Welcome to The Valve

Valve Links

The Front Page
Statement of Purpose

John Holbo - Editor
Scott Eric Kaufman - Editor
Aaron Bady
Adam Roberts
Amardeep Singh
Andrew Seal
Bill Benzon
Daniel Green
Jonathan Goodwin
Joseph Kugelmass
Lawrence LaRiviere White
Marc Bousquet
Matt Greenfield
Miriam Burstein
Ray Davis
Rohan Maitzen
Sean McCann
Guest Authors

Laura Carroll
Mark Bauerlein
Miriam Jones

Past Valve Book Events

cover of the book Theory's Empire

Event Archive

cover of the book The Literary Wittgenstein

Event Archive

cover of the book Graphs, Maps, Trees

Event Archive

cover of the book How Novels Think

Event Archive

cover of the book The Trouble With Diversity

Event Archive

cover of the book What's Liberal About the Liberal Arts?

Event Archive

cover of the book The Novel of Purpose

Event Archive

The Valve - Closed For Renovation

Happy Trails to You

What’s an Encyclopedia These Days?

Encyclopedia Britannica to Shut Down Print Operations

Intimate Enemies: What’s Opera, Doc?

Alphonso Lingis talks of various things, cameras and photos among them

Feynmann, John von Neumann, and Mental Models

Support Michael Sporn’s Film about Edgar Allen Poe

Philosophy, Ontics or Toothpaste for the Mind

Nazi Rules for Regulating Funk ‘n Freedom

The Early History of Modern Computing: A Brief Chronology

Computing Encounters Being, an Addendum

On the Origin of Objects (towards a philosophy of computation)

Symposium on Graeber’s Debt

The Nightmare of Digital Film Preservation

Richard Petti on Occupy Wall Street: America HAS a Ruling Class

Bill Benzon on Whatwhatwhatwhatwhatwhatwhat?

Nick J. on The Valve - Closed For Renovation

Bill Benzon on Encyclopedia Britannica to Shut Down Print Operations

Norma on Encyclopedia Britannica to Shut Down Print Operations

Bill Benzon on What’s an Object, Metaphysically Speaking?

john balwit on What’s an Object, Metaphysically Speaking?

William Ray on That Shakespeare Thing

Bill Benzon on That Shakespeare Thing

William Ray on That Shakespeare Thing

JoseAngel on That Shakespeare Thing

Bill Benzon on Objects and Graeber's Debt

Bill Benzon on A Dirty Dozen Sneaking up on the Apocalypse

JoseAngel on A Dirty Dozen Sneaking up on the Apocalypse

JoseAngel on Objects and Graeber's Debt

Advanced Search

RSS 1.0 | RSS 2.0 | Atom

RSS 1.0 | RSS 2.0 | Atom


Powered by Expression Engine
Logo by John Holbo

Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.



About Last Night
Academic Splat
Amardeep Singh
Bemsha Swing
Bitch. Ph.D.
Blogging the Renaissance
Butterflies & Wheels
Cahiers de Corey
Category D
Charlotte Street
Cheeky Prof
Chekhov’s Mistress
Chrononautic Log
Cogito, ergo Zoom
Collected Miscellany
Completely Futile
Confessions of an Idiosyncratic Mind
Conversational Reading
Critical Mass
Crooked Timber
Culture Cat
Culture Industry
Early Modern Notes
Easily Distracted
fait accompi
Ferule & Fescue
Ghost in the Wire
Giornale Nuovo
God of the Machine
Golden Rule Jones
Grumpy Old Bookman
Ideas of Imperfection
In Favor of Thinking
In Medias Res
Inside Higher Ed
jane dark’s sugarhigh!
John & Belle Have A Blog
John Crowley
Jonathan Goodwin
Kathryn Cramer
Languor Management
Light Reading
Like Anna Karina’s Sweater
Lime Tree
Limited Inc.
Long Pauses
Long Story, Short Pier
Long Sunday
Making Light
Maud Newton
Michael Berube
Motime Like the Present
Narrow Shore
Neil Gaiman
Old Hag
Open University
Pas au-delà
Planned Obsolescence
Quick Study
Rake’s Progress
Reader of depressing books
Reading Room
Reassigned Time
Reeling and Writhing
Return of the Reluctant
Say Something Wonderful
Shaken & Stirred
Silliman’s Blog
Slaves of Academe
Sorrow at Sills Bend
Sounds & Fury
Stochastic Bookmark
Tenured Radical
the Diaries of Franz Kafka
The Elegant Variation
The Home and the World
The Intersection
The Litblog Co-Op
The Literary Saloon
The Literary Thug
The Little Professor
The Midnight Bell
The Mumpsimus
The Pinocchio Theory
The Reading Experience
The Salt-Box
The Weblog
This Public Address
This Space: The Fire’s Blog
Thoughts, Arguments & Rants
Tingle Alley
University Diaries
Unqualified Offerings
What Now?
William Gibson

