Movie 26: The Great Mouse Detective

September 10, 2014September 10, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

Before starting this review I should explain something about my family. We are Sherlock Holmes obsessed. You see my parents have almost no interest in media. They will watch an occasional movie but basically no television. Aside from religious programming and an occasional sporting event (I would coral my family into watching the Olympics every 4 years), I have basically no memory of my parents watching television regularly.

…with one exception.

Every year from 1984-1994 PBS, as part of their Masterpiece Mystery programs. would air Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes. My Dad even videotaped the episodes, which was even more rare for him to do. The only other time I remember him recording something was Ken Burns, The Civil War, which is another great PBS program of that era.

If you haven’t seen his portrayal it is fabulous with all the mannerisms and cases we have come to know and love from Sherlock Holmes.

From that show we all read the original stories and saw all the versions we could including Great Mouse Detective by Walt Disney. I think I even read the mouse series Basil of Baker Street books the film was based upon.

Even now we will spend hours talking about how the Robert Downey Jr versions get it all wrong and Benedict Cumberbatch is perfect…You think I’m exaggerating but I’m not. Ask one of my sisters. Anna, who may be the greatest Sherlock fangirl of all of us, one year threw up her hands and said “can we talk about something else!”

So with that intro let’s talk about Disney’s 26th animated adventure- The Great Mouse Detective!

Production-

How Great Mouse Detective came into fruition is very interesting both for itself and how it influenced future Disney films. As the studio was hard at work with the Black Cauldron 2 animators, Ron Clements and John Musker, broke away and developed concept art for an adaptation of the Basil of Baker Street by Eve Titus and illustrated by Paul Galdone and were based on the original Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Sherlock Holmes stories but with mice in the leads. Clements went on to direct the movie and be actively involved in the Disney renaissance including directing Little Mermaid, Aladdin and even later The Princess and the Frog. Clements had also done a Basil of Baker Street short before he joined Disney, so that is no doubt where he got the idea.

Originally Disney gave the project a large budget but before production started Michael Eisner was hired as CEO and the budget was slashed from 24 to 10 million. This proved to be a good thing as it forced them to embrace computers in a new way that had only been dabbled in for Black Cauldron. Especially the finale in the clock was groundbreaking in its use of computer graphics and films like Little Mermaid would follow suit. Just shows a cut budget isn’t always a disaster for a project!

In so many ways selecting Sherlock Holmes was an inspired choice. It’s something that has had near universal appeal since Sir Arthur Conan Doyle penned the stories in 1887. Especially once the Black Cauldron faced production and then box office problems, having a stake in a franchise that has always scored money in publishing and at the box office in nearly every recreation and retelling was a stroke of brilliance. Having Brett’s version on PBS, also no doubt, helped create an atmosphere where kids wanted their own version of their parents favorite show!

This was another moment where Disney higher-ups threatened to close the animation department, especially after the colossal disaster of Black Cauldron (remember BC stands as one of the biggest monetary losses in not just Disney but Hollywood history. Right up there with Cleopatra and Heaven’s Gate). Fortunately for all of us Disney fans, Great Mouse Detective scored making 25 million in theaters on what ended up being a 14 million budget (good thing they cut the budget from the original 24 million). These profits were then taken and invested into a little movie about a little mermaid, so all of us that idolized Ariel have Basil to thank for it! 🙂

The whole picture has an artistry which is impressive for this type of urban based Disney picture . Every shot feels foggy and full of mystery- even inside. The characters are drawn with a sketchy style but there is enough ambiance and they are so much fun I didn’t mind it.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The soundtrack is wonderful and like Black Cauldron they hired a top name film and television composer Henry Mancini for the project. There’s a real broadway feel to the songs and I don’t know if that had been done before with Disney. You had all the jazzy music in Lady and the Tramp, Jungle Book and Aristocats but a broadway show in animation hadn’t really been done to my knowledge. It is also the first solo sung by a villain in a Disney film. The Siamese cats sing a duet and many other films have songs sung about the villains (such as in Peter Pan) but this was the first virtuoso villain number. For the next 15 years a villain solo is a hallmark of not only Disney but all animated stories and Ratigan’s ‘The World’s Greatest Criminal Mind’ still holds up very well. ratigan2

Aside from Jeremy Brett there was certainly no shortage of inspiration for animators to go off of with Sherlock Holmes. But as far as character design goes, the animators were clearly paying homage to Basil Rathborne and Nigel Bruce’s famous performances as Holmes and Watson. In fact, in one brief scene we hear the human Holmes talking and that voice is Basil Rathborne (who had worked with Disney back in Mr Toad).

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

But it was not an outright copy of Rathborne and Bruce. Director Ron Clements said:
“We didn’t want to make them simply miniature versions of Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce,” Clements affirmed. “Dawson’s not a buffoon. He’s a foil for Basil but also a warm and caring person.”

This is no doubt why the story begins with Dawson uncovering the case and presenting it to Holmes in a very loving and nurturing way. As with any Holmes story, Dawson is naturally the narrator and maternal presence to balance out Basil’s brusque and aloof nature.

One other funny part of production is usually in Disney there is an animal world and human world coexisting but this is the first one I can think of where the two are direct duplications. There is a human and mouse Sherlock, Watson, Queen Victoria etc. I find this to be a funny concept- makes me think about the duplicate Rachel mouse hanging out in her tiny townhouse, balancing books and blogging… 😉

The Story-

So let’s talk about the case. As I said, the film starts off with a lot of foggy, eerie atmosphere and we dive right into the scene at a toy store. It is scary but most of the violence is heard and not seen, and with an adult getting kidnapped it is slightly less traumatic than when it happens to a child. (Most of the voice cast is unknown but Mr Flavisham is voiced by Alan Young who would later voice Scrooge McDuck in Ducktales). For young children this may be too intense but it could easily be skipped over with a parent explaining what has happened.

Next we get introduced to Dawson and they hold remarkably true to the original Conan Doyle details even down to serving in Afghanistan in the army. Dawson then meets the little girl from the previous scene named Olivia, and this introduction shows the heart they were trying to achieve with Dawson:

Just a quick aside, I have been critical of Disney female characters in a few posts, so I will say I love Olivia. She’s sweet, tough and smart (without her Basil would never have even been involved). She is not a puppet, meant just as a love interest for a character (although at first she was supposed to be older and be Basil’s love interest. Thank goodness they didn’t go in that direction. Holmes a love interest? The very idea!) and there is NO instant love in Great Mouse Detective!!! I haven’t seen Oliver and Company in years so I’m not sure on that, but the rest of Disney animation will take a break from the girl batting her eyes across the stream and boy falling instantly in love with her trope I detest for many films! Hurray!

758px-Mousedetective017 — Olivia. Not just a great female character, but a great character!

Off to Baker Street they go and they meet Basil in a terrifically Holmes-like way.

Eventually Basil hears the case and off they go on his dog Toby to face Professor Ratigan (based on Professor Moriarty in original books) who we then meet through the villainous number I mentioned above. Ratigan is voiced by the incomparable Vincent Price. With probably the most distinctive voice of the 80s from the Thriller music video, Price is perfect as Ratigan. You can feel the fun he is having. The only performance I can think to relate it to is Robin Williams in Aladdin. It is that good.

