I'm Just Essayin'
This book is an excerpt of academic essays I had to write for school. There are papers running from eighth grade to my final year at the University of Toronto, but obviously the vast majority of them are university essays. Each year of school cost me somewhere between seven and nine thousand dollars, and these papers are what I have to show for it.
In other words, you should really be paying me roughly $28,000-$36,000 to read the full book - or about $600 for just this essay.
Now, I didn't start writing film reviews until way after my time at U of T, but I figured of all the essays to share, this one might actually be the one the widest array of people might be interested in. It's a paper where I talk about Disney and Pixar's influence on the director Andrew Stanton as he set out to tell a semi-biblical cautionary tale about excess and commercialism through the 2008 animated film Wall-e. Let's get right into it.
God, Pixar, and Stanton: The Advantages and Limitations of Auteur Theory in Wall-e
Disney/Pixar's 2008 film Wall-e was a critical and commercial success, and remains an excellent example of how a director's individual vision can work in cooperation with a production company's formula for filmmaking. As director and screenplay writer, Andrew Stanton's role in placing overt environmentalist and less-noted biblical themes into the film is evident, especially when analyzing the film using auteur theory. Simultaneously, Disney/Pixar's formulaic approach to moviemaking is exemplified through Wall-e's journey through the film. Viewing the film through an auteurist perspective can prove beneficial, especially for understanding the various nuances that Stanton inserts into the film. However, when film companies are as directly involved in the construction of their films as Disney/Pixar are, it is foolish to ignore their influence in favor of a purely directorial focus. As important as auteur theory is, Wall-e's commercial and critical success can be best understood when viewing it under the lens of auteur theory and remembering that both the director and the company itself play a massive role in shaping the film.
Whereas some directors have very few restrictions on the direction and subject of their films, when it comes to Disney/Pixar films the director must always keep in mind the overarching themes or patterns present in the vast majority of Disney's movies. As such, understanding Disney/Pixar's role in the construction of Wall-e is a prerequisite to approaching Andrew Stanton's role, however significant his is. Wall-e's adherence to the Disney/Pixar film formula is key to understanding its commercial success, as multiple critics agree. For clarity's sake, the Disney/Pixar formula is similar to the trope of the hero's journey; a character (generally a young character in Disney films) is separated from their family, makes new allies afterward, overcomes some trial and then reunites with their family.[1] While Wall-e lives in isolation apart from the companionship of a cockroach, his separation from home, acquiring of new friends, victory over an enemy and return home keep his adventure firmly rooted in Disney/Pixar storytelling. Mother Earth itself could be considered Wall-e's - and humanity's - family, as it is treated throughout the movie as the ultimate destination and goal of all the protagonists. The significance of this trend on the film's development will be discussed briefly, but first its impact on critical response should be noted.
This intentional decision to keep Wall-e within a certain form of storytelling did not go unnoticed by critics of the film. The New York Times' A.O Scott writes that the humanity of the film's robots "is as much a Pixar trademark as the painstakingly modeled surfaces or the classical virtual camerawork and editing."[2] Scott correctly identifies here how Wall-e follows a pattern established by earlier Pixar films, a pattern enforced by the company itself. For Scott, the personification of non-humans in Wall-e is a distinctly 'Pixarian' characteristic, reminding us of the company's role. Renowned film critic Roger Ebert agrees with Scott in his review of the film. "Like so many of the Pixar animated features, it finds a color palette that’s bright and cheerful, but not too pushy, and a tiny bit realistic at the same time."[3] Ebert notes how another aspect of Wall-e - the colour styling - falls in line with earlier Pixar tradition. Noting the influences of Pixar's tendencies on Wall-e helps us understand the film as a piece of a sort of cinematic mosaic created by their films. Entertainment Weekly's Owen Gleiberman adds to this idea by calling Wall-e "A film that brings off what the best (and only the best) Pixar films have: It whisks you to a new world, then makes that world every inch our own."[4] Addressing the fact that Pixar's films leading up to Wall-e were all critical and commercial successes (at Wall-e's release, Cars was Pixar's 'worst' film despite still holding a 74% approval rating and "Certified Fresh" on review aggregate site Rotten Tomatoes), Gleiberman calls out the Pixar-ness of the film as the main key to its success. Pixar's ability to draw its audience into a computer-generated world while maintaining the suspense of disbelief is one of its recurring characteristics. While each critic points out a different aspect of the film they appreciate, all agree that Pixar's style and thematic influence on the film's construction is evident. With the knowledge of how the Disney/Pixar style in Wall-e was received by critics, we can move on to understanding the style itself in greater detail.
