Beautiful and Delightful

Rating: 9/10 (19 October 2015)

Now first off, I must set the table before we can dig into the meat of this review. This movie was not made by the likes of Disney Animation or their then-fledgling affiliate and now property, Pixar. It was made by Warner Bros. Now, in the 90s, particularly the late nineties, there were a rush of animated movies not made by Disney or any real animation company that won't happen again. It was an interesting time for animation. Not a good one, perhaps; other than this film, the best of these so-called second-string animated movies (not counting TNBC, which is stop-motion) by common judgement is Anastasia, a movie that I professionally dislike and personally despise. But an interesting one.
This movie is a great example of why it never happened again. Here is one of the best movies of the year in a year that was filled with great movies, and yet it completely flopped at the box office due to legitimately horrible management by Warner Bros. Seriously; this movie was not relatively expensive (though it looks the part), and it has a very marketable premise. How do you screw that up? That's not rhetorical; I'm confounded. Yes, I'm aware Warner has a history in animation. But that's mostly in television; they should leave movies to the experts.
Wow that was long-winded. Thankfully, this movie is not; at only eighty-six minutes, it flies by. You often want it to stay longer; not because it does anything incorrect, but because you don't want it to leave you. This is the kind of film where, if I saw it at the cinema, I would stay during the credits and afterwards. I would stay until they forced me to get out; that's the sort of film it is.
If the animation is not as well-funded as Disney's, it does not show it. There are ambitious scenes in this film, scenes that seem to be the lovechild of 70s Disney, 80s Ghibli, and 00s Pixar. You can't honestly say that Tarzan looks like it has more money poured into it than this movie. The motion is especially eye-catching. Speed is one of the hardest things to get right, really right in animation. And yet when it is done right, there is nothing on planet Earth that looks prettier.
Miyazaki is the best at this; the first time I watched a scene in the third act of Porco Rosso, one where Porco flies his plane for one last long sequence over the land and to the sea, to meet his final challenge, my life was forever changed. I'm not exaggerating; those were some of the most invocative, most profound minutes of my life. But Bird clearly takes cues from, and shares interests with, Mr. Miyazaki. It does not surprise me that the two of them are friends. And of course, thanks to him helping bring Miyazaki's works over to the West, I'm glad they are.
This is a movie that gets darker as it goes along, but it does it in a smart way, a sensible way. And a way that can still get a kid-friendly rating. When I first-watched this movie, the first thing I thought of was eighties Spielberg (though without some of the sappiness.) If this isn't already, (I don't know) it should be one of those films that is in everyone's house, along with Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, Toy Story, Totoro, Finding Nemo, Kiki's Delivery Service, etc. Kids deserve to have this movie be a part of their childhood. If I have kids, I'm showing them this.
And of course, it is a gift to us adults as well, whether or not we believe that we deserve it. After the first ten minutes, the transition from 2D to 3D, doesn't feel weird at all. Even more, it feels magical, like it were conjured out of some fantasy world that we only by chance get to see. The writing is stellar and shows a lot of that quick wit that would latter become a staple of his. You get a lot of great lines without the sense that they're trying too hard like you do in The Avengers.
I wouldn't say the music is spectacular aside from a few pieces, but it does fit the tone of the film well. The same is true to some extent with the characters, who are my one grievance with the film. They feel too cliché and used. The good acting, particularly from the stars, Connick and Aniston, helps, but overall, he doesn't play enough with the characters. That's the main reason this film isn't as good as The Incredibles and one of the reasons why it isn't as good as Ratatouille (which also could have used stronger characters (except Ego, who was brilliant) but it is not as big of a problem and the rest of the movie is ambient enough to cover for it). And it's the reason I would give this film a 4.5 out of 5.
But that's just me comparing Bird to the ridiculously high standards he has set for himself with his era-defining work. I will go as far as to say this is the best American animated film of the late nineteen-nineties not including the Toy Story movies. Better than Hercules or Mulan or Hunchback. It's a whimsical film, it's arguably the essential 'Boy and His X' film, and it is a film with something to say. If this was made after 9/11, it would be the essential post-9/11 movie. The military are the villains and its clear they are acting out of misery instead of 'For the Evulz.' But above all this, I say that I look forward to watching it again. And I believe that's one of the endorsements I can give to a film.
And remember: sentient robots are not guns.
(P.S. This movie takes place in Bird's birth year, 1957)