The writers are also very clever because they give a character named Ratigan a violent repulsion to being called a rat. That’s just funny however you slice it! We also learn of Ratigan’s dastardly plan to create a robot queen and make himself ‘king of all mousedom’! Now that is a great villainous plot!

The next scenes are at a toy store trying to figure out why Ratigan has abducted Olivia’s father, a toy maker. The design of the toys and robots are great, almost steampunkish (an art movement also obsessed with robots and Conan Doyle).

Thinking it will motivate Flavisham, Ratigan has his bat crony abduct Olivia in the toy store and Basil at first reams Dawson for not watching the girl. His response is one of the most dejected in any Disney film. Again, another example of Dawson being the heart of the film. tumblr_m4dkifAu9Z1qh1mzno1_500

Basil realizes he has crossed a line and he seeks to reassure Dawson they will find Olivia and to not worry. I like that interplay between the two.

Any blog reader will remember how critical I was of the abduction of Penny in The Rescuers. However, there are differences in Great Mouse Detective that make Olivia’s abduction more palatable. First of all she is a mouse not a little girl. It is also not in a modernish time period or dwelt upon much like in The Rescuers. I said in that review if you like Medusa you will like the movie. I didn’t. In this movie I like Ratigan because he is so over-the-top and funny. I mean he wants to take over the world not just find a diamond. Plus, he’s a rat not a woman (much to his dismay)…

Fidget, the bat, leaves the 2 a clue and through his clever detecting Basil realizes Rattigan must be at a pub near the ocean. However, Rattigan also realizes Basil is going to the pub and sets up a trap to capture his foe.

Unfortunately, before that fun can happen we get the one scene in this movie I do not care for. They arrive at the ‘seediest bar in London’ and a female mouse starts singing with a dress on, and as she sings a pretty lyrically suggestive song she gets less and less clothes until she is wearing a bar girl type uniform. I know it is just mice but I don’t want my daughter seeing a burlesque inspired number in my Disney film. That kind of annoyed me.

The song is sung very well by Melissa Manchester and it could be in Chicago or any other broadway show. It’s very well written but just not my favorite example to be showing children, even like I said with mice.

It’s funny I asked my Mother about this because I have no memory of the scene and lo and behold she would fast forward through the song when we would watch the movie (see I have a good Mom). Problem solved. If you find it offensive then skip ahead, no harm done. 🙂

To Basil’s dismay, Ratigan’s trap appears to work and he and Dawson are captured and strapped to a mouse trap affixed to an elaborate rube goldberg device to kill them both. Basil is dejected. Oddly enough not because of his imminent death but by having been outsmarted by Ratigan!

Like his plan to take over the crown using a robot, Ratigan’s scheme to kill Basil is so over-the-top it can’t help but make you laugh. It reminds me of some of the early Bond villains who could never just shoot Bond. No, he had to kill him in the most complicated way possible, which is a lot of fun.

With Basil seemingly wrapped up, Ratigan begins to execute his plan and abducts the Queen and has the robot announce his approval as King. He then brings out a hilariously evil list of all the changes he is going to make in power including taxing the ‘elderly, infirm and little children’. Ha. That’s again very funny writing!

Sadly for Ratigan, Basil breaks free from the trap and stops him and his robot, but the movie is not over. Ratigan and Basil take to the air and end up on the Big Ben clock. As I said before, this sequence used computer animation for the first extended period and it’s remarkable how well it holds up. The sound effects are also fabulous with the tick, tock and the gears creating tension.

So, of course Ratigan’s plans are foiled, Olivia and her father are reunited. Dawson is about to leave and a new case comes in so Dawson and Basil become partners for life!

Movie Review/Conclusion

So what does this Sherlock obsessed girl think of The Great Mouse Detective? I think it is great! It is funny with just enough scary to entertain kids. It has a terrific villain with one of Disney’s best vocal performances by Vincent Price. The case is over-the-top but drawn with visual interest and appeal. Even the backdrops are great at creating ambiance and mystery.

I love when Disney can introduce children to new mediums like Lady and the Tramp did for Jazz (or Jungle Book) or Fantasia for classical music. Great Mouse Detective not only introduces kids to the greatness of Sherlock Holmes but to detective stories as a genre. It also has the message Sword in the Stone was trying to teach about education and using your brain, but with Basil it is demonstrated not merely expressed. Kids can see a keen intellect is important because it helps Basil put the clues together and solve the case.

That is why it is a bit of a downer to have a song in the middle which is about appearances and is basically a stripper song for mice (she literally looses half her clothing by end of number). But like I said, you all can be like my mother and skip over that scene. Nothing wrong with that. There is also some imitative behavior that may be of concern to parents- drinking, smoking cigars etc.

For young children (kindergarten and below) there are scenes of peril. Mainly the abduction, and particularly the bat may be too scary. It depends on the child. It is kind of like 101 Dalmatians in tone and feel. There is so much humor and it is all so over-the-top that it tempers the scenes pretty well but some kids are sensitive to anything scary. It does not have a gloomy feel like some of the films which scared me- Rescuers, Pinocchio and Return to Oz being the big examples.

Overall Grade- A-

Also, got a shoutout today from a favorite youtuber of mine The Lawn Gnome who has a great Disney vlog series called ‘Out of the Vault’. If you are on youtube please subscribe to his channel. Here is his Great Mouse Detective review.

PPS- I am now half way through my reviews of Classic Disney! What do you guys think of The Great Mouse Detective.?

Movie 25: The Black Cauldron

September 8, 2014September 8, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

Long ago there was a legend of a great movie flop. A flop that nearly crippled the great life force known as Sir Disney. It was even defeated by a mangy set of daemons known as the Carebears. Could it rise up and conquer as the beautiful Princess Rachel trogged through it sore knee and all.

Well good friends let’s talk about the Black Cauldron…

Production-

First there is a lot to talk about with production on this one. Black Cauldron was released in 1985 after a 9 month delay insisted upon by then Disney chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg (later Disney traitor!).

Based very loosely on a series by Lloyd Alexander called The Chronicles of Prydain. Alexander later said:

“First, I have to say, there is no resemblance between the movie and the book.
Having said that, the movie in itself, purely as a movie, I found to be very
enjoyable. I had fun watching it. What I would hope is that anyone who sees the
movie would certainly enjoy it, but I’d also hope that they’d actually read the book.
The book is quite different. It’s a very powerful, very moving story, and I think
people would find a lot more depth in the book.”

I actually think this is super cool of Alexander. It must be hard as writer to see your work and passion changed by another source (especially one as big as Disney) and to still have warm things to say about it is very commendable.

The movie has a darker feel than previous Disney films or at least since the minion scenes in Sleeping Beauty but there was a certain string of animation at the time that liked such mythological dark stories. Two I thought of were Ralph Bakshi’s Lord of the Rings animated movie (better than this and in 1978 so 7 years earlier) and Don Bluth studio’s Secret of Nimh.

Secret of Nimh even has a character with bone hands like the Horned King here. Nimh is the better movie IMO but you can see a similar trend in the movies and animation of the era.

That’s why it is maybe a bit surprising that so much ‘to do’ was made about the Black Cauldron being too dark and scary for kids. Many similar looking films had been released within 7 years so why did this one cause such an uproar?

