Jump to content

Old Dogs (film): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 28: Line 28:
==Plot==
==Plot==
{{Plot|date=December 2009}}
{{Plot|date=December 2009}}
Charlie Reed ([[John Travolta]]) and Dan Rayburn ([[Robin Williams]]) are best friends and co-owners of Rayburn+Reed, a successful sports marketing firm. Seven years prior to the present time of the movie, Dan was once married and when he divorced he was very depressed. In order to cheer Dan up, Charlie takes him on a wild vacation where Dan meets a woman named Vicki ([[Kelly Preston]]) who he thinks is his soul mate. Along with Vicki is her equally beautiful but weird best friend Jenna ([[Rita Wilson]]) who is overly obsessed with her hands because she is a hand model. Dan and Vicki marry the same night they meet but their love affair is short lived. Seven years later, Vicki arrives back in town and announces to Dan that they have twins: Zach (Conner Rayburn) and Emily (Ella Bleu Travolta) together.
Charlie Reed ([[John Travolta]]) and Dan Rayburn ([[Robin Williams]]) are best friends and co-owners of a successful sports marketing firm. Seven years prior, Dan, recently divorced, married Vicki ([[Kelly Preston]]) after being whisked away by Charlie for a tropical vacation. The wedding, however, is short lived. Seven years later, Vicki resurfaces to tell Dan that their short marriage resulted in something he never suspected: twins Zach (Conner Rayburn) and Emily (Ella Bleu Travolta).


Vicki, facing jail time for her work as an environmental activist, asks Dan to take care of the kids while she does her time. Thinking this might be his chance to get back with Vicki, Dan agrees, but only if Charlie will help him since neither have any experience taking care of kids. At the same time, the two must finalize a huge marketing deal with a Japanese company--something they've always dreamed of but will take all of their talents to clinch.
Dan offers to take care of the children the same day he meets them after Vicki has to go to jail for two weeks due to an activist crime. Originally, the kids were going to stay with Jenna but Dan severely injures her by mistakingly jamming her fingers in his car boot, then he opens the boot and then hits her in the face, she then ends up in the hospital, nearly immobile and unable to watch the kids. Because Dan's condo does not allow children, he has to board with Charlie. Whilst this is happening, Charlie and Dan are close to securing the biggest account in the history of their careers with a Japanese corporation. At first, Charlie doesn't want Dan hanging around the children, but later warms up to the idea. Dan does not know how to interract with his kids, and at night he resignedly groans to Charlie, "I just shook my daughter's hand goodnight". At camp, the four turn a three day trip into a nine hour one after the kids unwittingly convinced the instructors ([[Matt Dillon]]) that Dan and Charlie are homosexual partners. Charlie is harassed by the instructor's psychotic brother ([[Justin Long]]), and by the end of the day, Dan ends up destroying a statue of the founder of the camp.


Because Dan's condo does not allow children, he has to board with Charlie. Whilst this is happening, Charlie and Dan are close to securing the biggest account in the history of their careers with a Japanese corporation. Charlie and Dan's attempts to take care of the kids are well-intentioned but very misguided. On a trip with the kids to an overnight camp, a hard-nosed camp instructor ([[Matt Dillon]]) becomes convinced that Dan and Charlie are homosexual partners. The trip ends with a bang after Dan accidentally sets a beloved statue of the camp's founder on fire.
The morning they arrive back home, the kids spill Dan and Charlie's pills and clumsily put them back in the wrong bottles, believing they remember where they belong. This causes side effects for the both of them, with Dan not being able to speak and having odd sight perception during a golfing game with Craig and the Japanese corperation executives, and Charlie's face freezing in a smile along with a neverending appetite while he is trying to woo the attractive American-Japanese translator Amanda ([[Lori Loughlin]]) at her grandmother's funeral, which results in him grinning as Amanda is grieving and crying along with eating grandmother's last famous rhubarb pie which she made within the last hours of her life.


