![]()
Mommy? What the Fuck Just Happened?
Meet the Robinsons / Phillip Stephens
Disney’s animated credibility has been in steady decline since the mid-’90s, when their musical cash-cows started to dry up. This decay has shown no sign of reversing now that three-dimensional computer imagery is in the fore, and their failure (and DreamWorks’, come to that) seems to be the inability to bridge this gap that separates mindless children’s entertainment and genuine content that anyone can enjoy (Only Pixar and Studio Ghibli have the distinction of doing this consistently well). With Meet the Robinsons, Disney amps the absurdity to Tourettic heights and, though they try to rein enough of it in around a positive homily, the results are both numbing and unremarkable.
The story: A plucky young orphan named Lewis (Daniel Hansen), who clearly wants to be Jimmy Neutron, has an alarming technical acumen and can invent useless contraptions that explode. His antics turn off potential parents, however, so a discouraged Lewis sets his sights on finding his birth-mother via some mind-reading colander. But when he takes his invention to the local science fair, a weird kid named Wilbur (who also wants to be Jimmy Neutron) shows up, along with some mustachioed Moriarty, who sabotages the mind-reading colander and vanishes.
(Big gasp)
So, then Wilbur (Wesley Singerman) reveals to Lewis that he’s from the future, and the two hop into his time-traveling Impala to journey there. The future is apparently a realm of pure schizophrenia filled with sentient, singing frogs, bespectacled canines, neurotic robots, and Wilbur’s family, the titular Robinsons, who are all criminally insane. There’s also omnipresent technology that makes “The Jetsons” seem positively toned-down. Wilbur and Lewis break the time machine, stranding Lewis in this nightmarish future while the aforementioned villain continues to harass them, unleashing a T-Rex on the family. And did I mention that this guy has an evil, self-aware bowler that wants to take over the world?
(Exhales, head explodes)
Anyway, in addition to the visuals, which provide the movie with enough energy to transcend comedy and hover near the surreal, the time-altering plot might be confusing for youngsters. Only at the end, when the nonsensical plot-strands have been eliminated or resolved, does the story’s convolution arrive at its purpose, but by then, the damage has already been done. Meet the Robinsons was sheer lunacy (possibly because six different writers passed it around) that never really achieved its comedic goal, and only slightly redeemed itself with the affirmative message that tries to anchor the latter half. What was that message? That we shouldn’t dwell on our mistakes, but “keep moving forward” toward the future. It’s a message that seems innocuous enough, but it might also be the same reductive logic that has propelled Disney to unleash this, their umpteenth clunker, in the past decade, without stopping to wonder whether they should be moving forward without some kind of major overhaul. Still, the eight-and-under demographic may walk out of Meet the Robinsons entertained; unfortunately, everyone else will have had a hard time not scooping their eyes out with a melon-baller.
Phillip Stephens is the lead critic for Pajiba. He lives in Fayetteville, AR.
Lookout, The | | The Defining Movie of this Generation |
Comments
"Would mushrooms make it good?" is the most important question.
Posted by: Bucko at March 30, 2007 11:33 PM
From what I hear Disney is gonna ditch the pure 3-D movies and try to go back to what it had back in the early 90's (i.e. Broadway style musical numbers etc.) Anyone else hear about that?
Posted by: Ken Hart at March 31, 2007 12:01 AM
Just got back from taking the kids to this one. It blows. My 9 and 6 year olds were mildly entertained, but this has to be one of Disney's all time worst. The movie itself was deplorable, and Disney's plug for themselves at the end of the movie nearly led me to perform a frontal lobotomy on myself right then and there. Do not, I repeat, DO NOT see this movie - do not give Disney one red cent for this piece of shit.
Posted by: Chris at March 31, 2007 12:07 AM
I can't say I'm surprised to hear this one sucks, but I'm admittedly disappointed. While I usually avoid any non-Pixar CG movies like the plague, what looked like an overwhelming amount of sci fi in this one snuck up and filled me with the tiniest shred of hope that it might turn out okay. Shows what I know.
Posted by: Mitch Clem at March 31, 2007 12:38 AM
Outstanding review title.
Posted by: Rob at March 31, 2007 1:04 AM
For what it's worth, I was more entertained by Meet the Robinsons than Chicken Little, Open Season and both Ice Ages (if you take away the Scrat parts).
And what about the redeeming qualities? I daresay I heartily recommend this to animation aficionados! The villain's animation was the most amazingly wildly animated 3D character I ever saw! The humour was outlandish enough not to be stale (it had a few clichés too, but hey, it's a Disney movie) and provided quite a few solid laughs.