Black Cauldron was actually the first animated film to receive a PG rating, so that may have been part of the backlash; but also where people are able to take a bold artsy film from Bluth and Bakshi they expect lightness from Disney (although have these people seen On Bald Mountain or Pinocchio?)

Nevertheless, the movie had bad buzz before it’s release. Evidently at one point Katzenburg actually tried to edit the movie himself to keep the violence down. Michael Eisener, who Katzenberg would later use as inspiration for the design of Shrek, talked Katzenberg out of the editing room but he was still vocal about his distaste for the film. (Such drama!) All of this bad vibes didn’t help the marketing by Disney and it was a huge failure at the box office. The worst in all of Disney history.

In addition to being the most expensive animated film ever at the time, it was also was one of Hollywood’s top flops including live action:

“It’s right up there with Cleopatra and Heaven’s Gate as the most expensive film (unadjusted) made at the time, costing $44 million to produce, it grossed only $21.3 million domestically”

Worthy of the Hate?

So is it worthy of such hate? Yes and no. The animation is stunning. It looks full and rich with details rarely seen even today in a Disney film.

If we look at the shot above in the castle you can see how rich the backgrounds and animation is. Every crack and crevice of that wall is textured and ridged. The backdrops are also gorgeous, like a dark watercolor.

The other major standout of the movie is the score. Written by the great Elmer Bernstein it is one of the most stirring scores I’ve ever heard. And you’ll never guess who played the orchestrations?- The Utah Symphony! Right here at home recording for Disney! It’s one I might consider purchasing because I loved it and I like to listen to scores while I am working sometimes.

Where the movie looses me BIG TIME is in the voice work. With the exception of the Horned King (who has just standard villain voice by John Hurt), I thought all the voices were not only wrong but cringe inducing.

The worst of all is Gurgi, a dog, who sounds like Donald Duck is on the journey. It is Jar Jar Binks bad. The voice of the Princess Eilonwy by Susan Sheridan, while not as bad, is high pitched and annoying and even the lead Taran by Grant Bardsley is awfully whiny. They are all missteps.

I almost wish they could go in and record new voices like they do with the Miyazaki movies. It is so distracting.

The Story-

The story is pretty long and convoluted but it works all right; although, it feels like a poor man’s version of the kind of lore and legends of Secret of Nimh or Lord of the Rings. A prophetic pig and a black cauldron just doesn’t have the same gravitas as the ring of power or the amulet in Secret of Nimh.

We start out with a pig-keeper Taren daydreaming about becoming a great warrior.

As it turns out the very pig Taren is helping has special powers. He can see into the future if he dips his head in water (strange super power but there you go)

Next we meet the villain of the picture, the Horned King. The design on him is great but I’m not sure we get enough backstory of who he is or why he wants the cauldron. As contrast, Sauron in Lord of the Rings has a detailed backstory of why he turned and why the ring had such power over him.

Still it’s a cool design and the one voice I liked by John Hurt.

The other problem with the story in The Black Cauldron is there is never a sense of real jeopardy for the characters. I’m not sure if it is the comic relief thrown in at odd times but it never felt to me that they might not make it. In the Bakshi version and definitely in Secret of Nimh there is a real sense of peril for the characters.

The other difference is our character motivations. Frodo and Mrs Brisby have selfless motivations. Frodo wants to serve his friends and do what Gandalf asks. Mrs Brisby wants to save her son. Taran wants to be famous. He wants to be a celebrated warrior in all the land, which just isn’t as gripping as more noble ambitions.

In fact, Taran looses Hen-wen, who he has sworn to protect very quickly because he is daydreaming about being a ‘famous warrior’.

As Taran journeys to the castle fairly uneventfully we meet Gurgi who I already said is so out of place in this kind of film. The voice is just insufferable.

Anyway, Taran gets to the castle relatively easily. Again in Nimh and Bakshi there is way more peril at every step of the way, not just the climatic battle. This makes you care about the journey and the characters much more and be invested in the battles.

One cool thing at the castle is there are layers to the sound (sound mixing I think?) which I had never heard in a Disney film. You’d have a conversation going on in the forefront but could hear murmurings from the pub or guardsman in the background. That is a very cool immersive touch I think they should do more often.

So Taran and the Horned King meet and long and short of it Taran ends up in the dungeon and Henwen escapes. In the dungeon Taran meets a princess with the tough to pronounce name of Eilonwy. I agree with Doug Walker’s review of the movie on youtube that there really is no good reason to make her a princess. She doesn’t have any kingdoms we see, people looking for her or following her, or any of the other vestiges of royalty. There’s no sense of loss to her people shown if she isn’t freed from the Horned King. I also think if she is a Princess than she wouldn’t be in the dungeon with all the other prisoners. Think like Star Wars where Leia is used as a tool by Vader to try and get what he wants. In fact, I’m not sure if we ever see the Horned King with Eilonwy? (There actually isn’t enough of the Horned King in general).

I found her voice by Susan Sheridan to also be incredibly annoying. Not as bad as Gurgi but still very bad.

But to Taran’s good luck Eilonwy is escaping just as he arrives in the dungeon and she allows him to accompany her. They also meet a minstrel player named Fflewddur Fflam (doesn’t that name seem like something out of a Monty Python skit?) He doesn’t add much to the story but he is fine voiced by Nigel Hawthorne.

Taran also gets a sword of power kind of given to him but why we aren’t really sure? When Harry get’s Gryfindor’s sword he has been brave and it is a gift from Dumbledore. Here he kind of finds it which doesn’t quite make sense for this kind of story. Later the 3 witches will trade anything even the black cauldron for the sword, so why would Taran just stumble upon it? And again, he is most excited about it at the start because it will make him famous…

Eventually the band gets free from the castle and there is some bonding time, romance time that really falls flat (Eilowynn has such a dopey laugh) but it’s fine I guess. This middle section should be building peril and endearing us to the character but we don’t get that.

They stumble into a whirlpool that takes them to the world of fairies. Considering Disney knows how to design fairies I don’t know what they were thinking with these. They feel very Saturday morning animation style with the crabby faerie roped into helping the group on the quest.

I guess they are cute but why go the cute route? I would have gone the mystical route like the faeries in Fantasia.

So fairly easily they are taken to the room with the black cauldron but it is guarded by 3 witches who are fun with the exception of one who falls instantly in love with Fflam. Instant love? Haven’t seen that before in a Disney movie…And in this case it does nothing for the story except to be funny and for her to have big Dolly Partonish breasts (a strange design choice for a fable action movie)..

The witches make a deal with Taran to give them the black cauldron in return for his sword (which again he had just kind of stumbled upon). He gives it to them but it turns out he can’t really use the cauldron. It is only magical if someone jumps into it to their death, making the ultimate sacrifice.

I liked this idea of a Messianic feel to the cauldron. Many of these stories have Messianic overtones (anointed one, called to sacrifice for good, fights the devil, etc). That gives the story the kind of heft it sorely needs.

Eventually they end up back in the castle with the Horned King. He is attempting to use the power of the cauldron to create an army of the undead, which is super cool looking. I’m not sure how they did the design but they look like cellophane, layered on top of each other.

The Horned King is going to keep building his army if the black cauldron isn’t stopped. Again, this animation is awesome!

Someone must make the sacrifice into the black cauldron and in a very touching scene despite the annoying voice Gurgi takes the fall for his friends.

