Review: Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (1988)

I first saw the film ‘Who Framed Roger Rabbit?’ when it was first released to cinemas back in 1988. Even as a youngster back then, I’d already seen lots films at the cinema but nothing prepared me for the experience of watching this. Its effortless mixture of live-action and animation plus its dazzling array of inventiveness and charm made it my all-time favourite film at that time.

Unsurprisingly, the film was an enormous critical and commercial success. If ever there was a film destined to become as a beloved classic watched repeatedly over the decades, it would be WFRR.

And yet… it never really happened. Despite its outstanding qualities over 30 years on the film seems somewhat forgotten when one would’ve assumed otherwise. To be honest I’ve barely heard it mentioned over the decades in film literature, social media and the like to the stage where I’d almost forgotten about it. In a world where mediocre family films like ‘Hocus Pocus’ have become beloved public favourites and are labelled ‘cult classics’ (!), how is this possible?

Probably the best way to investigate this is to rewatch the film.

WFRR is set in a post-WW2 Los Angeles where cartoon characters (or ‘toons’ as they’re called) interact with humans in real life and have their own place in LA called Toontown. In this milieu arrives private eye Eddie Valiant (Bob Hoskins) who hates toons since one killed his brother. Struggling for money and with a drinking problem, Valiant takes a job involving the marriage of toons Jessica and Roger Rabbit. Just like the best private eye stories, this seemingly menial job is the key to a labyrinth tale of murder, corruption and blackmail.

After not having watched WFRR for decades, this current viewing showed that it has held up remarkably well. Often with films that are considered technically groundbreaking in their day they can seem dated and old-hat decades later, but not with WFRR. Even with today’s advanced technology it would be hard to envisage the interaction between humans and toons being more convincing than is on display here. With the added factor of it being a period piece, the film doesn’t feel dated at all.

But more important than its technical achievements is how it stands up as a piece of entertainment and on that level it is still masterful. There isn’t a notable flat spot in its running time and special note should be made of its fairly slim running time – 104 minutes. If a film like this were made today one could confidently assert that it would be 20 to 30 minutes longer

The secret to WFRR’s success is that it doesn’t just assume that the gimmick of people and animated characters interacting will be enough to carry it; it realizes it has to utilise that for entertaining and characters and situations on its own.

Take for example the beginning of a film which is a cartoon short where Roger Rabbit is a babysitter trying to protect a baby in what is seemingly the most dangerous kitchen known to mankind. As a cartoon on its own, it’s a dizzying array of ingenuity and lively gags in an enhanced Tom & Jerry reflection of animation of its era. As an introduction to the film and the world it creates, it’s succinct and clever as we see the ‘filming’ of the cartoon halted because Roger forgot his lines with the baby (now the voice of a gruff old man) furious at having to reshoot the scene yet again.

Director Robert Zemeckis was at the peak of his powers at this time and his handling of the material is consistently on-point. Not just with the big gags but with moving the narrative along efficiently. One example is how the relationship between Valiant and his dead brother is conveyed. After Valiant sees an old photograph of them together the camera glides through a series of photos and newspaper clippings in his office showing their relationship together from children, to cops, to starting their own private detective business, culminating in the image of Valiant drinking himself to sleep to deal with his brother’. What other directors would’ve tried to convey with extended dialogue, flashbacks and oodles of time, Zemeciks does all visually in less than a minute.

One of the other joys of WFRR is that the scope and inventiveness is such that it requires multiple viewings to enjoy the inventiveness of main scenes. Particularly so in the segment when Valiant visits Toontown which is a feast of hilarious detail; It was only on this viewing that I saw a background sign that read ‘Beware of falling anvils’.

As good as the animated characters are, the quality of the human performers was equally as essential to the film’s success. Bob Hoskins was an unlikely choice to play the central role for multiple reasons but he proved to be an inspired choice. It would’ve been easy to be self-aware or hammy but Hoskins plays his role with complete sincerity and that makes his character and the story surrounding him much more compelling. As well, Christopher Lloyd makes a great villain in his performance as Judge Doom in his typically idiosyncratic and extravagant way.

After all this though the question remains why hasn’t WFRR become a film that’s part of modern pop culture, that gets referenced on social media constantly, rewatched and shown every year and the like?

Perhaps it’s because it’s a difficult film to categorise. Despite its surface appearance it’s not really a kids film as it has lots of adult elements with the Jessica Rabbit character a prime example of this. And there are scenes where Valiant’s girlfriend Dolores (Joanna Cassidy) sees him hiding Roger Rabbit in his coat and remarks, “Is that a rabbit in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?”

Perhaps it’s because the character of Roger Rabbit didn’t take off in people’s imagination. To be sure he works as a character in the film, especially in how his well-meaning but exasperating and overbearing personality manages to antagonize the polar opposite Valiant. But as a character he seems a pale imitation of Bugs Bunny.

Perhaps WFRR is too idiosyncratic to become a beloved ongoing public favourite. But in anycase, what’s more important is that over 30 years after its first release it still holds up as a superbly made, exceptionally entertaining film.