Pixar’s Finding Nemo is not only one of the best movies made by a studio famous for churning out hit after hit after hit, but, in many people’s eyes, one of the best movies ever made. Period.

But what if the movie were made much more biologically accurate than it is now? The folks over at The Fisheries Blog seem to think Disney and Pixar are lying to kids by not being more factual, and that they will do it again with the upcoming sequel, Finding Dory.

Continue reading to get an idea of what the biologically accurate version of Finding Nemo would have looked like, and share your thoughts below.

Here’s their description of a biologically accurate story involving the clown fish we know and love from the movie:

Father and mother clownfish are tending to their clutch of eggs at their sea anemone when the mother is eaten by a barracuda. Nemo hatches as an undifferentiated hermaphrodite (as all clownfish are born) while his father transforms into a female now that his female mate is dead. Since Nemo is the only other clownfish around, he becomes a male and mates with his father (who is now a female). Should his father die, Nemo would change into a female and mate with another male. Although a much different storyline, it still sounds like a crazy adventure!

The only problem with all of this is that The Fisheries Blog is presenting it as an actual complaint to Pixar for lying to kids, and an argument for using these biological accuracies in the actual movie. They open with the paragraph “The Disney film, Finding Nemo, lied to your kids! Disney would simply argue that they altered reality to create a more entertaining storyline, but read below for the true story, and you tell me which you think is a more entertaining.” They then go on to state that because the movie’s makers “demonstrate reproduction and the killing of the mother in the first minute of the movie, how did they decide that a natural sex change is outside the bubble of viewable material?”

The fact of the matter is that Disney/Pixar’s “argument” would be accurate, this is a kids/family movie, made solely for entertainment purposes. The fish are freakin’ talking, ladies and gentlemen. It doesn’t have to be 100% biologically accurate; that’s why we love watching nature documentaries, to learn the more fascinating details about animals like the clown fish such as these. What’s the point in making this some kind of issue. To get some attention? The fish are talking!

I vote that people teach cool scientific facts where they can, like oh…say a blog, and enjoy movies for what they are, biological inaccuracies and all. That’s the whole point of movies. Go in, watch the show, try and enjoy, get out.

What do you think? Should Finding Nemo have been more biologically accurate?

[Source: via io9]