When he enters the cauldron it reverses the army of the dead and sucks the horned king into the cauldron in an awesome scene. I think it is one of Disney’s best villain deaths they’ve ever done.

With the Horned King gone the castle starts falling apart (not sure exactly why? Is his castle part of an evil spell or creation?) But the team escapes and meets the witches who try to give Taran the sword for the cauldron. Taran doesn’t want the sword. He just wants Gurghi back.

It’s a fine scene but I don’t know if the narrative has really earned it? I think it is good in Lord of the Rings for Gollum to make the ultimate sacrifice for the ring which has ruined his life. Or in Harry Potter when Dobby sacrifices himself we have an emotional tie to the character. I don’t know if I ever feel such a closeness between Taran and Gurghi or that he has really grown from wanting to be famous?

But it’s ok and Gurghi returns and our story is basically finished.

Movie Review/Conclusion-

So in the end is The Black Cauldron the horrible piece of junk some claim it to be? No. The animation alone takes it beyond the putrid level. While not as beautifully animated as Bakshi’s Lord of the Rings or Bluth’s Secret of Nimh, it still has stunning moments of visual artistry.

It doesn’t have the heart or the story which Bakshi and Nimh have either and the voice performances are almost all terrible. However, I think if they recorded new voices like they do with Studio Ghibli movies and rereleased The Black Cauldron might be a pretty big hit nowdays with kids sensibilities being more comfortable with darker stories.

The score by Elmer Bernstein is tremendous. Every scene it immerses you in the story in a way the story itself doesn’t actually do. It’s sweeping and then soft and magical at the same time. I loved it.

The characters motivations and the gravitas behind the prophetic pig and the cauldron just don’t have the weight of similar stories and movies. I know we are supposed to see Taran grow and learn that being famous isn’t everything but I needed another layer of motivation for him to go on this quest and make choices.

The other side characters are fine once you take away the voices. Princess Eilonwy doesn’t need to be a princess. In fact, I think her character might be more interesting and layered if she was a normal girl caught up in the magic like Taran.

I really liked the villain. I wish more had been done with him, explaining his backstory or why he wants the power of the cauldron but his design is very cool (and the only voice I didn’t want to punch in the throat).

So The Black Cauldron has its big flaws. Evidently Disney kind of dropped the ball on the marketing too so I can see why it wasn’t a big success but I’d take it any day over a mean spirited entry like The Rescuers. I know we have the undead and a Horned King but I still thought it was a more enjoyable and less cruel story than Medusa abducting Penny…

If you like this kind of adventure story and have seen Secret of Nimh and Bakshi’s Lord of the Rings than give this a watch. You won’t have a miserable time at the movies. As far as entertainment for kids it is pretty dark but then again kids like pretty dark in Lord of the Rings (Jackson version) and Harry Potter and even How to Train Your Dragon. So it just depends on the kid. If I was making a rule I’d say 10 and up.

It would be more terrifying if there was a real sense of peril for the characters like in Harry Potter or even the bear scene in Fox and the Hound. That to me is much scarier for kids because it comes out of nowhere and it feels like our heroes could actually lose. As much as I liked the Horned King I never felt like he was going to win.

There is some nice messaging about friendship, sacrifice and not seeking fame that would be great for kids. So depending on the kid give it a watch.

Overall Grade- C Voices- F

What do you guys think of The Black Cauldron?

Feminist Fantasies

September 8, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

This isn’t specifically about Disney but it is kind of the flip side of the earlier posts on villains. How different eras have a different type of ideal woman presented to us in the media. These ideals and villains may seem harmless but they can affect us and our daughters in serious ways. We always want to watch out for tropes and trends, acknowledge them and then enjoy the entertainment.

Feminism and Fairy Tales

September 7, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

I thought some of you might be interested in this piece I did on my other blog last year about how many women are villains in traditional fairy tales. It does frustrate me when women are only love interests or only silly characters and men do all the growing. I’d rather have a villainess with some personality than a bland puppet for men to oogle.
Anyway, was an interesting piece and so sharing it with all of you. Let me know what you think.

Movie 24: Fox and the Hound

September 7, 2014September 7, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

Anyone who knows me knows I am a sucker for a sentimental tale about romance and friendship. I have been known to snuggle up to the 25 days of Christmas on Hallmark and whatever syrupy story is coming out of ABC Family.

That said, Fox and the Hound lays it on almost too thick even for me. One thing is for sure if you are at all averse to that kind of message you will hate the movie. As for me, I liked it but it bore on me after a while.

Production-

Released in 1981 (year I was born!) The Fox and the Hound had a very dramatic time in production (took 4 years and 12 million). Based on a novel by Daniel P Mannix, it was initially started by the legendary 9 Old Men of animators with Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnson, in particular, taking the lead in the early storyboarding and concept development.

However, at the same time Disney had a school of animators and such big names as John Lasseter, Tim Burton (who knew right?), John Musker, Ron Clements and Brad Bird all had graduated and began work on the Fox and the Hound.

Don Bluth, who had been a part of Disney animation since Sleeping Beauty, led a contingent that felt Disney had ‘grown stale’ and wanted to do edgier things with the material. Mid-production Bluth quit and took 11 animators with him, 17% of Disney’s staff. I’m sorry but to me that is just wrong. Finish out the project and then severe ties. I mean can you imagine someone doing that on a regular motion picture? Like if Brad Pitt and Christopher Nolan didn’t get along or agree with the direction of the movie so they just bolted?

What makes it worse is then Bluth went on to be a competitor to Disney. Early on Bluth’s movies were stiff competition to Disney with Secret of Nimh (1982), An American Tale (1986) and Land Before Time (1988). To be fair this competition I believe made Disney better and led to the renaissance but it was still a dirty move to leave mid-project and take animators with him.

This change in leadership led to a few rocky moments in Fox and the Hound such as the bear attack that feel disjointed and episodic which is to be expected since the film was probably drawn and conceptualized in episodes by different men.

However, at least the animation is gorgeous. It was getting close to the art pieces of the 30’s and 40’s and I enjoyed Fox and the Hound on that level very much.

Look at this intro. For a second I thought it was the beginning of Bambi.

The voice cast is very strong with everyone from Kurt Rusell (Copper), Mickey Rooney (Tod), Pearl Bailey (Big Mama), Paul Winchell (from Tigger fame as Boomer) and more. Everyone does a good job with the voices although at times it was a little distracting because I kept thinking of Tigger when I’d hear Winchell’s voice.

The music is a mixed bag. It’s not that it is bad. It’s fine and the score by Jim Stafford is great. The strange thing is most of the songs don’t really feel like songs at all. It feels like the songs start and then get interrupted by talking or activity. It’s a shame in a way because I liked the songs if I could have heard them all the way through. I wonder if they were just over time at 83 minutes so cut down the songs?

The movie opened to mixed reviews but it made 63 million at box office.

Story-

Kind of like with Lady and the Tramp the beginning we get to meet baby Tod and baby Copper and they are uber-cute.

Copper is owned by Amos and Tod is adopted by the Widow Tweed. It’s interesting because there are no children in this film. All older adults.

There are an array of side characters including Big Mama owl, Boomer (woodpecker) and Dinky (canary), and Chief who is owned by Amos.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Tod and Copper meet when they are too little to know that foxes and dogs are enemies and hunt each other. Like I said, if this kind of sentimentality makes you roll your eyes and groan this is not the movie for you.

