Review: Speed Racer
Filed under: Action, New Releases, Tribeca, Warner Brothers, Theatrical Reviews, Family Films, Comic/Superhero/Geek
.jpg)
I don't know a lot about Speed Racer aside from what I've gleaned from the theme song over the years -- apparently, the young man's a demon on wheels -- so, in many ways, I'm the best possible audience for Larry and Andy Wachowski's new big-screen interpretation of the character. Originally a Japanese animation program exported and re-dubbed for the American market in the '60s, Speed Racer has now been revived and revitalized for now. And the Wachowskis have created a blast of pure pop family fun; Speed Racer's a bright, bold visual spectacle designed for kids.
And why shouldn't it be? Or, rather, how could it not? This is a property where one of the supporting characters is, after all, a monkey; any fully-grown individual hoping for an adult action film or racing realism is looking in the wrong place. Speed Racer plays like a car-crazed visual wonder -- it looks and feels like what pop artist Roy Lichtenstein would dream if you locked him in a room full of gas fumes, gave him only candy to eat and showed him nothing but Tron, Indianapolis 500 footage, episodes of the '60s Batman TV show and Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. All at the same time. With the volume very, very high.
Speed Racer revolves around a young race driver named ... Speed Racer. (And, again: Yes, it's for kids.) We first meet Speed (Emile Hirsch) sitting in the ready room before a big race, ratcheting his right heel up and down with nervous energy. The film goes into reverse gear, flashing back to show us Speed's boyhood and his unabashed love for two things: racing and his older brother, Rex (Scott Porter). As Speed races around the track in the present day, we learn how Rex moved on from the Racer family's independent crew ... and died in a crash during a cross-country rally. As Speed, in the present day, laps the track, it becomes clear he may be on the way to breaking the course's record ... which is currently held by Rex.
And so, millions of dollars in special effects are being used to create the simple, blunt metaphor of Speed literally racing his brother's ghost. But in a way, that sets the tone and tenor for the film; bold colors, big emotions, tricky driving, simple motivations. Speed's win attracts the attention of the huge corporate race sponsors, who want him to work for them, but he respectfully declines -- at which point he's told that all of racing is a rigged fix to sell tech and stock and auto parts. It's a sham, and worse, it's a sham he'll be shut out from. Speed vows to carry on even in the face of this crushing knowledge, but he's not alone. Racing overseer Inspector Detector (Benno Fürmann) wants to make sure the sport is clean, and his enforcer is the masked driver -- a skillful, willful master of the track called "the harbinger of boom" by fans and foes alike -- known only as Racer X (Matthew Fox).
And, of course, Speed's family and friends are there for him, too: his race car designing dad, Pops (John Goodman); his supportive mother, Mom (Susan Sarandon); the comedy-relief duo of his little brother Spritle (Paulie Litt) and pet monkey Chim-Chim and his chase-copter pilot and best girl Trixie (Christina Ricci). Speed vows to race, and win, and with the backing of those who truly believe in fair racing and the support of those who love him, he may pull it off.
And I felt a bit like an idiot just typing the above sentences, but, again: It's for kids. Using digitally-created backdrops for the live-action actors, integrating pixel-forged spectacles with flesh-and-blood performances, depicting racetracks that look like something from a videogame driven by cars loaded with weapons that look as if they were designed by a cartoon coyote, Speed Racer creates a universe of day-glo, neon-edged fun. The acting is, at best, secondary to the spectacle, but the actors know that it is. Hirsch plays speed as a polite, earnest, gentle young man who turns into a lunatic behind the wheel. Fox is all gravel-growl gruffness in the Han Solo role. (Racer X wears leather, crossed holsters and a gun on his hip; Speed wears ... an ascot. But while Racer X is cooler than Speed, Speed has a certain emotional availability that Racer X doesn't. Your older kids will pretend to be X, your younger kids will identify with Speed, and that's as it should be.) Ricci is a retro-plucky sweetheart and sidekick given to exclamations like "Gee!" and "Hubba, hubba," while Goodman and Sarandon lend lightweight moments some emotional ballast by the heft of their presence. But you don't need a lot of character development when all your characters are there to do is step on the gas, metaphorically and literally.
