The Road

So let me get this straight: the world shattering event wiped out all the…bicycles? I have to imagine that this story worked better on the page than on the screen, as the depiction here simply shows too many internal story contradictions to truly give the viewer a worthwhile experience. By the tale’s own internal logic, these characters should have starved to death long before the narrative ever begins. More problematic is the movie’s core concept: things are awful, then they’re awful some more, and then, finally, they’re still awful—with perhaps the suggestion that things might get better, but maybe not. One has to wonder, what exactly is the redeeming value of telling such a story? It comes across as a simple exercise in misanthropic speculation, as virtually no one in the tale comes across very well. Even the worst curmudgeon among us must believe that, even in such dire circumstances, more people than not would choose to do right by others, rather than resort to, among other things, cannibalism. Really, this story seems like a work that pretends to offer wisdom and a deep understanding of humanity, but in fact it just indulges in an unrelentingly bleak outlook simply for the sake of bleakness. And, finally, I am biased against people who say “papa” instead of “dad”; just a quirk of mine. No amount of emotional heavy lifting from Viggo Mortenson is enough to overcome this film’s fatal, fundamental flaws. I suggest skipping this trip—and if you do find yourself forced onto this journey, maybe be sure to use that one bullet you have left sooner rather than later. 

Robot Dreams

Alternately sweet and brutal. But mostly brutal. Frankly, I’m not quite sure what to make of this movie. Generally, I like my movies—including my animated movies—to come with a healthy dose of snappy dialogue, so this mostly wordless work operates at a disadvantage right there. The story of friendship found and then lost and then (kinda sorta) found again has its effective moments, but most of those are the joyful instances when the main characters are building their relationship. When things go south, that’s when the brutal comes in, and it is difficult to accept the notion that the sorrows are ever truly overcome, despite an ultimately upbeat denouement. Upbeat is a good term here, considering that music plays a major role in telling the tale—somewhat naturally, given the lack of spoken language; the filmmakers, to their credit, have some excellent taste in tunes, and that helps a lot of this flick to go down a bit easier. Still, one cannot help but see the sorrowful side ultimately winning out; perhaps it’s my own lived experience speaking, but I think the biggest takeaway from this film is that, even in their dreams, losers are losers, and thus they just simply lose. That’s a hard nut to crack. Beyond story basics, the movie presents some good animation, with very representative depictions of ‘80s New York City (except for having a Mets game at Yankee Stadium, for some reason), with the old cityscape beautifully rendered in many scenes, as well as offering a wide range of literally well-drawn animal characters throughout (the better to doll up the story’s harder edges). Certainly, this is a well crafted work and deserving of attention—I just can’t escape the feeling that it ultimately comes across as a bit of a downer. And, the lack of dialogue is probably why the film seems longer than it is; not that the story drags, but it begins to feel drawn out after a point. So watching this movie presents some challenges as well as rewards. give it a look, but don’t expect a standard animated laugh riot. 

Roman Holiday

Who wouldn’t fall in love with Audrey Hepburn? You can hardly blame Gregory Peck, given that his leading lady here it at the height of her powers as the epitome of grace, beauty, charm and charisma. Hepburn is a wonder in this movie, bringing absolute believability to her role as a European princess out on the lam for one free day. (It probably helped that she really was the progeny of at least minor royalty.) The third costar of the film, the city of Rome, does yeoman’s work at giving the tale a magical setting with both ancient and modern touches throughout, as befits a fairy tale. Though the story may fit that most traditional of genres, this one casts its spell in many standard forms, but without, perhaps, a real fairy tale ending. Certainly, had this film been made recently, the denouement would have been radically different; maybe there’s something to say there about the difference between this time and a period when easy outs were not always the order of the day. One negative critique: the pacing of the movie seems a little too slow for the modern viewer. Whether that’s something wrong with the film or with me is a matter for debate. Overall, this movie makes for light and breezy entertainment, something that may not be profound but is most assuredly a good time spent with one of the medium’s most luminous stars. That’s the scoop: she’s a girl you want to spend a day with, for sure. 

