Rango (Gore Verbinski, 2011)

[Jeff]

Here is an animated film that, for the first time in a long time, feels like it was expressly made for adults. Rango is not one of those cartoons that gives an occasional subtle wink to the grownups in the audience. Instead, it’s all winks. Rango is a knowing, often cynical, nod to the western films of the 1960s - especially those of Sergio Leone and his acolytes. The plot (and a menacing antagonist) owe just as much to Chinatown as they do to Once Upon a Time in the West and The Man With No Name trilogy. There are overt references to Cat Ballou, Apocalypse Now, and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas too. Unlike the loathsome Shrek movies though, which are also full of pop-culture name checking, the homages here never feel jokey or gratuitous.

Rango pushes the limits of its ‘PG’ rating, with plenty of smoking and drinking, occasionally graphic violence, and language salty enough that it wouldn’t fly on broadcast television. The town of Dirt feels dirty, and gritty, and lived in, like the lesser spaghetti westerns of Leone’s era (the title is a nod to Django).

More than anything else, this is one of the rare auteur-driven animated films. Despite the Nickelodeon imprint, this is not one of the cookie-cutter, committee-made feature cartoons that studios seemingly churn out monthly. In the same way that The Fantastic Mr. Fox is drenched in Wes Anderson, this film reaks of Gore Verbinski. That fact alone will be enough to turn off many potential viewers. Rango does have the same percentage of gags that land with a thud as Verbinski’s other films, but the few who admired the flawed-but-charming rambling eccentricity of The Mexican, The Weather Man, and the first Pirates of Caribbean film will find similar pleasures here.

Verbinski is aided by a first rate cast and crew. Johnny Depp, Isla Fisher, Ned Beatty, et. al. lend distinct personalities to their characters, and their performances don’t have the phoned-in feel of so many celebrity cartoon voiceovers. The script (again non-committee) is by the estimable John Logan, and Roger Deakins served the cinematography consultant. Visually, this may be the among the most stunning of all the computer-animated films, blending photorealistic landscapes with meticulously detailed animal characters in carefully framed compositions that feel grandly cinematic. Refreshingly, Rango eschews the current 3-D fad, and therefore avoids the dull, murky images, gimmicky staging, and clunky headgear associated with that format.

Rango's middle third, like most of Verbinski’s films, has plenty of sections that feel like dead weight. It also never comes close to rising to the emotionally operatic virtuosity of Pixar’s best work (nary a heartstring will be tugged), but it is a matinee treat for those who like their cowtowns dirty, their cactus juice neat, and their movies with a capital M.

[knives]

I've been interested in seeing this(and Drive Angry appropriately enough)for a while and the fairly identical reviews have only made me more curious. While Verbinski seems to get a lot of hatred for his work I actually really enjoy his films, even the Pirates sequels to an extent, and feel that he's one of the few remaining great studio auteurs.
The one thing from your post I'm curious about though is the reference to adult animation. I'm a tad curious what you mean by that because while much of animation that hits the mainstream is aimed at children there is still a sizable percentage aimed at adults. Hell the academy nominated one this year, The Illusionist.

[Jeff]

The one thing from your post I'm curious about though is the reference to adult animation. I'm a tad curious what you mean by that because while much of animation that hits the mainstream is aimed at children there is still a sizable percentage aimed at adults. Hell the academy nominated one this year, The Illusionist.

I should have specified American studio-driven animation (of the Megamind, Ice Age, Shrek variety). Rango seems at first blush to be a part of that club, but turns out to be a different beast entirely.

You are, of course, correct that Sylvain Chomet and others (My Dog Tulip, Persepolis, Waltz with Bashir, Secret of the Kells) have been doing some great grownup "arthouse" animation for a few years. Notably, most of those films are of the hand-drawn variety (or at least look like it). Rango, on the other hand, is being marketed as a CGI kiddie crowdpleaser, yet it subverts those expectations at every turn.

[knives]

I get that. American animation does tend to be stunted as children's stuff(at least as far as movies are concerned, teevee is a whole other game). Though the DTV market seems to have that cornered with stuff like Red Hood and Planet Hulk which are really good too.