One day when trying to play,Chief see’s Tod and chases him off the property, which angers Amos,and he shoots at and threatens Tod and the Widow. As a result, she keeps him inside but it doesn’t matter because Amos is taking Copper away for a winter hunting trip.

Our next scene is Tod and Copper all grown up. Copper knows how to hunt and he tells Tod they can’ t be friends any more.

In between these tense scenes we get some comic relief from Boomer and Dinky as the chase a caterpillar.

Tod and Copper end up getting involved in a scuffle involving a train that injures Chief. The segment with the train is very well animated.

Feeling that Tod has injured Chief Copper vows revenge and he and Amos chase Tod and the Widow in a fun car scene.

Eventually the Widow decides it is for Tod’s own good to take him to back to the woods. I don’t mean to be harsh but she sing/talks one of the worst poems I have ever heard (and I know poetry pretty well). It’s discount greeting card bad.

“We met it seems, such a short time ago.
You looked at me, needing me so.
Yet from your sadness, our happiness grew.
Then I found out, I need you, too.
I remember how we used to play.
I recall those rainy days, the fires glowed, that kept us warm.
And now I find, we’re both alone.
Goodbye may seem forever, farewell is like the end.
But in my heart’s a memory, and there you’ll always be.

I mean yikes…

So Tod is forced to make it on his own in the forest. He meets a mean badger and then finds a friend in a porcupine played by John Fielder of Piglet fame. Then we meet my least favorite character in the movie. One of the worst in all of Disney- Vixey the female fox or vixen (clever name there…).

Voiced by Sandy Duncan, Vixey is the cooing, fawning, giggling, idiot female character I hate in Disney. And of course we get the instant love trope like we do in every Disney movie but this one is one of the worst for sure. Why couldn’t it have been like in the Lion King where they meet in some way as little foxes and then meet up again later? Or anything but the instant love twitterpated scene from Bambi all over again…She reminds me of an idiotic Michael Bay woman in fox form.

What makes it worse is that Tod behaves like kind of a pompous moron when they meet but one song from Big Mama and she’s back on board the ‘oh well. He’s so pretty…’ train. Urgh…At least in this movie we have Big Mama and the Widow but seriously why does every other Disney woman have to be a complete twit? Thank you Renaissance for changing that at least a little.

Moving on.

Amos decides to set traps and Tod and Vixen come upon them. That leads to a chase with the climatic bear scene. It is an amazingly animated scene but for a movie that has been kindergarten aged friendly the bear is too scary. My nieces all bolted at the bear in Brave, and I know they would be terrified of the bear here too.

Tod eventually comes to Copper’s defense so when Amos is about to shoot Tod, Copper steps in, the two realizing they really are friends at heart.

We get an ending back at the farms where all is back to normal and Copper thinks about those early days and we hear the voice over ‘Tod, you’re my best friend’…

Conclusion/Movie Review-

Another mixed bag for me, and I think recommending the picture entirely depends on the type of movie-goer you are. If you don’t mind the ooey-gooey messages laid on very thick than you will eat this up! I went with it for most of the way. It eventually wore me a down a little bit and I HATED Vixey character just as much as about any character in Disney ever.

There are a lot of good messages for kids but the bear scene is very scary (and the train fight too). I guess it just depends on the kid in question. Like I said, I know it would be too much for at least my youngest niece. And it is kind of a long scene so if you fast forward it you are missing story and a lot of the movie (plus, it is animated very well).

It was so nice to see animation from Disney that looked pretty. For once I am liking a Disney movie more for the animation than the music and story. That hasn’t happened since Bambi!

It is not up there with the greats. I’d put it smack in the middle of Disney films. It’s not terrible. It has a nice message. The comedic scenes work and the action is good. So if you can handle the script you will probably like it!

Overall Grade- C+

Movie 23: The Rescuers

September 6, 2014September 6, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

Out of all the pictures I would be rewatching for this project The Rescuers is probably the one I was looking forward to the least. When the sequel came out in 1990 they re-released the original into theaters and my mother took me. I didn’t go to many movies as a kid and I saw even fewer scary movies. That is why The Rescuers and Return to Oz stick out as the most unpleasant movie-going experiences of my young life.

Why you ask? Because I was 9 and it is about a little girl who is abducted by a ghastly lady, beaten, shot at several times and forced to go down a small cave and told she won’t be rescued if the water comes up. I mean that is terrifying stuff for a little girl!

I know this movie has its fans but I don’t get it. If you like it please put in the comments below. I will mention a few things I like but on a whole I think it is just mean spirited.

I honestly do not know what Disney was thinking with this one….

Production-

The Rescuers was released in 1977 just months after Winnie the Pooh (what a contrast! We even get a brief Pooh cameo in the movie). It was based off of a series of books by Margery Sharp about a mouse named Miss Bianca who solves crimes. Disney changed it around and made it about a pair of mice who are part of a UN-like organization, the Rescue Aid Society.

The 70s trend of celebrity voices continued with Eva Gabor returning to Disney animation after the Aristocats and Bob Newhart as Bernard, the high/low society couple who is sent on the case. They are fine as the voices and Eva’s accent is toned down from the Aristocats. and i didn’t have any trouble understanding her. She is still kind of a bland socialite but has more spunk and personality than in Aristocats.

It was a landmark movie in many ways for Disney staff. It was the first movie that Don Bluth (future Disney traitor and competitor) animated, Also first for Glen Keane, Ron Clements and Andy Gaskill who would all be very influential in the upcoming Disney renaissance.

It was also the last film with the legendary 9 old men and Wolfgang Reitherman of Jungle Book fame as director.

However, the most exciting change The Rescuers brought with it is the beginning of the end of the sketchy xerox phase, which although I like some of the movies it is typically in spite of the animation, not because of it. They had worked on the xerox technology and now outlines could be made in softer tones and not the hard blacks of the sketch movies.

Unfortunately they were clearly working on the technology because sometimes the animation shows it’s weaknesses. In a lot of the scenes you can see a little halo effect on the characters. A white streak that separates them from the background. I did a screen shot below and put arrows so you can see the white lines in many shots. It seems like a little thing but for a studio like Disney I expect better than Saturday morning animation.

There are also moments where it is clear the backdrop is stationary and the subject is being moved over the background. It makes it look very cheap and doesn’t have the rich feeling driving a car or a swamp machine should have. It kind of looks like a driving scene from a sitcom in the 50s where you can tell they are in front of a screen in a stationary vehicle.

swamp car — In the scene this vehicle moves around while the background stays the same. It looks so hokey. And a lot of halos around the drawings in this shot. Looks cheap.

For Medusa it is obvious they started with Cruella De vil, even down to her crazy driving. In my research they even discussed doing a 101 sequel but they decided they didn’t want to do sequels (which is interesting because The Rescuers gets a sequel in 1990). The thing about Cruella is it was about puppies, and as much as we all love puppies there is a difference between dognapping and kidnapping, at least to me. What was funny or cooky in Cruella was shocking with Medusa.

In the world of Elizabeth Smart and Jaycee Duggard I don’t think you could get away with a character like Medusa. I know some people love her antics but I think it crosses a line into mean spirited and terrifying.

