Finding Nemo (2003) Script Review | #60 WGA 101 Greatest Scripts of the 21st Century
Emotional, funny, and heartwarming, Pixar delivers another adventure filled with wonder, danger, and memorable characters.
Logline: Nemo, an adventurous young clownfish, is unexpectedly take from his Great Barrier Reef home to a dentist’s office. Now it’s up to his worrisome father Marlin and a friendly but forgetful fish Dory to bring Nemo home as they encounter vegetarian sharks, surfer dude turtles, hypnotic jellyfish, hungry seagulls, and more along the way.
Screenplay by: Andrew Stanton, Bob Peterson, David Reynolds
Original story by: Andrew Stanton
Pages: 141
Finding Nemo is the first screenplay in Pixar’s filmography that feels decidedly more grown up and mature than its other outings. Perhaps it has something to do with its themes of parenting and how to protect your child without being overprotective. No matter: Finding Nemo is grand; engaging, thoughtful, and funny, it’s the kind of screenplay that will carry it all the way to the bank (and how!).
Two types of stories unfold in this tale about a clownfish who travels across the ocean to rescue his son. The first—where Marlin and Dory make a treacherous journey to Sydney while becoming unlikely friends— is essentially a road trip movie combined with a buddy comedy (think Planes, Trains, and Automobiles). This is the A-plot. The second— where Nemo must get out of the fish tank with the help of his new friends— is in the vein of a prison break movie. This is the B-plot. I think this might be the first script I’ve come across on the WGA’s list where the A-plot and B-plot have different genre tones; you’d think they wouldn’t go together, but it does.
Lesson for the aspiring screenwriter: If you’re brainstorming for ways on how to make your screenplay feel original, try mixing up the genres for your A- and B-plots. It certainly works for Finding Nemo.
The genius behind Pixar’s work (their earlier work especially) is that they tackle very real, very relatable problems through anthropomorphized characters. This was partly due to a technical limitation— it was easier to animate toys, ants, and fish than humans— but it was also a way for the filmmakers and writers to deal with problems they were wrestling with. Andrew Stanton came up with the story based on multiple experiences— most influentially being an experience of overprotectiveness with his son that made him realize the damage he was unintentionally inflicting on their relationship. Marlin becomes an avatar for Stanton (and millions of anxious parents) who undergo the challenges of parenting (pushed to an extreme) without having to actually ever deal with their child getting kidnapped. Pixar was- and to an extent, still is- the kind of company that encourages writers and directors to approach their stories from the bottom-up— from a personal emotional core— a seed of truth, if you will— that anchors the concept, versus a top-down approach that starts with the concept and then tries to find its core.
Coincidentally, Finding Nemo came out a year before Dreamworks Animation’s Shark Tale, another animated film about fishes and underwater life, and the contrasts are stark. In Finding Nemo, the filmmakers seek to tell a story about an overprotective father (the reason being he lost his wife and all his children) who must learn to trust his son to find his own way but it happens that the characters are all fish (the bottom-up approach). Shark Tale, however, seems to have started with a top-down approach of a concept where a fish capitalizes on a false rumor that he killed a shark for his own gain. Not that there’s anything wrong with starting from a concept, but Shark Tale becomes a muddle of mobster movie cliches and pop culture references of its time than finding an original way to talk about a human truth.
It's a mistake that many aspiring screenwriters make— and I include myself in this boat— where we try to the fit the concept around the emotional core instead of the other way around. Granted, this strategy does pay off when the concept grabs attention in the market, and if you’re lucky, it’ll connect with readers beyond the initial appeal of its conceit. But it’s risky because the opposite is even likelier: your script will be seen as having an intriguing concept and nothing else going for it.
Moreover, starting from a truth (in this instance, overparenting is bad) gives you freedom to slot it in different scenarios. It could be set in space, it could be set in a fantasy world, it could be set in a post-apocalyptic world— it’d still work because the message of overparenting would still apply! A concept is more rigid and gives you less wiggle room.
Lesson for the aspiring screenwriter: Start with a truth or message, then work it into the concept.