Wall-e's adherence to the Disney/Pixar formula certainly aided in its critical success, but it also helps us understand its development and why certain aspects of the film are the way they are. The plot of Wall-e follows many other major Pixar/Disney works. Specifically looking at Pixar, the films A Bug's Life, Finding Nemo, Ratatouille, Toy Story, and Toy Story 2 all focus on a character or characters separated from their family and the struggles associated with restoring the relationship with that family. Looking at films produced by Walt Disney Animation Studios, The Lion King, Tarzan, Hercules, Mulan, and Pocahontas are other examples of this same plot pattern that resulted in profitable and critically successful films. With this in mind, attempting to understand the techniques and tropes used in Wall-e would be difficult without acknowledging how significant Disney/Pixar's role in its construction was. A purely auteurist analysis of Wall-e would deny us this aspect of the film's production. That said, Andrew Stanton's influence on the film is remarkably significant, and it is when looking at his role that auteur theory becomes essential to grasping some of the finer details and themes prevalent in Wall-e.
Andrew Stanton's influence on Wall-e is threefold. In the first place, he directed the film and thus had a largely controlling voice on how the final product appeared. Secondly, Stanton wrote the screenplay along with Jim Reardon, ensuring that his intended themes and ideas would be evident in the film before the animation even began. Thirdly, Stanton's role at Pixar has been hugely influential in the development of the company's overarching themes. Stanton was a writer for Toy Story, Toy Story 2, Monsters Inc., and the director and writer for A Bug's Life, Finding Nemo, and Ratatouille. Because of Stanton's deep connections with Pixar, it may be difficult at times to understand where Pixar's influence ends and Stanton's begins, or vice versa. This is why in the case of Pixar films, a purely auteurist view can be difficult.
Pixar aside, Andrew Stanton's personal influence on the movie is evident when applying auteur theory and helps us identify and analyze the commonly understood themes of the film, mainly consumerism and environmentalism. Western culture's tendency to live in excess is exaggerated in the film, and every aspect of the movie's world from the trash-covered Earth to the floating chairs of obese space travellers points towards this as a fairly overt indicator of theme. Scott notes Stanton's role in generating these themes, as he writes in his review.
"Mr. Stanton shows his awareness of the contradictions inherent in using the medium of popular cinema to advance a critique of corporate consumer culture. The residents of the space station...eyes fixed on video screens, taking in calories from straws sticking out of giant cups...look like moviegoers at a multiplex. They’re us, in other words."[5]
Scott correctly attributes the source of the message being sent here to the film's director/screenwriter, showing us the defining role Stanton has had in shaping Wall-e's world. In 1994 when the release of Toy Story was approaching, Stanton and the other Pixar leads began developing the idea for Wall-e, which should be an indicator of the time Stanton has put into this particular project released in 2008, fourteen years later.[6] Scott goes on to say in his review of Wall-e that "the genius of Wall-E, which was directed by the Pixar mainstay Andrew Stanton...lies in its notion that creativity and self-destruction are sides of the same coin."[7] Scott continually credits Stanton with generating the intended meaning of Wall-e, suggesting his auteurist view of the film. With regards to the idea of creativity and self-destruction, Scott is pointing out how Stanton presented mankind's need to expand and create to the point of excess as a potentially disastrous impulse, as it resulted in a garbage-strewn planet. In short, The New York Times agrees that the most blatant themes in Wall-e are a direct result of the film's director, Andrew Stanton. Focusing on the director of the film therefore allows us to understand where certain themes or ideas came from. This is particularly important because through auteur theory, we can even grasp subtler themes that are not as blatant as the "stop treating the Earth like garbage" moral of Wall-e.
Auteur theory allows us to recognize Andrew Stanton's influence on the movie in a way other theories do not, and with regards to Wall-e it allows us to uncover some deeper meanings that are present in the film. Gleiberman's review of Wall-e utilizes auteur theory to draw parallels between Stanton's directing style with Spielberg:
"For a while, Wall-e is nearly wordless, and the director, Andrew Stanton stages the early scenes with a gentle, unhurried mystery that is unabashedly Spielbergian. He forges a world that's casually amazing in its tactile metallic grandeur."[8]
This auteurist look at Wall-e invites us to compare the film with other Spielberg works, which could lead to discovering other patterns or parallels besides the 'gentle, unhurried mystery' that Gleiberman identifies here. Noting Stanton's influence on the introduction of the character Wall-e is integral to understanding some of the finer nuances of the film. With this in mind, the less-discussed biblical undertones of the film should be given attention and attributed to Stanton, as will be made clear.