[Finch]

We just got back from the movie: I was keen on seeing it after the trailers and sneak previews, and luckily it didn't disappoint. I didn't think of Chinatown while watching the movie but now that Jeff mentions it, it is one of the more obvious inspirations plot-wise. Instead, the movie it reminded me most of was Who Framed Roger Rabbit? but Rango isn't as well-paced (over-length always seems to be an issue with Verbinski's movies) and I felt it skirted around the darker stuff it could have explored more. Granted, it already is too subversive and gritty for younger audiences as it is (two teenage girls and a mum with her boy walked out well before film's end) but it made me wish that they'd been more courageous still to push the envelope. But there is so much to like about the movie: it is very well cast (though Timothy Oliphant sounds too young for an Eastwood stand-in), Bill Nighy especially nails his part and it was nice to see/hear Harry Dean Stanton in a bit part. Several setpieces are excellently staged (my favourite was the hawk chasing Rango through Dirt's backyards and Rango's use of licorice) and the homages, though obvious, felt more integrated and less smug in this film than in most of its competition: I guess the Wagner joke was all the funnier for us since we happened to watch the Apocalypse Now Blu last night. Speaking of the music, I was shocked to find that Hans Zimmer was responsible for a score that I liked (I usually detest the man's music but this is another score of his after The Thin Red Line that didn't make me want to cover my ears). I only hope that the studios haven't already run out of their few good annual titles with this one. I'll be getting the Blu in August/September.

[LQ]

Thanks for making a thread about this! I was intrigued ever since I first saw ads for it but thought I might have to rent a kid or something to attend without embarrassment. Glad to know that is not the case, and that its being received positively here.

[flyonthewall2983]

Now I'm really interested in this. The trailer was up before True Grit and my brother and dad were howling in laughter at some of the gags, which is an odd occurrence at something for a kid's movie.

[lacritfan]

Johnny Depp, Isla Fisher, Ned Beatty, et. al. lend distinct personalities to their characters, and their performances don’t have the phoned-in feel of so many celebrity cartoon voiceovers.

For his part, the director has broken with convention by recording the vocal performances, not separately in the isolation of studio booths but with the actors working together on a prop-laden and partly dressed stage for 23 days, during which time their work was shot by HD cameras so that animators could later reference their facial expressions and bodily gestures for inspiration. There is evidence of this working more with some actors -- particularly Depp and Beatty -- than others, but the verbal exchanges do spark and flow in the manner of accomplished ensemble work; in the promotional materials, the filmmakers call the technique "emotion capture," as opposed to motion capture.

[karmajuice]

The trailer for the film left me completely disinterested, but after seeing this thread I decided to give the movie a chance. Very glad I did.

I don't have much to add, but I'll echo the praise the others have given. I was especially impressed with the voice work and how downright cinematic the animation is. The others are right: this isn't a string of homages. The film really integrates the same solid filmmaking and stylistic panache that made its predecessors so great. The film makes excellent use of space and carries on Leone's flair for dynamic angles, not only in the action scenes but throughout the film.

The film suffers most at the end of the second act, beginning of the third, where it comes closest to kid-movie cliches. I'm also not sure how I feel about Verbinski's intermittent surrealist episodes (which are very reminiscent of the third PoC movie), where ponderously relevant imagery dominates the frame in white space. It occasionally elicits some interesting results, but on the whole they feel unnecessary and I think their grandiosity inhibits the film.

Still, solid work all around. The comedy's strong (the trailer seems to have collected the weakest moments). The animation is great: vivid characterizations (that bring to mind the character actors who often filled these roles), a world rich with texture and tone, and an authentic sense of having been filmed (which I suppose we can thank Deakins for).

For his part, the director has broken with convention by recording the vocal performances, not separately in the isolation of studio booths but with the actors working together on a prop-laden and partly dressed stage for 23 days, during which time their work was shot by HD cameras so that animators could later reference their facial expressions and bodily gestures for inspiration.

Didn't Jonze use this approach on Where the Wild Things Are? Obviously that's not an animated film, but I believe the voice actors all worked together on a stage, along with the boy playing Max, to allow for improvisation and to help determine how the characters would interact physically.

[Roger Ryan]

Didn't Jonze use this approach on Where the Wild Things Are? Obviously that's not an animated film, but I believe the voice actors all worked together on a stage, along with the boy playing Max, to allow for improvisation and to help determine how the characters would interact physically.