The kids then proceed to spill and replace Charlie and Dan's prescriptions, mixing them up int he process. Dan then must play a game of golf with the Japanese executives while experiencing extreme side effects and Charlie tries to woo Amanda ([[Lori Loughlin]]) with a face frozen by the pills. Needless to say, neither event goes well.
Dan, Charlie, and the kids all become one big happy family, and Dan learns how to appreciate his kids and even have fun with them. Charlie recruits Jimmy Lunchbox ([[Bernie Mac]]), a world famous children's entertainer (who Charlie has been friends with for years) to help Dan make-believe he is a superhero/king for his daughter Emily who wants a protector in her life. Charlie meets up with Jimmy Lunchbox backstage at one of his shows and asks for his help. Lunchbox agrees to the deal but asks if his latest idea be kept a secret. The next day, Jimmy Lunchbox straps Dan and Charlie in motion control puppet suits and Dan has a tea party with Emily (while Jimmy Lunchbox and Charlie watch in another room via hidden camera). When the party goes wrong, Dan gives a heartfelt apology to Emily but it makes Charlie and Jimmy Lunchbox emotional. Afterwards, Dan accomplishes all the tasks his son wrote down on his "Dad List". All is splendid when Vicki comes home, possibly wanting to reunite the family for good by rekindling her and Dan's long gone flame.


Desperate to communicate with the children despite his inexperience with Children, Dan has Charlie recruit Jimmy Lunchbox ([[Bernie Mac]]), a world famous childrens' entertainer. Jimmy straps Dan and Charlie in motion control puppet suits so Charlie can help Dan make all the right moves with his daughter while having a tea party. The suits malfunction but Dan speaks from the heart, winning over Emily. Everything is great with Vicki returns home; however, the guys have sealed their Japanese deal, sending junior associate Craig ([[Seth Green]]) to Tokyo; however, Craig goes missing after arriving there and the guys must fly to Toyko themselves to work. Dan must leave the kids and Vicki despite his (and their) desire to be a family.
The Japanese corporation agrees to hire Dan and Charlie's firm, and they happily send Craig off to Tokyo. However, when Craig does not show up for his first day at work in Tokyo, it puts Dan and Charlie in hot water. The overseas corperation is still willing to do business with Rayburn+Reed but only if Dan and Charlie move to Tokyo instead of Craig. Dan must leave Vicki and the children, whom he promised he would spend their next birthday with, and boards the plane with Charlie.


Dan realizes once in Tokyo that what he really wants is to be a good father. He leaves the meeting without sealing the deal, rushing with Charlie to Vermont for the kids' birthday party. They aren't able to get into the Burlington Zoo in time and are forced to break in with the help of Craig; however, they mistakenly wind up in the gorilla enclosure. Though Dan and Charlie escape, Craig is captured by the gorilla (which takes a strong liking to the man).
During their first meeting, Charlie wows them with his charm and then lets Dan dive into his business pitch. Dan's laptop accidentally opens up a home video of him, Vicki, and the kids and he is unable to stay, boarding the next plane and supposedly ending his friendship with Charlie.
When they arrive home, Dan finds Vicki and the kids have gone back to Vermont, and Charlie is disappointed to find that Lucky has died in the dog hotel, leaving Dan a message saying he is indifferent to whether Dan comes to the funeral or not. Craig calls as well, apologizing for his ways and asking for a second chance.
Dan arrives at Lucky's funeral with a puppy in tow, and the two friends make up, desperately trying to get to Vermont in time for the kid's birthday along with Craig who tags along. The trio are not allowed into the party, which is held in the zoo, and must sneak in through the gorilla enclosure. Dan and Charlie escape, while Craig is left behind.


Dan then steals a jet-pack from a birthday party performer, flying into the ceremony and winning his kids back over. A year later, Dan and Vicki are together, Charlie has married Amanda, and Craig has become like a new "uncle" to the kids.
Dan and Charlie make it out of the gorilla enclosure and into the penguin exhibit, where the penguin's attack Charlie as Dan hurries away. After once again finding he will not be able to make it to the party, he spots a superhero who has been hired by Vicki to fly in, as Emily wanted a superhero. Dan pays the man to let him fly in instead, and does so just as Charlie escapes from the penguins.