Sunday, June 29, 2008

The Raw Critic: WALL-E

Posted by Bill Benzon on 06/29/08 at 08:16 AM

I went to see WALL-E on Friday. It’s Pixar’s latest film and, as someone with a particular interest in animation, I had to see it. I’d seen trailers last year and read chit-chat on the web. Late last week I read some of the early reviews, in the New York Times, Slate, Salon, Ebert, and one or two others (Metacritic links them all). So I was primed.

This has been my standard practice for years. I also read reviews afterward, more so than ahead of time. And I talk with people about a film.

The point is that my movie-watching takes place in the context of other peoples’ observations and reactions, and that those opinions and reactions affect me.

Did I like WALL-E? Yes. No surprise there. But I’m still mulling things over, still trying to understand my experience of the film. Sure, it’s my experience, but that doesn’t mean that I understand that experience. Things aren’t so simple.

The big hype going in was that there’s no dialog during the first third to a half of the film. No dialog?! Just two robots scurrying around on an earth bereft of humans but piled high with the scrap they left behind. WALL-E’s been doing some of that piling. The other robot, EVE, is visiting earth on a mission. WALL-E sees her and falls in love. Boy meets girl. A classic.

But no dialog. I didn’t get all the pre-release chatter on this point. Sure, it’s not the standard thing, but I didn’t see why it couldn’t work, and work as commercial fare. It worked – the reviews and post-release chatter confirms it.

The dialog starts when WALL-E and EVE get back to one of the giant space craft where all the humans are, now bloated and floating around on hover chairs. The action picks up – conflict and chase scenes. My interest flagged a bit, and something about those humans bothered me.

Reading comments at Cartoon Brew helped me think about those things. The Brew is devoted to animation. The people who post and comment there are knowledgeable and passionate. Many of them work in the animation industry. As I said, their comments helped me think about my own reactions. But let me quote one of them, Chris Berdoz:

So I finally saw it on opening day, and afterwards I thought “that was okay”. I felt it didn’t live up to my expectations, perhaps only about 80% or so. I still felt like the Incredibles was my favorite CG movie of all time. But as I got home I couldn’t get the film off my mind. I started thinking about the message behind the movie. I started thinking about parts of the movie. The more I thought about it the more it settled in that the movie really did live up to my expectations. It was kind of a delayed reaction, I guess. Then I really wanted to watch it again. I decided I’d buy the DVD when it came out, which is pretty major because I never buy DVDs unless I seriously love a movie. And then I started reading people’s interpretations of the film and that got even more excited.

He too had to think about the film, and he too was affected by comments he’d read after seeing the film.

I don’t think that is unusual. That’s just how it is. Our own personal experience is not so exclusively personal, so exclusively ours, as we sometimes think. Nor is it transparent to us. Immediate experience has a holistic quality that resists analysis. It is not so easy to figure out just what in the movie (or the poem, the novel, the musical performance, etc.) caused this or that aspect of our experience, much less why.

What are the limits of this process? In particular, how much can it change our evaluation of the work, in this case, an animated film? The reviews of WALL-E have been positive to extravagantly positive. Many have expressed reservations. How long will it take for this process to settle-in? Will anyone watch WALL-E DVDs or Blue-ray disks in five years?

