I admit it: if I were 10 years old (or younger), and "Racing Stripes" was the first movie of its type that I'd seen, I'd probably like it better. And while this is strictly hackwork, even the 2nd string and 3rd string actors involved here (and I count Muniz waaay back in the 3rd string as a voice actor, although he may improve with time) are obviously professionals - "Racing Stripes" is at least mostly competent.
The trouble is, as an adult, I can see that the screenplay's got no heart, no juice, and no guts, and the director doesn't know how to give it any. Stack this up against "Cats And Dogs", and this film gets left in the dust. Stack it up against something like "Babe", and it doesn't even make it out of the gate. Both those films had the same theme as "Racing Stripes", ("You can do it if you try"), but here it just comes out flat - the hero wins because the hero is supposed to win, because that's what heroes do.
For instance, a day or two before the big race, the Bad Horse from the Rich Stables horsenaps the hero's mare-friend, and Munoz's character is beaten and left unconscious by the hench-horses. Yet the very next scene, he's running around emoting , with no visible ill effects from the beating. Dammit, race horses are delicate creatures, for all their size, and even a small injury, something that leaves them limping, is enough to completely ruin their chances of winning a high stakes race (where the winning difference is often measured in .10ths of a second). The screenplay ignores this little aspect of horse-racing, which could have been milked for some real drama and suffering and anxiety - but no, that would be some actual emotion, and there is no room for that in this by-the-numbers tale of a maverick winning against the odds.
Also bothersome - our hero actually gets some help during the race that none of the other horses get. The two flies zip back and forth several times between Stripes and his coach/mentor with tactical advice and last moment inspiration. I realize that this plot device is meant to invoke the "Use the Force, Luke" moment from the run on the Death Star, but...Excuse me, is this ethical? Or even legal? None of the other race horses are allowed this kind of assistance (that the film shows us, anyway), so how is Stripes' victory any kind of moral victory? It's as bad as movie like "Angels In the Outfield", where the ethics of using supernatural forces to cheat the other team of their deserved victory (cause your own team just ain't good enough to win on its own) are conveniently overlooked. In fact it's worse, because usually in the clutch championship moment, the hero has to pull off the big play on his own. Not here.
I will admit that the final sprint to the finish, where Stripes reaches down and finds what he needs to win, is well done. It's almost worth all the 2nd rate work that precedes it. Anyone who has been in crew races, bike races or marathons can identify with those make-or-break emotional decisions.
The voice acting - well, the two juvenile leads just can't surmount the drabness of the material. I feel this is the director's fault as much as the actors. I deride Muniz's voice talent, as he mostly got over on "Malcolm" with his looks and charm..., but still, he is a pro who carried a popular TV show. As a pro he is still better voice actor than 99 out of 100 amateur actors of the same age. So the director could have gotten better line readings out him (if only by happy accident) with better coaching. As it is, it sounds as if the two leads are reading the lines off cue cards for the first time, with no chance to punch up the drab dialog.
The human "live" acting - well, the 'live' half of the screen play is "National Velvet Lite", written for a situation comedy (and given a lobotomy). The actors do the best they can and it's serviceable for a juvenile movie.
For a family flick, there sure are a lot of poo and fart jokes, but those don't offend me. It DOES cement my opinion that the film team tried to make a "hipper" picture than, say, the old Disney films like "Herbie" and "The Nutty Professor" in attempt to hide the film's basic lack of invention. The trouble is, by centering the film around talking animals, they invite comparison not only to other live "talking animal" films, but also to animated classics like "101 Dalmations" and "The Aristocats", neither of which needed to worry about "hipness" (or fart jokes) to get over. For that matter, "Mr. Ed" and "Francis the Talking Mule" managed to be funny and whimsical without riffing on horse feces either.
Don't misunderstand me. If your kids want to rent or buy this, or want to watch this when it comes on cable again,it won't kill you to watch with them. "Racing Stripes" is not offensively bad or stupid, it's just a little, um, lame, compared to other, better, more original kid's films. They'll probably enjoy it OK (although I can't see it displacing "Finding Nemo" or "A Bug's Life") and forget about it within a week. So will you.