Rock 'n' Roll High School

They don’t make them like this anymore. Really, they don’t make anything like any of this anymore. Not just the music — the Ramones are sui generis vs today’s music—but all other aspects of this flick are of another time and place: the silliness, the look, the sense of liberation and rebellion, the sheer innocence of it all stands out like a punk rock riff against the world of computer generated noise we live in today. Sure, much of this story displays cardboard cutouts of characters and scenarios instead of anything realistic, but that was kind of the point here. This is almost a junior version of the Zucker-Abrahams style parody films—it was made in ‘79, right about the same time as Airplane and the Police Squad TV series—and while it is not as polished or (let’s face it) as funny as those works, this movie still provides a lot of nostalgic fun and good vibes. No lobotomy required to enjoy this field trip. 

The Reluctant Dragon

Back in the desperate days of the famous 1941 animators strike, Walt Disney put out this bowl of cinematic hash, in hopes of bringing in a bit of money to save the studio. I guess it did, since the studio stuck around (and is a going thing today), but the fact that Walt’s remaining crew could do no better than this shows how much impact the labor action had. Most of this movie consists of documentary footage of author Robert Benchley’s purported visit to the Disney studio to pitch Kenneth Grahame’s titular short story, in a series of hokum setups that run the viewer through the animation process. The individual production process scenes reveal numerous aspects of the cartoon assembly line, but show little about how the actions are done; mostly, the presentations give a superficial view of the workflow. What garnered more attention, for this viewer, was the revelation that Benchley was such a soft touch. Who knew? Maybe the most revealing item in this picture comes when Benchley finally meets up with Disney himself. Walt, who in today’s retrospect exists as man of middle age on the cusp of being senior citizen (Disney was 65 when he died), looks shockingly young here; he would have been 39 when the movie was filmed, but seems more youthful than that. It is a reminder of how often those who achieve greatness do so at a remarkably young age. As for the embedded cartoons, it is notable that while there is still some of the studio’s magic touch to be seen in some of the shorts, it is also notable that the cartoons show the beginnings of the deterioration of the studio’s animation quality that would become so glaring in later films. There is a Goofy short that shows some of the old style, but is also rather boring, too. The Baby Weems segment—a cartoon composed entirely of storyboard-style drawings—is clever enough, but is also purposely not high in artistry. Finally, the title piece, while somewhat amusing, is also a distinct step down towards more abstract (more cartoonish, you might say) artwork than the studio was producing even a year or two before. The final impression is one of a work that was jumbled together in haste, and that focus on alacrity over artistry hampered the creative process. As it is, this film survives as a snapshot of a moment in history when the most innovative studio in the animation business found itself in a state of flux, a disruption that had ripple affects that, in some ways, are still felt to this day. It’s one for the archive, for sure, a film that those with a nose for the turning points in history will want to examine and ponder, even if casual viewers can probably skip it in favor of more rewarding fare.

The Rocketeer

There are shades of Spielberg, with minor touches of Lucas, all throughout this forgotten cult fave. The use of light and shadow. ILM special effects. A score very reminiscent of Raiders of the Lost Ark's music. The 1930s setting. A slew of classic movie tropes, all used for both homage and subtle humor. And of course, Nazis. Definitely a familial resemblance, as a cousin at least, to Raiders and other Lucas/Spielberg collaborations of the ‘80s. No real surprise there, since director Joe Johnston worked on the original Star Wars trilogy and was an art director on Indy’s first adventure. So does this work, if you’ll pardon the pun, soar as high as its ancestral films? Not quite. It has much going for it: the aforementioned borrowed elements of earlier hits; it looks great—especially its recreation of 1930s Hollywood glamour—and that doesn’t even count the visual feast that is a very young and incredibly gorgeous Jennifer Connelly; and the story and script offer lots of entertainment value, with nice amounts of action and humor. But the whole package never quite grabs the viewer all the way; the stakes don’t seem nearly as high as the story elements would have you believe. And, overall, the plot takes a little too long to take flight. (You don’t see the Rocketeer rocketeering until well into the running time.) And, perhaps, lead/hero bill Campbell and villain Timothy Dalton don’t quite have the charisma, in either direction, to really get the viewer totally engaged. So it’s no surprise that a movie like this, which has its fans, also never quite caught on with the viewing public. And there it sits, a modest monument to a brand of filmmaking that once upon a time dominated big-budget big-screen entertainment, and a precursor to the superhero genre that eventually came to rule the motion picture landscape. Maybe Disney will choose to make a reboot of this one, some revved up version with a similar storyline that will take another shot at zooming to amazing heights. (God knows they’ve mined every other past property at this point.) Until then, we have this pleasant, charming, somewhat modest piece of entertainment available to be watched, mildly enjoyed, and then tucked away into a corner of almost forgotten-ness. Sounds about right to me.

