I'd rather be hangin' with the Triplets
I went to see the Triplets of Belleville a few weeks ago with the Cute Little Red-Haired Girlfriend and my friend Joe. Just before the Oscars each year, the girlfriend and I go on a film feeding frenzy trying to see as many nominated films as possible. We never quite hit all of them, but this year, because of the early telecast, we really fell short.
There were only three nominations in the animation category this year, and we managed to see just two of them: Finding Nemo and The Triplets of Belleville. I enjoyed them both and thought they made an interesting contrast in animation styles. While Nemo is a polished example of Disney storytelling, next to Triplets it seems formulaic and rather conventional. Although I am a huge fan of Disney animation, a movie like Triplets shows what has been lost through Disney's dominance in the field, at least in the U.S.
Where Nemo is heartwarming and clever, Triplets is, well, trippy. The story is told for the most part without dialogue, yet its narrative manages to be much more specific than Nemo. We know more about the internal lives of triplets characters, in part due to the film's evocative story-telling methods. For example, portions of the Triplets story are told through the dreams of a dog that belongs to the lead characters, which provides the viewer with a completely different, yet intimate perspective on the action.
Many viewers rightly praised Nemo for its beauty and technical achievement. The ocean provides a fantastic setting for dramatic colors and textures. I was a bit jaded going into Nemo, however, because I have for some time suspected that I may suffer from Animated Liquids Fatigue. This condition affects mainly animation fans who have seen one too many gratuitous scenes of animated water (e.g., Pocahontas), lava (e.g., Shrek) or other liquid, inserted into a film primarily to show off and say, "Hey! Look how realistic-looking this liquid is!" Wow. Just like water. How much did I pay for this ticket?
The ocean sequence in Triplets, on the other hand, lasts only long enough to make its story point: we are crossing water now. And it does so artfully, relying not on realism but on more suggestive, painterly effects. The animated transformations in Triplets are intended to make us marvel and to stretch the imagination, rather than to smoothly give the illusion of life. In this sense, I think the film embodies more of the spirit of animation, and is a better exemplar of the art form, than more technologically sophisticated endeavors.
I loved many of the characters in Nemo (a lesbian fish!), including the villainous, fish-eating sharks. The fish-eating Triplets, on the other hand, are not sentimentalized--they remain spooky and mysterious even in close quarters. None of the characters in Triplets are exactly lovable, though they are memorable. I expect the club-footed, bespectacled grandmother in Triplets will live long in my memory even though her character is not destined to become a stuffed toy in the Disney store.
As in the Wallace & Gromit series, there is a strange Rube Goldberg-like invention at the center of the story. At one point, the Triplets form a slapdash band, making music from household objects instead of instruments. Even the jazzy Triplets theme song, which was also nominated for an Oscar, is filled with verbal contortions. It is this unexpected action, of things turning into other things, that makes the film so magical.

While reading