ROTTEN TOMATOES: Exclusive: Brad Bird Takes RT Through Ratatouille Comments

Exclusive: Brad Bird Takes RT Through Ratatouille

by Joe Utichi | October 26, 2007

Summary

The director of The Incredibles tells us how he shaped Ratatouille from ailing trouble into Certified Fresh masterpiece. Back to Article

(1-26 of 26 posts) | Reply

Gimy writes:
on Oct 26 2007 10:32 AM

one of the most overrated flicks of the summer. very boring and its one of the only kid's movies my son didn't even ask when it comes out on dvd. worse than Shrek 3...

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Oct 26 2007 10:50 AM

Honestly, I'm not trying to be a hater...but Ratatouille sort of sucked. It was really bland. And where did you get "masterpiece" from?

(Reply to this)

moviemonkey2 writes:
on Oct 26 2007 10:56 AM

I'm with you guys. It looked good, like all Pixar movies, but it was bland. I'm hoping Bird wasn't a two trick pony, because Iron Giant and Incredibles were...well incredible. This one was just....meh.

(Reply to this)

Xynotyro writes:
on Oct 26 2007 11:05 AM

In reply to this comment (#1224112)
Why do people like you even go to this site if you can't appreciate good films. Of course you should be happy since most Hollywood movies these days (animated and not animated alike) are aimed at your of demographic and meant for attention spans smaller than Michael Bay's left nut.

(Reply to this)

Baccus83 writes:
on Oct 26 2007 11:44 AM

You're all allowed your opinions, but come ON.

Ratatouille worse than Shrek 3? Really?

I personally thought Ratatouille was one of the best movies of the summer. It's really a great film about the creative process. I mean, the story has a spine to it, and it's thematically consistent and non-pandering, unlike many animated films these days. I really enjoyed it, and I think Brad Bird is one of the great directors working today.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Oct 26 2007 12:01 PM

In reply to this comment (#1224197)
Believe me, I'm not one of those people who has a short attention span. I'm one of Michael Bay's biggest detractors here, and I love really slow and long movies. My favorite movie this year (so far) is The Assasination of Jesse James.

I laughed at a few parts of Ratatouille, but overall I just felt it was really dull. The plot was a cute idea, but nothing amazing. I didn't find the color palatte all that interesting, either. Overall, it just felt like a 30 minute TV cartoon stretched out too long.

(Reply to this)

rt_hire_me writes:
on Oct 26 2007 12:10 PM

Rat was a great movie. You can never predict what is going to happen with Bird. You think "oh, the critic is going to taste the tomato and then vomit like the Simpsons 3eyed fish scene" or "he's going to love it bla-bla", but then when he tastes it and recalls his childhood, it was such a geat moment, and you think 'they did it again, they amazed me and I just didn't see it coming'. Pixars ideas are consistently novel without being too left field or convenient.

But what I really want to say is good for rt for doing interviews like this. It's almost like people in the industry aren't allowed to talk about how bad movies get made. So here's Bird, permitted, I assume, to talk about how a good concept got rescued from a possible train wreck. Whenever Rupert Everet is on Letterman or some other show, you never see the host ask "How could you make a movie like 'Next Best Thing?' What made you think that was going to be a good movie?" And then Rupert could explain what he liked about the script and how the train ultimately came off the rails and how the victims who watched it can get 1 1/2 hours of their life back.

How do sane and talented people make bad movies, and how do institutions like Pixar keep their winning streak alive? RT, you have to go after these people and make them accountable, especially ticket prices being what they are today, not to mention the value of our time.

(Reply to this)

VML writes:
on Oct 26 2007 02:06 PM

Worst than SHREK 3?!!!! That's sooooooo not true! SHREK 3 was worst! RATATOUILLE was not a bad movie. I thought it was the best movie I've seen all summer. (Probably my favorite film of this year.) I didn't like SHREK because it wasn't as good and funny as the first two. Plus, the franchise got really annoying and it seemed that the movie was solely made to make money.

Anyway, interesting article. Pixar is probably one of the only studios in the US that still relies on creativity-over-marketability, something that's been missing from Disney. I'm looking forward to more of Brad Bird's films, including the live action historical movie he's currently making (its about one of the San Francisco earthquakes, BTW).

