Archive for Johnny Depp

I guess Johnny Depp doesn’t want us to like him anymore

Posted in Celebrities, Movies, Reviews with tags , , , , , , on May 15, 2012 by Sarah

Johnny Depp is my #1 Fantasy Crush, my first Fantasy Husband, and one of the few actors I will see in anything. I’m a big fan and a massive apologist and I own both of those things, but now, even I can’t deny that Depp’s prolonged midlife crisis is really bumming me out. I had my come-to-Jesus moment with The Depp during Dark Shadows, the latest in his eccentro-quirktastic partnership with Tim Burton. That movie is…not good. It’s not completely repellant—as is always the case with Burton the production design is insane and it’s a gorgeous film to look at. And the acting isn’t bad, either. Depp is very committed and even quite good as time-displaced vampire Barnabas Collins. The problems come largely from the script, which is bereft of character development and the humor is caught somewhere between too broad for camp and too weird for mainstream appeal. There’s a lost, meandering quality to Dark Shadows—there’s no there there.

Which is why I checked out on watching the movie and started wondering what’s been going on with Depp over the last decade. Obviously, he’s having some kind of personal crisis, but his career is flailing in a strange way, too. Strange because it’s not like he doesn’t make money. Even the terrible Tourist did well, thanks to international box office. And Pirates of the Caribbean: Give Us Your Gold rejuvenated that franchise. But there’s been a downward tick in the non-Disney movies lately. The Rum Diary did not do well, Rango—which is actually good—also underperformed, and now Dark Shadows is losing money. It’s looking like, unless he’s being Jack Sparrow, people are over Depp (does not bode well for next summer’s mega-budgeted The Lone Ranger). Depp built up his career through the 1990’s with deeply weird roles, often directed by Burton, making his name as the beautiful young man who would not be bound by his face. He was The Outsider. He was the Generation X James Dean. So what has happened?

I think, to an extent, there was an expectation that with mainstream success would come mainstream conformity. Compare Depp to his contemporary, Robert Downey, Jr. RDJ overcame significant personal demons and revived his career in the mid 2000’s, emerging as major box office in 2008 in Iron Man. RDJ is a weird dude himself, but it’s like, once he got his shit under control for the last time, he pulled together a reasonable facsimile of a working leading man and though he wears odd suits and makes questionable footwear choices, RDJ’s quirk does not get in the way of his commercial interests. His eccentricity is an enhancement, not a hindrance. It’s—Oh that RDJ, always with the purple glasses and the sneakers, but isn’t he so sexy and charming and great? (YES, HE IS.) Meanwhile, Depp’s eccentricity is slowly strangling his public persona under the weight of all those chains and bandanas. It’s become a liability. Because Depp isn’t really conforming to what we think he should be at this stage.

And maybe that’s fair. The man is nearly fifty and he’s dressing and acting exactly like he did twenty years ago. There’s some arrested development happening that is unappealing. But here’s where I’ll defend Depp, my last line of defense on his behalf. I have always said that Depp is a deeply weird dude. Hollywood is anxious to replicate him, to announce “the new Johnny Depp”. The problem with that is that to date, no young actor has been remotely close to as genuinely weird as Depp. We think he’s getting too old for his schtick but what if it’s not schtick? What if he really is just that bizarre?

Depp’s past decade has not been without merit. People have taken to discussing his (and by extension, Burton’s) last ten years like it’s a vast wasteland of shitty work. It’s not. Finding Neverland, Sweeney Todd (a Burton collaboration), and Public Enemies are all solid-to-good movies. He turned in above-average voice work for The Corpse Bride (another Burton flick) and Rango. And though the public may not want to buy what he’s selling, The Rum Diary, Dark Shadows, and The Lone Ranger are all passion projects. He’s doing the work he wants, regardless of the public reception. That two of those movies happen to be big-budget tent poles is beside the point. It does make me wonder, though, if he was using his Disney money and public good will to make little artsy indies like he did in the 1990’s, if we’d even be having this conversation. I strongly suspect a lot of the critical ire aimed at Depp recently has more to do with what people see as a squandering of his talent on kitschy mainstream projects than any real objection to the number of necklaces he’s wearing.

Johnny Depp is engaged in an unusual conversation with his audience. As the public shouts “you’re getting too old for this” and “tone it down”, Depp continues barreling down his oddball path, doing what he wants, making the movies he wants, regardless of whether or not the audience will be there for him. That’s the rebel spirit of filmmaking, man (said in Dennis Hopper’s voice). That he’s doing it with massive studio projects is actually kind of…funny. Increasingly, it seems like he doesn’t want us to like him, wants us to take him off the pedestal Captain Jack put him on. He’s burning through public good will like he really doesn’t care (again, does not bode well for The Lone Ranger). All that remains is to see what the final outcome is, if the box office of the Pirates franchise can continue to justify giving him hundreds of millions to make his next pet project, or if Depp will retreat to the Land of the Peculiar Things and lick his wounds with a low-budget movie about a man whose eyes are made of razor blades.