Disney had done scary in the past but it had always been in a far away time like with Headless Horseman or with a fantasy world like with the Devil or Pink Elephants on Parade. Pinocchio would be the next scariest as it is about a little boy but it is still a fantasy world where foxes walk around with cats and people live in whales. I know what I thought when I was 9 and I know what I think now- Medusa is too much. Kids need to feel secure and safe and they do not need to worry about being abducted and abused in their trip to the Disney theater.

Badly done Disney!

Story-

That said there are some things I like in the film. The introduction is different for Disney. Instead of a book or a narrator it has still paintings that tell the story of Penny sending bottles out to get help (another traumatic thought for a little girl sending bottles for help!).

The music was written by Sammy Fain, Carol Connors and Ayn Robbins and sung by Shelby Fint. It is the first background songs since Bambi and the songs are nice but I’m afraid the singer does not age well. The voice screams ‘Karen Carpenter wantabee’ and I just don’t care for it. But, I own that is my personal preference and there is nothing outright wrong with it. The lyrics and melody are quite good.

Eventually Penny’s bottle ends up in the United Nations mouse division called The Rescue Aid Society. It is a cute scene.

Bernard and Bianca are put on the case and they have a lovely repertoire together and they are very clever with following the case to Penny’s orphanage where they meet a cat named Rufus who piles on the heartbreaking tale. The poor girl has lost all hope. Feels unloved. It’s pretty intense stuff (this is no Little Orphan Annie plot line here…)

Off they go to find Medusa and her Pawn Shop. I don’t know if I was thinking of Annie but I thought for years Medusa was voiced by Carol Burnett who is Miss Hanigan in Annie but it is actually Geraldine Page . It is a very grating and shrieking performance without enough humor like a Cruella had.

I think what makes Medusa terrifying in an unpleasant way is it feels like a woman like her could and does exist. Nothing that happens in the Rescuers except for the mice is that outlandish like skinning 101 puppies or turning children in to donkeys (terrifying as that scene is Medusa could actually happen)

Bernard and Bianca end up at the airport but instead of a plane they take an albatross to the Bayou. These scenes are very funny with the albatross named Orville voiced by Jim Jordan. The comic relief is sorely needed in this film.

As they are flying there is some nice animation.

After some fireworks they arrive at the Bayou and meet some of the local redneck rodents (more comic relief) including a cute firefly named Evinrude

We see several scenes of Penny running away, getting caught and getting sent down the cave. It’s all played for alarmingly little comic affect and is cold and shrill. I mean look at the fear in Penny’s face. That will terrify little girls of strangers for years…

There is also a brutal scene where Medusa tells Penny ‘why would anyone want to adopt a homely little girl like you’. This has to be one of the most heartbreaking images in all of Disney:

We already know she is insecure from the scenes with Rufus so it just is so sad. Then we get this song, which is devastating:

Even though I hate the singer it is a pretty song but it is just too much. I was bawling by the end of it and not in the cathartic way a good tragedy invests you. More in the Nicholas Sparks manipulate the viewer kind of way. Again a girl is kidnapped, abused, told she is worthless and is crying, which is enough to get me crying and definitely not what I want out of my Disney film.

We do get one of the only instances I can think of where a Disney character prays and it is quite heartfelt and lovely:

penny prayer — We also get our Winnie the Pooh cameo red shirt and all in this scene.

It is after the prayer she meets Bernard and Bianca, and they start scheming to get her out of there. Unfortunately they are unable to put their plan in the works before another trip down the cave. This time Medusa threatens to leave her if she doesn’t find the diamond.

After struggles with water and getting diamond out of a pirates skull they, Bernard, Bianca and Penny, find the diamond, and Medusa has her prize:

Of course Medusa immediately turns on them and her henchman Mr Snoops and threatens to kill them all. (Again…nice in our Disney film). She even takes away Penny’s beloved teddy bear.

Luckily Evintrude and the Redneck clan come help and there is a fun chase sequence that even involves some alligator water skiing.

Eventually Medusa is chased up a pole and Penny gets the diamond. I actually felt with how bad she is we needed to see an arrest at the end of this movie. Just this shot wasn’t enough for me:

We do get a nice scene at the end where we learn the diamond is at the Smithsonian, Bernard and Bianca are a couple and continuing on cases, and Penny has a family and is adopted.

Movie Review/Conclusion-

So here’s the deal on this movie. If you can stomach the plot and Medusa than you will like this movie. I could not at 9 or 33. It is too much. It is too real. It is too cruel. I don’t like that Penny is abducted to begin with but then told repeatedly she has no value and is unwanted and unloved. She is yelled at, dehumanized and forced down a cave despite her clear fear multiple times.. I think it is a mean spirited movie, and while I like Bernard and Bianca, their warmth is not enough for me to like the picture.

The music is nice even though I don’t care for the singer. Some of the animation is good but other parts show their age with the halos and static backgrounds. At least they were trying to do something different and not just imitating the past like with the Aristocats.

I like there are some messages of faith, prayer, hope and eventual rescue but it is too little too late for me.

So I am going to give this film 2 grades.

If you can tolerate Medusa and the plot C+ but for me personally I give it an D-, and I never want to see it again.

I do have a notoriously low tolerance for scary movies involving murders, abductions, exorcisms and evil spirits. So most scary movies I do not care for. Even some popular comic book villains I am not a fan of. Oh well! Each his or her own.

That’s my story and I’m sticking to it. What do you think? Can you tolerate such a grim plot, such a cruel villain?

Movie 22: The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh

September 5, 2014September 5, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

While writing the title to this post I can picture all of my readers smiling and sighing contentedly. Winnie the Pooh. The only person who doesn’t like Winnie the Pooh seems to be PL Travers at the beginning of Saving Mr Banks!

When I was 10, 16 and 18 my mother had babies, which meant as a teenager, not just children’s programming , but small, toddler focused entertainment was often playing at my house. Barney and Telletubbies would get a huge eye roll from me and most animated films are too scary, sad or long for children under 5.

The only shows I wasn’t completely miserable watching was Wishbone and Winnie the Pooh. And yet it’s hard to say why? What is it about a bear looking for honey with his friends that is so darn appealing? Even watching it today I was completely charmed.

Production-

The production on Many Adventures is pretty simple. It combines 3 shorts that had been released previously in the 60s into one film. This included Winnie the Pooh and the Honey Tree (1966), Winnie the Pooh and the Blustery Day (1968), and Winnie the Pooh and Tigger Too (1974). Many Adventures was released in 1977 just a few months before The Rescuers (talk about a change of tone in one year!).

All 3 shorts have songs by the amazing Sherman Brothers. They are sweet, simple songs and I love them. All 3 have the same cast, except for Roo and Christopher Robin. All break the 4th wall and involve the narrator, Sebastian Cabot, and the book in the story.

Here’s a great example of the narrator involvement from Winnie the Pooh and Tigger Too:

Not many movies can pull off the breaking the 4th wall (Ferris Bueller comes to mind but not many others).

This would be one of the last package films for Disney in theaters until 1999’s Fantasia 2000 and I think it was a smart move on their part. Because it could be divided into bits it was very easy to transfer to television and if it was on TV a small child is going to have a far easier time staying engaged for 24 minutes vs 2 hours and a mother is more likely to allow a child to watch a brief program than a full length movie. This made it easy viewing for nearly every child for decades.

