As I went to see WALL-E (from now on Wall-E, as Nature abhors a shout, even though it’s supposed to be an acronym) last a couple of days ago, I was feeling highly ambiguous and thus also a bit scared. You see, my hopes for this movie were nothing short of astronomic, as just about everything I’d read about and seen of it seemed to scream “AWESOME!” Naturally, this made me concerned, as at one point, I believe my expectations were so high few things short of Donnie Darko or Le Pacte des Loups or freakin’ Das Leben der Anderen or Gosford Park could have lived up to them. Luckily, though, I was able to restrain myself, by remembering (feverishly, but still) that Wall-E was essentially a kids’ movie. But by now I am sure you are all mentally screaming, “Enough of this egocentric quasi-meta-stuff! What about the movie?!”, so I’ll indulge you.
When the humans had finally managed to cover Earth in the waste of their manic consumption they took off on a luxury cruise, leaving a few thousand (probably significantly more) robots to clean up their mess. Only (heh, I do love me my understatements) problem was, the cruise was meant to be over in five years, at which point the robots’ job would be done, and the humans could return. This estimation was a bit on the optimistic side, as Wall-E has been toiling for 700 years.
Now, all his colleagues are defunct, and he, as mentioned above, has developed a personality.((Not really an all too unrealistic premise, I think, as I remember a clip from Discovery Channel about ten years ago, where this computer guy was talking about how he had connected a lot of computer chips in a network, and observed that, as data was passed around, while some chips (or circuits; don’t forget I’m a historian here, people!) burned out, others survived and became more efficient.)) He collects all manner of useless (though oddly well-preserved) garbage, repairs himself from parts scavenged from his incapacitated kin, and has the weirdest obsession with a Hello Dolly movie from the 1960s that he got off an old video iPod.
While frighteningly endearing, this is of course not really a basis for a non-avantgarde movie, so his daily routines are utterly ruined when a drone ship sent out from the mothership of the humans arrives. From this drone the robot EVE disembarks on a search for plant life (which, coincidentally, Wall-E has just discovered and is hiding in his hull), and Wall-E falls desperately in love. From here on out, Wall-E’s existence is connected to that of the human race, as he follows EVE when she returns to the ship of the humans.
Wall-E might just be one of the best movies Pixar has made. An atmosphere of bittersweet tragicomedy permeates the whole movie, as the almost sickeningly cute Wall-E is shown going through his pre-programmed but ultimately pointless routines during his days, and then going home to his storage container where he sorts through the interesting garbage he has found during the day, watches a scene or two from Hello Dolly and mimes a bit to a dance-routine, before shutting himself off for the night. This opening part of the movie is so wistful it continually kept me on the brink of crying, while it at the same time depicted the ultimate consequence of our current lifestyle in the Western world — which is what the movie is basically about.
Because fundamentally this is a moralising environmentalist movie, no doubt about it. From the opening scene, with its tour through a metropolis where the piles of compressed garbage tower over skyscrapers, to the end credits (I strongly advise you to remain seated through them, by the way; they’re awfully sweet), the essential message is that we’re on the wrong track, and that while it might not end up precisely as this, it will not go well for us if we don’t change our ways. In other words, it is not much different from the fire-and-brimstone preacher’s “Repent, sinners, or burn for all time!”
A familiar structure for those of us well-versed in the world of science fiction, then, and not really a very original one; this particular kind has been around at least since the 1970s. What makes Wall-E stand out, though, is obviously its form, format and distribution. Granted, as I said I reminded myself before I went to see it, the movie is a kids’ movie, so it lacks the nuances and slightly more disturbing imagery a more adult-oriented movie might have had. However, the lack of nuance is only apparent; if judged by the parameters of your run of the mill children’s movies, I felt that Wall-E took kids a bit more seriously than is normal. It dealt with serious issues, presented causes, distributed blame, and even suggested solutions (very superficially, of course, but still) in manners I can’t remember having seen much before. Furthermore, the absence of more disturbing imagery, while obviously vastly expanding its potential influence, might actually have served to make it more persuasive. After all, the more dire the predictions, the easier for critics to scream about doomsday prophets and thus illegitimising it with large parts of the population.
