Disney's The Kid/102 Dalmatians

Bruce Willis had a time when he was co-starring with children in films that dealt with the supernatural. After “The Sixth Sense” in the summer of 1999, here is “Disney’s The Kid,” released in 2000, which (despite the Disney logo on the title) is not really a kids’ movie but geared towards “The Sixth Sense” crowd, more or less. Roger Ebert said in his review, “It's a sweet film, unexpectedly involving, and shows again that Willis, so easily identified with action movies, is gifted in the areas of comedy and pathos: This is a cornball plot, and he lends it credibility just by being in it.”

He plays Russ Duritz, a Los Angeles “image consultant” who needs a lot to consult with himself. He’s rude, harsh, indifferent, and angry. Stuck next to a TV anchorwoman on a plane, played by Jean Smart, he first tries to ignore her, then delivers a shocking review of her hair, eyebrows, makeup, clothes, voice and the horse she rode in on. In the office, he bullies his assistant, played by Lily Tomlin, who survives only because of a hard, funny case.

Strange things start to happen. If “The Sixth Sense” was about a kid who keeps seeing dead people, this one is about a guy who is dead inside and keeps seeing a kid. A fat little kid, who takes him into a diner that later looks to have vanished. The kid eventually lets himself get caught. They compare similar characteristics, and Russ is forced to the surprising fact that this kid is himself, a few days before his own 8^th birthday.

Ebert admitted, “I don't know about you, but I would be able to recognize myself at 8 without looking for scars and markings.” Still, maybe Russ, so smooth and dressed, doesn’t want to remember that he was once a fat little nuisance. The kid, called Rusty, played by Spencer Breslin, is likable and straight, and seems to know what’s going on in a way that Russ doesn’t. (Ebert said, “Clue: The movie could have been called "Ebenezer Willis and the Ghost of Childhood Past.''”) Together, the boy and man share memories and revisit the times of childhood defeats, and Russ begins to understand why he is so distant from his father, from the world and from himself.

The movie was directed by Jon Turtletaub and written by Audrey Wells, and has that nice combination of sentiment and comedy that movies they both worked on found. Ebert admitted, “I like Rusty's attitude as he confronts the full horror of growing up.” At one part, asking Russ about his life, he finds out that Russ doesn’t even own a dog.

The movie shows more supernatural parts as the runtime goes. At first it looks like a little visit from Russ’s childhood self. Then, through the dark tools, the boy and man are able to go back and redo something form the past, and particularly a critical playground fight where a bully, played by Brian McGregor, and a plan to tie firecrackers around the neck of a three-legged dog named Tripod.

The movie’s quick-mix method argues that Rusty grew up to be the bitter Russ because he didn’t stand up for himself on the playground. This time, after Russ takes Rusty to train under a client who is a professional boxer, Rusty does a better job of defending himself, which does not only change the future (as in “Back to the Future”) but more vaguely allows Russ to learn the same lesson at 40 that Rusty now learns at 8.

Ebert said, “The problem here is that this lesson is the same old macho John Wayne BS in which the secret of being a happy man is to learn to fight. That's the same lesson preached in "The Patriot.'' Both movies dismiss the possibility that men can think and reason their way out of difficulty, and teach that the answer lies in revenge, assisted by fighting skills. Both movies, otherwise so similar, have plots that absolutely depend on these values ("The Patriot,'' to be fair, provides powerful motivation after a British monster kills one of the hero's sons and prepares to hang another, which is even worse than mistreating poor Tripod, although PETA might not think so). When will a mainstream big budget mass market movie argue that one can use intelligence instead of violence to settle a dilemma? To quote John Wayne, "That'll be the day.'' These observations aside, "Disney's The Kid'' is warm-hearted and effective, a sweet little parable that involves a man and a boy who help each other become a better boy, and a better man (there are parallels of course with "Frequency''). I smiled a lot, laughed a few times, left feeling good about the movie. I am still mystified by the title. If Disney added the studio name to "The Kid'' to avoid confusion with the 1921 Charlie Chaplin classic starring Jackie Coogan--well, I'm surprised they believe that many people remember it, and a little touched.”

