The Horse Whisperer


Plenty of horsepower

It was said of director George Stevens that, when he directed Shane, he composed every scene as if he wanted to hang it on the mantlepiece. Watching Robert Redford's latest directorial (and starring) effort, it feels a bit like watching a National Geographic documentary. Either that or a tourist ad for Montana.

The film (based on Nicholas Evans best-selling novel) concerns a girl, Grace McLean (Scarlett Johansson) who suffers horrific injuries (both mentally and physically) when she and her friend are involved in a freak accident while out horse-riding. Her friend is killed Graces' horse, Pilgrim is also badly injured. Her mother, Annie (Kristin Scott-Thomas) is a hyper-busy editor of a fashion magazine, who refuses to allow Pilgrim to be destroyed, believing that her daughter's recovery can be helped if her beloved horse can be restored to health. She happens across a magazine article describing the work of Tom Booker (Robert Redford), a so-called "Horse Whisperer" who can cure horses and decides that he can cure Pilgrim. Despite an initial rebuff, and against her husband's Robert (Sam Neill) wish, she loads the wounded animal into a trailer and sets off with her daughter from New York to Booker's ranch in Montana. The rest of the film deals with Booker's attempt to cure Pilgrim, while exploring the developing relationship between Annie and Booker.

There are a couple of things that require a little suspension of belief. You don't have to be American to suspect that Montana is one hell of a drive from New York. Particularly while towing a psychotic horse in a trailer. Indeed, the journey is shown as a series of shots of the jeep and trailer driving through valleys, snow-covered mountains. In fact it looks like a John Denver music video. Since Pilgrim is unapproachable at this point, it's safe to assume that there is one hell of a mound of horsecrap to be unloaded in Montana.

Secondly, it's a little hard to accept that a cowboy that looks like Robert Redford doesn't have a girlfriend. In fact, all the ranchers are fine, upstanding folk that practically drip with decency, generousity and virtue. In contrast, the city folk, while not being exactly nasty, are soon cut down to size after initially sneering at the locals. Redford, as Booker, seems to be the Mother Therese of ranchers, admittedly a bit better looking. He's good-looking, patient, even-tempered, good with kids, always has a wise observation,and is a lover of classical music. He also seems to have plenty of time to spend with Pilgrim, despite having a ranch to run.

As director, Redford seems more in love with the countryside than either himself or the other performers. As I said, there is scene after scene extolling the value of the farmers, but the real star of the movie is the landscape. He obviously shot miles of footage because there's lots of it in the movie; gorgeous sunrises, sumptious sunsets, soft-focus vistas etc. etc. etc. Unfortunately, there's far too much of it, because the movie is far too long to tell the story. It's a pity, because the scenes with the greatest potential for boredom (the horse-whispering itself) are handled very skillfully. Considering these scenes are all variations of "Pilgrim looks at Booker. Pause. Booker looks at Pilgrim. Pause, etc.", it's no trivial task.

Those of you with a cynical disposition may find the healing theme a little too overwhelming. The McLean family need a lot of healing; Grace from her physical and psychological injuries resulting from the accident, the mother-daughter relationship between Annie and Grace, the faltering marriage between Annie and robert, and hell, even Booker has some scars to heal.

Sam Neill and Diane Wiest are solid in small supporting roles, and Redford, Scott-Thomas and Johansson are excellent in their respective roles. There's no explicit sex (not even between the horses) and almost no violence (the initial accident scene, involving the two riders and a truck, is shocking but not graphic). Instead, Redford tells a gentle story, and though he spends maybe a little too long telling it, it's worth seeing, nonetheless.


  

Directed by Robert Redford.



 

****** Excellent   - An outstanding movie 
*****   V. Good   - Very enjoyable or engrossing 
****     Good        - Entertaining 
***       Mediocre  - Nothing special 
**         Poor         - A  waste of time 
*           Terrible     - Complete rubbish 
 
****

 
 

Top
Back to Main Page
© 1998 Stockholm Film Review. All Rights Reserved.