Rio Grande

In a lot of ways, this is a really weird movie, and that’s even considering that it is a western from the olden days (1950) and reflects a philosophy and mores that are ever more alien to today’s society. The plot, such as it is, does a lot of meandering to ultimately make its point, which is ... well, that’s hard to pin down. A conflict with Apaches serves as the milieu for what is actually a family story of estrangement and internal conflict. That’s a clear through line of the film, though it sometimes gets lost in various and sundry other bits of rather superfluous subplots and story aspects. A B-story about a soldier on the lam trying to avoid prosecution for a crime works its way into the story, without being particularly interesting or necessary to driving the main storyline. That soldier is portrayed as a former rebel, a piece of the movie’s overarching element—I’m not sure it qualifies as a theme—that suggests that the U.S. army in the Indian wars days was loaded with unreconstructed Confederates, which would explain a lot. (One might surmise that that continues to be the case down to the present day—and, again, that explains a lot.) And speaking of loaded, Victor McLaglen does yeoman's work as a relentlessly boozing Irish sergeant, a character that might draw some viewer ire in a film made today. Ultimately, the film pays off its efforts at trying the audience’s patience with a typical climactic shoot-'em-up set piece. I guess it’s not a bad movie, but when John Ford and John Wayne are involved, you expect something a bit more impressive. The cavalry does arrive, eventually, but maybe not in time to save this movie’s day.

Raya and the Last Dragon

At its best, this movie is charming, fascinating and even moving. At its worst, it is superficial, silly and sometimes downright stupid. So I guess you could call it a mixed bag. The strengths: beautiful to look at, emotionally true, and effective in its use of its Southeast Asian cultural milieu (at least as far as a total outsider can tell). The weaknesses: the story, though overall fine, has some real holes in it, not the least of which being, why isn’t everyone immediately on the same page once the dragon shows up, given she is otherwise treated like a god? A lot of the conflict should just melt away once everyone knows who they’re dealing with. Also, the secondary characters, though eventually integral to the climax and resolution, are at first really annoying (and kind of stay that way, to be honest). Given the foregoing, one might expect this to be a mid-range movie—but that would be grading on too steep a curve. After all, I did enjoy much of the film, and what I didn’t appreciate—besides the plainly-selling-to-toddlers silliness—may have been just me missing something culturally. So let’s let this one squeak in just at the barest lower echelon of the PURR range, and declare it a qualified success.

Ralph Breaks the Internet

Expansion is sometimes a good thing, sometimes not. This movie here is a case in point. Overall, the story is a bit too ambitious; when the characters achieve their originally stated goal, it seems like a good place to wrap up the proceedings and call it game over. But then things move in an altogether new direction, and not always successfully. The additional plot and resolution does not really add anything onto the story that needed to be there, beyond making an animated movie feel more cinematic by virtue of its being what is generally regarded as feature length. But that’s not to say that all of the story’s twists and turns are unwelcome. There’s good stuff in this flick, especially when the thing turns kind of twisted and starts sending up its own studio’s sacred cows, which leads to many of the movie’s laugh-out-loud moments. On the downside, one thing that looms over the entire tale is its vision of the internet, which includes a slew of major names (almost certainly paid product placements) and is hard to view without considering, from today’s standpoint, how much of all that has proven to be problematic, if not outright malevolent. That drops a bit of a buzzkill onto the presentation. Still, there’s enough satisfying entertainment here to get this flick just over the threshold for a PURR rather than a MEOW. One might accept another sequel with this cast, if someone comes up with a truly fresh idea—there were certainly possible story developments left on the table in this outing—and if the filmmakers can get everyone (including the studio) on board for the ride. If not, this would probably be a fine time for this crew to check themselves before they wreck themselves.

Raiders of the Lost Ark

You know what this movie gets wrong? The opening credits. They’re sometimes difficult to read, and not particularly a good fit for the rest of the movie, stylistically or creatively. That’s it. The rest is perfect, a masterpiece of the cinematic art of action and adventure. Beyond that, there is little more to say; the thing speaks for itself. No wonder this is a Best of All inductee and ranks No. 2 on this author's all-time Top Ten list. If you are one of the few people on earth who has not yet seen this flick, then set aside a couple of hours and watch one of the finest works in all of filmdom.

