MovieChat Forums > Moana (2016) Discussion > Excellent Film With One Real Flaw

Excellent Film With One Real Flaw

posted 8 years ago by mohamedsid7
15 replies | jump to latest

Enjoyed this film much more than I thought I would. Before I get to what IMO is the only real flaw, let me give it credit for all the ways it excelled.

- Fully rounded characters: Moana and Maui are the only main characters and plenty of time was given to get to know them. The first 32 mins is solely devoted to understanding Moana's want to be a good daughter/future chieftain vs her inner need to voyage across the water. Maui's narcissism was forged by parental abandonment causing him endlessly yearn for mass adulation. Their character arcs are clear and every decision they made is easily understood. Too many films get this most basic step wrong.

- Lush animation: This is arguably Disney's most gorgeous film. Seriously. Every other frame could make a great wallpaper for your home screen.

- Excellent songs: Parents who've gotten sick of Let it go will love this soundtrack. Getting Lin-Manuel Miranda & Opetaia Foai together to craft this was a stroke of genius on Disney's part. Here's a list of my faves:

1) We Know The Way. I couldn't wipe the grin of my face when I first heard this. Opetaia Foai is tremendous and Lin-Manuel's voice inspiring without being showy. Head and shoulders above every other track for me personally. Wish it was 12 mins long.

2) Shiny, which I didn't like when I first heard it but have come to love after continously listening to the soundtrack this week, a wildly different in tone glam rock song that will be a delight to David Bowie fans. Jermain Clement is too good in this genre.

3) How Far I'll Go. Auli'i aces Moana's "I Want" song and it's easy to see why she won that singing competition that led to her audition for the part. Not as iconic as Let it go, but also won't wear out its welcome as fast.

4) Logo Te Pate. Can't get enough of those Polynesian rhythms. Wish there was one more song like this in the film/soundtrack.

5) You're Welcome. Dwayne Johnson has a surprisingly pleasant voice and totally sells the boastful self-confidence of the Demigod.

6) I am Moana (Song of the Ancestors).
That climax Tho. Parents should brace themselves when driving with kids in the backseat for that moment.

Least favourite song: Where You Are.
A status quo song used as an audience intro to the world that doesn't take enough risks. Uninspired and forgettable.

You could make a strong case that a Disney animated film featuring vivid characters in a gorgeously animated world with an excellent collection of songs is all anyone should expect/want/hope for. But there's one crucial ingredient needed to make those 3 parts coalesce into a full and satisfying meal.

The one big flaw - Level Up Plotting.

Moana suffers from a very specific writing flaw I like to call Video Game Plotting. VGP goes like this:

Hero enters level 1, given objective, must defeat boss.
Hero enters level 2, given objective, must defeat boss.
Hero enters level 3, given objective, must defeat boss.

Moana's Act 2 is basically this:

Moana searches for Maui, convince him to help, defeat cute/murderous coconut dudes.
Moana and Maui enter releam of monsters, to retrieve Maui's hook, defeat Tamatoa.
Moana and Maui fight Te'ka, to return the heart to it rightful place, but are defeated.

You may not have a problem with this type of plot but it's generally regarded as inferior to a well written narrative that doesn't rely on mini objectives and mini bosses. This flaw is the reason that Tamatoa gets the villain song instead of the true villain Te'ka. Te'ka should've been prominently featured in Acts 1, 2 & 3, not left to the final 30 mins alone. Tamatoa should've at least been foreshadowed in Act 1 or called back to in Act 3. ( I know he's in the end credit scene but that doesn't count).

Act 1 was already jam packed and you might say that not every villain needs a villain song. But even a clandestine villain like Frozen's Hans at least co-sang one song and was featured throughout. Imagine if Toy Story 3 saved Lotso the bear for the end of Act 2 and the Act 3 climax.

I wish the script had one more rewrite. I wish Acts 2 and 3 were better meshed together. I wish this film was perfect instead of flawed but still excellent.

Pros:
- Fully fleshed out main characters
- Outstanding animation
- Excellent soundtrack
- Highlighted & respectful protrayal Polynesian culture
- Plenty of humour & perfect for kids
- No damsel-in-distress moments & unnecessary love interest

Cons:
- Video Game Plotting

Verdict: 8/10

The best from Disney animation since The Lion King.

In my humble opinion, of course.

[–] mohamedsid7 8 years ago

Bump

[–] dogsoldier_spoon-1 8 years ago

Hmm, I see where you're getting at but personally I didn't mind very much.

The only thing I would've liked was just a little bit more development to Maoi. Yes, it's Moana's movie but I think it would've been interesting to explore his motivations and fears more.

[–] mohamedsid7 8 years ago

His motivations and fears are doled out in bits and pieces through the prolouge, the song Shiny and his own obsession with being beloved.

