Alright, if you were to ask me what the best animated film I've seen in 2013 is so far (And I can only see Frozen maybe replacing), I would say it was Monsters University. It's not that it didn't have that much competition, though to be fair, The Croods is about the closest any film has come to outdoing it so far, but it's just... I thought this movie was great and while it's not exactly hated by the general public, I still think it's underrated with the members of Spillcom seeming to be the only online reviewers who actually agree with me. (Save for Co-host who gave it the same treatment he gave Tangled) But not only do I think MU is better than every other animated film to come to theaters this year so far, I think it's better than its predecessor, Monsters Inc. Yeah, MI is among 5 other Pixar titles that used to have a perfect score on Rotten Tomatoes until that one guy who feels the need to trash every Pixar film decided to ruin that and it's one that so many adore, and I think it's good, but I don't think it's that great. I'll drop little tidbits explaining that as I go along, but the main focus here is that I want to explain why I think Monsters University is great while I thought its predecessor was just good and nothing more. Remember, this is just my opinion.

Before I truly start this, I'm not gonna bring up the animations. I mean, think about how many years apart both films are. It would be unfair to list that as a reason. Now with that out of the way, let's begin the actual explanation.

Now one thing I will say MI had going for it was its premise. It was certainly more creative and the story was more interesting. However, even the best of story lines can be ruined to a certain degree by uninteresting characters. Now, I'm not gonna say I didn't like the characters in the first movie. I just didn't think they were all that special.

This is where I feel Monsters University really shines. First, let's look at the lead characters, Mike and Sullivan. In the first movie, Mike was uninteresting. Heck, he wasn't even that likable of a character. Sure, there were some funny moments with him here and there, but I found myself strangely not caring about him or what was going on in his life once. In Monsters University, they have him as an overachiever who has to learn to overcome his one biggest weakness or perhaps use it to his advantage. See, that's much more interesting. There's depth to him and character development! Sully in Monsters Inc was admittedly one of two characters I did actually find somewhat interesting, though this was mostly because of his connection with the little girl, Boo. It wasn't that he underwent any major changes, just his connection to the girl was sweet. Here, though, he starts off as an arrogant jerk and has to learn to work with others while also being less egotistical. Again, character development and depth! And what's more is that he and Mike actually have to learn to establish a friendship with each other unlike in the first movie where they were already friends, so there wasn't much of a conflict between the two of them.

I've noticed some people tend to bash Mike and Sully in this movie for how they act at the beginning of the film while completely ignoring their development throughout the rest of the movie. It's like when people bashed Ted from The Lorax just because of how he acts at the beginning of the film while completely ignoring how he changes throughout the rest of the movie. That just comes off to me as unfair, and I've noticed plenty of people seem to have this mindset.

But it's not just the main characters who make this more interesting. I actually found myself caring about some of the side characters. The members of Oozma Kappa, while not the most original concept out there, are still very interesting and you can sympathize with them. I found myself constantly rooting for them and wanting them to make a name for themselves because they were likable and, again, they had depth to them. In Monsters Inc, well, I found the side characters amusing but I didn't find them interesting. Sure, the secretary was funny, but I didn't find myself caring about her or her job. The yeti was alright but I can't even remember his name. The only character I can forgive is Boo as she is just a child and therefor doesn't need a massive amount of development/depth, so I'm fine with that.

Actually, one character I will admit I did actually find interesting in Monsters Inc, though, was Randall. I think he's an awesome villain, and this is one of a few things to criticize about Monsters University. This film explains Randall's hatred toward Sully but after the first few scenes with him, they give him the shaft until that very moment comes up in which it doesn't last long. The main antagonists of the film also aren't that interesting as they're just the typical jocks you see in an everyday high school/college setting. That said though, there are a couple of silver linings to this aspect of the film. The first is that, well, I kinda like the fact that there's no actual villain in this movie but just antagonists who aren't evil. As much as I love villains, I find it refreshing when a film, a family film especially doesn't actually have one. The other silver lining is that I will admit, I did rather like the movie's third antagonist, Dean Abigail Hardscrabble. She was actually very interesting and intimidating and combined with the fact that she's not even bad, that's great stuff.

Now onto the humor: Well, if there is one thing I will admit about Monsters Inc, it's that the humor is very good, but this film also has some great humor and honestly, I think both are on the same level. I enjoyed the humor just as much in MU as I did in MI, so that's something I feel is equal in quality for both movies. Honestly, the only joke in MU I didn't care for was the joke with the slug. Not because it's obvious or was shown in the trailers, but because I feel the creators stretched it out a tad too long. I feel like they could have had it go for 2 seconds maximum and it would have worked much better.

One complaint I hear a lot about this film is that's it's predictable. Okay, first of all, it's a prequel. What were you all expecting? Secondly, I don't think it's all that predictable. Actually, I'm kind of impressed. With this being a prequel, it COULD have been really predictable, but the writers actually took it in a lot of unexpected directions, especially the ending which threw in a twist that genuinely surprised me. Yes, some things you see coming, but come on, how many of you can honestly say you knew how this stuff was going to happen?

Is Monsters University flawless? Well, no, and I've already stated the biggest flaws it has, but I still think it's a great film that has truly brought Pixar out of their, ahem, 'losing streak' and, you know what? This was better than Brave, which I did think was very good as a Disney film but not as a Pixar film. Would I say MU is among my top 5 favorite Pixar Films? No, but it is pretty close, seventh place to be exact. (And no, I'm not going to make a list about that, so don't ask)

Ultimately, if you disagree, that's fine. I just wanted to state why I thought Monsters University was great while finding Monsters Inc to be just good and nothing more. I often feel like most reviewers ignore all the character arcs and just focus on the story/premise and that's why it's not getting all that great of a reputation from the general public. If there's one conclusion I've come to over the years, it's that the plot isn't what makes a story truly work; it's the characters, and I think Monsters University proves this point and, again, I feel that some people are overlooking that. Again, if your opinion is still different, hey, who am I to change it, right? This entry isn't meant to change your views nor is it meant to demonize you. I just wanted to get this out there and state my honest thoughts on Monsters University.