Granted this is no Pixar, but it's not "a piece of shit" either. It has pretty much no winks to adults - apart from a weird oedipien flash, but the upside of this is that there is no tired pop culture references. The story and charcaters is a bundle of wacky nonsense, but it's filled with so much energy it's almost intimidating.
Seriously, I'm going to see this one again because I didn't get the RealD version. And I wasn't high.
Also I want to see the Ratatouille trailer again. This one is going to be so great!
Posted by: Sunsneezer at March 31, 2007 1:11 AM
i have lost all faith in the disney company
Posted by: hannah at March 31, 2007 1:20 AM
People still have faith in Disney??? Thanks for letting me know just how cynical and jaded I am hannah. Had I any left, it would have most certainly evaporated away (along with my brain) with this painful eyesore of a movie.
Posted by: ScarletKnight at March 31, 2007 2:12 AM
...you're welcome??
Posted by: hannah at March 31, 2007 3:35 AM
Seriously, the T rex doing an Arsenio Hall fist pump in the commercial for this told me all I needed to know.
Posted by: kimmie at March 31, 2007 11:24 AM
Wow. Interesting to see two commentors (Chris and Sunsneezer) with such different ideas. I suspect I'd be on Chris's side, if the review gave me any reason to want to see this dreck.
Posted by: Rob at March 31, 2007 12:14 PM
I love Disney. In fact, I go there a few times a year. But movies like this make me want to grab the Mouse by his lapels and shout in his face, "Why, Mickey?! Why, for the love of Walt? Why why why?" and run off, tearing my hair out.
Posted by: stardust savant at March 31, 2007 2:01 PM
Why is it that Disney can't make a movie about a child who has parents? If you think about every disney animated movie, the main character either has one or two dead parents. Some of which die in the process of the film. Can't they ever think of one way for a story line to emotionally involve the kids without killing off a parent?
Just my Disney pet peeve.
But, Sunsneezer...don't expect that a "wierd oedipian flash" is a real "wink to the adults". Recently after sitting next to Justin Timberlake's mother at one of his concerts (yes I am a fan, I can't help it)I remarked to my 30something neighbors that there seemed to be something "oedipal" about their relationship and they had no idea what the fuck I was talking about.
Ahh... I weep for the future.
Posted by: wsapnin at March 31, 2007 2:44 PM
I would never, ever see this movie, but I will gladly watch the T-Rex say "I have a big head! And little arms!" while doing that shimmy, over and over again, and I will laugh every damn time.
Posted by: Geetch at March 31, 2007 6:04 PM
I was very impressed with the graphics. Dabbling in computer graphics made me appreciate all of the details, especially the different textures found in the opening sequence. It definitely makes me look forward to future animations.
As far as the story. I got no beef. It was handled well, all clean, and wraps up beautifully with a great message. It's hard to find movies with a positive strong message, and clean enough for the kids it was meant for. I'm tired of the "adult" animated movies that tease the kids with their commercials and other products.
My FAVORITE part was the classic Mickey Mouse short at the beginning.
Posted by: shotn at March 31, 2007 6:19 PM
Supposedly, Disney is going to have an animated film (not CG, ANIMATED! Like they USED TO DO!) starring a black princess that will come out in '08 or '09.
Posted by: bb at April 1, 2007 9:02 AM
bb- Yes, it's the Frog Princess, and it takes place in New Orleans. It's supposed to be traditionally animated, and it seems kind of like an obvious ploy on Disney's part to expand their cache of Disney Princess merchandise. Hopefully it will be better than just one big commercial.
Posted by: Phaeolus at April 1, 2007 4:09 PM
But it's not important if a film is 3D or animated or acted. It's the story and characters, not the medium, that is important.
Posted by: ChrisD at April 1, 2007 5:24 PM
Geetch, you hit it on the head. The first time I saw that T-Rex bit in the trailer I giggled like a maniac. Like a girl with a Promise Ring at a frat party, I can imagine getting drunk enough to lose my better judgement and possibly endure this pain.
Ah hell, I'd probably have to do my heartiest Raoul Duke impression to get through this but that scene would still be great.
Posted by: kali at April 1, 2007 10:17 PM
Thank God my daughter is nearly 13 and I've finally gotten her interested in great old flicks. Now we can give up on this shit FOREVER. I'm going to be the mean grandma who refuses to take the grandkids to shitty kids' movies, too.
Posted by: Kathy at April 2, 2007 12:02 AM
Yes Kathy - I will be that same old lady who will refuse to pay into disneys crap even if I have grandkids begging me to go. The last time I thought Disney had any imagination left in the whole company was before Aladdin 2 came out.