Someone else posted that the film would've benefited from a scene between Maui's desertion of Moana and the climax where he returned to help her. A scene where he realized the error of his ways or something.

I don't think audiences needed that. They can put 2 & 2 together. They know he's conceited and needs to become selfless. Just like they didn't need a scene showing Han Solo deciding to help Luke during the death star run. Him being there was enough to complete the character arc.

[–] DarklordRB 8 years ago

Well that kind of 'Level Up Plotting' usually happens in adventure, quest type movies since the setting is a bit mobile. The Odyssey was like that; Odysseus had to go up against the Cyclops, Circe, the Sirens, Syclla and Charybdis, etc. The same kind of plot also happens in the recent Kubo and the Two Strings movie.

[–] Therru_Babayaga 8 years ago

I have the same pros and cons as you, but I gave it a strong 7 because I have a deeper problem with the plot.

I really felt it lacked an actual threat, something we as an audience really felt afraid of. There was so many opportunities and they did nothing with it.
The beginning made us really feel that taking the stone was a big deal, but was it? Was really the sea more dangerous without it? Nowhere do we see that Maui did a terrible thing, that had a deep impact on people. Sure, we see a few rotten coconuts, but on the sea, there are no apparent particular danger coming from the so-called unbalance in the world. No more than with the stone, I mean. No big monsters, no dangerous mist, nothing.
The coconuts pirates were more cute than threatening, Tamatoa had a dangerous feel but he was such a buffoon it was hard to take him seriously, and Te'ka had an awesome design and presence but really didn't sold us the "danger factor" in the end.

Something was lacking that other recent Disney movies did better. In Tangled, you could feel that Eugene might die. In Wreck-it Ralph, you felt like Ralph and Vanelope were in real danger. In Frozen, Anna and Elsa were at real risks, and so was Arendel. Even in Zootopia, it felt like Judy and Nick could end badly.

Here, I don't know, there were plenty of opportunities to make it a real dangerous world full of marvel, but they made it pretty straightforward and a bit flat. At no point were I afraid for Moana or Maui, I felt no tension or excitment trying to fight their way through the obstacles.

I also felt that making Moana's father the protective type just slow down the movie and prevent us to go right into the action. Hiding to Moana the fact that her people were explorers really brings nothing in the end, except filling some time.

A good movie, with gorgeous animation (I felt like a kid seeing it) but I didn't feel as excited by the story that I could have been if they had taken a more adventurous approach to the story (it was such the perfect setting).

[–] mohamedsid7 8 years ago

You have to remember that this is a family film from Disney. They're in the business of creating entertainment for 5-100 year olds. Predictable and safe stories that's also (hopefully) a lot of fun is what their fans and parents expect of them.

Making the film more suspenseful for you, might mean it's inappropriate for their target audience.

I'll never forget riding the subway shortly after Toy Story 3 hit theaters and overhearing two dads talk about it. One had seen it with his kids and the other was considering taking his own kids soon.
The dad who saw it was warning him about the terrifying climax and how it might be too intense for young kids. They decided that he should see it alone first and judge it for himself.

I loved everything about that film especially its climax and couldn't believe that they didn't trust Pixar with not scaring the crap out of their kids. Then I read an article online saying that Toy Story 3 shouldn't be rated G, but PG or its harrowing furnace scene.

From the viewpoint of a parent, it kinda made sense. They're not like us. They don't need storytelling wizardry. They just want a 90 min cartoon that'll entertain their kids without boring them to pieces.

I don't think you'll hear many kids or parents complaining about how our hero's journey never really felt in peril.

[–] Therru_Babayaga 8 years ago

Predictable and safe stories that's also (hopefully) a lot of fun is what their fans and parents expect of them.

No, that's not what Disney is about at all. It's not about being "safe und predictable", never. They want to make money of course, but they always make quality-entertainment that is trying to go beyond this safe zone. They have made intense and scary scenes in a lot of their movies, for example. They change settings, technology, they make musicals again after setting them aside for a long period. They evolve with the time, which still makes them relevant 70 more years after their creation.

Beside, how being "suspensful" is inappropriate for children? Kids need to be challenged, kids need quality in entertainment even more than adults at this stage of development. As long as it ends on a happy note, kids can take almost any darkness. I really don't like this mentality where a movie is just to baby-sit kids, and movie-makers shouldn't have this mindset in the creative process, it's just poison to any creativity. Most people have no idea what is good for their kids anyway as far as movies go, so they really shouldn't be pandering to them, because let's face it, Disney has no rival and people will continue to see their movies anyway, so they should make the most of it.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Zaphenzo 8 years ago

The beginning made us really feel that taking the stone was a big deal, but was it? Was really the sea more dangerous without it? Nowhere do we see that Maui did a terrible thing, that had a deep impact on people. Sure, we see a few rotten coconuts, but on the sea, there are no apparent particular danger coming from the so-called unbalance in the world. No more than with the stone, I mean. No big monsters, no dangerous mist, nothing.
The coconuts pirates were more cute than threatening, Tamatoa had a dangerous feel but he was such a buffoon it was hard to take him seriously, and Te'ka had an awesome design and presence but really didn't sold us the "danger factor" in the end.

The islands were dying. Without any coconuts or fish, the islanders had no food, and they all would've died.

Something was lacking that other recent Disney movies did better. In Tangled, you could feel that Eugene might die. In Wreck-it Ralph, you felt like Ralph and Vanelope were in real danger. In Frozen, Anna and Elsa were at real risks, and so was Arendel. Even in Zootopia, it felt like Judy and Nick could end badly.

Moana had to face off against a massive crab that wanted to eat her basically by herself, as Maui couldn't control his transformations. Moana and Maui had to go up against Te Ka after getting their butts kicked the first time, with the only difference being the Maui's hook was now damaged (so, in other words, they were worse off the second time). So I don't really see how that's any less peril than the other movies you mentioned. Sure, you knew they were going to somehow find a way to win and live happily ever after, but you knew the same for the other movies you mentioned, so I don't see the difference.

I can see how the VGP applies, and how it might detract from the movie for some. But I think it really makes sense in this movie. They're on a vast ocean, so the enemies are going to be different. As someone else mentioned, The Odyssey is an amazing adventure book that has stood the test of time, and he faced different dangers everywhere he went because the dangers he left behind couldn't follow. The coconut pirates lucked into finding them the first time, and after Maui crashed their boats, they had no hope of finding Moana and Maui again. Tamatoa was stuck on his back, and had no way of following. They did still face Te Ka twice. So I see where you're coming from, but personally, it made sense. But to each their own.

[–] Therru_Babayaga 8 years ago

The islands were dying. Without any coconuts or fish, the islanders had no food, and they all would've died.

Yeah, I got that of course, it's just that Moana left to search for Maui before anything happened and the people really suffered, and we don't see any other island where the lack of stone really had any visible impact. No devastation, no dark mist, nothing.

Show, don't tell.

Moana had to face off against a massive crab that wanted to eat her basically by herself, as Maui couldn't control his transformations.

And this crab is not scary at all, so it was hard to take him seriously, especially after his catchy song.

Moana and Maui had to go up against Te Ka after getting their butts kicked the first time, with the only difference being the Maui's hook was now damaged (so, in other words, they were worse off the second time).

Te'Ka was afraid of the water, which in the middle of the sea makes her quite a weak villain. The spirit of the sea had to open a path for her to meet Moana at the end. I don't even know why Maui bothered fighting her at all, as he could just have flown over her without any problems. Throwing rocks was not that efficient anyway.

In the other movies, you know of course they will prevail, but it is presented like they COULD fail and that it will have an impact, that there was some danger to the characters, and that it was real and a bit unpredictable (Rapunzel saving Eugene even without her magic hair, Ralph sacrificing himself, Anna being unfrozen by her sister's love). In Moana, it was more artificial. Maui leaving for example was a bit weak, even if you get that he is afraid to lose his powers, but his return makes no real sense, since Moana didn't try to reason with him or tried to look for him afterwards. Also, Moana didn't really have to fight with Te'Ka when she understood who she really was, she just walked to her and that was it. It's a fine twist, but it seems a bit like a cop-out in a way.

Moana is not bad at all, but it was a bit weaker compared to what it could have been. It lacked some darkness in the movie despite the fact that it was introduced in the tale at the beginning of the movie, with the whole legend talking about the end of the world. Light and fun is fine, but it needs some darkness to really make it shines.

[–] Zaphenzo 8 years ago

Yeah, I got that of course, it's just that Moana left to search for Maui before anything happened and the people really suffered, and we don't see any other island where the lack of stone really had any visible impact. No devastation, no dark mist, nothing.

Show, don't tell.

But what she was setting out to do to save them would take a while. If she waited till people were dying of starvation, then who knows if any would survive until she returned? She saw the need of her people, as the plants stopped growing, the fish were gone, and the coconuts were not providing any nourishment any longer. They literally had no food. She saw that need and set out to try the only thing she knew could possibly save it. And no, we didn't actually see other islands dying, but we were told at the beginning that it happened. People have already talked about the movie being overly long (I don't think it is, though), so adding scenes showing other islands fading away would be a little pointless when we already know it's happening.

And this crab is not scary at all, so it was hard to take him seriously, especially after his catchy song.

I guess I can see your point. Though he did get dangerously close to eating Moana. And he threw around Maui like a rag doll.

Te'Ka was afraid of the water, which in the middle of the sea makes her quite a weak villain. The spirit of the sea had to open a path for her to meet Moana at the end. I don't even know why Maui bothered fighting her at all, as he could just have flown over her without any problems. Throwing rocks was not that efficient anyway.

Moana realized she was afraid of the water during the first fight, and it didn't really help at all. And even if Maui had just flown over her, it would have been for naught, because he would've discovered the same thing Moana had. So even after that, he still would have had to fight her, because without Maui fighting, Moana couldn't have ever seen that Te Ka was actually Tafiti. And considering that Maui had to save Moana's life both times they faced Te Ka, the second time going so far as willing to die to give Moana more time (the slap dance at this part was awesome), it gives a sense of real peril, at least to me. As much as any of the other Disney movies you mentioned, at least.

In the other movies, you know of course they will prevail, but it is presented like they COULD fail and that it will have an impact, that there was some danger to the characters, and that it was real and a bit unpredictable (Rapunzel saving Eugene even without her magic hair, Ralph sacrificing himself, Anna being unfrozen by her sister's love). In Moana, it was more artificial. Maui leaving for example was a bit weak, even if you get that he is afraid to lose his powers, but his return makes no real sense, since Moana didn't try to reason with him or tried to look for him afterwards. Also, Moana didn't really have to fight with Te'Ka when she understood who she really was, she just walked to her and that was it. It's a fine twist, but it seems a bit like a cop-out in a way.

Again, for me, I feel like the same amount of danger is in Moana than any of the others. I felt no more or less peril in Moana than in any of the others. And I thought Maui leaving made sense. We saw throughout the movie that he was afraid of Te Ka, afraid of failure, and highly valued his hook. To him, the hook was all that gave him any worth. Moana finally convinced him to give it a chance, and they failed miserably and his hook was damaged. His knee jerk reaction was to leave, because his fear of Te Ka and failure was validated and he was also in danger of losing the only thing that gave him self worth, and he saw no reason that a second go at Te Ka would be any different. So he left. But, from his development throughout the movie and the relationship between him and Moana, we know he wouldn't leave her alone to deal with Te Ka, so he came back.

I don't know. I mean, I see your point, but for me, personally, I disagree. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[–] Herengone 8 years ago

I think the "issue" with Disney movies is that they rely heavily on a super villain to move the plot along. Moana's plot was basically internal conflict and personal growth aka "man versus self". I love it. Very Miyazaki.

[–] thecimmeriankingconan 8 years ago

I can see what you mean about the problems with the film. My personal problem with the story was that it lacked any sense of urgency. And near the climax when Maui leaves and then later comes back...It didn't really feel natural. The reason for him leaving felt weak and he came back with no shown reasoning.

My Moana Review
https://youtu.be/9lpl7F_K8j4

[–] pale_dog 8 years ago

How is his reason weak? His fishhook grants him his powers. And we know they're a huge part of who he is. And in Maui's mind it's all he is.

When Moana doesn't listen and he gets very very close to almost losing that (again), of course he's pissed and says 'screw this I'm out' in anger. It's perfectly fine.

[–] dwellman21 8 years ago

Fair criticisms. I do feel you on the whole video game plotting thing, where all the adventures they went on didn't feel as tight or as character building as I would've liked. I mean Disney does these type of buddy-buddy movies all the time where two characters travel around from place to place together, but I think in films like Tangled, the relationships between our two leads were built better, and what happened leant more toward developing them both individually and as a pairing (romantic or otherwise). It's not necessarily BAD in Moana, but I dunno, something kept me from truly falling in love with it. It didn't feel as interconnected and "necessary" to the development of those two, if that makes sense.

Like take for example Tangled: it's a big moment for Rapunzel to stand up to the ruffians at the bar and go into the "I've Got A Dream" number, because that's the first time she's experienced something like that in the real world apart from Mother Gothel ("and with every passing hour I'm so glad I left my tower). And that's followed up with Flynn giving her props for it, with Rapunzel not being help to help beam with glee for the validation of her competence and independence she never got before. I don't really remember scenes like that in Moana in terms of completing her character arc like that.

And yeah, this probably could've benefited with Te'ka having more of a presence throughout. I really do like the ultimate resolution, but maybe if they would've encountered and failed against that villain more by trying to do things one way and THEN doing things the other way after all the lessons they've learned throughout the story, then I think it would've made the film feel that much more complete and full circle. Even Hiro and Callaghan from Big Hero 6 had a better hero/villain parallel, and that wasn't exactly the strongest either.

I dunno. Again there just a something that was missing to really bring the tears out or me. Buuuuuuut on the other hand, it took another rewatch of the aforementioned Tangled for me to appreciate it better, so maybe I'll catch more things to like with this movie too. And seeing how I already like a lot about it, I'm eager to see it again soon.