The trouble is, as an adult, I can see that the screenplay's got no heart, no juice, and no guts, and the director doesn't know how to give it any. Stack this up against "Cats And Dogs", and this film gets left in the dust. Stack it up against something like "Babe", and it doesn't even make it out of the gate. Both those films had the same theme as "Racing Stripes", ("You can do it if you try"), but here it just comes out flat - the hero wins because the hero is supposed to win, because that's what heroes do.
For instance, a day or two before the big race, the Bad Horse from the Rich Stables horsenaps the hero's mare-friend, and Munoz's character is beaten and left unconscious by the hench-horses. Yet the very next scene, he's running around emoting , with no visible ill effects from the beating. Dammit, race horses are delicate creatures, for all their size, and even a small injury, something that leaves them limping, is enough to completely ruin their chances of winning a high stakes race (where the winning difference is often measured in .10ths of a second). The screenplay ignores this little aspect of horse-racing, which could have been milked for some real drama and suffering and anxiety - but no, that would be some actual emotion, and there is no room for that in this by-the-numbers tale of a maverick winning against the odds.
Also bothersome - our hero actually gets some help during the race that none of the other horses get. The two flies zip back and forth several times between Stripes and his coach/mentor with tactical advice and last moment inspiration. I realize that this plot device is meant to invoke the "Use the Force, Luke" moment from the run on the Death Star, but...Excuse me, is this ethical? Or even legal? None of the other race horses are allowed this kind of assistance (that the film shows us, anyway), so how is Stripes' victory any kind of moral victory? It's as bad as movie like "Angels In the Outfield", where the ethics of using supernatural forces to cheat the other team of their deserved victory (cause your own team just ain't good enough to win on its own) are conveniently overlooked. In fact it's worse, because usually in the clutch championship moment, the hero has to pull off the big play on his own. Not here.
I will admit that the final sprint to the finish, where Stripes reaches down and finds what he needs to win, is well done. It's almost worth all the 2nd rate work that precedes it. Anyone who has been in crew races, bike races or marathons can identify with those make-or-break emotional decisions.
The voice acting - well, the two juvenile leads just can't surmount the drabness of the material. I feel this is the director's fault as much as the actors. I deride Muniz's voice talent, as he mostly got over on "Malcolm" with his looks and charm..., but still, he is a pro who carried a popular TV show. As a pro he is still better voice actor than 99 out of 100 amateur actors of the same age. So the director could have gotten better line readings out him (if only by happy accident) with better coaching. As it is, it sounds as if the two leads are reading the lines off cue cards for the first time, with no chance to punch up the drab dialog.
The human "live" acting - well, the 'live' half of the screen play is "National Velvet Lite", written for a situation comedy (and given a lobotomy). The actors do the best they can and it's serviceable for a juvenile movie.
For a family flick, there sure are a lot of poo and fart jokes, but those don't offend me. It DOES cement my opinion that the film team tried to make a "hipper" picture than, say, the old Disney films like "Herbie" and "The Nutty Professor" in attempt to hide the film's basic lack of invention. The trouble is, by centering the film around talking animals, they invite comparison not only to other live "talking animal" films, but also to animated classics like "101 Dalmations" and "The Aristocats", neither of which needed to worry about "hipness" (or fart jokes) to get over. For that matter, "Mr. Ed" and "Francis the Talking Mule" managed to be funny and whimsical without riffing on horse feces either.
Don't misunderstand me. If your kids want to rent or buy this, or want to watch this when it comes on cable again,it won't kill you to watch with them. "Racing Stripes" is not offensively bad or stupid, it's just a little, um, lame, compared to other, better, more original kid's films. They'll probably enjoy it OK (although I can't see it displacing "Finding Nemo" or "A Bug's Life") and forget about it within a week. So will you.