(Reply to this)

katsat writes:
on Oct 26 2007 03:27 PM

I hesitate to say that something is boring if many intelligent people think otherwise. Sometimes it just shows a lack of sophistication or savvy if one is bored by something that is overwhelmingly deemed to be of high quality - kinda like jazz. Of course, that is not always the case, and sometimes it's just a matter of different tastes. I can understand how Ratatouille may not be everyone's cup of tea. but for myself, I loved it and think it is probably, in a good way, the most adult of all Pixar films.

(Reply to this)

robcat2075 writes:
on Oct 26 2007 04:39 PM

If Ratatouille is bad then what are all the other movies Hollywood cranks out? They're hideous toxic slime by comparison.

(Reply to this)

witherwings writes:
on Oct 26 2007 05:25 PM

Ratatouille wasn't supposed to be a comedy so much. I really enjoyed it--saw it three times. I love what Brad Bird said about Pixar not focus-grouping ideas. Focus-groups kill creativity, IMO.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Oct 26 2007 05:57 PM

In reply to this comment (#1224722)
I agree about the focus-groups, Witherwings.

I didn't say Ratatouille is bad. I just felt it was sub-par. Mediocre, is unfortunately, a failure as far as I'm concerned. Yet we all do mediocre work, even the best. It's just something that happens.

But I'm glad some of you enjoyed it so much.

(Reply to this)

Alterran writes:
on Oct 26 2007 07:47 PM

Ratatouille was beyond doubt the best family film of 2007. In fact, it was probably one of THE best films of 2007. No one in our family is under the age of 15, and yet we all loved it. So far, Brad Bird = Good Movie.

(Reply to this)

laika86 writes:
on Oct 26 2007 09:34 PM

To be honest, Ratatouille wasn't really that much of a family film. It didn't contain any objectionable content, but its themes (and the fact that it involved rats scapering through kitchens) made it more appealing to artsy adults/college students than children.

By the way, I am one of the aforementioned artsy college students, and I loved it. Pixar's 2nd best film, behind Finding Nemo. I wish other studios apporoached film the same way as Pixar.

(Reply to this)

meadowblaster writes:
on Oct 27 2007 06:50 AM

I was underwhelmed when I first saw it, but upon repeat viewings I think it's really good.

I think movies like this are good for children, instead of mind-rotting unfunny movies from Dreamworks that rely mostly on tired slapstick, fart jokes, and shots to the crotch to get laughs. This movie will stand up and be remembered 10 years from now, much like Iron Giant.

And please don't put this movie and Dreck 3 in the same sentence.

(Reply to this)

zbbrox writes:
on Oct 27 2007 07:25 AM

I can see why someone would be underwhelmed by this flick, because it's a much subtler movie than other Pixar movies--it doesn't have the obvious heartstring-tugging of Finding Nemo, or the non-stop laughs and action of The Incredibles (both of which I love, by the way)--but it's a genuinely beautiful film, on several levels. I think the climactic ratatouille-tasting scene was one of the most surprising, satisfying, and thematically-faithful film resolutions I've seen in years.

(Reply to this)

JUDGE DREDD writes:
on Oct 27 2007 07:33 AM

Visually i thought Rat was incredible i did love the film. BUT, i thought it was just a bit short on gags. It did have a very disney movie feel about it, which isnt bad. But disney just dont do gags.

Shrek 1 n 2, Incredibles, toy story, all had great elements of comedy, wether it be a visual gag, or a clever pun that the adults would notice. I dont remember anything like that in Rat.

Ice-age is also one of my faves, as is Wallace n gromit movie. They are fun to watch, as well as visually impressive. If Rat had humour it would have been my number 1.

might i also recomend Surfs up, if you havnt seen it, i thought it was pretty clever funny and boasted the best water FX ive yet seen.

(Reply to this)

subframer writes:
on Oct 27 2007 08:50 AM

Ratatouille is a movie about creativity, art, criticism, as well as other Pixar fundamentals, family, love, loss and redemption. I'm not suprised that some people, who I presume not to be artists or artistic types, don't resonate with the essence of this storyline. This is a beautiful film, with considerable artistic depth and insight tucked inside of a simpler but compelling storyline tucked inside of a children's movie. Bravo Mr. Bird

(Reply to this)

witherwings writes:
on Oct 27 2007 09:04 AM

In reply to this comment (#1226259)
You're approaching the movie looking for laughs, then slighting it because you find little. Again, since when do computer animated movies have to be comedic? This movie was a drama, through and through. You're hashing it into a genre it was not.