Dan makes it just in time, putting smiles on his loved one's faces until he crashes into a nearby pond and is whisked away to a hospital. There, him, Vicki, and the kids make up and promise to be a family as Dan has bought a house in Vermont so he can be near them. Charlie enters the excitement making for a happy ending, with Craig sitting precautiously in the gorilla's lap having never escaped.

The film closes with footage of the group one year later on Dan's new boat which Charlie is having child proofed (as Dan had Charlie's apartment done earlier in the film). Charlie is married to Amanda and they have a three month old daughter. Dan and Vicki have remarried and Craig, like Charlie, has also become an "uncle" to the kids. Charlie's new dog, Lucky, Jr., is seen panting happily at the [[Bow (ship)|bow]] of the boat. The "child proof people" are downstairs in the boat while the happy families above are taking pictures, and they accidentally spill both families' pills in the sink. One asks if they should tell, and the other reluctantly replies, "I think I remember where they go" as they hastily put the pills in the wrong bottles, the last picture showing the whole lot with obnoxiously large, frozen grins on their faces: one of the side effects as Craig, who is taking the photos, remarks, "Maybe not ''that'' big of a smile".


==Cast==
==Cast==
Line 66: Line 60:
== Reception ==
== Reception ==
=== Critical response ===
=== Critical response ===
The film received extremely negative reviews, and [[Rotten Tomatoes]] gave the film a 6% rating based on 77 aggregated reviews, making it certified "rotten"<ref>{{cite web
The film received largely negative reviews, with [[Rotten Tomatoes]] giving it a 6% rating based on 80 aggregated reviews.<ref>{{cite web
| title = Old Dogs (2009)
| title = Old Dogs (2009)
| url = http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10009596-old_dogs/
| url = http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10009596-old_dogs/
Line 73: Line 67:
| accessdate = 2010-01-17
| accessdate = 2010-01-17
}}
}}
</ref> and based on a selection of 19 of their top "Top Critics" the film achieved a rating of only 5%.<ref>{{cite web
| title = Old Dogs (2009) - Top Critics
| url = http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10009596-old_dogs/?critic=creamcrop
| work = [[Rotten Tomatoes]]
| publisher = [[Flixster]]
| accessdate = 2010-01-17
}}
</ref> The film was ranked number three on their list of the ten most moldy films of 2009.<ref>{{cite web
| title = ROTTEN TOMATOES: 11th Annual Golden Tomato Awards: Moldy
| url = http://www.rottentomatoes.com/guides/rtawards/moldy/
| work = [[Rotten Tomatoes]]
| publisher = [[Flixster]]
| accessdate = 2010-01-17
}}
</ref>
</ref>
⚫
Film critic [[Roger Ebert]] gave ''Old Dogs'' a rating of one star out of a possible four, commenting "What were John Travolta and Robin Williams ''thinking...''"<ref name="ebert">{{cite news | first=Roger | last=Ebert | coauthors= |authorlink= Roger Ebert | title=Old Dogs | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] | url =http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091124/REVIEWS/911249994/1023 | work =RogerEbert.com | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-25 | language = }} {{Rating|1|4}} </ref> Bill Goodykoontz of ''[[The Star Press]]'' commented, "''Old Dogs,'' which stars Robin Williams and John Travolta as a couple of aging bachelors who suddenly have twins thrust upon them, delivers everything you’d expect. Which is: not much."<ref name="thestarpress">{{cite news | first=Bill | last=Goodykoontz | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=REVIEW" 'Old Dogs' could use new tricks | date=November 23, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.thestarpress.com/article/20091123/ENTERTAINMENT04/91123024 | work =[[The Star Press]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Rene Rodriguez of ''[[The Miami Herald]]'' gave it a rating of two stars, characterizing the film as a "disposable but inoffensive picture.<ref name="rodriguez">{{cite news | first=Rene | last=Rodridguez | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Movies: Review / Old Dogs (PG) ** - No new tricks in this family comedy | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.miamiherald.com/entertainment/movies/news/story/1349375.html | work =[[The Miami Herald]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref>
At [[Metacritic]], ''Old Dogs'' received an aggregated rating of 19 based on 22 reviews, indicating "overwhelming dislike".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/olddogs |title=Old Dogs |accessdate=2009-11-25 |date=2009 |work=CBS Interactive Inc. |publisher=[[Metacritic]] }}</ref>