In fact, we didn’t have the combined feature but had 3 separate VHS tapes with the shorts and I remember liking them all but especially The Blustery Day (more to come on that later).

Why so Loved?

Brevity and a target audience wouldn’t be enough to be so consistently and universally loved. So why? Well, it simply makes a lot of correct choices.

First of all, it is lovely to look at. The animation is light without the heavy outlines of the last 15 years of sketch Xerox Disney films. It was a breath of fresh air just to look at today.

It’s about toys and playtime. It’s the same reason we love Toy Story. It has easy to understand conflict and characters who learn subtle but important lessons.

They also have iconic voice performances by Sterling Holloway as Pooh, John Fieldler as Piglet, Junius Matthews as Rabbit and Paul Winchell as Tigger. Winchell in particular played Tigger until 1999. There’s a warmth to all of their performances which is so winning and almost comforting to all ages.

Finally, the reason I think people love Winnie the Pooh is they are genuinely great characters. Pooh is not relentlessly cheerful like Mickey or Minnie. He can be very selfish and self-absorbed. Of course, Eeyore is always gloomy, Tigger has no boundaries, Piglet stutters, Rabbit is a nag, Owl is pretentious etc. They all have flaws and strengths and they learn through the story. It just shows good writing really does make all the difference.

One of the best examples of character growth and tender-hearted characters is in The Blustery Day when Piglet decides to give up his house for his friend. In a matter of seconds you see Piglet’s face and body go from concerned about self to amazing charity, and even knowing it is the right thing to do doesn’t make the words easy to say. Love that! It feels so genuine:

Story-

Let’s talk about the individual shorts for a second .

We get a lovely intro to the picture.

Winnie the Pooh and the Honey Tree

We start out learning that Pooh is thinking and “when he thought, he thought in the most thoughtful way he could think”. He then does his stoutness exercises which is such a fun number.

So off he is to find honey! With Christopher Robin’s help he creates a clever disguise to fool some bees into giving him their honey.

He’s so innocent and funny. How can you not love it?

Next Pooh decides to visit his friend Rabbit and eats all his honey. He gets stuck in Rabbits open door . What I’ve always thought was funny is Rabbit could push him back but he’d rather have him stuck than back in his house. ‘Having gone this far it seems a pity to waste it’.

We also meet the Gopher in this segment. His humor is meant entirely for adults as he talks about not wanting to give an estimate and working strictly cash. Concepts kids wouldn’t understand. He’s not in the book you know!

Finally he is free and we move on to

Winnie the Pooh and the Blustery Day-

We start out meeting Piglet and hearing about his house and what a blustery day it is! Piglet even gets turned into a kite

Piglet and Pooh visit owl and tells them a story about his aunt that plays the glockenspiel (see good writing again!) but then disaster strikes!

Eeyore sets off to look for a house for owl and the blustery day turns into a blustery night. This is when we first meet Tigger.

What a loveable character! But he has also told Pooh about Heffalumps and Woozles and despite his best efforts Pooh falls asleep and dreams of creatures stealing his honey. This scene is so reminiscent of Pink Elephants on Parade it is exhilarating and quite bold for a film for toddlers. Does it scare little children in your life? Oddly enough I don’t remember it scaring my siblings and they were wimps 😉 .

After a lot of films of safe animation the heffalumps and woozles segment was so refreshing. It must have felt that way to viewers in 1977 too!

Next we wake up to the blustery day turning into a flood. I love Piglet says ‘it’s awfully hard to be brave when you’re such a small animal”. What great writing for a movie geared towards small children (and even now I feel like a small animal sometimes).

Pooh saves Piglet and we have a hero party. Piglet gives Owl his house in the scene from above so it becomes a double hero party!

Winnie the Pooh and Tigger Too-

This last set is all about Tigger. He has gotten so bouncy that he has ruined rabbits garden and rabbit has had enough:

They decide to trick Tigger and scare the bounce out of him! But things don’t workout quite the way they expect. What I love about this story is the team is trying to take away what makes Tigger special. After all bouncing is ‘what Tiggers do best’.

Rabbit wants to change Tigger but he ends up grateful for his friend and being humbled more than a little bit! I love this scene:

Then the last segment is Tigger realizing that even bouncing can be done too much. He gets stuck up in a tree and as you saw in the narrator clip above it is tough getting down!

Finally we get an ending to all 3 pictures I had never seen before with Pooh and Christopher Robin talking before he goes off to school. I found this segment very touching:

Rip my heart out why don’t you. Now I know where Toy Story 3 got the idea for their ending.

“Pooh promise you won’t forget me”

“Oh I won’t ever Christopher I promise”

That’s exchange alone demonstrates the staying power of Winnie the Pooh. I think one of the great fears of nearly every human is a fear of being forgotten and for a child’s film to pick up on that is so lovely.

Conclusion/Review-

I heard an interview with the creator of Elmo and he said Elmo always meant love, and I think Winnie the Pooh is all about childhood- the innocence, selfishness, forgiveness, imagination and friendship. So often as adults those virtues get lost and a movie like The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh reminds us to go back to Pooh corner and remember.

The voice work is fabulous and fits perfectly with the stories.The songs are lovely. The animation is fluid and non-sketchy. It feels light and the story rarely drags.The writing is sharp and full of memorable lines.

It is also not always syrupy and sentimental. We get scares and trippy nightmares. Characters have to make hard choices and sacrifice for their friends. They make mistakes and have to be rescued. They overdo things and are judgmental at times. It’s just go it all.

Each of the shorts is the perfect length to entertain very small children who can be difficult to find programming for. The Heffalump and Woozles might have to be skipped for toddlers but it depends on the kid.

The ride at Disneyland is also a lot of fun if you ever get a chance to ride it.

I really don’t have anything bad to say about The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh

Overall Grade- A+

(If people disagree with me on this one I will be stunned!).

Movie 21: Robin Hood

September 4, 2014September 4, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

(This review ended up being less about the story of the movie but more about the things I learned in my research and how I feel about individual scenes. I hope it works for you guys)

Robin Hood is a movie as soon as I heard it was on blu-ray I went out and bought it. I really do love it. That said, I do have to look at films a little bit objectively or what’s the point in even reviewing them? It can’t be all based on nostalgia even if that is a factor.

So, let’s talk about it.

Production-

There isn’t a ton of production info on a lot of these movies from the 70s. Honestly I poured through the internet trying to find out the thought process behind the writing, art, songs, etc in Robin Hood but found very little. However, I was able to piece some interesting tidbits together, and really enjoyed rewatching it again.

First thing to know is Robin Hood is the first movie to be made without any involvement from Walt Disney. (Walt had signed off on the Aristocats before his passing).

Released in 1973 Disney had moved its focus away from its animated division in the late 60s and all of their capital and energy was going into Walt Disney World in Florida. We are used to it now but at the time Epcot was a herculean task and another example of Walt Disney dreaming big!

But the budgets on the animated films suffered for a long time. We didn’t see Disney invest real money into a picture until 1985 with the Black Cauldron, which was also their biggest flop (kind of excited to see that one!).