The Rescuers Down Under

The animation here is superb. Some sequences actually prefigure the top-notch work of the still to come The Lion King. And Eva Gabor and Bob Newhart remain charming as ever as the leads Bianca and Bernard. Still, something is a bit off in this flick. There’s just a bit too much slapstick in the story, and the tone of the tale varies a bit too much, erratically spiking high and low from scene to scene. It all reveals a movie that’s trying just a touch too hard, like the filmmakers didn’t quite trust what they were working with. So while there are impressive moments that give this movie a familial resemblance to the classics to come—this piece was released between The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast—at this juncture the studio had almost but not quite found its footing. A solid, transitional step, but still just below the heights the studio would soon achieve.

The Rescuers

It has its charms. The songs, for instance, are notable improvements over previous works' musical interludes. The main characters are sweet and likable enough, though the villains and supporting cast are mostly forgettable. The plot, such as it is, doesn’t make much sense; it seems a bit too involved for what is otherwise just dingy, small-time crime. The script lays on the schmaltz pretty thick at times, and delivers more than a few weird tone shifts. The animation--always a key ingredient when we're talking Disney--varies significantly throughout the film and from aspect to aspect. Sometimes the drawings are very good; at other times the scenes or scene elements look amateurish. Put it all together and stir it up, and you get a fair representation of mid-century, mostly lost-years Disney studio output. It's not painful to watch, but it hardly measures up to what came (well) before and what was to come (in about 15 years).

Robin Hood (1973)

In a vacuum, this might be a decent, kid-friendly retelling of the old legend. But this movie did not drop in a vacuum. It showed up not just as the Disney studio was losing its way, but also within the context of movie history. Seriously, can one really argue that this animated, animal-oriented version of the story is in some way a better choice than Michael Curtiz’ 1939 classic, even for kids? As someone who used to be a 7-year-old boy, I’d take Errol Flynn over a cartoon fox any day, and I dare say young girls would appreciate Olivia de Haviland more than this flick's foxy lady. This film’s cartoony silliness doesn’t out-amuse or outshine or outthrill the adventure depicted in the antecedent (which, to be fair, happens to be one of the greatest movies of all time). The animal characters only remove the tale a little further from the viewer, and dull the deeper impact of the story. Indeed, the decision to make this story with animal characters comes across as the product of a lazy and simplistic in mindset; i.e., “cartoons are for kids, kids like animal stories, etc.”--a paint by numbers version of moviemaking. Thus, the whole project comes across as conceptually flawed from the get-go. In the interest of fairness, I will note that some of the animation here—particularly the backgrounds, as usual at this point in the studio's history—are pretty good, and a couple of the songs are OK, if not classics (others less so). You don’t hear much about this piece of the canon these days, and it says here there’s good reasons for that. If The Mouse wants to remake this one, as it’s done with any number of its older titles, I would suggest a complete overhaul, starting with human characters. Otherwise, this work and its legacy will remain a largely forgotten piece of the total picture.

Rashomon

Kurasowa's masterpiece of … anticipation. Virtually everything in the direction and storytelling in this work is built to generate a sense of unbridled anticipation in the viewer; you’re always looking to see what’s going to happen next. That may sound like a moviemaking universal, but as an operative concept it rarely springs to life to this extent. The story and its presentation are top notch, to be sure, and the narrative—or narratives, if you will—firmly hold the audience’s attention throughout. So there’s certainly success. Then again, this style of storytelling shares--indeed, by reputation, you could say it created--the problem other variable perspective tales (such as the recent The Last Duel) offer the viewer, even if, in this film's case, it introduces the variable deliberately; to wit: why believe one narrative is more truthful than the others? It may not be a problem here--Kurasowa seems to understand that there is no real "truth"--but this model sure has spawned a lot of problematic cinema in subsequent decades. More specifically problematic here, unless you’re Japanese or intimately familiar with the culture—and let’s face it, most of us aren’t—a lot of key aspects of motivation in this multichannel story are subtly lost, and that can make for some distraction and confusion. The complaint may be a quibble—this is undeniably a good and memorable film--but it nevertheless is there and it's real, and it has an impact on the viewer. So then, is this one of the greatest movies ever? That’s a stretch too far for this viewer. The truth--subjective, as always--is that this is a very good film, and worth watching.

