Review of The Mighty Ducks (1992) by Edith N — 21 Aug 2011

Not Exactly [i]Bobby[/i] but Not Terrible.

What I can't help wondering is how many of the critics who have given it such terrible reviews would have done so had the kids been perhaps five years older. It seems it's more okay to make a terrible sports movie if everyone concerned is of legal voting age, or at least in high school. It's heartwarming. Inspirational. And even if there's absolutely no characterization of most of the team beyond "the surly one" or "the girl," well, that's okay, because the important part is watching the team overcome the odds, come together, and win. Indeed, there is really only one sports movie plot, and we have to follow that arc here to its logical conclusion. The only alterations come because there are certain conventions which have to be followed in kids' movies, and definitely in movies wherein an adult is artificially put in charge of a group of kids. It would take hard work to make this kind of movie good; the most you should expect is not actually bad.

As a child, Gordon Bombay (Emilio Estevez) was a hockey player for the Hawks. They made it to the championship game and only lost because Gordon missed a penalty shot. He never played hockey again. He grew up and became a cutthroat lawyer. One day, his employer, Mr. Ducksworth (Josef Sommer), watches Gordon win a case through trickery and tells him that he needs to learn a proper sense of fair play. Gordon gets angry, drunk, then busted for DUI. He is given community service, namely coaching "District Five Hockey Team," your standard collection of Kids' Movie Misfits in a Sports Movie Setting. They are, of course, terrible, and initially, Gordon decides that the best way to get the kids to win games is to cheat and get as many penalty shots as possible. However, he sees the error of his ways and becomes a real coach. Along the way, he must overcome the demons left in the person of still Hawks coach Jack Reilly (Lane Smith). He also falls in love with Casey Conway (Heidi Kling), mother of Charlie (Joshua Jackson).

The thing is, this is not the story of the kids. It's Gordon's own story. And so of course we don't get into detail about, oh, how Adam Banks (Vincent Larusso) feels about being forced to play on a new team in the middle of the season when all his friends are on the one he's leaving. That's hard, and we see vague depression on Adam's face, but it isn't explored. That's because Adam is really only a representation of one aspect of Gordon and another point of contention between him and his old coach. Why did they put Goldberg (Shaun Weiss) in at goalie when he's terrified of being hit by the puck? So we can get another example of Gordon's revolutionary coaching style when he ties the kid to the goal and has the team fire pucks at him. Which strikes me as child abuse, but what do I know? This is marketed as a kids' movie, and I think that's not quite an accurate tactic.

Really, this is the story of Gordon's becoming a man. He starts the movie as a child, and I don't just mean the flashback scene of him on the ice at the championship. I mean that he is stunted in emotional growth at that moment until he is able to overcome the teachings of his father figure. It's implied that his actual father wasn't any great shakes, and he chose the wrong mentor. Had he listened to old Hans (Joss Ackland), he would have been a better person. Reilly teaches anger and selfishness, and Hans teaches decency and joy. Play the game because you love it, or even just like it. Winning is good, but it isn't what truly counts. That nature of thing. Taking Adam Banks for the Ducks is, in my opinion, the last action of the old Gordon, the child Gordon. Adam is his on a technicality, and he wants him. Whereas Gordon learns that winning isn't as important as having fun, though he never, for all that, asks if Adam is having fun. He's still that selfish at the end.

We'll leave aside that I don't quite understand how everyone can consider Gordon to have lost that final fatal game. Everyone acknowledges that the effect of missing that shot was to send the game into overtime, and surely the whole team had a chance to win the game in overtime and failed. What I don't understand is quite how big the championships in question are. The implication I get is that they're big--state championships, for example. Important. However, all but two teams in the district are explicitly stated to get to the championships. One of which has had to forfeit because the team has the measles. (Which I also don't get--didn't they get vaccinated? It's '92; making it chicken pox would have made more sense.) I'm sure this is because the Ducks have to overcome a losing season up to the point where they Learn a Valuable Lesson About Teamwork, [i]et cetera[/i], but it's still a little odd. If it's just the district championship, it doesn't seem to me that they would have the size crowd they do in those later scenes. Maybe I'm just failing to understand how much people who aren't me care about sports.