Now we come to an underwhelming sequel, “102 Dalmatians,” also released in 2000. Ebert started his review by saying, “Pavlov, you will recall, conditioned dogs to salivate at the ringing of a bell.” It is only appropriate that his name, a modern scientist in “102 Dalmatians,” is able to make Cruella De Vil feel loving she sees a dog. As “102 Dalmatians” starts, the famous dognapper and fur enthusiast has been turned into a dog lover by Dr. Pavlov’s secret tricks. 

Released on probation, Cruella (Glenn Close) is given to a parole officer named Chloe (Alice Evans), who is a Dalmatian lover and doesn’t believe Cruella has really been cured. However, Cruella looks to have changed over completely and even gets involved in the activities of a shelter for homeless animals run by Kevin, played by Ioan Gruffudd, who loves Chloe. Then, sadly, a Pavlovian bell rings (it is not like the Big Ben), and Cruella goes back to her old ways. 

This is the story for “102 Dalmatians,” a movie that follows as the night does the day that Cruella eventually goes back to her old dog-hunting ways. Ebert said, “While the 1996 live-action version of "101 Dalmatians" had the original animated film to supply much of its story, this sequel is an original, with new characters, most memorably Monsieur Le Pelt (Gerard Depardieu), a fur designer who wears a quasi-medieval costume influenced by Depardieu's recent film, "Asterix" (a huge hit in Europe, but never released in the States).” There are also new dogs, including a puppy named Oddball, which is depressed, because it was born without spots.

Ebert said, “I have here an urgent message from a dog lover urging me to emphasize in my review that Dalmatians are sensitive and demanding animals who require dedicated owners. The earlier Dalmatian films apparently inspired countless dog lovers to adopt Dalmatians they were not quite ready for, causing overbreeding and consequent homelessness; my correspondent will be happy to learn (1) the movie itself ends with a request that puppies be adopted only by owners prepared to be responsible and committed, and (2) if a movie hasn't yet driven you to acquire a Dalmatian, "102 Dalmatians" is unlikely to do the trick.”

The film has reliable resources, including Cruella’s home with its secret fur-storage rooms and dungeons. The good characters are played as brave and cheerful, the evil ones grit their teeth more than the dogs, and Cruella’s hairstyle, half black and half silver, is something to think of, as are her hair, her nails and her weird makeup (Ebert said, “the character is so seriously kinky I have always wondered what an R-rated version might have to offer us”). It is a movie that has style and energy.

Ebert said, “And yet whether you like it depends largely, I think, on how you feel about the dogs.” Yes, Oddball is adorable but he and the other dogs kind of suffer because they are real. The Disney animated classics, including “Lady and the Tramp” and the animated “101 Dalmatians,” were able to make their dogs into actors. In a live-action movie, they become supporting characters. Smaller children aren’t going to understand Curella and Le Pelt, except as adults who are cruel to dogs. There are some enjoyment in chases and thrilling escapes, but taking the dogs out of the main roles leaves you with really eccentric humans and not enough puppy love.

Glenn Close does what can be done with the character. Really, she does more than can be done. Cruella is almost not enough for a live-action film and needs animation to fit her operatic level. The Le Pelt character is superfluous, and despite Chloe and Kevin (and Cruella’s nervous servant Alonso, played by Tim McInnerny) do what they can, the film also feels superfluous.

However, Cruella De Vil has possibilities. Ebert said, “I wonder why movies like this stay so close to their origins. Wouldn't it be intriguing to lift Cruella entirely out of dog roles and put her back into animation as the star of a cartoon version of "Sunset Boulevard"?” She’s still big. It’s live action that got little.

Look out tomorrow for more excitement in “Disney Live-Action Month.”