(Reply to this)

ShowBizBaby writes:
on Oct 27 2007 12:06 PM

Why do people continue to insist that any animated feature film is a "kids' movie"... or even a "family film"?! Why, just because it happens to have been created via animation instead of live action? Listen to filmmakers like Brad Bird when they talk about their work: it drives them INSANE when their efforts are summarily dismissed/relegated to the "children's table." Only in the U.S. is this the case! Animated films are created and released every year in Europe and Asia, and not automatically looked at as fodder for tykes. RATATOUILLE was made for anyone to enjoy -- kids, adults, even senior citizens. And it happens to be a masterfully created film, teeming with brilliant visuals, great dialogue, fully developed characters, humor, surprises, and heart. Maybe it's not to everyone's liking (nothing in this world is), but how can anyone claim to be bored by it? Did it need more explosions?

(Reply to this)

minderbinder writes:
on Oct 29 2007 02:40 PM

This was one of the best movies of the year, but I think it skewed less to kids and more to adults than most of Pixar's other films.

I can see how a little kid would lose interest, but they did an incredible job with it. And the ads for it were pretty bad, I think some people went into it with completely the wrong expectations. Personally, it's my favorite Pixar has done so far.

(Reply to this)

bztian writes:
on Oct 29 2007 03:16 PM

You know having comments in this order is ridiculous. It should be the most recent comments on top, else the first to respond gets a HUGE weight in what they say. This is one of those cases where the first writers happen to have odd opinions that don't reflect the overall feeling of most people. I am a huge byrd fan myself, he understands how to make a great script that touches you on all levels.

(Reply to this)

LillyVon writes:
on Oct 30 2007 09:54 PM

I never thought this film was a comedy, but more a light hearted drama. It was certainly not aimed for children, and I would think people who drool while they try and talk would also probably find this movie boring.

I think it was absolutely charming. One of my favourites of the year.

(Reply to this)

JackRobber writes:
on Oct 30 2007 10:43 PM

Now, now, you haters - go back to your Transformers and Shrek 3's and quit trying to use your grey matter. Your brain is just for storing nekkid pictures of celebrities anyway, right? I can understand why you wouldn't like Ratatouille, with its absence of fart jokes and pop culture references - I mean, there wasn't even one mention of Michael Jackson or Britney Spears. How could they call themselves a made-for-kiddies-only animated cartoon? They didn't even have a Smash Mouth song in it, ferchrisesakes!

The only thing I ask is: if you don't like a film and want to leave a critique, please give us a few actual, constructed reasons. "It sucks" or "It's cool" are not statements that help anyone understand your viewpoint. They're general statements used by people who can only think on two levels. It's a waste of my time to have to scroll past your bulletin. Think of what a waste of time it is for you to type the entire post, with your two good fingers, repeatedly going back to spellchecker in MS Word, only to still type with bad spelling and grammar. Ugh.

But I%u2019ll give you a pass. When you get past your adolescent years, in a decade or so, you%u2019ll be working on that drill press, looking forward to your break, and you%u2019ll look back at your former self and your taste in entertainment and wonder, why did I think Shooter was so cool? What was so amazing about Rush Hour 3 that I had to see it seven times? Then, you%u2019ll slowly start to realize that Ratatouille was not only an amazing film, but truly a classic among all films, not just children%u2019s entertainment.

JR

(Reply to this)

spchu writes:
on Oct 31 2007 08:02 AM

anyone who thinks the Shrek 3 is better than this must have their heads examined....
enough said....

(Reply to this)

thomas.crown writes:
on Nov 09 2007 02:40 AM

In reply to this comment (#1236386)
Exactly, spchu. Shrek 3 is boring and not funny, a major disappointment compared to the first two movies. Ratatouille is not really an animated film in the spirit of kids/family movies like Finding Nemo and The Incredibles, but more subtle and I think even have better story than those previous two. Remember, 'anyone can cook'!

So far Brad Bird = good movie. Looking forward to his next non-animated movie, 1906. Should be interesting.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Ratatouille

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links