I haven’t decided whether or not I will see WALL-E again in the theater, but I will probably buy a DVD and study it. I have no idea how that process will change my experience of the film, but it will change it.

When I saw a theatrical release of Fantasia back in 1969, for example, I thought it was OK, but not all that. When I bought the DVD a few years ago, I was stunned. I’m pretty sure that the version I saw on the DVD is not the same as what I saw back in 1969. I doubt that that’s what made the difference. The difference was in me, I had changed. And yet I still learned by watching the DVD over and over, sometimes stepping through sections frame-by-frame. I found some of the segments immediately appealing, “The Nutcracker Suite” and “The Rite of Spring,” for example. Others were less appealing; both “The Pastoral” and “Dance of the Hours” seemed a bit embarrassing. Through study I’ve come to appreciate and to like “Dance of the Hours,” but, while “The Pastoral” sequence does have its virtues, I’m afraid it’s fatally flawed.

How is it that we can learn to see a film? Just what is it that we learn? And why do we decide to learn how to see, to change ourselves in some way, rather than just dismissing the film as being, in some way, bad?

P.S. The opening short, Presto, was a laugh riot, perhaps the best since the classic Warner Brothers cartoons of the 40s and 50s.

* * * * *

UPDATE, 6.29.08: I saw the film again. Yep, it runs 40 minutes before we get real talking, the captain of the Axiom talking to the ship. About an hour in I found myself yawning, not a sign of deep engagement with the film. I forget what I was thinking at that time, but I certainly was, at one time or another, thinking: “Yeah, I know, it’s an ecological fable. But that’s an intellectual knowing, not a gut feeling.” By the last 10 or 15 minutes, though, I was back in it. Shed a little tear, just a little one, when EVE manages to revive WALL-E, not the last time, back [REDACTED], but before that, on the ship, perhaps in the garbage bin.


WALL-E has just been released in the UK, Bill, guess it’s worth seeing, huh? I was by excited by the trailers etc. and think I’ll ‘shed a tear’, too!

By on 07/20/08 at 04:03 PM | Permanent link to this comment

Oh sure, worth seeing. And worth a tear.

By Bill Benzon on 07/20/08 at 04:32 PM | Permanent link to this comment

I continue to think about this film. Not too long about Mike Barrier returned from a research trip and indicated he’d be getting around to seeing and then writing about WALL-E. He also recommended a critique by Mark Mayerson. So I read Mayerson’s piece, did some thinking, and sent Mike some emails. Here are the guts of those emails:

And then there’s the ecological message. I understand that there’s a problem and it’s real real serious; but that understanding is outside the film. I just imported it into the film because the film called for it. Well, that’s what I think the film-makers did as well. This is a boy-girl story about a dorky by lovable boy-robot who scores way above his league in the looks department. That’s fine by me. I don’t know what that message was supposed to be doing in there, but it didn’t articulate with the main action in a way that made in compelling or even all that noticeable in any but an intellectual way. Imagine a Road Runner cartoon in which Wiley Coyote sues Acme Corp. for selling defective merchandise. He looses because the judge is a road runner and thus biased. Road Runner wins again. An effective filmic treatment of corruption in the judicial system? I don’t think so.

It’s not clear to me exactly what went wrong here. But the complicating action in the WALL-E & EVE story didn’t follow from the ecological premise in an interesting way. It was just your standard computer-gone-nuts story. So we’ve got boy-&-girl vs. the crazy computer for a plot. That ecology stuff is just there clanking around the margins. I mean, the man vs. nature theme of Bambi is far more convincing.

* * * * *

I re-read the Mayerson essay and he’s right about the disconnect between the robot plot and the ecological plot. Though perhaps it’s even worse than he said it was.

After all, WALL-E seems to have benefited from the disaster. As the movie opens the whole world’s his sandbox and he gets to spend all his time playing in it. What fun! He’s the self-sufficient Robot Caruso and he’s doing fine. Yes, he does watch and re-watch the Hello Dolly! tape (and it is a tape, not a DVD), and that, I suppose, indicates that he has a sense of something missing in his life. But it doesn’t really grab you; you see that something’s missing, but you don’t feel it. And you see the lack because you’re importing your knowledge of human life into this movie where there are no human beings (so far).