Film critic [[Roger Ebert]] gave ''Old Dogs'' a rating of one star out of a possible four.<ref name="ebert">{{cite news | first=Roger | last=Ebert | coauthors= |authorlink= Roger Ebert | title=Old Dogs | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] | url =http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091124/REVIEWS/911249994/1023 | work =RogerEbert.com | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-25 | language = }} {{Rating|1|4}} </ref> Ebert opened his review commenting, "'Old Dogs' is stupefying dimwitted. What were John Travolta and Robin Williams ''thinking'' of? Apparently their agents weren't perceptive enough to smell the screenplay in its advanced state of decomposition".<ref name="ebert" /> ''[[The Salt Lake Tribune]]'' gave ''Old Dogs'' a rating of zero stars out of a possible four, and criticized the film for "hammy acting and sledgehammer editing".<ref name="slt">{{cite news | first= | last=The Salt Lake Tribune staff | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=5-minute movie reviews: 'Old Dogs,' 'Ninja Assassin' | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.sltrib.com/themix/ci_13857602 | work =[[The Salt Lake Tribune]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Film critic Roger Moore of ''[[The Orlando Sentinel]]'' gave ''Old Dogs'' a rating of one and a half stars out of a possible four.<ref name="moore">{{cite news | first=Roger | last=Moore | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Movie Review: Old Dogs, no new tricks | date=November 23, 2009 | publisher=[[Orlando Sentinel]] | url =http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_movies_blog/2009/11/movie-review-old-dogs-no-new-tricks.html | work =Movies with Roger Moore | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> "Trashing Old Dogs is a bit like kicking a puppy. But here goes. The new comedy from some of the folks who brought us Wild Hogs is badly written and broadly acted, shamelessly manipulative and not above stopping by the toilet for a laugh or two," wrote Moore.<ref name="moore" />
⚫
Bill Goodykoontz of ''[[The Star Press]]'' gave the film a critical review, and commented, "'Old Dogs,' which stars Robin Williams and John Travolta as a couple of aging bachelors who suddenly have twins thrust upon them, delivers everything you’d expect. Which is: not much."<ref name="thestarpress">{{cite news | first=Bill | last=Goodykoontz | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=REVIEW" 'Old Dogs' could use new tricks | date=November 23, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.thestarpress.com/article/20091123/ENTERTAINMENT04/91123024 | work =[[The Star Press]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> He concluded his review with, "Let’s hope Williams, Travolta and the rest got a fabulous payday for “Old Dogs.” Because otherwise, you know, woof."<ref name="thestarpress" /> In a review for ''[[The Arizona Republic]]'', Goodykoontz gave the film a rating of one and a half stars out of a possible five.<ref>{{cite news | first=Bill | last=Goodykoontz | coauthors= |authorlink= | title='Old Dogs' | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.azcentral.com/thingstodo/movies/articles/2009/11/24/20091124olddogs1226.html | work =[[The Arizona Republic]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref>
Writing for the ''[[San Jose Mercury News]]'' in an analysis of movies that were released around [[Thanksgiving]], Randy Myers placed ''Old Dogs'' below "The Scraps: Leftovers that should be immediately placed in Fido's bowl."<ref name="myers" /> Myers commented, "We have a winner in the Thanksgiving movie turkey contest."<ref name="myers">{{cite news | first=Randy | last=Myers | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Thanksgiving Movie Guide: From the main courses to the doggie scraps | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.mercurynews.com/entertainment/ci_13850907?nclick_check=1 | work =[[San Jose Mercury News]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Dennis Harvey of ''[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]'' wrote, "Too bad this shrilly tuned comedy doesn't demand more than clock-punching effort from everyone involved."<ref>{{cite news | first=Dennis | last=Harvey | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Old Dogs | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117941669.html | work =[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref>

