I know I’m a bit late to the party writing about a movie that was released almost two weeks ago (I saw Dory the day after it came out), but sometimes I like to let a moviegoing experience marinate for awhile. In our “hot take” society, we throw out instantaneous reactions to everything because, well, Twitter/Snapchat/Facebook. Anyway, with the benefit of perspective, I occasionally find it useful to revisit my initial impressions on a movie to see if I was too generous or harsh on it, or if I have a realization about a particular plot point or theme. Yep, it’s this, then solving world hunger on my agenda. Anyway, after seeing the latest Pixar offering, I channeled Pauline Kael and declared, “Well, that was garbage.” Seeing the accolades pour in for this supposed staggering work of genius incited a fire within that I thought had died long ago. I’ve grown accustomed to Pixar worship; we’re to the point now where I expect John Lasseter’s farts to be marketed as air freshener – but I can’t stands no more. Yep, I downgraded FD to WET GARBAGE. Oh yeah, I went there. I’d rather have watched 90 minutes of the Great Pacific garbage patch than one minute of this waterlogged mess. I’ve already deleted my browser history in case sends assassins dressed as Woody and Buzz Lightyear to eliminate me. Enough preamble. Here’s five reasons why this 41-year-old guy is worked up over a kid’s movie (which I saw because my kiddos wanted to). Should I have done ten? Maybe, but this stinker doesn’t warrant the effort.

1.) The recycled plot. We all kinda walked into this one, given the title. But yeah, it’s the same basic premise they perpetrated upon us 13 years ago with Finding Nemo… and one that wouldn’t take up even half a cocktail napkin. When you take into account the awfully familiar Star Wars: The Force Awakens storyline, audiences have eaten up $2.5 billion worth of reheated material in the past six months.

2.) Wasting its stars’ talent. Let me get this straight, Dory writers… you have two of the funniest comedic performers in entertainment in Albert Brooks and Ellen DeGeneres and give them virtually no funny dialogue?! Put another way, Brooks was funnier as a psychotic mobster in Drive. For this crime against moviemaking, writers, I sentence you to two weeks in a locked room with Mr. Wrong running on an endless loop.

3.) It’s a little, uh, repetitive. Actually, a lot repetitive. Beyond the ultra-similar plot to it’s predecessor that I’ve already so eloquently whined about, the title character, has short-term memory loss. This device, which grew tiresome in the previous film, is just plain aggravating. I know there’s some hokum in there about overcoming disabilities, but I had been pummeled too far past the point of submission to care.

4.) It’s a little, uh, repetitive. Actually, a lot repetitive. Beyond the ultra-similar plot to it’s predecessor that I’ve already so eloquently whined about, the title character, has short-term memory loss. This device, which grew tiresome in the previous film, is just plain aggravating. I know there’s some hokum in there about overcoming disabilities, but I had been pummeled too far past the point of submission to care. See how annoying that is?

5.) I know it’s animation, but come on. An octopus steals a truck and proceeds to drive it. It may seem odd that I’m questioning the believability of a movie populated by talking sea life, but this somehow felt… desperate. It’s almost as if — wait for it — Pixar may have jumped the shark.

I’d like to think that I’m giving a voice to those millions of parents who have had to pretend for tears that Pixar can do no wrong (the Toy Story series is overrated, and they still hasn’t answered for plagiarizing Doc Hollywood and calling it Cars). I’m realistic, though. Pixar has built up a ton of goodwill with audiences over the years, so it’ll probably take three or four stinkers to even begin to chip away at its facade. Until then, I’ll be waiting…dutifully shelling out money like the rest of the free world.