RED 2

Significant? Hell no. Enjoyable? Hell yes, especially given that it’s a sequel, and not necessarily one that follows an original that really cried out for a continuation. As it turns out, this crew made the best of what they had, and for a fun, breezy, somewhat dopey time, the result is certifiably good enough. I wouldn’t say, in the end, that this is a flick of any real consequence, and you might not remember much about it after the credits have finished their roll, but you won’t feel bad about having spent these two hours watching this movie. Sometimes, that’s about all you can ask, and all you really need.

RED

An enjoyable romp through mayhem with old people. The film is hardly perfect—a-few of the confrontations feature notably absurd actions on the part of the characters involved, which supplements an amount of general, all-purpose absurdity throughout--but the action is well done and makes a certain amount of warped sense in its own context. It is also worth noting that the story deftly plays both sides of the matter of "black ops," celebrating the concept and its enactors while holding a rather jaundiced view of the thing at the same time. If you’re fairly indulgent of flaws, and are OK with not thinking too much, this flick is worth a couple of your idle, mindless entertainment hours.

Richard Jewell

The premise of this film, at its core, is that a couple of pretty people conspired to destroy a fat, ugly guy. Sounds about right. Perhaps I take that lesson away for personal reasons; but for my lack of a Georgia accent, I could be this guy’s cousin, and I watched this flick keenly aware that, had I ever been in the wrong place at the wrong time, I could easily have gone through what the late Mr. Jewell did. Paul Walter Hauser does good work as the title character, but it’s really Sam Rockwell and Kathy Bates who deliver the tour-de-force performances here. His outrage and her emotional depth drive home the personal dimension to a story that has a much larger scope: every time the government abuses its power, there is at least one individual who suffers terribly for that. It’s well worth taking the time to watch this movie and take that reminder to heart.

Rocketman

Thanks to some unfortunate scheduling, this outing suffers from an inevitable comparison to Bohemian Rhapsody, that other, at least superficially similar '70s rock-icon bio. There is a key difference, though, in that this work's "filmed stage musical" approach doesn't work quite as well as a straightforward narrative treatment of Sir Elton's story might have. Furthermore, the device of telling the story through the artist's songs--without much concern for their temporal sequence, for anyone old enough to be familiar with the discography--makes the life story seem somewhat muddled. Egerton's acting performance--playing someone thoroughly well-known to most of the audience, so a challenge there--is strong, though his singing voice doesn't really match John's very well. And the representation comes with certain other veracity issues, even given--or perhaps because of--the subject's clear participation in the production. (One obvious example: movie Elton never goes as bald as the real-life rocker did). Ultimately the film relies heavily upon the goodwill viewers have for the music; as that resource exists in abundance, this film edges more towards positive territory. It doesn't shoot into orbit, but it flies just high enough for most fans.

Raise Hell: The Life and Times of Molly Ivins

The thing speaks for itself--as did its subject. I feel sorry for those who did not get to enjoy Ivins' journalistic efforts firsthand; it was a joy to read her words and to know that there was at least one smart person out there. Alas, as with all things good in this world, Molly didn't last long enough--nor did she "win" in the end, either, insofar as her wisdom did not win out in the long run, and our political landscape is worse off for it. Not to mention, you know, all of us who now and in the future must live in the antithesis world embodied by George W. Bush--a particular target for Ivins' acid pen--and his successors. The fact that Bush lives on--as does the smoking rubble he and his ilk left behind--while Molly is only memorialized in this documentary adds a somber note to an otherwise celebratory viewing experience. But this show is worth the diluted joy. Take what you can get and give Molly and her work one more look, out of respect for one of the best.

Rio Bravo

Guns, booze, hats, horses, melodrama, violence, murder -- yeah, it's a western, all right. And, in fact, it's a pretty good one. What lifts this flick above the average oater is the chess match aspect of the plot. The strategic back and forth of the plot keeps what is an otherwise very simple story a little more complex and a lot more engaging, even through a long running time. The performances help, too; Dean Martin provides strong work as a man caught in the middle of two conflicts (one of his own making), Ricky Nelson is fine as the young hotshot, and John Wayne is...well, he's John Wayne -- the exact same sui generis performer who made so many movies like this must watch entertainment for a nation of movie-goers. Indeed, part of the appeal here is, from today's perspective, the palpable sense that this is a relic from a bygone country. Everything from the set design to the way people talk and interact in this film speaks about frames of mind that are, at this point, long gone in the past -- and no, not exactly with good riddance, either. Ultimately, this here's a super-satisfying blast from the past that entertains in the moment, and leaves one pondering just what has been left behind.