Cats and Dogs, DVD

I have no opinion on Cats and Dogs – but my cousin had one once; and it was that Cats and Dogs is “like a fucking endurance test”. I guess that’s a start. What was left of my brain, after my inexplicable second viewing, luckily retained enough of the basic premise to write this review. Jeff Goldblum, unable to resist the allure of either another zany scientist role, or another paycheque, plays Professor Brody (thank you, Wikipedia…) an inattentive, but well-meaning father, intent on curing his allergy to dog hair. However, his current test subject and son Scott’s (Alexander Pollock) beloved pet, apparently runs away. In fact, he has been kidnapped by a SWAT team of nefarious cats, led by the maniacal Snowball (Sean Hayes). Enter Lou (Tobey Maguire), a puppy mistaken for a highly-trained dog-agent (I can’t believe I just wrote those words), who is adopted by Brody and his family. What follows, is a torrent of unrelenting crap - more so than if you were to buy an actual dog.

Bratty little Scott Brady (not the actor’s fault, just the script’s) rejects poor Lou at first, before gradually warming to him. This is fairly standard family fare and therefore comparatively inoffensive. The scenes between Brody and his wife (Elizabeth Perkins) are hopeless, however. Coldly written and acted, as if the two have never seen a conversation between actual human beings before. But this is nothing compared the A Story, a war between the cat population, who under Snowball’s lead, wish to rule the planet, and the canine agents, who seek to protect their beloved, oblivious humans. The animal characters, like in Madagascar (the last movie I reviewed on here and one that, compared to this, could be fucking Fantasia) are cardboard cut outs. Lou is taken under the wing of a gruff, older dog, with “a past” and a lost love. She herself is sassy, self-assured and of course, good hearted. Yawn. But Sean Hayes’s Snowball is a character that, under a more adept writing team – yes, this was written by more than one person (!??) had the potential to be really funny. He’s an arrogant, sophisticate who is routinely and humiliatingly coddled by his elderly owner’s house keeper. Hayes’s ability is wasted, by and large, apart from a few mild chuckles regarding his happy-go-lucky and incompetent assistant. There is nothing wrong with a movie for families satirizing the standard character traits that appear frequently in adult films, but it’s not enough for them to just exist. They have to be written well and this film’s writing is mind numbingly stupid.

You may have wondered why I have relayed so little of the plot, thus far. It's because there is almost none – nothing happens, until about two-thirds of the way through, when the conflict comes to a head, and then ends, in a scene where the audience has next to no idea what’s happening and cares even less. Everything up until that point is a series of stupid exchanges between the animals and dull and stupid exchanges between the humans. I’ve rarely encountered movies with so little respect for their audience.

What is particularly disheartening about this film, is that according to the featurette, the CGI and animatronics were at the cutting edge at the time the movie was made. The artists (crew, not actors – they’re clearly just picking up their cheques) speak passionately about the effects they are able to accomplish on the film – but what a waste. The idea that a large sum of money was spent on Cats & Dogs is depressing, but unsurprising. But to invest in talent in regard to effects and not script, seems genuinely odd.

It may seem, given I’m not a part of this film’s demographic, that I’m judging it too harshly. I go further into my feelings on this in my Madagascar review. I will say this, however. I grew up loving cinema, not because poor family films did not exist during my childhood. They did - and how... But despite getting some laughs from such mediocre movies as Space Jam, the films that made me fall in love with the form were the Jungle Book, Aladdin, Roger Rabbit. And unless I’m actually a twenty-three year-old curmudgeon, it seems movies of that high a standard, for kids, are rarer nowadays. Does this mean a generation of children will grow up not falling in love with the movies? Probably not. But I don’t think we should take that chance.

Coming soon – A far more light-hearted review, of the high-larious Return of Jafar. A movie so bad, yet so glorious, that it can’t be and WON’T BE (!!!) faulted.

Also check out The Pitch, in which I attempt to analyse animated films that are genuinely good.