Additionally, the format of the animated movie primarily aimed at children allows it to do things it normally wouldn’t do. For example, its argumentation is fairly blunt and could easily be labeled as “preaching”, but seeing as this is not exactly rare in movies and literature aimed at children, fewer people are going to react negatively to it. Some are perhaps going to cry out about “indoctrination of our kids” or something, but while the didactic elements are not exactly subtle, they’re not all that overt, either. I felt that this was a movie that had a lot of shining lights, slapstick and action to draw in and please the kids (and a lot of adults, too, of course), with an added dollop of moralising camouflaged as child-oriented but in reality focused on the parents.
Anyway, enough of this semi-coherent rant-passed-off-as-analysis; let’s try to sum things up. Wall-E is a fun movie, a touching movie, a potentially action-inducing movie, and (as most of Pixar’s movies) a movie that appeals to both old and young. I strongly advise you all to go and watch this splendid pearl of a movie in cinemas, as it is quite mind-blowing.
9.5/10.

Posts
As you probably know from my own review, I find this movie to be severly overrated. The first quarter of it, with Wall-E alone on Earth, was superb. Some tads too melancholy for me personally, but undeniably superb. As soon as we entered space, it got flat, predictable, and dreadfully unoriginal. Yes, it was sweet and funny, but honestly, not mentionably more so than Disney and Pixar-movies when done well tend to be anyway.
It’s a good, entertaining children’s movie with a visual look that’s quite stunning, especially in the first, bleaker quarter of the movie. But a 9.5 is ludicrous to me. 9.5 is a grade that should be reserved for the movies that are so mind-blowingly awesome that they can almost measure up to the very best and most entertaining movies in history. This movie, if it had hit my buttons properly (it didn’t) would’ve been an 8 instead of the 7 I gave it, and so, I can see people whom it DID affect giving it an 8. Maybe a weak 8.5. It was well enough made to reach that, and you’d hear no argument from me.
But seriously, it’s no 9.5. There’s nothing original about this movie except daring to show that consumerism could ruin the planet in a bit more vivid forms than Disney usually does (but if you watch movies such as Pochahontas or The Lion King closely enough, you’ll see that the message is just as strong there, if somewhat less on the nose) and the admittedly very successful visual of Wall-E himself - but the former is then bought back by showing an ending where the human spirit overcomes the problem and it doesn’t matter that the world was ruined, it’s no problem to start over again, killing off what little impression the unusual strength and candor of the initial message might have had on the viewer. You say it tooks kids seriously? Yes, it did, shockingly so. For the first 20 minutes. After that, it was honestly way more “kiddied” down than most of the children’s movies Disney or Pixar have put out.
The plot is straightforward and largely predictable, and there are only three real characters in the movie: the captain, who is utterly two-dimensional, and Wall-E and Eva - both of which are truly adorable, but having two adorable characters really isn’t grounds for being praised to high heaven.
Seriously. I love a well done animated kid’s movie as much as the next guy, usually way more so, but this one is overhyped and overrated. It’s good. It’s solid.
It’s not great.
20. September 2008 @ 15:36 ( Permalink )
See, Loki, THAT was the kind of review that would’ve made me go stag to a cinema filled with small children (no, I’m not rephrasing that sentence thankyouverymuch). Now it’s stopped playing and I have to wait until it’s on DVD, all the while you can both have a lively discussion where I can’t add my own bullshit to the pile.
What’s the use of me then? Ah, damn you Terje! I hope you become a muffin for this!
20. September 2008 @ 23:15 ( Permalink )
“(no, I’m not rephrasing that sentence thankyouverymuch).”
By all means, who in their right mind would avoid sounding like a pedophiliac when they can help it?
And you didn’t miss that much.
20. September 2008 @ 23:35 ( Permalink )
“9.5 is a grade that should be reserved for the movies that are so mind-blowingly awesome that they can almost measure up to the very best and most entertaining movies in history.”
