OLD DOGS (Blu-ray; Disney)

Mike LoManaco

Studio Name: Disney
MPAA Rating: PG
Disc/Transfer Information: 1080p High-Definition 1.85:1
Tested Audio Track: English DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 48 kHz/24-bit
Director: Walt Becker
Starring Cast: John Travolta, Robin Williams, Kelly Preston, Seth Green

SYNOPSIS/PLOT ANALYSIS:

The first time I saw any kind of trailer for this was on the DVD release of my wife’s new favorite film, The Proposal. It looked funny enough, what with Seth Green getting mixed up in comic mayhem between Travolta and Williams, which I thought was an odd combination to begin with. The problem with Old Dogs is multi-fold; first, the trailer spoiled all the spoofs and gags of the comedy, which once you view it, you know exactly what to expect. Second, Williams and Travolta just don’t go well together – Travolta in particular is trying his darndest to be funny, but he’s not. His deliveries of “Well…I didn’t know they can afford to hire supermodels here…” when he hits on a restaurant’s waitress were lacking and simply off-putting. Third, the marketing of this film didn’t really suggest a true Disney feature that’s strictly kid-oriented; this title could have almost as easily wore a G rating due to its softness and Are We There Yet-esque approach.

Still, those elements aside, this had some laugh-out-loud moments. The premise has Williams and Travolta as aging sports agent partners whose lives are turned upside down when Williams learns that his ex, played by an aging but still deliciously sexy and slim Kelly Preston, has come back into his life to give him the news that they have some kids together. The directing and editing is ill-timed and odd in the film with strange flashbacks to Williams’ days of Travolta trying to get him tattooed and other weird hijinks; Travolta is portrayed as the younger, cooler aging dude a la Adam Sandler in I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry in which Sandler tries to stick it to everything wearing a mini skirt – Travolta’s character does the same here, although toned down for the Disney moniker. The technique is harrowing and – gasp – old. Preston wants Williams to be more a part of the kids’ lives, and he drags Travolta into the experience to be “Uncle Charlie.” What follows are misguided attempts at making comical scenarios, such as the two of them going to a Boy Scout’s meeting in the woods and running into a very bizarrely-acting Justin Long who confuses Williams for an “old woman” and Travolta for the “old dude that stole his girlfriend.” The gag wasn’t funny.

The prerequisite “old men playing young men’s sports” sequence follows, in which Travolta and Williams have their asses handed to them in a game of killer Frisbee; honestly, this has also been done before, and it was more embarrassing than comical to see these two seasoned actors acting like they were desperate for Depends and Proactiv. Meanwhile, Preston has been sent to a week’s jaunt in prison for trespassing – another odd and meaningless plot element – and Williams has Travolta’s ultra-mod bachelor pad kid-proofed as he takes in his daughter and son while mom’s behind bars.

Actually, the more comical part of the film centers not around Williams’ and Travolta’s main characters, but Seth Green’s, who works for their sports marketing film and is sent to Japan to close a deal. What ends up happening is hilarious, in that Green becomes some kind of “karaoke junkie” and never shows up to meet the board of directors in Japan on behalf of their company – Williams is told that if he wants to secure this deal of a lifetime, he and Travolta must move out to the Far East. The plot begins to take a bit of a twist here, in that Williams promised the kids he’d be there for them, but ends up going to Japan anyway. Once there, of course, he has a change of heart and we see him becoming Mrs. Doubtfire all over again – well, Mrs. Doubtfire’s parallel personality at least. The concluding frames of Old Dogs have Travolta, Williams and Green somewhere in a zoo desperately trying to find Preston and the kids, who are having a birthday party there. The “hero dad must sweep in and save the day” theme runs rampant here, per Disney’s instructions, and the scene in which Williams takes to the air as a mock superhero with a propelling gas tank on his back was just ridiculous and simply not comical. But what was comical was the film’s trademark scene from the trailers – that is, when Green is “abducted” by an adult killer gorilla and made to sing to the primate in order to keep it calm. His rendition of Air Supply’s seminal “All Out of Love” while he’s in the ape’s giant arms was truly Seth Green at his ludicrous best.