Then EVE arrives. How and why is a mystery. But, as Mayerson notes, it’s hard to take his attraction to her seriously. He has no sense of why that plant is important, just that it is. For that matter, neither does EVE. It may be her “prime directive,” but she doesn’t seem to understand what it’s about. It’s merely her programming.

Neither WALL-E nor EVE have any awareness of what’s at stake here. She’s just following her directive and he’s following her, mechanically. Without awareness their lives can’t intersect with the lives of the humans in a meaningful way. More and more the film looks like an example of what Herbert Marcuse used to call “repressive desublimation.” You’re allowed look at the nasty truth just enough to feel that you’re doing your duty by the truth, but not so much as to want to actually do something on behalf of that truth, thereby threatening the existing order.

“Don’t worry, be happy, the cute little robot will save us. Or at any rate, we can feel warm and fuzzy watching him try.”

As a cute critter film, this is fine until EVE arrives. That much of the film has no plot, just WALL-E doing his daily rounds. But that’s interesting and well done. Once EVE arrives, from that point we have this mechanical plot that just goes through the motions. It’s a device from which to hang a bunch vignettes that just wave in the breeze like wet laundry.

By Bill Benzon on 07/21/08 at 02:20 PM | Permanent link to this comment

Hi Bill,

I just got around to seeing WALL-E and wanted to come on the thread and say, ‘Yep, you were right, it was worth a tear!’ I got much bigger lump in my throat, though, when I read your latest post [above] because it sounded so embittered and nowhere near as connected to the film as your original post.
I know you’re making a point and I see it but don’t you think you might be over-analyzing a little? I mean, the film does its primary job i.e. to entertain, to provoke emotion etc. but you can be too distant, too concerned with socio-political agendas.
I recall being bawled out by a lecturer for reacting emotionally to the portrayal of poverty in George Moore’s Esther Waters; he seemed to think that by feeling something I was revealing some kind of unsophisticated lack of critical awareness: ‘Didn’t I realise,’ he said, ‘that Moore was just manipulating me and making poverty ‘picturesque?’
Of course I realized but no way was I sacrificing that gut reaction to the pain I read, however it was produced, so I yelled back and hung on thanking God for that feeling which no amount of education will ever dull. The day it does, I give up.
So, here you have it, my emotional response to the ‘cute critter film’. But I’ll confess that the tear came to me not because of WALL-E and Eve but because I felt something remotely related to ecological concern when the fat clutsy captain asked, ‘Where is the blue sky?’
Yeh, me, who never gave ecology a second thought before and found recycling a bore and a nuisance. WALL-E made me think - and feel - differently: God bless the little ‘critter’!

By on 08/05/08 at 09:48 PM | Permanent link to this comment

Perhaps I’m over-analyzing, but all the eco-hype around the film asks for more than the film supplies. When the DVD comes out I’ll pick it up and give the film another few viewings.

By Bill Benzon on 08/05/08 at 10:12 PM | Permanent link to this comment

You’re a good guy, Mr Benzon!

By on 08/05/08 at 10:30 PM | Permanent link to this comment

Wall-E was an animation gift. From the shot of the toaster (Brave Little Toaster reference), to Wall-E’s hitchhike into space (2010: Escape scene with Dr Chandra). Many other references to classical sci-fi. What disturbs me is the recycle of the story-lines of Max Headroom (ABC/Chrysalis movie and TV series) and the movie Idiocracy. I thought of it as an extension of these two. It seems odd that this story-line needs continuance over 22 years. It IS relevant, and thats the sad part. The only thing scary? It might become self-fulfilling prophacy the more its repeated.

By on 11/24/08 at 06:47 AM | Permanent link to this comment

ive just seen WALL-E and i loved it but how is it connected to recycling ????

By on 02/04/09 at 12:58 PM | Permanent link to this comment

Add a comment:



Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below: