Interview: Buck Brannaman, the Real Horse Whisperer

Posted on June 23, 2011 at 8:00 am

I loved “Buck,” the new documentary about Buck Brannaman, the real-life horse whisperer who inspired the book and movie. The film is extraordinarily moving. Buck’s gift for animals is a wonder, but it is his understanding of people and his own inspiring recovery from abuse that make it so stirring. It was a genuine privilege to speak with him.

You were training the people on how to deal with the horses, not the horses on how to deal with the people.

Sometimes they don’t realize that when they come to the clinic. They think we’re going to fix the horse. But pretty soon they realize the problem is not really about the horse. It’s really about them.

I love the appearance by your foster mother.

She’s the best. I can hardly watch the last few minutes of the movie with her in it without crying. She’s 88 years old now. And then when there’s a Q&A after the screenings I always go up there crying. Her and her husband moved to the ranch after WWII. It’s a small ranch, nothing grand, and they struggled for many many years from one month to the next. I don’t think they ever had any money to speak of but they always had an open door for kids, long before there was a formal foster care program. They were the place where people dumped their kids off when they couldn’t get along with them, when they couldn’t get anything accomplished with them, like you might dump off a kitten at a ranch because it could turn out to be a barn cat. They had four kids of their own and then 17 other boys they raised over 40 years. I was the last one.

You tell a very moving story about how much it meant to you the first day with your foster parents when your foster dad handed you a pair of work gloves.

I was scared when I met my foster dad because of the horrible experiences I had and the best thing he could do for me was not to put a lot of time into feeling sorry for me. He knew I needed some direction and a job to do. I needed something so I could move on. He knew if we dwelled there too long it was going to be nothing but negative for me. He did the same thing for me I tell people to do with the horses that are troubled. We can’t do anything about what happened yesterday or last year but we can live in the moment and do something about it right now. So we give him a job to do and pretty soon he has something else to think about.

My husband and I are both old enough to remember the TV commercial you made when we were kids.

It’s amazing how many people our age still remember that! In those days you looked forward to watching cartoons Saturday morning all week long.

Has there ever been a horse you couldn’t handle?

I’ve never found one I couldn’t handle, or couldn’t help. But occasionally someone will bring a horse to the clinic that is so far out of their league based on their experience. If they had another couple of thousand horses under their belt than maybe you could do this horse some good. Sometime the human doesn’t have what they need to help the horse. It all comes from the horse. Tom Dorrence, who really was the godfather of this kind of horsemanship, he spent his entire life studying horses and trying to find a way to work with the horse as if he made up the rules how you’d help him to understand, to teach a horse what you’d like him to do. And being real, it’s not always going to be fuzzy and warm. Sometimes there’s going to be trouble and struggles but that’s true in all relationships. It’s true in raising kids. It’s not always going to be Mayberry RFD. But you do the best you can. You try to be as engaged as possible so that when they’re ready for redirection you are there to put them on the right path.

I get everything from Olympic riders and dressage to ranch cowboys to people who ride for pleasure. The demographic of horse owners spans from one end to the other. There are places in the country where people still make their living on a horse. Sometimes the cowboys are the least likely to listen or get advice. Whatever you’re talking about, the male ego can kind of get in the way. All of us men have to deal with that one time or other.

And all of us women have to deal with you men dealing with that! I love the scenes with you and your daughter. You’re clearly so close and have such a loving, trusting relationship.

I never get tired seeing that. I always had an idea of the dad I hope I would turn out to be, nothing like my own dad, and I always figured these things applied to people as well as horses. Even before I had kids I would draw that analogy to people because they could relate to it. In the back of my mind I always thought, “I sure hope this applies the way you say it does!” And sure enough it did.

What do you hope people will take away from the movie?

The big picture is that these things apply whether you’re talking about people or horses. It’s about taking responsibility rather than shirking, that’s true whatever you might be talking about. And, to be honest, I’m hoping that of all the people who might be seeing this, maybe there will be a handful that might get the idea, “I don’t care so much if I can be like Buck, but I sure would like to be like Betsy and step up and give a kid a home, someone that nobody cares about and nobody wants.” If that came of it, wouldn’t that be cool?

Related Tags:

Documentary Interview

Interview: Sue Bourne of the Irish Dance Competition Documentary ‘Jig’

Posted on June 17, 2011 at 10:14 am

Director Sue Bourne talked to me about her new documentary, “Jig,” the story of the Irish dancing world championships. It is thrilling, touching, and inspiring, with unforgettable characters and stories and dancing that would make Michael Flatley stand up and cheer.

This is your first feature, right?