Posted by: Rew at April 2, 2007 12:40 PM
Whilst I appreciate Disney's efforts to (finally!) include a decent role model for young black girls in their 'Princess' line (tho', I may note, Mulan, the most admirable of the lot, is noticeably excluded), I am a bit disappointed that they've gone the hand-drawn way. It seems doomed for failure even before the first line is drawn.
Posted by: Ciji at April 2, 2007 1:13 PM
"The future is apparently a realm of pure schizophrenia ...and... the titular Robinsons, who are all criminally insane."
Something in you is subconciously trying to get people to see this movie.
Posted by: mango.miasma at April 2, 2007 6:34 PM
I took my 9 year old brother to see this for his birthday and you know what? He laughed. I laughed. We ooh and ahhed over the animation and really, the movie was adorable and fun. I think if you need a movie that both you and your kids can enjoy, you could do a lot worse than Meet the Robinsons.
Posted by: Sarah at April 2, 2007 6:54 PM
Geetch: I would never, ever see this movie, but I will gladly watch the T-Rex say "I have a big head! And little arms!" while doing that shimmy, over and over again, and I will laugh every damn time.
Amen! I thought that was hysterical. Unfortunately, the rest of the movie looks crapulent.
Posted by: Sarah at April 3, 2007 9:04 PM
I have to admit. I really started to like it towards the end. With the weird bowler future.
The beginning is just too cutesy crap being thrown into the air hoping someone will like it. The robot is totally annoying. The family is about 3 seconds per member. But they did pull it out of the crapper by the end.
Rent it when it comes out.
Posted by: AnonymousCoward at April 5, 2007 10:26 AM
The advent of 3d animation was profoundly underwhelming to me, in every way. As time has gone on and I have watched people wax poetic about how many pixels it took to make the pores on Shrek's face, I've continued to be completely uninterested.
I've always found it strange that special effects can wow people so much. Especially when movies rife with technological advancements in animation, CGI, and etc, usually are far more likely to fail in the story and emotional departments-- the creators are too busy fawning over how cool their new movie-making tools are. Look everyone! you can see the individual hairs on Shrek's face!
Yeah, does that make a movie good? (Okay, Shrek was sweet but Shrek 2 sucked)
We have photoshop and a huge array of other artistic computer programs, but people still paint with watercolours and brushes.
I went to school with enough people who were so in love with the technology that they completely ignored story and emotional content. I'm not saying you can't have a technically beautiful, amazing movie and a good story rolled into one, but people DO tend to focus on one or the other.
So, people, what I'm saying is, quit writing off the old styles. Quit flocking to the newest and sharpest CGI flick. This was Disney's mistake. They decided the old methods of animation were obsolete, closed down their departments, and have been pooping out technological marvels.
And we're all underwhelmed.
Posted by: Ari at April 5, 2007 5:58 PM
everyone else will have had a hard time not scooping their eyes out with a melon-baller.
Oh... I like that!
Posted by: Ellis Dee. at April 6, 2007 8:03 AM
I took my 8 year old daughter to see this and we really enjoyed it. I am an avid movie goer (twice a week--we have an inside hook-up) and this one was better than alot of that other crap that's out. The story was good, it had a "Back to the Future" feel and we all know that is a classic. Give Disney a break. Let's see how good your productions would be after over 80 years of business. Most people don't even live that long.
Posted by: Y'all Crazy at April 6, 2007 10:45 AM
I agree
"I have a big head, and little arms..."
That's all I had to see to laugh. I don't want the rest of the movie to ruin that hilarious part for me, so I will most likely skip it and just laugh at and enjoy the trailer
Posted by: sammy at April 6, 2007 11:35 AM
This is one TERRIBLE movie . . . ADHD x 10 . . . no likeable characters . . . and no heart.
Did I mention ADHD?
Posted by: Mike in Santa Cruz at April 7, 2007 7:33 PM
I agree with most of the comments... the movie sucked in the beginning. I didn't understand what was going on with the family, or how the hell they could tell the kid was from the past because of his hair. WTF?
Anyway, I took my two little cousins, age 10 and 6. They were entertained, but the 10 year old couldn't recite what happened in the movie when someone else asked her what happened. So exactly... "mommy, what the fuck happened?"
Posted by: IL DUCHE at April 9, 2007 3:58 AM
Meet the Robinsons: Bringing Self Trepanation To A Theater Near You..
Posted by: sarah at April 13, 2007 7:00 AM

