When it comes to their portrayal in movies, cats are the Rodney Dangerfields of the animal world. While dogs are sometimes presented as dumb or vicious, they also have the likes of Lassie, Benji, Rin Tin Tin and others to portray their species in a positive light. Other than a handful of exceptions, however, cats are seen as sneaky, lazy, and evil or simply heard yowling somewhere off screen when something is thrown or crashes into something else.
Thus, I'm pleased when a cat gets the prominent leading role in a film as some corrective PR can then be done. Alas, the latest such feline portrayal in the cinema will likely have kids and adults alike yowling to be let out of theaters. Yes, Garfield, the popular comic strip character has finally made it to the big screen in the appropriately titled "Garfield: the Movie."
Unfortunately, that's about the only thing the film gets right. Reportedly read by 260 million some million people worldwide in more than 2,500 newspapers, the self-absorbed kitty has also been featured in books, on mugs and T-shirts, as various stuffed toys, and on TV in commercials, specials and even his own show. Thus, it would seem fit that he'd get the big screen treatment.
It's just too bad that the resultant film isn't any better. Granted, it's rather innocuous entertainment that the entire family can watch together and there's something to be said for that. But that doesn't mean it's good from an artistic standpoint. Part of the problem stems from trying to turn a three-panel newspaper comic strip -- that's really just one brief observation after another -- into a full-length film with a real plot.
Writers Joel Cohen & Alec Sokolow ("Cheaper by the Dozen," "Goodbye Lover") and director Peter Hewitt ("The Borrowers," "Tom and Huck") try to find a balance between the two, but both parts end up being incredibly bland, lacking in imagination and, most importantly, not very funny or even enjoyable on just a diversionary level.
The story quickly boils down to Garfield being his usual lazy and self-centered self, having to deal with the appearance of Odie in his life, and then trying to find and rescue him from a greedy TV personality who takes the dog for his own gain.
Movies aimed at kids, of course, don't need a ton of story to work. Yet, this bare bones approach -- that also features a lame human love subplot -- pushes its luck and will likely try the patience of all but the most ardent Garfield fan or non-discerning youngster. It will also amaze you that these are the same writers who delivered "Toy Story" to the masses all those years ago.
One can't rest on their laurels, however, and I guess you can't hit a home run every time. Nevertheless, the script is the weak link. That said, it doesn't help that the title character is so self-absorbed and lazy that he turns out not to be much of an endearing or sympathetic creation.
Then there's the fact that the filmmakers opted to use a computer-generated version of him. I suppose it would be difficult to find a real feline that would pass for the cartoon character, but the fact that he's the only critter spit out by a computer makes him seem all the more artificial. The effect is akin to the title character in the live-action "Scooby-Doo" movies. Juxtaposed against the real background and other animals (that have had their speaking mouths computer-enhanced), he doesn't look or seem real.
Which is a shame since Bill Murray ("Lost in Translation," "Rushmore") is around in an attempt to infuse some spirit into him. At first glance, the actor would seem to be the perfect choice for the part as he's often played the very sort of human character that shares Garfield's traits.
Yet, in films such as "Groundhog Day," much of the humor comes from the complete Murray package -- the facial expressions, the way he holds his body, etc. -- and that obviously doesn't transfer to the computer-generated character. Murray tries his best, but those limitations and the lame dialogue he's given to speak circumvent his verbal actions.
He fares better than Breckin Meyer ("Kate and Leopold," "Road Trip") and Jennifer Love Hewitt ("The Tuxedo," "Heartbreakers"), however, who are cast in thankless, underwritten and instantly forgettable roles. In fact, if not for the latter showing up in some quite tight-fitting attire, I don't think anybody would notice either human character. Stephen Tobolowsky ("Freaky Friday," "Groundhog Day") plays the obligatory cartoonish villain character, but he's probably the weakest such creation to hit the screen in a long while.
I guess I should disclose that I've never been a big fan of the comic strip (despite being a cat lover and long-time owner) and thus wasn't particularly looking forward to this offering. I didn't think, however, that it would be as bland and boring as it's turned out to be.
Coming on the heels of the fabulous, highly imaginative and incredibly enjoyable "Shrek 2" (not to mention "Nemo" and other such films), about the only thing this film does is make you appreciate the quality of those works that much more.
Possibly okay for fans and young kids who don't know any better, but about as fun or exciting as cleaning out a litter box for everyone else, "Garfield: The Movie" rates as a 3 out of 10.
![[Logo]](/images/screenit_logo2.jpg){kind=logo}