Revisiting Rango

Posted in Movies with tags , , , , , , on March 9, 2011 by Sarah

When I saw Rango a few weeks ago I really like it. Granted, I am a huge fan of Johnny Depp and also a cartoon junkie, so I was predisposed to like it. But I liked Rango for being Rango—a smart, funny cartoon that was gorgeously animated. Since Pixar began their utter domination of CG animation in the mid-nineties, no one else has come close to their particularly rich environments. Pixar cartoons feel alive in a way that many critics accuse CG animation of lacking. I think this comes from Pixar’s approach to animation. I’ll never forget Brad Bird’s (The Incredibles, Ratatouille) reaction when he was asked for his opinion on Robert Zemeckis’s Polar Express. “If you’re making a cartoon, make it look like a goddamned cartoon,” he hissed, his expression a study in scorn and disdain. If you want to see what Bird means, just compare stills of the human characters from Up and Disney’s upcoming Mars Needs Moms. Which one makes you want to kill it with fire?

But Rango’s animation, which initially struck me as wonderful, easily the best non-Pixar CG cartoon to date, is entirely in keeping with Bird’s “make a cartoon” edict. Rango is a stunning first effort from Industrial Light & Magic, especially when you consider that it took DreamWorks Animation twelve years to arrive at their best effort, How to Train Your Dragon. But Rango isn’t just pretty. It’s funny and quirky and has tons of movie references to keep the adults entertained while the kids laugh at all the funny ways Rango’s body contorts as he scurries around the desert town of Dirt. And Rango has a nice, if mild, moral about being yourself and standing up to bullies and so on. Morality was not really the point of Rango.

Which may be why it scored so low with CinemaScore over its opening weekend. Despite amassing a $38 million opening weekend, the biggest opening weekend in 2011 so far, audiences didn’t seem to be leaving the theater thrilled with what they saw (WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE). There’s a big disconnect with Rango’s 87% “fresh” rating on Rotten Tomatoes and it’s C+ audience grade from CinemaScore. I found myself wondering why Rango didn’t seem to be connecting to audiences. So I went to see it in a theater, to judge how people were taking it. And I think I figured it out.

Pixar has ruined animation.

Pixar makes unquestionably the best CG cartoons going right now. As beautiful as Rango is, I’m not sure it’s more beautiful than Wall-E, or Up, or any number of Pixar films. It’s right up there with them, but I don’t think it’s actually better. (Although I want to say this now so that I can be right in a year: Rango will win Best Animated Feature at the 2012 Oscars. It’s an off year for Pixar with the money-grabbing Cars 2 so that category will be open to a non-Pixar winner.) But Pixar also makes cartoons that have big, mushy hearts that make us all cry for two hours. Each time I go to see a Pixar movie, I bring a pack of tissues with me. I just count on crying now. Up made me miss my grandparents so much, Toy Story 3 had me hauling my old toys out of the basement to let them see the light of day, and Wall-E is the only movie that can still make me cry on repeat viewings.

Rango made me laugh a lot but it didn’t make cry. It didn’t even try to. And I wonder if, after fifteen years of Pixar conditioning, we don’t subconsciously expect to be moved by our cartoons now. Not that there weren’t emotional touches in Rango, because there were. An unnamed pet lizard in the beginning of the film, Rango’s closest friend is a wind-up fish toy named Mr. Timms. Rango is lonely, bored by his terrarium life, but also petrified of the outside world once he’s dumped in the desert. Rango’s relationships with rancher’s daughter Beans and the skeptical Priscilla unfold nicely, and the pep talk the Spirit of the West delivers is perfect poaching material for coaches, teachers and motivational speakers. (Timothy Olyphant is so extremely cool that even just his voice as the Spirit, which is basically just a cameo, is extremely cool.) But for all it’s heartfelt flourishes, at the end of the day Rango was not trying to jerk my tears.

It was just being funny. And tossing out movie reference after movie reference. And then there’s all that wonderful animation. Rango is just a really well made cartoon without aspiring to be anything more. A few critics called the movie “soulless” in their reviews and I rolled my eyes, thinking that they missed the point. I still think they missed the point but now I also think they tapped into why audiences didn’t have a strong impression after seeing Rango. In the wake of Pixar, we no longer know how to enjoy cartoons without tears. Makes you wonder how those silly, pointless Looney Tunes would fare today.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 181 other followers