Buddy - Un gorilla per amico

it seems be the film for animals lovers. and only for theme. because , against the premise than it reflects real facts, the story is far to be interesting or plausible, the end too sweet and Rene Russo in a role for she has a huge effort to do coherent. sure, the eccentric rich people stories are a good subject but it is not comfortable to answer yourself why the director has need by Rene Russo, Robbie Coltrane or Alan Cumming for his film. a noble message like this could be better with not great actors. the only good point - the performance of Irma P. Hall. short, a film with very precise target. only a fan of animals can ignore the errors of logic and the too obvious message and could discover the purpose of film, out of a sentimental story about incompatibility between different species.

One of the worst films I have seen in some time, this movie was all the more disappointing because it missed the opportunity to say something very important about man's relationship with animals.

There is almost no value to this film as it stands. It's never explained why Rene Russo's character wants to keep so many animals and turn them into humans, or why her husband, by all appearances completely sane, puts up with it. One meaningless scene follows another, none of them with enough humor or pathos to merit watching.

This was a nice, gentle film with no villains, pretty colors, nice surround sound, a nice recreation of the early 20th century and a fast-moving story. That's the good news.

The bad news is that for a story that is supposed to be "true," it is ludicrous. No animal understands human language as well as another human. Duh! Not in this movie; here they do, which leads the filmmakers into their gigantic plus for Darwinism. They even bring a priest into the picture who proclaims (while looking into "Buddy" the gorilla's eyes, "Those are not the eyes of an animal!"

Are you kidding me?They aren't even subtle about their evolution propaganda and it's some of the most ridiculous baloney I've ever heard.

Too bad because, as I said, it's basically a nice film with nice people. They even show a nice husband, played by Robbie Coltrane. Hollywood usually doesn't show husbands in a good light. In their twist political correctness, women are good and men are bad. Not here.

My Aunt Gertrude did own a gorilla named Buddy, but she also owned another named Massa, and they combined the lives of the 2 together.

First let me give you the true ending, Buddy was sold to the Ringling Bros circus, his name was changed to Gargantua, Massa was sold to the Philedelphia Zoo, and lived to be the oldest living Gorilla in captivity.

The story was hollywoodized to the extreme. If they had stuck to the facts, maybe it would have been better.

Gertrude also raised prize winning Saint Bernards, having over 100 on her estate in Brooklyn. She won the Westminster Dog show blue ribbon 5 times in a row. She helped to develop the "modern" pet foods. Since before then people just fed their pets scraps.

Also just one more minor note, my family is Jewish, yet in the movie, she wore a cross, and as far as I know, no-body in my family was paid or had given permission for the movie to come out.

My Take: More proof that decent special effects and pretty sets can't tell the story.

BUDDY is the film that BABE could have easily been, but while that harmless, little achievement took to a different direction (and succeeded as a great, little film), BUDDY takes off on the wrong track. The story elements are easily predictable, but that's rarely the worst part since the film, despite some imagination and style which went into the production design, the story drags on. It's dully paced and slow-moving, it's pretty hard to care for a somewhat interesting character (a domesticated ape, no less).

Rene Russo plays, and is actually fine as, eccentric wealthy animal lover Gertrude Lintz, who adopts all sorts of animals, chimpanzees mostly, and grooms them into civilized beings, dressing them up and teaches them to walk upright and eat on a table (with a spoon and fork, no less). Alongside her and her menagerie of trained (and well-dressed) apes is her husband (Robbie Coltrane), a helpful maid (Irma P. Hall) and her assistant (Alan Cumming). But when she decides to adopt a harmless orphaned gorilla, her confidence is slowly loosing as Buddy, as groomed and as attentive an animal he is, he's still an animal.

Russo and co., thankfully given some decent roles, are actually good, and the ape (cheesy as ape suits are today) is pretty endearing. But unlike BABE, the focus pitched on the animals are pretty tedious. This time, I think, giving the animals the gift of speech is a welcome asset. Director Caroline Thompson seemed to be distracted by the overall look of the film (the production design, from costumes to sets, are spontaneously elaborate) to strongly develop the script. The story lags a long in a drowsy, monotonous pace that could even put a few children to sleep.

What could have been an eagerly acceptable fantasy with touches of engaging tragedy is an elaborate and fancy bore. BUDDY isn't a failure, but it fails more than it succeeds. At best, it's a promise that never really got off the ground.

Rating: **1/2 out of 5.