This weekend's showpiece on the Sunday Times "Op-Ed" page was Frank Rich's epic dispatch from the weekday megaplex, "Wall-E For President," an ode to the future Best Picture nominee and a condemnation of the two candidates for president currently duking it out on cable news. Though the headline ups the ante on our Wall-E Oscar campaign considerably, Rich is not literally suggesting that the little trash-collecting robot launch a third-party candidacy, just bemoaning the fact that, as he puts it, "a cartoon robot evokes America’s patriotic ideals with more conviction than either of the men who would be president." Rich, in fact, obviously wept through the entire running time of Wall-E, and we're pleased he liked it so much — it can only help Wall-E's Oscar chances, though Andrew Stanton is probably gritting his teeth to hear his movie, the environmental message of which he's so carefully downplayed, described as "a gentle, if unmistakable, summons to remake the world before time runs out."
But why couldn't Wall-E run for president? He's certainly got a great Q-rating, with $128 million in tickets sold already. He is diligent, honest, and hard-working. And he stays admirably on-message ("Eve"). Sure, he won't even be manufactured for another 200 years or so, but who cares? "Wall-E: The Candidate of the Future!" We're already excited about reading Jeffrey Wells's diatribe: "Animated characters, stay on your side of the fiction/nonfiction fence."
Wall-E for President [NYT]