I thought Anderson used this approach as well with THE FANTASTIC MR. FOX. Regardless, it's a smart way to operate if you can get everyone together in one room.

[LQ]

I loved Rango. I wore a smile miles wide through it all.
When I was in my wee single digits I watched An American Tail: Fievel Goes West approximately 80 gazillion times, and its nice to have the same feelings of adoration for anther animated Western in my 20s. Objectively, I agree with the above posters regarding its faults, you don't really connect emotionally to the characters, and as with every Verbinski movie I've seen, the film seems longer than its running time would suggest, but none of these issues detracted from my enchantment with it. The love and attention that went into creating every pinch of grit up to the sweeping vistas and intricate, ingeniously devised characters like Rattlesnake Jake really paid off; its one of the most splendidly cinematic animated films I've seen, with inhabitants that feel at home against the rich tangible texture of the backdrop. Its a pleasure to behold at every frame. And as for what transpires within this perfectly realized world, I completely agree with Jeff, this does feel like a film explicitly conceived for adults. There isn't any dull pandering to the current tastes of children...in fact I don't know if children under the age of 10 would fully grasp Rango's bombastic, pompous thespian/gritty gunslinger-hybrid speech. And, the film is delightfully and dynamically patchworked together from bits of movies and tropes that might go well over the average 21st century kid's head.

Please go see it, Rango is bursting with creativity and spark, snark and laughs, and a real movie-lover's love for the inspirations whence it came.

[MitchPerrywinkle]

Jonze did have a fake set built for the actors who played the Wild Things, and he and Catherine Keener would take turns playing Max. Anderson actually recorded his actors in the outdoors rather than in a studio. Either way, it's nice to see variations on this method being developed by all three filmmakers.

[HistoryProf]

Johnny Depp, Isla Fisher, Ned Beatty, et. al. lend distinct personalities to their characters, and their performances don’t have the phoned-in feel of so many celebrity cartoon voiceovers.

For his part, the director has broken with convention by recording the vocal performances, not separately in the isolation of studio booths but with the actors working together on a prop-laden and partly dressed stage for 23 days, during which time their work was shot by HD cameras so that animators could later reference their facial expressions and bodily gestures for inspiration. There is evidence of this working more with some actors -- particularly Depp and Beatty -- than others, but the verbal exchanges do spark and flow in the manner of accomplished ensemble work; in the promotional materials, the filmmakers call the technique "emotion capture," as opposed to motion capture.

that's really interesting. I actually leaned over to my wife and mentioned how cool it was that the animated characters actually seemed to share expressions with the actors voicing them. it's touches like that which make it all the more fun for adults. I was incredibly impressed with it as a genre piece, but as a western!

I don't have much to add, but I'll echo the praise the others have given. I was especially impressed with the voice work and how downright cinematic the animation is.

this was the other aspect that really impressed me, and I was amazed to see Roger Deakins credited as "Cinematography Consultant" or some such.

[MichaelB]

I didn't think of Chinatown while watching the movie but now that Jeff mentions it, it is one of the more obvious inspirations plot-wise.

Weirdly enough, I thought "that turtle is a dead ringer for John Huston in Chinatown" well before the specific plot parallels started to appear - so of course I picked up on them instantly. And I'm sure the resemblance was entirely deliberate.

While I agree with the structural criticisms - it really does fall flat in the middle and take some time to recover - this is one of the few films I've seen this year that I'm actively looking forward to watching again, next time without my kids sitting either side of me asking reasonable but irritating questions. (I realised very early on that pretty much their entire notion of Western iconography comes from the Toy Story films!).

[Nothing]

I realised very early on that pretty much their entire notion of Western iconography comes from the Toy Story films!

Tsk, parental responsibility and all that. Time to Wild Bunch 'em up!

[knives]

There's not really anything for me to add to this, but I have to mention Bill Nighy as a standout. His American accent is absolutely convincing and more importantly the whole performance is frightening. A lot of that must be credited to the animators who did a gorgeous job all around, but when Jake first opens his mouth you could even hear the babies shut up. I can't remember the last time a "children's" movie villain was so damn threatening.