{{quote box2 |width=25em | bgcolor=#c6dbf7 |align=right |halig=left | salign=right|quote="'Old Dogs' is stupefying dimwitted. What were John Travolta and Robin Williams ''thinking'' of? Apparently their agents weren't perceptive enough to smell the screenplay in its advanced state of decomposition"|source=&nbsp;—[[Roger Ebert]]<br />{{Rating|1|4}}<ref name="ebert" />}}
Kirk Honeycutt of ''[[The Hollywood Reporter]]'' summed up his review with, "Bottom Line: Insipid, predictable, broad comedy mixed with Disney Family Values makes for one exasperating sit."<ref name="honeycutt">{{cite news | first=Kirk | last=Honeycutt | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Old Dogs -- Film Review | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/film-reviews/old-dogs-film-review-1004047938.story | work =[[The Hollywood Reporter]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Honeycutt called the film "a dumb male movie", and concluded, "'Old Dogs' gives men a bad name."<ref name="honeycutt" /> Duane Dudek of the ''[[Milwaukee Journal Sentinel]]'' gave the film a rating of one and a half stars.<ref name="dudek">{{cite news | first=Duane | last=Dudek | coauthors= |authorlink= | title='Old Dogs' digs up a tired plot that should have stayed buried | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.jsonline.com/entertainment/movies/71974927.html | work =[[Milwaukee Journal Sentinel]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Dudek did not recommend the movie to parents or to children, commenting, "'Old Dogs' is not your father's Disney movie. And, maybe, despite the PG rating, not your kids' either. The movie, opening in theaters Wednesday, has lots of rough edges unsuitable for little tykes."<ref name="dudek" /> He concluded that the film, "has no new tricks, only preposterous story lines."<ref name="dudek" /> Film critic Joe Williams of the ''[[St. Louis Post-Dispatch]]'' wrote, "There are no new tricks in 'Old Dogs,' a cheesy chew-toy of a comedy about reluctant fatherhood."<ref name="williams">{{cite news | first=Joe | last=Williams | coauthors= |authorlink= | title='Old Dogs' *1/2 | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/entertainment/reviews.nsf/movie/story/70EEFDF95A62056D86257678006C56F6?OpenDocument | work =[[St. Louis Post-Dispatch]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Williams gave the film a rating of one and a half stars, and concluded, "After it’s exhausted every other gimmick, the movie tries to win our hearts. But 'Old Dogs' is so oafish, when it tosses us a biscuit, it feels like we've been smacked with a newspaper."<ref name="williams" /> Mary Pols of ''[[MSN|MSN Movies]]'' gave the film a rating of zero stars out of a possible five.<ref name="pols">{{cite news | first=Mary | last=Pols | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Put These 'Dogs' Down | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher=[[Microsoft]] | url =http://movies.msn.com/movies/movie-critic-reviews/old-dogs/ | work =[[MSN|MSN Movies]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-25 | language = }}</ref> Pols wrote that the jokes in the film were not appropriate for children, commenting, "It's not just that the jokes are tasteless and inappropriate for children. They aren't even a little bit funny."<ref name="pols" /> Dann Gire of the ''[[Chicago Daily Herald]]'' reviewed the film and concluded, "Like real old dogs, this movie should be put out of our misery."<ref name="gire">{{cite news | first=Dann | last=Gire | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Shallow 'Old Dogs' lacks emotional bite | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=339223 | work =[[Chicago Daily Herald]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Rene Rodriguez of ''[[The Miami Herald]]'' review the film and gave it a rating of two stars.<ref name="rodriguez">{{cite news | first=Rene | last=Rodridguez | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Movies: Review / Old Dogs (PG) ** - No new tricks in this family comedy | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.miamiherald.com/entertainment/movies/news/story/1349375.html | work =[[The Miami Herald]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Rodriguez characterized the film as a "disposable but inoffensive picture".<ref name="rodriguez" /> Writing for ''[[Metromix]]'', Matt Pais described ''Old Dogs'' as "A great opportunity to gather family members you clearly think are stupid."<ref name="pais">{{cite news | first=Matt | last=Pais | coauthors= |authorlink= | title='Old Dogs' review - A great opportunity to gather family members you clearly think are stupid | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://chicago.metromix.com/movies/movie_review/old-dogs-review/1627252/content | work =[[Metromix]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Pais commented on the acting in the film, "The verdict: All of the actors involved (including Matt Dillon, Justin Long, Ann-Margaret and Paolo Costanzo) seem to have collectively placed their sense of self-respect in a bag and tossed it in the toilet. Yet the biggest culprits are Williams and Travolta, who are now so devoid of comic instincts that Becker must rely on reaction shots from Charlie's dog to show that someone is actually trying."<ref name="pais" />