But the film's star, in the end, is the Wachowskis -- they've created a visually stunning entertainment that blurs the line between animation and live-action through high-tech wizardry and sheer velocity. And keeping Speed Racer a family film blunts some of the ironies inherent to the material: This is a multi-million dollar film backed by a huge corporation about how a small group of friends can thwart a major corporation, and it's weird to see so much auto-erotic racing action at a time when gas is over four dollars a gallon -- but you'd have to be some kind of commie weirdo to think about those things when Hirsch zooms around the track while the laws of physics smile and look the other way. And Speed Racer is long, but trust me, it isn't slow. If your kids have trouble with the bladder-bursting length of it (well over two hours), rest assured, there'll still be plenty of stuff going on when you get back. When we first meet Speed, in flashback, we get to see his young boy's dreams of racing, all motion and color and speed and energy; thing is, that's also what we get in the film. Speed Racer may not look too real when it's stopped and you're walking around it taking notes, but when it's moving, it's a bright buzzy blur of excitement and fun your kids will love.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
5-05-2008 @ 10:36PM
akaison said...
Have you met a bit of visual stylization that you don't like? That's to all who come to this site. I mean- I pretty much expected this review. That's the sad part.
Reply
5-05-2008 @ 10:49PM
gottacook said...
Why do you list Chitty Chitty Bang Bang as a possible influence? That would make me want to stay away... unless, of course, you mean the original Ian Fleming novel and not the film, that inglorious refuge of Sherman Brothers songs likely rejected from Mary Poppins. (The book was about a traditional family of four named Pott; that is, no Truly Scrumptious or any of the other non-Pott characters seen in the movie.)
Question: Do they use a real monkey or a virtual one?
Reply
5-05-2008 @ 11:45PM
Mike said...
You know, it's ok to say you didn't like a movie even though the site you write on has been salivating over the film for 6 months like R. Kelly in Dakota Fanning's underwear drawer. And you wouldn't have to spend hours finding sometihng nice to say about it. Write a fast, honest review and take the extra time to spend with your family. Here's your byline: This movie will go down in history as the equivalent of The Flintstones 3 if it had starred Short Round. Was that so hard?
Reply
5-06-2008 @ 3:40PM
Liz said...
James is one of the best critics around, and Cinematical is a great site with honest, well-written, and thoughtful reviews. Sure, sometimes I don't agree with a review, but it is usually because I feel they are too harsh- never the opposite.
If you really think they write reviews based on advertising, then please stop visiting the site. We don't need to read comments like yours here.
5-06-2008 @ 12:18AM
Gregory Rubinstein said...
To Mike,
Um, I think that James can write for himself and I am sure he is giving an honest review. He has reviewed films that had big hype badly before. Just because you don't like the movie doesn't mean that everyone doesn't like it. Maybe James is giving an honest review. Weird idea, huh? Oh, and I have only a passing interest in Speed Racer, so my excitement over the movie didn't influence what I just wrote.
Reply
5-06-2008 @ 1:51PM
pete thomson said...
Imagine my surprise to see your name an read your put down in the same prissy superior tones you replied to me - lol!!! Im sensing issues Galore !!!!!
5-06-2008 @ 12:48AM
akaison said...
Sorry Greg,b ut I must agree with Mike. this review seems like crap, and so does the movie. if i wanted to watch a cartoon- I would watch a cartoon. it seems rather odd to make a live action movie that cost millions of dollars only to make it as if it were a cartoon. This site can sometimes be just a little bit weird.
Reply
5-07-2008 @ 12:40AM
Tivius said...
I thought that was a great review. Honest and fair -- laying out a realistic understanding for those who aren't already fans, while also expressing the obvious; It was fun!
Ignore the negativity of naysayers, clone-sheep and those who lack vision, goodwill and a little heart. The same people dogged Star Wars/The Matrix/etc. when those films dared to be different.
Great review ! Thanks.
GO SPEED GO !!
Reply
5-06-2008 @ 9:46AM
Erik Davis said...
Mike, this site has never been dishonest with its reviews, so to imply that James is writing a good review for Speed Racer even though he didn't like it is a slap in the face of not only Cinematical, but also James Rocchi -- one of the most respected film critics in the industry.
