Simply Awful. This is the worst kind of movie - confusing, frustrating, and ultimately, a waste of the actors' talents and the viewers' time. It took talented actors, gave them multiple opportunities to explore complex subjects, and either shrugged them off with a cliché or chickened out and ignored them entirely. As I was watching, it felt like it was a particularly bad adaptation of a much longer story, maybe by someone who completely missed the point of a book and only included the parts that didn't make him uncomfortable. By the end, I didn't really care - I was just furious about the two hours of my life that I'll never get back.
What little plot there is involves the fate of Dulcie, the child of divorced parents. Her behavior is so out of control that her lawyer mother can't handle her, and sends her to live with her rancher father. When we first see Dulcie, she is rude, obnoxious, spoiled and completely unpleasant. But soon she does something so hideous that it's apparent that the girl doesn't need time with Daddy, she needs intensive therapy, immediately. At one point her father asks "Are you crazy" and I wanted to yell "Yes! Are you blind? Get that girl a doctor!" But ultimately, that hideously cruel act is never discovered, and instead the memory of it is left to fester. Maybe 15 years from now we'll get a much more interesting sequel about the psychological wreck this girl has grown into.
Tom Selleck plays the Dad, Stephen; his girlfriend Leah and Leah's teen-aged daughter Roxanne have also just moved in with him. Why, though, it's never clear - Leah is just a cypher. The people responsible for this drek managed to pull off a miracle with Leah: they created a character that has zero chemistry with Tom Selleck. That miracle is due in large part to the writers' inexplicable hostility to Leah: Her actions are inconsistent, she never gets to have her own personality, and it's clear from the start that her job is to be a plot device. Her actions are dictated by the needs of the writers rather than according to how a real human being might act.
It's worse with her daughter, Roxanne, because Roxanne at least has her own subplot. And an infuriating one it is. Was she happy to move to the ranch? Why does she so quickly form such an intense tie with the obnoxious Dulcie? Doesn't she have any other friends? It's obvious that Roxanne's boyfriend is supposed to be a loving and spiritual young person - instead, he came off as a creep. When Roxanne experiences a crisis, he's happy and oblivious to her distress. But then, we're never really sure *what* Roxanne is thinking. At one point she makes a religious declaration, and it's done in such a way as to suggest that she isn't completely sincere, and is only doing out rebellion against her mother, or to try to please her boyfriend. What did that declaration mean, and what effect will it have (besides the obvious one)? If it was sincere, why was it out of the blue? After a second crisis, given every reason to abandon her new faith, does it occur to her to do so? Was she even tempted? Or does that second test make her faith stronger? We never know, and there's no hint that the writers even consider this a question; they are completely uninterested in her as a person. Before and after her conversion, the girl is a plot robot.
Time passes. Shattering, life-changing controversies develop and are resolved after many bitter arguments and no doubt many tears. ALL OF IT OFF-CAMERA. We don't get to see any of the controversy between characters, or experience any of the terrible inner conflict that characters must feel within themselves. One moment Selleck is talking to his neighbor about the arguments to come, next moment everything has been settled and he's reporting on the outcome to his ex on the phone. Huh?
Time passes. Dulcie becomes even more obviously in need of psychiatric care (which she doesn't get). Stephen and his ex talk regretfully about why their marriage failed, and resolve nothing. Then there's a short-lived emergency involving something on the ranch. The end.
Huh?
What little plot there is involves the fate of Dulcie, the child of divorced parents. Her behavior is so out of control that her lawyer mother can't handle her, and sends her to live with her rancher father. When we first see Dulcie, she is rude, obnoxious, spoiled and completely unpleasant. But soon she does something so hideous that it's apparent that the girl doesn't need time with Daddy, she needs intensive therapy, immediately. At one point her father asks "Are you crazy" and I wanted to yell "Yes! Are you blind? Get that girl a doctor!" But ultimately, that hideously cruel act is never discovered, and instead the memory of it is left to fester. Maybe 15 years from now we'll get a much more interesting sequel about the psychological wreck this girl has grown into.
Tom Selleck plays the Dad, Stephen; his girlfriend Leah and Leah's teen-aged daughter Roxanne have also just moved in with him. Why, though, it's never clear - Leah is just a cypher. The people responsible for this drek managed to pull off a miracle with Leah: they created a character that has zero chemistry with Tom Selleck. That miracle is due in large part to the writers' inexplicable hostility to Leah: Her actions are inconsistent, she never gets to have her own personality, and it's clear from the start that her job is to be a plot device. Her actions are dictated by the needs of the writers rather than according to how a real human being might act.
It's worse with her daughter, Roxanne, because Roxanne at least has her own subplot. And an infuriating one it is. Was she happy to move to the ranch? Why does she so quickly form such an intense tie with the obnoxious Dulcie? Doesn't she have any other friends? It's obvious that Roxanne's boyfriend is supposed to be a loving and spiritual young person - instead, he came off as a creep. When Roxanne experiences a crisis, he's happy and oblivious to her distress. But then, we're never really sure *what* Roxanne is thinking. At one point she makes a religious declaration, and it's done in such a way as to suggest that she isn't completely sincere, and is only doing out rebellion against her mother, or to try to please her boyfriend. What did that declaration mean, and what effect will it have (besides the obvious one)? If it was sincere, why was it out of the blue? After a second crisis, given every reason to abandon her new faith, does it occur to her to do so? Was she even tempted? Or does that second test make her faith stronger? We never know, and there's no hint that the writers even consider this a question; they are completely uninterested in her as a person. Before and after her conversion, the girl is a plot robot.
Time passes. Shattering, life-changing controversies develop and are resolved after many bitter arguments and no doubt many tears. ALL OF IT OFF-CAMERA. We don't get to see any of the controversy between characters, or experience any of the terrible inner conflict that characters must feel within themselves. One moment Selleck is talking to his neighbor about the arguments to come, next moment everything has been settled and he's reporting on the outcome to his ex on the phone. Huh?
Time passes. Dulcie becomes even more obviously in need of psychiatric care (which she doesn't get). Stephen and his ex talk regretfully about why their marriage failed, and resolve nothing. Then there's a short-lived emergency involving something on the ranch. The end.
Huh?