The third thing that makes Finding Nemo memorable is its colorful supporting characters. Just as Nemo finds a tribe in the fish tank, especially a mentor with whom he can relate and who believes in Nemo, Marlin and Dory encounter many other creatures along the way. Not only does this flesh out the world and make it feel large in scope, it also creates moments in which the characters either learn to overcome obstacles, learn something about themselves, or learn something about the other person.
Let’s start with Marlin. After meeting Dory, the duo encounter:
Bruce the vegetarian shark and his friends Anchor and Chum – Marlin learns that Dory can read and he escapes death;
The moonfish – Marlin realizes that despite Dory’s forgetfulness, she is in fact helping him;
Crush the turtle – Marlin sees firsthand how letting your child figure things out for themselves strengthens the father-son relationship and makes for better parenting;
Nigel – although the pelican does meet Nemo first, Marlin must overcome his fear and trust the bird.
Now Nemo’s supporting cast has more presence than the characters Marlin and Dory encounter:
Gill – helps Nemo escape, believes in the little fish and shows that his deformed fin doesn’t have to hold him back;
Peach – she is a maternal figure to Nemo (who never had a mother) and serves as the fish tank lookout;
Bloat – an uncle-type of character who puffs up when anxious;
Bubbles – a neurotic who has been in the tank way too long;
Jacques – an obsessive cleaner shrimp;
Deb – an eccentric type;
Gurgle – an obsessive-compulsive type.
The characters Marlin and Dory meet only have one scene (with a cameo later if lucky- like Bruce the shark) because the focus is on Marlin’s budding friendship with Dory as they travel to various locations. But since Nemo is confined in the tank, his supporting characters have more screentime. And by letting each character have memorable traits, it goes a long way to make them memorable to readers (surfer turtles, anyone?).
Lesson for the aspiring screenwriter: Supporting characters serve as an oxygen system for your screenplay. If your characters are going on a journey, have them meet one memorable character at each step who helps them in their quest and to learn something about themselves (or each other); if your character is confined to a location, keep a stable ensemble of supporting characters.
Although Finding Nemo runs up to 141 pages, its final runtime is only 100 minutes (credits included). You shouldn’t be afraid of going over the usual stipulated 120-page count… provided your screenplay is as strong as this one! It’s got plenty to teach about how to write a winning screenplay that can connect with adults and children alike. By finding a memorable and unusual way to talk about a universal anxiety, Finding Nemo will stay with you long after you close the final page.
Who are the writers of Finding Nemo?
Andrew Stanton
Andrew Stanton (born on December 3, 1965) is an American filmmaker, screenwriter, producer, and director, widely recognized for his contributions as a key creative force at Pixar Animation Studios. He joined the animation studio in 1990, and co-wrote the screenplays for A Bug’s Life (1998) and Toy Story 2 (1999). However, it was his directorial debut with Finding Nemo (2003) that established his stature, winning him the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature at the 76th Academy Awards. He followed it up with WALL-E (2008), another stunningly ambitious film that netted him his second Academy Award for Best Animated Feature. In 2016, he returned to the world of Nemo with a sequel, Finding Dory, and though it didn’t hit the levels of critical acclaim that its predecessor did, earned a staggering $1.029 billion at the global box-office. He has been nominated for a total of six Oscar awards and won two (other nominations include Best Original Screenplay for Toy Story, Finding Nemo, and WALL-E, and Best Adapted Screenplay for Toy Story 3.
Bob Peterson
Bob Peterson (born on January 18, 1961) is an American animator, screenwriter, director, storyboard supervisor, and voice actor. Peterson began his career at Pixar in the early 1990s, transitioning from an animator on commercials to the feature films starting with Toy Story (1995). He served as a co-director and co-writer on Up (2009) in addition to voicing memorable characters in different Pixar productions. He has received Oscar nominations for Best Original Screenplay for Finding Nemo and Up.
David Reynolds
David Reynolds is an American screenwriter and animator whose credits include The Emperor’s New Groove and Finding Nemo, for which he received an Oscar nomination for Best Original Screenplay. He has contributed to other Pixar projects in various capacities, and his latest screenplay credit is as the co-writer of The Garfield Movie (2024).