Mike, go see the film first. Then come back and intelligently disagree with James' review. But don't come on here and throw ridiculous claims at us just because you want the film to suck. If anyone has an agenda, it's you my man.
Reply
5-06-2008 @ 9:55AM
ML said...
Just a comment. I don't think it matters that Speed Racer doesn't seem "real" if you step back and think about it ... it is, after all, a fantasy, not science fiction. It's meant to be fun. If it catches you up in the experience, it's doing its job. If a moviegoer is bothered by this, perhaps this is not the movie for him. Thanks for a thorough review.
Reply
5-06-2008 @ 9:55AM
Fredo said...
I personally hate the "it's for kids" argument, a movie is either awesome or not... The first Spy Kids was awesome, and I was well above the demographic when I saw it, why do we have to assume that kids have to be treated like idiots to be entertained?
I for one can't wait for Speed Racer, It'll either be awesome or not, either way, I'll most likely go see it late at night to ensure there won't be many pesky kids in the theater; because, you know, it's for kids...
Reply
5-06-2008 @ 10:14AM
DAVID F said...
I saw this at a screening on Saturday and loved it! It was so much fun! Bursting with dazzling color and visual stimuli with amazing energy. It looked like the great cast was having a blast too (that always helps). Sure, it may have been a tad long but like Mike said, it goes by fast. I was familar but not faithful to the cartoon and I found myself absorbed in a vibrant world of.....speed! Sure, there will be the naysayers but....When was the last time there was really a fun movie out (regardless of the season)? This is it! It's here!
Reply
5-06-2008 @ 12:01PM
kevjohn said...
There's a really fun movie out in theaters right now called "Iron Man". I'm not really interested in the adventures of Speed at all, and the film looks like a colorful, goofy mess to me. I can't find a reason to go see this instead of going to Iron Man again, or save my money and wait for Indy, or go to the park and play with my dog.
Wall-E is also movie 'made for kids', and it looks a hell of a lot better than this.
5-06-2008 @ 1:01PM
GearsofWar said...
Count me in as someone who also hates the whole "well, its for kids" excuse for a film. Its one thing if its a CareBears or My Little Pony cartoon, but lets be real here-Speed Racer was developed for the target demographic of guys 18-35, not "kids". Its not rated G is it?
When I see "It's a movie aimed at kids" approach, the reviewer inevitably comes across as apologetic or diplomatic-or, judging from the other comments..worse :p
Reply
5-09-2008 @ 3:05PM
Jen Yamato said...
James' reminders that this movie is intended for kids are important because so many people are dismissing Speed Racer precisely for that reason. I'm hoping when more reviews come into Rotten Tomatoes that most critics (who are by and large older people) aren't turned off by the bright colors and racing sequences and the monkey - that's too easy an excuse for damning SR, and quite frankly feeds the notion that too many critics are out of touch and over the hill. We should embrace innovation in movies, like the entire 2-hour eyegasm that is Speed Racer, rather than discourage it because "it's for kids."
(By which I mean, good review, James.)
Reply
5-06-2008 @ 3:13PM
Gregory Rubinstein said...
You know Pete, I believe it was you who said that you didn't want to exchange insults. After you said that, the two posts that I put up in the RDJ post didn't insult you at all. Weird how you don't follow your own rules, huh? Oh, and I was not that mean to Mike, but even if you think I was, he had it coming for assuming that just because he dislikes a movie, everyone does.
Reply
5-07-2008 @ 5:35PM
Gregory Rubinstein said...
To Akaison,
If you read my earlier comment you will see that I never said the review was good or bad. Same with the movie. All I said was that it was ludicrous to assume that since Mike doesn't like the movie, that James won't like it either. Mike accused James of lying about his opinions just to promote a movie. If James says he liked the movie, he liked the movie.
Reply
5-10-2008 @ 11:56PM
southfloridasally said...
Awful movie! Saw Iron Man last weekend: This doesn't even come close to that action packed film. We slept through part of it, and my 8 & 10 year olds kept asking how much longer it was going to be. (We don't go to the movies a lot). 2 1/2 hours at the cinema was WAAAAY too long to keep any child interested, let alone the adults. I hate to say it, but people were leaving early. This could have easily been done in less than 90 minutes and may have kept more interest from the viewers. Sorry, this was very disappointing. No flames, just mine...
Reply