I must admit that when I hit play on 1998’s You Lucky Dog, I was not expecting good
things. I mean, you try not getting a prejudice worked up about this particular
TV movie when I tell you it stars Kirk Cameron as a guy who can read dogs'
minds. See? Not so easy to keep an open mind, is it?
The movie manages to be not quite as bad as I feared. It's
amiable and rather sweetly dumb in the way that a not-so-bright pet can
ingratiatingly cause a bit of a mess that takes no time at all to clean up.
Filmed when Cameron was only a few years removed from his popular family sitcom
Growing Pains and a few years before
he waded into far-right Bible-thumping waters and emerged full loon, this movie
is harmless kiddie stuff, the kind of thing that might've been a cheapie Disney
B-picture back in the days that would still be a viable option. I mean, have
you seen 1967's Monkeys, Go Home?
Strange how things change, huh?
You can see I'm dancing around the main subject. This
isn't because the movie's particularly awful. It's not. It would be easier to
approach head-on if it were. I'm writing my way around it because its biggest
failure is not clearing the basic low bar of any fiction: the question of why
we should care. It’s clear that veteran TV director Paul Schneider and
screenwriter David Covell assumed our answer would be: because it’s on. I'm not
even talking the suspension of disbelief. When the movie opens – to the tune of
a faux-Randy Newman singing a "You've Got a Friend in Me" knock-off –
we get a montage of newspaper clippings that tells us Cameron's character was
some kind of kid celebrity for his ability to commune with canine minds. Now,
as an adult, he markets himself as a dog therapist, but we quickly learn that
it's an act. He's a con man. But could he ever
talk to dogs? Apparently it wasn’t always a con. When an eccentric rich man
(Hansford Rowe) brings in his Lucky, the gift comes back. Fine. I can buy that.
But I haven’t yet found a reason to care.
Why we have to have the is-he-or-isn't-he-a-fraud whiplash
in these opening minutes is beyond me. But it’s what forces a change in Cameron's
life, since his presumed fraudulent business is shut down coincidentally on the
same day Lucky's owner suddenly dies. Yes, this movie moves fast, casting off
characters and plot developments almost as quickly as it can introduce them.
It's a whole lot of set-up for strained silliness to follow. You see, the rich
man, on the basis of his sole dog-whisperer appointment, used his will to
legally ensconce Cameron as the dog's trustee and translator, a job title in
much need of filling, what with leaving all his wealth and assets to the dog.
The plot of the film follows Cameron trying to help the
dog by listening so intently that he finds himself compelled to do very
dog-like things. A scene in which he and the dog chew up all the couch cushions
together typifies what goes on here. He's not so much communicating with the
dog; he's possessed. That's what it looks like to the deceased rich man's
scheming relatives (Taylor Negron, Christine Healy, and, Q himself, John de
Lancie), who are entirely unsympathetic as they engage in tame slapstick to get
their hands on the estate. The very thing that would allow them to claim the
riches - Cameron's apparent insanity, what with the belief that he can hear
Lucky's thoughts and all – is also the very thing that will legally allow the
proper execution of the estate. It's a largely theoretically funny construct
that's a sort of kiddie Catch-22.
But who cares where the money ends up? The climax of the
film is an endless dumb courtroom scene that has no tension. Despite Cameron's
likable enough performance, do we really want him to get the money? Sure, he
can talk to dogs again, but he was an unrepentant con man for so long. The
relatives are all cartoon-awful, but, hey, they do have a point. Why let this
total stranger get their uncle's assets? The whole thing seems questionable to
me, and needlessly overcomplicated in a way you'd not expect such
lowest-common-denominator children's programming to be. In the end, who cares?
Up Next: Brink!
Where did you watch it? I've been trying to find it.
ReplyDeleteI saw it on YouTube some time ago. I'm not sure it's still there, but it might pop up again.
ReplyDelete