Stanton has discussed openly his Christian faith and how the accompanying values show up in Wall-e. Upon the first viewing of Wall-e the biblical references that Stanton inserts may not be obvious, but when intentionally hearing from the director himself they become far more blatant. One biblical reference is how Stanton paints Wall-e as the only living soul on earth akin to Adam from the book of Genesis, and then introduces a 'female' robot.
"That's certainly why I picked EVE as an appropriate title for the female robot"[9], Stanton admits in an interview with Christianity Today. He suggests that many of the patterns of storytelling present in Genesis run in humanity's DNA, and that the biblical parallels are thus a result of that innate sense. "I just loved the poetic-ness that these two machines held more care for living and loving than humanity had anymore", he continues. Understanding Stanton's intent here allows us to uncover a deeper meaning of Wall-e and Eve's relationship wherein they are supposed to represent the 'first' of a sentient race, learning to live and love while also taking on the responsibility of caring for Earth. The robot protagonists act now as a loose allegory for what mankind was originally supposed to look like in Stanton's view; innocent, caring, and hard-working. Stanton also admits in his interview that parallels were drawn between Eve's character and a part of the story of Noah's Ark; in the biblical story, Noah sends a dove from the ark during the flood to see if the earth is safe to live on again, and the dove returns with an olive branch. In the same way, Eve is sent from the Axiom - mankind's last home away from home - to see if the earth is hospitable, and brings a plant back to the ship's Captain. While it was Jim Reardon - another Pixar employee - that noted this similarity in the early stages of Wall-e's development, Stanton embraced the idea and reworked the plot to emphasize this more fully. He explains, "I loved the parallels of EVE almost being like this dove, going down for proof that it's time to come back. It just worked in that allegory, so I ran with it." Wall-e's entire plot structure is laced with biblical references, an important point that could be missed without looking closely at Stanton's role in creating the film.
Some would say that an auteurist approach to cinema limits the critic's ability to understand the different meanings a film can have by reducing the analysis to one director's perspective. However, by looking at Andrew Stanton's influence, we are actually able to see Wall-e not as an isolated independent work but as a project heavily dependent on earlier traditions, from older Pixar movies to the Bible. At the same time, the influence that Disney/Pixar exerted over Wall-e's production should not be understated. Wall-e adheres strictly to the codes and conventions of Disney filmmaking, and critics agree that this is a major reason for the film's success. A purely auteurist view provides much information but falls short of granting a comprehensive understanding of what makes Wall-e what it is. That said, it still gives us a very precise look at one of the most influential factors on the movie's production - the director. Stanton's 'Pixarian' heritage and Christian faith shine through the film and allow us to grasp at more complex or hidden meanings layered throughout the movie. In short, Wall-e's success belongs to its dependency on the Disney/Pixar tradition, but appreciating its nuances cannot be done without acknowledging the massive impact that its director had on its production.
[1] Sammond, Nicholas. CIN270Y1 Lecture. [2] Scott, A. O. "In A World Left Silent, One Heart Beeps." The New York Times. The New York Times, 2008. Web 25 Feb 2016. [3] Ebert, Roger. "Wall-E Movie Review & Film Summary (2008) Roger Ebert." All Content. 26 June 2008. Web 25 Feb 2016. [4] Gleiberman, Owen. "Wall-E EW.com." Entertainment Weekly's EW.com. o4 July 2008. Web 25 Feb 2016. [5] Scott, A. O. "In A World Left Silent, One Heart Beeps." The New York Times. The New York Times, 2008. Web 25 Feb 2016. [6] Moring, Mark. "The Little Robot That Could." ChristianityToday.com. 04 June 2008. Web 25 Feb 2016. [7] Scott, A. O. "In A World Left Silent, One Heart Beeps." The New York Times. The New York Times, 2008. Web 25 Feb 2016. [8] Gleiberman, Owen. "Wall-E EW.com." Entertainment Weekly's EW.com. o4 July 2008. Web 25 Feb 2016. [9] Moring, Mark. "The Little Robot That Could." ChristianityToday.com. 04 June 2008. Web 25 Feb 2016.
Comments