another fine pairing in Albert Brooks & Ellen DeGeneres. Both are natural comedians, and they help to make the film as clever and funny as it is. Even if DeGeneres sometimes becomes irritating, I think that's intentional. Listening to them and to all the other characters, we can see that Pixar are almost as good as casting their voices as animating their films.
Anyway, I have said enough. Go and see Finding Nemo. You will not regret it. (And you'll get to see a wonderfully inventive short film from Pixar's past beforehand...)