You know how criticism can make you reconsider ideas you thought you’d thought through properly? Well, congrats, you just did that. (Again, I guess I should add.)
You see, a couple of weeks ago I decided to start rating movies in a system where I would evaluate them in relation to the perceived standard of their genre, and only that, in order to get past my long-time problem of relating my ratings of movies of widely disparate genres. This stood out to me as the solution to all my problems, but obviously it was not, as it leaves me with no proper arguments with which to defend my position on WALL-E. (The review of which, by the way, is one of the worst ones I’ve written in a while. It’s almost also the only one I’ve written in a while, but let’s ignore that for now.)
The most immediate problem with such a method is of course how to define what genre to place a movie in, or in other words what other movies I should bunch it up with. This is not really a new problem for me, seeing as I’ve on sereval previous occasions tried to sort my DVD collection by genre, so I should have known this was tough. Or, 90 per cent of the time it works just fine, but the remaining 10 per cent make up such an obstacle, the whole system falls through. At first I end up sorting them by their approximate genre, but because the system isn’t clear enough, the DVDs shortly end up in such a way that while the remains of a system might be glimpsed, somewhere behind the mayhem, the overall impression is chaos, and locating a specific movie will take a couple of minutes.
This is clearly analogous to what would have happened had I continued with this system of rating movies.
Secondly, what I perceive to be the standard (i.e. the average performance) of a genre is so wooly a concept, it would have been bound to vary with my day-to-day form, and thus not useable for anything.
So thanks for making me reconsider this.
Obviously, the estimated average rating of a genre will probably still be a factor in my ratings (as they have been before), but they will obviously also be compared to the absolute best of the best of movies, just to take into consideration what the movie format has the potential of doing. Additionally, I’ll consider whatever else I might happen to think of when reviewing a movie, but going further into details here and now will most likely be a mistake. Suffice to say that I’ll probably go back to doing things the way I’ve pretty much always done.
As for my review of WALL-E, it was — besides not being among of my best, to say the least — written to comply with the new system, to “prove” to myself that just evaluating how a movie is in relation to movies of the same “genre” could work out just fine. Thus the whole review can pretty much be ignored.
In a more sober state of mind, I’d probably say that WALL-E was adorable, fun, and pretty much everything else I said about it, but I’d tread a bit lighter when it came to comparing it to other movies primarily for children, seeing as this is something I know relatively little about these days. (I’ll certainly cede to your superior knowledge of the field.) This was also the field where I thought it excelled the most, so when I reduce the importance of this part, the movie’s total score also decreases. A 8.5/ 10 sounds about right.
24. September 2008 @ 17:27 ( Permalink )
I didn’t feel your review of WALL-E was bad, so don’t beat yourself up. It was written just fine, I just disagreed with some of the sentiments within it.
And 8.5 I truly get. I think I’d have given it that, too, had I been closer to their target audience and thus enjoyed it more.
24. September 2008 @ 19:47 ( Permalink )
“I didn’t feel your review of WALL-E was bad, so don’t beat yourself up.”
Well, *I* thought it was bad, so I’m gonna go and beat myself up about it.
Or at least I think that’s what I think; I haven’t really read it. Perhaps I should go and do that…
24. September 2008 @ 20:02 ( Permalink )
Okay, so I exaggerated that somewhat in my head; it was actually quite nice.
24. September 2008 @ 20:03 ( Permalink )
As I suspected you had.
24. September 2008 @ 21:01 ( Permalink )
Yes, you’re quite the perceptive little fellow, ain’t you?
24. September 2008 @ 23:09 ( Permalink )
I don’t know about “little”, I’m 1.84 and overweight. (And I’ll have to take your word for “perceptive”.) I can vouch for the “fellow”-bit, though.
And thanks.
24. September 2008 @ 23:12 ( Permalink )
At least that’s a relief, then. And I do believe you *can* take my word for it. And probably other people’s too.
27. September 2008 @ 14:36 ( Permalink )