Michael Phillips of the ''[[Chicago Tribune]]'' gave the film a rating of one star.<ref name="phillips">{{cite news | first=Michael | last=Phillips | coauthors= |authorlink= | title='Old Dogs' -- 1 star | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher=[[Chicago Tribune]] | url =http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/talking_pictures/2009/11/old-dogs-1-star.html | work =Talking Pictures | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> "'Wild Hogs,' 'Old Dogs' — what’s next, 'Bumps on Logs'? Truly, I would rather watch John Travolta and Robin Williams sitting on a tree trunk, doing nothing, than endure their best efforts to energize this ol’ hound," wrote Phillips.<ref name="phillips" /> He concluded, "The labored premise of this setup is not worth the effort — it’s sort of icky both as humor and as pathos. Good will generated by familiar faces cannot overcome all obstacles."<ref name="phillips" /> Ty Burr of ''[[The Boston Globe]]'' was critical of the film, and also called it a "turkey".<ref name="burr">{{cite news | first=Ty | last=Burr | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=‘Old Dogs’ lacks plot, purpose | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/articles/2009/11/25/old_dogs_lacks_a_plot_purpose/ | work =[[The Boston Globe]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Burr said of Disney's decision to produce the film, "If they had any respect for audiences, they might never have released it at all."<ref name="burr" /> John Hazelton of ''[[Screen International]]'' observed, "the supposedly touching moments often feel manufactured".<ref name="hazelton">{{cite news | first=John | last=Hazelton | coauthors= |authorlink= | title= Old Dogs | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.screendaily.com/reviews/old-dogs/5008514.article | work =[[Screen International]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Lisa Schwarzbaum gave the film a grade of "F" in her review for ''[[Entertainment Weekly]]''.<ref name="schwarzbaum">{{cite news | first=Lisa | last=Schwarzbaum | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Old Dogs | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20322465,00.html | work =[[Entertainment Weekly]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> [[Filmcritic.com]] reviewer Alexander Zalben gave the film a rating of one star out of a possible five.<ref>{{cite news | first=Alexander | last=Zalben | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Old Dogs Movie Review | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.filmcritic.com/misc/emporium.nsf/reviews/Old-Dogs | work =[[Filmcritic.com]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Keith Phipps of ''[[AV Club]]'' called the film "insulting" to children.<ref name="phipps">{{cite news | first=Keith | last=Phipps | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Old Dogs | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.avclub.com/articles/old-dogs,35742/ | work =[[AV Club]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Phipps did not recommend the film for either children or adults, concluding, "Adults should steer clear. Kids should be sent to it only if they’ve been extraordinarily naughty."<ref name="phipps" />


