Cute, But Doesn't Quite Make It

Rating: 3/10 (21 April 2001)

There are some really nice special effects in this part live action, part animation comedy about a detective (Bob Hoskins) who has to clear the name of a cartoon character (Roger Rabbit) accused of murder. The premise of the movie (an interesting one, I concede) is that cartoon characters ("toons") are real beings of some sort with their own existence beyond the pen of the cartoonist, and who even have their own neighbourhood to live in ("Toon Town"). More than that, they can even interact with we humans. The live action and animation blend together quite nicely, and Bob Hoskins does a good job of playing Eddie Valiant - even managing to keep a straight face through most of it. (I really enjoyed the scenes in which Eddie Valiant drives an animated car.) So, why do I only rate it a 3?
There's a lot of very predictable slapstick humour packed all the way through. It's funny at first but degenerates to boring after a while. There are long scenes which aren't very interesting but are apparently used to allow the "toons" to be shown off, which is, I admit, necessary to allow the viewer to get to know some of them. But that leads in to another problem. It's hard to get truly involved with this when the movie for the most part uses cartoon characters who are completely unknown to the viewer; created, apparently, only for this movie. Setting aside the plethora of minor "toons," who is Roger Rabbit anyway? Jessica Rabbit? Baby Herman? The Weasels? We don't know any of these toons! Who framed Roger Rabbit? You want to know the truth? Who cares! I don't even know the guy! Now, if it were "Who Framed Bugs Bunny" then I'd be inclined to be rooting for this unjustly accused toon. And why wasn't it? A lot of familiar cartoon characters appeared in the movie - including beloved Bugs - so the producers obviously had permission to use them. Why not focus the movie around characters we know? To me, that would have made far more sense.
My last concern is about the conflict (in my view) between the content and the target audience. I'm assuming this is meant as a family movie. (I watched it on Canada's Family Channel.) Given that, I was rather surprised when the disclaimer at the beginning of the movie said that it wasn't appropriate for younger children, and was rated PG. And - fair enough. The content is too mature for the average 7 or 8 year old. But the cartoon nature of the movie makes it rather dull viewing for anyone older than that. It would be OK if you were going to watch it with your kids, but apparently given the rating you're not really supposed to. So - who's supposed to watch this anyway?
It's worth a look-see if only for the special effects and for Bob Hoskins good performance, but that's about all.