Rango

Rango is a great Western.  It’s a great kids’ movie.  It’s just plain great.

This beautifully animated film both ribs and pays homage to the Western, and particularly the spaghetti Western.  It’s a tale of an evil boss and a new sheriff, and it references enough classics of the genre to keep the aficionado in deep clover.  More importantly, it tells its own Western story, and it does so well enough to capture the imaginations of children for whom it represents their first exposure to the genre.

Johnny Depp voices the titular Rango, a chameleon who dreams of adventure and heroism.  When he wanders into an Old West town populated with (beautifully rendered) desert creatures, he tries to blend in.  After all, that’s what chameleons do.    Next thing he knows, he’s the sheriff.  Now, if he can only figure out how to work that gun …

And away we go.  Rango has gunslingers, saloons, jailbreaks, and even a plucky belle struggling to save her ranch.  It also has great music, funny jokes, and the most beautiful animation I’ve enjoyed since Kung Fu Panda.  I loved it, my wife loved it, and my kids loved it.  Now, if only I can get ‘em to watch Stagecoach.

Toy Story 3

They made Toy Story 3 for kids, right?

They animated it with pretty colors and they used established characters from the first two Toy Story films, which definitely felt like kid-friendly fare.  They set much of the action in a day care center, and they used a fuzzy purple teddy bear for a villain – how much more kid-friendly could they get?

A lot more.  In fact, I rate Toy Story 3 as the most terrifying kids’ movie since Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (You remember Chitty: the Andrews / Van Dyke Disney romp that featured a child abductor who haunted preadolescents’ dreams for years).  The themes center on loss and betrayal and the slow, mortal march of time.  The day care center becomes a chamber of horrors that will make a generation of children scream in dismay at the prospect of spending time anywhere similar.  The visuals include a creepy baby-doll who looks like something out of a Romero film, a gelatinous octopus that’d make Lovecraft shriek, and a Daliesque animated tortilla with Potato Head features that weaves and lurches in sickening contortions.  Don’t even get me started on the aforementioned villain, an evil good ol’ boy of a bear (brilliantly voiced by Ned Beatty) who represents everything wrong with authority and everything to fear in those who promise to look after you.

Here’s the deal: the first films’ Andy’s all grown up and ready to head off to college, and his toys find themselves in a box dropped off at the local day care.  Things seem lovely at first, but it isn’t long before the true nature of the facility reveals itself.  Can our heroes escape?  With Andy leaving them behind, to what do they have to escape?  Why bother?

We’re talking about some dark stuff.  Combine it with some of the film’s unnerving visuals and scary sequences, and I can’t imagine showing it to anyone under the age of ten.  Hell, just writing about Toy Story 3 creeps me out all over again.  If this is a kids’ movie, I’d hate to see what Pixar can put together for adults.

Shooter

SHOOTER is your basic action/conspiracy thriller, starring Mark Wahlberg as the former superdupersoldier who can ... not ... be ... stopped.

Which is fine, and lots of stuff goes boom and all. But what makes this movie interesting are Danny Glover, Ned Beatty, and Elias Koteas as villains. These are not names I normally associate with villainy, and it's great fun to watch Glover do "efficiently amoral," Beatty do "self-interested evil," and Koteas do "batshit crazy." Further, the excellent Michael Peña (BABEL, CRASH, MILLION DOLLAR BABY) does fine work as the noble FBI agent, and I'm actually coming to like Kate Mara (pictured), whom I found grating in ZOOM.

But this movie is so pedestrian, so lacking in creativity or unique voice, that I can give it no more than the most lukewarm approval. If you like watching stuff blow up and you find SHOOTER on cable, you could do a lot worse. But don't go out of your way for it.

Superman

You know that tagline for SUPERMAN? The one that goes, "You'll believe a man can fly"? Well, after screening SUPERMAN, my boy drew a letter on his chest and asked me to toss him onto the bed not once, not twice, but until my arms felt like they were going to drop off my shoulders. Those SUPERMAN guys weren't kidding.

I hadn't seen SUPERMAN in decades, and I'm happy to report that the movie holds up quite well. It's out on a fantastic DVD transfer, so mom can appreciate Christopher Reeve in all his glory while dad marks time 'til Miss Tessbacher shows up again. It's fun to see Gene Hackman and Ned Beatty camp it up, and I particularly enjoyed noticing (for the first time) a young John Travolta's blink-and-you'll-miss-it contribution. SUPERMAN is just plain fun, and it's welcome dessert after the gloomfest that must necessarily be a Batman movie. The closing shot, with Chris Reeve grinning to the audience as he flies off to heroism, is such a winner that I'm surprised it doesn't show up in all those "Best shots in Hollywood History" lists.

What a delight.

PS I miss Christopher Reeve. That guy was a class act. Did anyone else read his book? It's almost enough to make you forgive Robin Williams for that "Dr. Clown" movie

Rudy

What’s not to love about RUDY? It speaks to powerful American archetypes and values, it’s competently plotted and paced, and it sells its characters every step of the way.

RUDY’s one of those movies I’ve long felt that I should see, but I couldn’t quite muster the will. I imagined it would be treacly and pandering, and I don’t particularly care about either the University of Notre Dame or its football program. When I finally dug in and gave it a go, RUDY hooked me from the moment an authority figure told the scrappy hero what he couldn’t do – what ambitions were beyond realization for a youngster of his means and talents. I strongly identify with that situation, and I was right there with Rudy as he put his thumb in the eye of The Man through a combination of hard work and perseverance. I suspect that the movie resonates with a wider audience because RUDY’s story is the classic American story, that of the underdog who succeeds against all odds.

The nature of that success helps sell the movie. RUDY doesn’t face an obstacle, go through a handy montage, and quickly triumph over his opponents while winning the girl. He fails again and again and again, questioning himself and the value of his goal, but he keeps at it like a terrier at a rat. His triumph isn’t the sudden victory of the naturally talented or magically transformed; it’s the triumph of hard work over natural talent, of tenacity over nearly everything. It speaks to us because we can so readily identify with Rudy. How many of us are super-geniuses or fantastically gifted athletes? How many of us have gotten where we are through our willingness to work a little harder, study a little more, run a little farther than the next guy?

The story moves along briskly. Rudy dreams of playing football for Notre Dame, but he’s told that he isn’t college material and he believes it. Four years after high school, he’s stuck working in a steel mill until he realizes that if he doesn’t get to work on his dream, it will never happen. He heads to South Bend and tries to enroll at Notre Dame. He’s rejected and settles for the local junior college, where he does absolutely everything he can think of to get in to Notre Dame. After multiple rejections, he asks his priest, “Is there anything more I can do?” The answer is no – he’s doing everything he can and it doesn’t seem to be good enough. Nevertheless, he perseveres and finally gets accepted. Next stop: the football team, where he barely makes the practice squad. Will he ever get to suit up and take the field, even though he’s smaller than the other guys? The answer is obvious, but that doesn’t keep us from coming along on every step of the journey, rooting for the underdog Rudy as he overcomes the myriad challenges and scores the little victories that add up to success.

Sean Astin, as the titular character, does fine work here. He’s hopeful and determined, and we feel for him in his failures and successes. He’s backed by a solid cast which includes Ned Beatty as a millworker father, John Favreau as his tutor, and Charles Dutton as the groundskeeper who acts as a sort of surrogate father for Rudy, giving him a pat on the back or a kick in the ass, as required.

I wasn’t expecting to particularly enjoy RUDY. I saw it for cultural awareness. What a pleasure, then, that its combination of message, structure, and performance worked so well. RUDY is a real treat.