A SECOND LOOK AT A POPULAR FISH FILM

READER’S RESPONSES HOPE TO CHANGE A CRITIC’S OPINION
by: Steven Snyder

People change their minds often. A television show, a piece of music, a restaurant, a movie – first impressions often change with time. I still remember the first time I saw “2001: A Space Odyssey.” I was bewildered. But with every viewing since, I have learned to appreciate the brilliance of its ideas and scope.

As a film critic, however, I am not allowed the same freedom to waver. I see a film once, must write about it almost immediately, and must make a concrete decision. Was it good or bad, entertaining or boring, fluffy or enlightening?

Sometimes I am asked whether I would go back and change a rating or an opinion for a given film. Usually my answer is no, but there are exceptions. Every year, there seems to be one film that grows on me long after my experience with it in the movie theater. That movie in 2002 was Spike Lee’s “25th Hour,” now available on video.

There are also times when I am congratulated on a great review or told that I was wrong about a given film. I heard from scores of readers regarding “Chicago.” They were as excited about it as I was. I also heard from those who disagreed with me concerning “In The Bedroom,” which I named the best film of 2001.

The controversy over “Nemo”

And then, there’s “Finding Nemo.” A loveable children’s film about a father, a son, and the strain between protective parents and their independent offspring, “Finding Nemo” is a film that has generated more response than I have ever encountered as an arts writer.

I gave the film 2.5 out of 4 stars. I thought it was cute, but that it was lacking something, particularly in regards to a forced story that never really found its own momentum. Yes, the film is cute. Yes, families will love it. But the difference between a good “family” film and simply a great film is profound.
I heard from scores of readers. Some were positive, some where negative, but almost all agreed that I was wrong about my overall impression concerning “Nemo.”

Some noted what they enjoyed about the film, attempting to counter my many points of criticism. Scott, one of the first to reply about my piece, said that “I was pleasantly surprised. It was flush throughout with warmth, witty humor and a visual luster that left our party of 16 almost speechless.” He went on to say that “I always look for the "odd man out" in the crowd, because they usually have something very interesting to say. Unfortunately in this case the "odd man out" did not.”

Other respondents noted how out-of-step with the mainstream I was. On www.rottentomatoes.com, which is a website that catalogues every online review for a given film, I was only the second out of 145 posted reviews to give the film a “rotten” rating.

“ Congrats, you must feel like the fifth dentist,” said Troy. “Steven Snyder seems to be in the extreme minority for a movie critic on this one,” said another unsigned e-mail. Denis wondered, “Perhaps scoring the only negative on Rotten Tomatoes might be regarded as a minor dash for fame.” “Are you trying to be different so you will stand out from the crowd?” asked Andrew, “Anyway, enjoy your status as the village idiot.”

Revisiting the film

So, given the sheer volume of responses I received, and the consistent message I was hearing, I revisited the film. I gave myself a chance to do what I am so rarely allowed to do: change my mind.

I was wrong, sort of.

This is not a 2.5 star film. Looking over past reviews, I cannot say that “Scooby Doo” is better than “Finding Nemo.” In fact, “Bruce Almighty,” for what it does, should not be considered better than this cute fish tale.

There is a sensitivity, energy and warmth to “Nemo” that deserved more credit than I afforded it. True, the film has flaws, but I think I may have focused too extensively on the few negatives that surface during its father and son story.

But this is also not a four-star film. The creative spark present in great films like “Spirited Away” and “Shrek” is missing here. The characters seem a bit forced. “Finding Nemo” has flaws.

While it is cute, and extremely satisfying for a parent looking for family-friendly entertainment, this does not mean “Nemo” is a great film on its own merit. Those are excuses. As I said in my original review, I never forgot who the target market for this film really was. I admitted it would satisfy families. I also said that was not enough.

Does my rating for “Finding Nemo” change? Yes. After hearing your thoughts and after viewing it with, perhaps, less critical eyes, I see something a bit brighter than I did. And I am happy that people are talking about what they are seeing, and thinking rather than simply consuming.

While I may be a lonely voice on “Nemo,” at least I am being true to myself. I cannot praise a film that does not invigorate me. I will not say something is amazing simply because it is cute and technically brilliant. And while some may disagree with me now, at least they will always know who they are listening to and what my opinions, both positive and negative, truly stand for.

I would criticize anyone who gave “Nemo” the same rating as “Beauty and the Beast.”