Writing for ''[[The Philadelphia Inquirer]]'', Carrie Rickey gave the film a rating of two and a half stars out of four.<ref name="rickey">{{cite news | first=Carrie | last=Rickey | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Old Dogs | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/movies/20091124_Old_Dogs.html | work =[[The Philadelphia Inquirer]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Rickey commented of the multiple [[cameo]]s in the film, "A child of 5 can see that these brief appearances serve to pad a gauze-thin script."<ref name="rickey" /> The review concluded, "''Old Dogs'' may not be good. But the sight of pesky penguins pecking Travolta and Green in the embrace of an unlikely partner makes it just good enough."<ref name="rickey" /> Pete Hammond of ''[[Boxoffice (magazine)|Boxoffice]]'' gave the film 3/5 stars, and concluded, "''Old Dogs'' may not reach the box office heights of ''Wild Hogs'' but its fun family friendly attitude should guarantee a healthy holiday haul."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://boxoffice.com/reviews/2009/11/old-dogs.php | first=Pete | last=Hammond | title=Old Dogs Movie Review | publisher=www.boxoffice.com|work=[[Boxoffice (magazine)|Boxoffice]] | date=2009-11-25 | accessdate=2009-11-28}}</ref>
Some reviews were more positive. Writing for ''[[The Philadelphia Inquirer]]'', Carrie Rickey gave the film a rating of two and a half stars out of four.<ref name="rickey">{{cite news | first=Carrie | last=Rickey | coauthors= |authorlink= | title=Old Dogs | date=November 24, 2009 | publisher= | url =http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/movies/20091124_Old_Dogs.html | work =[[The Philadelphia Inquirer]] | pages = | accessdate = 2009-11-24 | language = }}</ref> Rickey writes that "Travolta's and Williams' unpredictability makes for some chortle-worthy slapstick."<ref name="rickey" /> Pete Hammond of ''[[Boxoffice (magazine)|Boxoffice]]'' gave the film 3/5 stars, and concluded, "''Old Dogs'' may not reach the box office heights of ''Wild Hogs'' but its fun family friendly attitude should guarantee a healthy holiday haul."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://boxoffice.com/reviews/2009/11/old-dogs.php | first=Pete | last=Hammond | title=Old Dogs Movie Review | publisher=www.boxoffice.com|work=[[Boxoffice (magazine)|Boxoffice]] | date=2009-11-25 | accessdate=2009-11-28}}</ref>


=== Box office ===
=== Box office ===

Revision as of 20:01, 8 March 2010


Old Dogs
Theatrical release poster
Directed byWalt Becker
Written byDavid Diamond
David Weissman
Produced byAndrew Panay
Peter Abrams
Robert Levy
StarringJohn Travolta
Robin Williams
Kelly Preston
Seth Green
Lori Loughlin
Bernie Mac
Matt Dillon
CinematographyJeffrey L. Kimball
Edited byRyan Folsey
Tom Lewis
Music byJohn Debney
Distributed byWalt Disney Pictures
Release date
November 25, 2009 (2009-11-25)
Running time
88 minutes
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
Budget$35 million
Box office$81,210,719[1]

Old Dogs is a 2009 American comedy film directed by Wild Hogs's Walt Becker and starring John Travolta and Robin Williams with supporting roles played by Kelly Preston, Matt Dillon, Justin Long, Seth Green, Rita Wilson, Dax Shepard and Bernie Mac. It was released in theaters on November 25, 2009 and will be released on DVD March 9th, 2010.

The movie is dedicated to both Bernie Mac (his final film in a cameo role, who died in August 2008) and Jett Travolta (John Travolta's son, who died in January 2009).

Plot

Charlie Reed (John Travolta) and Dan Rayburn (Robin Williams) are best friends and co-owners of a successful sports marketing firm. Seven years prior, Dan, recently divorced, married Vicki (Kelly Preston) after being whisked away by Charlie for a tropical vacation. The wedding, however, is short lived. Seven years later, Vicki resurfaces to tell Dan that their short marriage resulted in something he never suspected: twins Zach (Conner Rayburn) and Emily (Ella Bleu Travolta).

Vicki, facing jail time for her work as an environmental activist, asks Dan to take care of the kids while she does her time. Thinking this might be his chance to get back with Vicki, Dan agrees, but only if Charlie will help him since neither have any experience taking care of kids. At the same time, the two must finalize a huge marketing deal with a Japanese company--something they've always dreamed of but will take all of their talents to clinch.

Because Dan's condo does not allow children, he has to board with Charlie. Whilst this is happening, Charlie and Dan are close to securing the biggest account in the history of their careers with a Japanese corporation. Charlie and Dan's attempts to take care of the kids are well-intentioned but very misguided. On a trip with the kids to an overnight camp, a hard-nosed camp instructor (Matt Dillon) becomes convinced that Dan and Charlie are homosexual partners. The trip ends with a bang after Dan accidentally sets a beloved statue of the camp's founder on fire.