Yes. I’ve been making films for British television for a long time, won some awards, but this is my first feature and it has been a very interesting journey to go on. Once we heard that 6000 dancers from all around the world were coming to Glasgow for the Irish dancing world championships, I pitched the idea to the BBC. They said, “That sounds interesting,” and I said, “I want to make a feature film,” and they said, “Why?” I said, ” I don’t want to make a film about an Englishman, and Irishman, and a Scotsman going to Glasgow — that’s dull as ditchwater.” If we’re going to make a film that shows the true international scope of Irish dancing then let’s be ambitious about it and raise a big budget and do a big proper feature film. So it began with me being a bit big for my boots and saying, “I want to go around the world! I need a big budget!” and it escalated from there! I could see it would have international appeal and a cinema audience. Very few documentaries have what it takes for a cinematic theatrical release but I knew this was one.

How did you know?

My key thing in the films I make is finding the extraordinary in the apparently ordinary. Everyone’s got a story to tell and I am always keen to show that it’s not about dance; it’s about people and their stories and their lives and what they are passionate about. I just sensed that there would be great stories and great characters, that it would be about much more than Irish dancing. And you throw into that that it’s got great music, great dancing, children — I thought, this could be like “Spellbound,” plus “Mad Hot Ballroom” with a dash of Riverdance thrown in as well.

Those children are amazing, not just in their talent but in their determination and maturity. When the two top competitors hugged each other, it was a stunningly moving and powerful moment.

And they’re just 10! We knew that one of the stories we would have to find was a ten year old coming to the World’s for the first time. We looked for a long time, and many of them were shy. But then I saw Brogan and she was so remarkable. I said, “Who’s that!” I thought, “I’ve got to find out more about that wee girl.” She could talk for Britain and she was a 10 year old with a sense of humor. She’s remarkable. Yes, it’s about dancing, but it’s about much, much more than that.

We live in a world of “do your own thing” and yet this incredibly rigid and formal style of dance that is so particular and unchanging attracts passionate devotion from people around the world.

After two years, I’m none the wiser about that as to why they all love it so much. As one said, “It’s the shoes and the rhythm.” The closest I’ve got is that it casts a spell and you’re hooked. Something inside them connects with the rhythm or the music or the dance.

One of the most fascinating parts of the movie is how many people overlook their own cultural and ethnic traditions to devote themselves to Irish dance. You have a group from Moscow, Americans, and a Dutch kid originally from Sri Lanka.

Only about three of the dancers are Irish! Even little Brogan, her family never did any Irish dancing. And people said, “The film is going to be filled with pushy parents.” On the contrary, we found bemused parents who’ve been dragged into it by children who have been captivated by the dance.

It is as engrossing to watch the parents as the children, though. You have a couple of shots where you can tell everything just from the way they tense their shoulders and life their chins as they watch their children perform.

As with all sport, the teachers and parents live a little vicariously through their children and it is so beautifully manifest in that moment. I had to ask myself as a mother if I would be willing to make some of the sacrifices the parents in this movie make to support their children — to move from California to Birmingham! If you’ve got a tennis or golf prodigy you might movie because they could make millions. But here, if you are the world champion, you get a little bauble. They’re not motivated by celebrity, they’re not motivated by money, they’re not motivated by anything other than the goals they set themselves to be the best.

Related Tags:

How to Tell If 3D is Worth the $

Posted on June 17, 2011 at 8:05 am

Cinema Blend has the best discussions I’ve seen about when you should pay the extra for the 3D glasses. The factors they consider include whether the movie was filmed in 3D or had the effects added in post-production, whether it minimizes the inevitable dimming, whether it provides a sense of depth, and the “glasses off test.” The Green Lantern 3D analysis is an excellent example. Whether you do or don’t like 3D, you’ll appreciate it much more if you check out Cinema Blend’s take before deciding whether to put on the 3D glasses.

Related Tags:

3D Understanding Media and Pop Culture

Mr. Popper’s Penguins

Posted on June 16, 2011 at 6:25 pm

It used to be that a comedian who wanted to be in movies had to make an armed services comedy. Now, we stick them in domestic stories about daddies who need to learn that the family is more important than the office. Steve Martin, Eddie Murphy, Tim Allen, Robin Williams, and Jim Carrey have all been, there, some more than once. Other performers take on movies through this rite of passage: look at Ice Cube’s “Are We There Yet?” and “Are We Done Yet?” or The Rock in “The Game Plan” or “The Tooth Fairy,” or Hulk Hogan in “Mr. Nanny” or Vin Diesel in “The Pacifier.”

Actually, don’t.

As rigidly structured as a limerick, these films also require: crotch hits, potty humor, grumpy bosses, and Daddy working through his own issues before finding that what really matters is family. Sometimes, as happens here, they appropriate the title of a beloved book and then jettison just about everything else about it. I’m still hoping for an authentic version of the real-life story “Cheaper by the Dozen,” updating the classic movie version with Clifton Webb. The charming book by Richard and Florence Atwater merits more than a homeopathic speck of a relationship to a movie someday as well.

The book, written in 1938, is the story of a decorator who dreams of adventure and is sent a penguin by an antarctic explorer. In the movie, Jim Carrey plays the son of an explorer who was never home when he was growing up. Now in his 40’s, he is the divorced father of two who works so hard for a company that buys beautiful old buildings and tears them down to build new ones that he misses a lot of soccer games and dance recitals. He very much wants to be a name partner in the firm. If he can make one more big acquisition for the company, it’s his. The only privately-held space in Central Park is the elegant old restaurant, Tavern on the Green. In real life, it is now closed, but in the movie it is owned by redoutable dowager Mrs. Van Grundy (Angela Lansbury).

And then, a crate is delivered. Mr. Popper’s father has died and he has inherited a penguin, soon followed by five more. Popper tries desperately to get rid of the penguin until his son Billy (Maxwell Perry Cotton) sees them and thinks they are his birthday present. So Popper keeps them as a way to connect to his kids, even though his building does not allow pets and a zealous zookeeper wants to take them away. Various forms of chaos disrupt Popper’s life, interfering with his efforts to persuade Mrs. Van Grundy to sell and the no-pets rule in his apartment building but enhancing his communications with his children and ex-wife. As he scrambles to create an optimal environment for the penguins, his home starts to look more and more like the South Pole. And when three of the penguins lay eggs, it brings out his protective father instincts.

Carrey gets to make faces and do some improvising, which is undeniably fun, and there are some clever lines. Popper’s son describes his upset middle-school sister as “95 pounds of C4 explosives on a hair trigger. You’re in the hurt locker now.” Carrey has some fun with the sillier situations and the lovely Madeline Carroll (Popper’s daughter) is a welcome presence. The book that inspired it is warmly remembered more than 70 years later. The movie may not be remembered by the time you get home.

(more…)

Green Lantern

Posted on June 16, 2011 at 9:52 am

Let’s get right down to it with the superhero essentials checklist. Cool powers? Check. Interesting villain? Check. Interesting girlfriend? Half a check. Aliens? Check. Fancy gala party? I’m not sure why that appears to be a crucial part of every superhero movie, but it’s here. Working through some angsty parental issues? Check. Special effects and action sequences? Maybe three-quarters of a check. Does the superhero outfit avoid looking silly? Half a check. Is the 3D worth it? No check.

Another month, another superhero, this time DC (home of Batman and Superman), not Marvel (home of the Fantastic Four, Iron Man, and Thor). Hal Jordan (a very buff Ryan Reynolds) is an irresponsible but irresistible rogue and a test pilot for a company that makes planes for the military. He has an on- and off relationship with the test pilot/executive daughter of the head of the company, Carol Ferris (“Gossip Girl’s” Blake Lively). When four members of the intergalactic force for peace and justice — think outer space Seal Team 6 — are killed by a creature who looks like a spider made of smoke, their special green lantern rings seek out the successors. For the first time, a human is invited to join the Green Lanterns. The alien dies, telling Hal only that he has to use the ring and lantern and say the oath. Hal tries the only oaths he can think of — pledge of allegiance, He-Man — before the ring and lantern lights up and he gets it right: “In brightest day, in blackest night, No evil shall escape my sight. Let those who worship evil’s might, Beware my power… Green Lantern’s light!“

It is fun as long as you don’t think too hard. There’s so much nattering about Will versus Fear that it could have been written by Ayn Rand and directed by Leni Riefenstahl. (Carol would be right at home with Dominique and Dagny.) The Lanterns’ power includes calling into being anything they can imagine, which undercuts any peril and dramatic tension in the big confrontations. It makes the struggle internal, one of strategic imagination and determination, not the best idea for a big special effects film. The bad guys include a nerdy scientist whose exposure to the evil smoke-spider turns him into a misshapen, anger- and jealousy-driven madman, and the smoke-spider, whose surprising connection to the Lanterns makes him even more dangerous. But it seems unfocused, overly fussy and most likely re-cut following a poor reaction to an earlier version — characters like Hal’s nephew and best friend are introduced and then disappear and Angela Bassett barely appears as a scientist. Mark Strong is a skeptical alien with a ridiculous mustache and even more ridiculous dialog, and the elders look like first-draft Yodas. And everybody has father issues. What, no one has a father who’s present and supportive? Aren’t there any mothers left? Reynolds does fine as Hal but Lively never lives up to her name, swanning around in elegant sheaths and high heels but without any of the wit or energy of Gwenyth Paltrow’s Pepper Potts. The credit sequence ends with a sneak peek at the villain for the next episode. Let’s hope they have the will to call up something a little more fearless next time.

(more…)