At best, this is a decent evening’s rental, and if you have kids lying around your Berber carpeting, this is indeed a wise family night suggestion. There are some comical gags good for a few belly laughs, but I wouldn’t put it, personally, on my shelf to own.

VIDEO QUALITY ANALYSIS: HOW DID THE DISC LOOK?

Wow. I know that’s clichéd and hollow, but that’s just the exact emotion that was spurred when I spun this disc in my Oppo BDP-83. Not surprising, since this is Disney we’re talking about, but wow did this 1.85:1 non-letterboxed 1080p transfer really pop and snap – fleshtones were unbelievably accurate, colors jumped off the screen (even on my SSE-loaded rear projection set) and details were ridiculously vibrant. I did not detect much grain or noise, if any, and the transfer had an almost cartoonish, animated look in certain sequences – this was true, rudimentary Disney eye candy on Blu-ray.

Of particular note were facial close-ups; my G-d did these shots exhibit detail and a texture beyond what I’ve experienced so far on my particular set and with its particular limited technology; every pore, mark, scrape, pimple, blemish and facial element was amped up and brought to the surface on Old Dogs’ Blu-ray transfer. This was, refreshingly, a very clean, crisp image from beginning to end.

AUDIO QUALITY ANALYSIS: HOW DID THE DISC SOUND?

The disc’s English 5.1 DTS Master Audio track – the first one I believe I have sampled from Disney thus far – wasn’t quite up to the standards of the video, but it was extremely and surprisingly lively given the subject material. It’s still a head-scratcher to me why certain films from Warner Bros. on Blu-ray – such as Michael Clayton and the first release of Superman Returns – carry lossy Dolby Digital audio tracks and comedies such as Old Dogs are treated to Master Audio soundtracks. At any rate, there is a copious amount of whiz-bang surround activity on the track to complement the silly antics the film suggests early on, and there are even a couple of moments of LFE that shake the room during some of Williams’ flashback sequences and such. Ambient atmospheric cues, articulate panning and the sounds of busy New York City streets fill all the channels when called upon, and I was surprised by this track’s slightly aggressive elements.

Thanks for reading, and I suggest you give this one a rental first!

concealer404

Ugh.

Ricardo

I watched this one with my daughter. We both thought is was boring.

Mike LoManaco

Hey, Capri!

Thanks for reading and for your input/thoughts! Let me address them individually...

xcapri79 wrote: »

Thank you for the review Mike. I read it with interest.

Thank you.

Now you were impressed with the video effects, but I've always felt that this sort of movie would be adequate as a DVD purchase. The additional cost for the Bluray wouldn't be worth it. Would you concur with that?

Have you seen it yet, at all? If not, give the Blu-ray a rent first -- it looked REALLY good in high definition, but I cannot speak for the DVD version as I haven't seen it. I am sure it looks almost as good. If you like it enough to buy, and money is tight, buy the DVD version.

You mentioned Adam Sandler. Do you feel that the movie would have been better if he played John Travolta's role?

No -- that isn't what I meant. I was just trying to say that much like Sandler's role in "Chuck and Larry," where he wants to screw everything that wears a skirt, Travolta's character seems as though he's trying to do the same, but it just didn't work IMO...

On an side note, are you back in the good ole USA? How was your trip to the far east?

Yes, I am back, and was severely jet-lagged! The trip was good though; they treated us like royalty so I would write a good article...you know...brownie points?

When will you be reviewing Sherlock Holmes? Now that was a great movie in my opinion.

I wasn't really interested in seeing it, but maybe I'll give it a spin; if you already saw it, why do you need a home video analysis of it? Just asking; have you seen it at home or theatrically?

wingnut4772

This is a **** of a movie.

bobman1235

I think that's insulting to ****.

wingnut4772

bobman1235 wrote: »

I think that's insulting to ****.

You're right. I apologize to shidoobies everywhere.

Mike LoManaco

xcapri79 wrote: »

I saw it at home and it is definitely worth a view and review. I would enjoy your comparison of Robert Downey Jr. and Basil Rathbone, the previously "quintessential" Holmes. I really enjoyed the portrayal of Dr. John H. Watson very capable character by Jude Law vs the stoggy old character portrayed by Nigel Bruce.

Gotcha, Capri -- I shall check it out when I can!