The kids then proceed to spill and replace Charlie and Dan's prescriptions, mixing them up int he process. Dan then must play a game of golf with the Japanese executives while experiencing extreme side effects and Charlie tries to woo Amanda (Lori Loughlin) with a face frozen by the pills. Needless to say, neither event goes well.

Desperate to communicate with the children despite his inexperience with Children, Dan has Charlie recruit Jimmy Lunchbox (Bernie Mac), a world famous childrens' entertainer. Jimmy straps Dan and Charlie in motion control puppet suits so Charlie can help Dan make all the right moves with his daughter while having a tea party. The suits malfunction but Dan speaks from the heart, winning over Emily. Everything is great with Vicki returns home; however, the guys have sealed their Japanese deal, sending junior associate Craig (Seth Green) to Tokyo; however, Craig goes missing after arriving there and the guys must fly to Toyko themselves to work. Dan must leave the kids and Vicki despite his (and their) desire to be a family.

Dan realizes once in Tokyo that what he really wants is to be a good father. He leaves the meeting without sealing the deal, rushing with Charlie to Vermont for the kids' birthday party. They aren't able to get into the Burlington Zoo in time and are forced to break in with the help of Craig; however, they mistakenly wind up in the gorilla enclosure. Though Dan and Charlie escape, Craig is captured by the gorilla (which takes a strong liking to the man).

Dan then steals a jet-pack from a birthday party performer, flying into the ceremony and winning his kids back over. A year later, Dan and Vicki are together, Charlie has married Amanda, and Craig has become like a new "uncle" to the kids.

Cast

Reception

Critical response

The film received largely negative reviews, with Rotten Tomatoes giving it a 6% rating based on 80 aggregated reviews.[2] Film critic Roger Ebert gave Old Dogs a rating of one star out of a possible four, commenting "What were John Travolta and Robin Williams thinking..."[3] Bill Goodykoontz of The Star Press commented, "Old Dogs, which stars Robin Williams and John Travolta as a couple of aging bachelors who suddenly have twins thrust upon them, delivers everything you’d expect. Which is: not much."[4] Rene Rodriguez of The Miami Herald gave it a rating of two stars, characterizing the film as a "disposable but inoffensive picture.[5]

Some reviews were more positive. Writing for The Philadelphia Inquirer, Carrie Rickey gave the film a rating of two and a half stars out of four.[6] Rickey writes that "Travolta's and Williams' unpredictability makes for some chortle-worthy slapstick."[6] Pete Hammond of Boxoffice gave the film 3/5 stars, and concluded, "Old Dogs may not reach the box office heights of Wild Hogs but its fun family friendly attitude should guarantee a healthy holiday haul."[7]

Box office

Going up against the second weekend of New Moon, the film opened the Wednesday before Thanksgiving and grossed $24,228,546 in its first five days. In total, the film grossed $48,804,594 domestically and $31,510,539 internationally. Given its production budget, estimated at $35,000,000, the film's worldwide gross of $80,315,13 can be considered a financial success.[8]

References

  1. ^ "Old Dogs (2009) Box Office". The-Numbers. Retrieved 2010-01-23.
  2. ^ "Old Dogs (2009)". Rotten Tomatoes. Flixster. Retrieved 2010-01-17.
  3. ^ Ebert, Roger (November 24, 2009). "Old Dogs". RogerEbert.com. Chicago Sun-Times. Retrieved 2009-11-25. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  4. ^ Goodykoontz, Bill (November 23, 2009). "REVIEW" 'Old Dogs' could use new tricks". The Star Press. Retrieved 2009-11-24. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  5. ^ Rodridguez, Rene (November 24, 2009). "Movies: Review / Old Dogs (PG) ** - No new tricks in this family comedy". The Miami Herald. Retrieved 2009-11-24. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  6. ^ a b Rickey, Carrie (November 24, 2009). "Old Dogs". The Philadelphia Inquirer. Retrieved 2009-11-24. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  7. ^ Hammond, Pete (2009-11-25). "Old Dogs Movie Review". Boxoffice. www.boxoffice.com. Retrieved 2009-11-28.
  8. ^ http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=olddogs.htm

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Old_Dogs_(film)&oldid=348591414"