Thanks, bro.

Mike LoManaco

xcapri79 wrote: »

Great. A comparison and contrasting of the movie styles and character interpretations makes for an interesting read.
Welcome back, Mike.

Thanks so much, as always, Capri!

I will let you know what I think when I get a chance to get a copy...

Mike LoManaco

concealer404 wrote: »

This movie blew herds of chimp.

Yeah, we got cha the first time.

Ricardo

concealer404 wrote: »

Ugh.

I think you have a point there.

Jstas

I think that ik Mana and Capr are the same guy.

Ricardo

They certainly love each other. You can tell that by reading their posts. Good for them. Love is a good thing.

reeltrouble1

The Beatles wrote a song about it.....Love that is, at least that would be something worth reviewing, thanks to the members who said this one blows chunks.

RT1

dorokusai

This movie was awful.

kuntasensei

5% on Rotten Tomatoes? Yeah... I'm good. I'll re-watch something decent instead.

lightman1

I couldn't finish watching this complete waste of celluloid.

Mike LoManaco

xcapri79 wrote: »

Sounds good. Another movie worth reviewing is, "The Men Who Stare at Goats".
I'm about to watch this comedy myself, so I'm interested in your impressions on it.

Heard a lot of things about this one; will get back to you with my impressions if it makes my list. Thanks.

Mike LoManaco

xcapri79 wrote: »

Sounds good. Another movie worth reviewing is, "The Men Who Stare at Goats".
I'm about to watch this comedy myself, so I'm interested in your impressions on it.

Something I also failed to mention in the main review was that this was made by the same creative team responsible for Wild Hogs, which flopped miserably as well; I kind of suspected going into it that it was going to be reminiscent of that film -- that is, hyped with tons of hysterical clips for commercial advertising and trailers, and then offering little in the way of meat or substance in terms of the finished product. :rolleyes:

shack

My daughter rented this one...I saw less that 10 minutes and figured my time would be better spent arranging my sock drawer. My daughter made it through about 30 minutes and decided that a re-run of "Criminal Minds" was a better choice (even though she already has the box set).

This movie has NO redeeming features.

Keiko wrote:

I think it's beautiful. Bringing tears to me eyes. :~ )

I can only read some of the quoted comments...but there certainly appears to be a man-crush going on here.

Danny Tse

Mike LoManaco wrote: »

Something I also failed to mention in the main review was that this was made by the same creative team responsible for Wild Hogs, which flopped miserably as well

Mike, I believe Wild Hogs was successful enough that a sequel is in the work. Another sign we are nearing the end.

Why can't Travolta and Williams get better movies to make?

shack

Danny Tse wrote:

Why can't Travolta and Williams get better movies to make?

Because Travolta sucks and Williams' best days are behind him. He hasn't acted in anything good for quite some time...and his voice-overs have been his only notable work of the last several years.

Did I mention Travolta sucks?

Danny Tse

shack wrote: »

Did I mention Travolta sucks?

But Kelly Preston still makes good eye candy, right?

shack

Danny Tse wrote:

But Kelly Preston still makes good eye candy, right?

Maybe...but Travolta still sucks.

concealer404

I'm not quite getting you.... so do you like Travolta or not?

RuSsMaN

I thought it was ok, not a Travolta fan, but it didn't matter for this one, Robin Williams carried him through the whole film. Predictable, but actually laughed out loud a couple times.

Cheers,
Russ

shack

concealer404 wrote:

I'm not quite getting you.... so do you like Travolta or not?

If I liked actors that totally suck...he would be my favorite.

Mike LoManaco

xcapri79 wrote: »

I agree, although I did find Wild Hogs to be mildly entertaining.
But, "it is what it is" as they say.
This genre of movie typically doesn't have a very deep storyline.
They are light family fare, so my expectations remain minimal.
Certainly they are no worse than most of what is on TV now and so they will live another life there.

Okay, perhaps mildly entertaining, yes, but it still was a very odd grouping of good actors, for the most part, and I felt as though in better, more talented hands, it could have been really hysterical.

I agree regarding today's television roster.

kuntasensei

Is it just me, or is that spammer's story oddly relevant?

Systems

idk this movie looks terrible to me...