Robin Hood didn’t always start out as a comedy. Lead writer and storyboard artist Ken Anderson (who is given writing credit on the feature even though he hated it) was commissioned by Disney to come up with a story based on Reynard the fox, a fearless creature known throughout France. He gave his drawings to Disney animators and I read multiple places he ‘wept when he saw that his “character concepts had been processed into stereotypes for the animation in Robin Hood”

It is the first Disney movie to have all anthropomorphic creatures. The Rooster says at the beginning it is ‘the animal kingdom’s version’ of the story. Not sure why they did it this way but there were shows and stories featuring all anthropomorphic creatures for kids successful at the time. On the anthropomorphic note doing this research I came across a group called the furry fandom which have an unhealthy love for anthropomorphic creatures. Let’s just say I have nightmares! 😉

They also give us a really long intro with the character name, type of animal, and the celebrity voice which is new to Disney. Before Jungle Book Disney had not used celebrity voices, but had relied on talented voice overs actors like Verna Felton and Sterling Holloway. Even now when celebrity voices are very common I still don’t recall them having a character introduction like in Robin Hood.

Recycling Animation-

Something surprising I learned in my research is Disney has admitted to recycling animation (I didn’t know you could do that) from other films to make Robin Hood. I’m not sure I really care but it is kind of disappointing.

This recycling or ‘limited animation’ is defined as- “Limited animation is a process of making animated cartoons that does not redraw entire frames but variably reuses common parts between frames

It is for this reason that Disney as a company kind of hates Robin Hood and many other films from this era, despite them being very popular. I’ve always thought it was interesting how little attention they get in the park and I think this recycled material explains why.. .

Humor in Robin Hood-

The thing I liked as a child and still like today about Robin Hood is its humorous script. There is a ton of funny dialogue like when Prince John tells the guards to ‘seize the fat one’ or when Little John says ‘who’s driving this flying umbrella?’ This scene at the tournament is full of classic physical comedy. We even get a pie in the face. Some may think that is cliche but to kids watching they haven’t seen those bits before and they are put together so well. It still makes me laugh:

There is also humor with Robin Hood and Little John dressing in drag to steal from Prince John. Again the scene uses classic comedy tropes including some sexy music but it works. I repeat it still makes me laugh:

One Disney site I found said Prince John’s humor had been based on The Smother’s Brothers, which makes sense. They were a very funny comedy sketch team that produced popular comedic albums and had The Smother’s Brothers Comedy Hour from 1967-1969 but it was deemed as too edgy and taken off the air.

Listen to this bit and see if it reminds you of Robin Hood.

As I was watching it today I kept thinking about a Muppets sketch from the 70s I had seen a few days ago. It felt very similar in tone and cadence to Robin Hood and it made me wonder if the two were connected in some way? I did some research and found out Sesame Street started in 1969. Real work on Robin didn’t start till well after that date. I could be wrong on the Muppet connection but it just feels like a similar form of comedy. The Muppets are very bawdy in their humor, they have all different animals behaving like humans and they have sincere moments like Rainbow Connection. I think Disney saw the success of Muppets and decided to apply it to Robin Hood.

When I saw this clip my opinion was even more confirmed. From season 1 or 2 of Sesame Street:

I am spending so much time talking about the writing because I think that is what is special about Robin Hood. The animation clearly has problems but even if it is recycled, the humor still works.

The Music-

The music is pretty good. Following the lead of the Aristocats and Jungle Book, they used recognizable singers including Phil Harris and country singer Roger Miller who wrote the songs and serves as narrator. (A folksy feeling soundtrack may also be a nod to the Smothers Brothers who played guitar and sang in their act).

The introductory song is my personal favorite and I pretty much have it memorized. It’s not a song that will change your life but I kind of like it.

The Love song is pretty 70’s corny so it isn’t my favorite. I do like Phony King of England song even if it is recycled animation. (What about you guys? Does knowing that make you like it less or do you not care?)

Characters-

Another thing I like about Robin Hood is you get introduced to a lot of characters. In 83 minutes (long for Disney those days) we have little vignettes with the sheriff, Prince John and Hiss, Clucky and Maid Marian, and the rabbits and friends, etc.

I don’t know if there is a more morose moment in Disney than the ‘Not in Nottingham’ number because it affects so many people. I remember as a child being less interested in the last third of the movie and I still kind of agree with that assessment. The scenes with Nutsy are fun but the jailbreak we don’t really get any action that is better or different from the tournament scenes earlier so it is less engrossing.

That’s a pretty sad song but I like it. The score is nice by frequent Disney collaborator George Bruns. They use music for a lot of the sound effect cues so instead of a bonk on the head noise, it is a noise worked into the score.

There is also no attempt in the movie to give accents to any characters but Prince John and Hiss (who is totally a rip off from Kaa down to the hypnotizing eyes but he has a lot of great lines). Everyone sounds like they are from Chicago but it is less distracting than in the Aristocats because it wasn’t supposed to be London.

I love Hiss’s dialogue like “What cheek! Creepy? Buster? Long one? Who does that dopey duke think he is? or “Sire, you have an absolute skill for encouraging contributions from the poor”

Prince John is also funny with lines like “Yes, my reluctant reptile, and when our elusive hero tries to rescue the corpulent cleric” and “You cowardly cobra! Procrastinating python! Agravating asp! Ooh, you eel in snake’s clothing!” That’s pretty high vocabulary for a kids movie and it totally works. It still makes me laugh.

Clucky is one of my favorite characters. In one scene she fights off a bunch of rhinos football style and it is very funny. There is also a lot of sadness with Robin Hood with taxes, and people going to prison and one particularly cruel scene where the Sheriff steals the last farthing the church mice have given to the poor.

Movie Review/Conclusion-

So what do you do with a movie like this? Is it an artistic masterpiece? No. Do I get why Disney is embarrassed by it? Kind of but not really. It’s not like in recycling they were stealing from other animation studios artwork. I get why it may not be your greatest achievement but if it makes people smile than that’s an accomplishment however crudely it is accomplished.

Maybe part of it is Disney had been the first so they didn’t have to recylcle ideas or formulas from any one else. They were then what Pixar was in the 2000s. Everything at the beginning had been so great, like Pixar, that when they are less ambitious it feels like a failure even if lots of people like the end product.

I guess when it comes down to it making kids laugh isn’t all that easy, and I think Robin Hood does a good job with that. I like the vocal performances. I like the action scenes. I like that the characters use big words and challenge kids a little bit with ideas of social justice and taxation.

So even acknowledging its flaws I still love Robin Hood and think it is one of the most rewatchable Disney movies. The artpiece films are amazing but a good laugh goes a long way!

Overall Grade- B+ (I’d give it an A but I do think that last act drags a little)

What do you guys think about Robin Hood?

Movie 20: The Aristocats

September 3, 2014September 3, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

When I started this project I was hoping I might find some hidden gems or perhaps grow to love movies I had discounted as a young child.

I guess that kind of happened with Pinocchio and Fantasia but I had already grown to like them as an adult. I just like them even more after this project.

With our next picture, The Aristocats, we are diving into the 70s and 80s which were rough for Disney animation. There were some gems but there is a reason they call 1989 to 1994 the Disney renaissance.

Unfortunately now on this blog we are in the dark ages…

Let’s talk about Aristocats.

This movie in basically every way is an attempt to merge everything we liked about Lady and the Tramp with 101 Dalmatians and the result feels pretty mediocre.

Lady and the Tramp elements-

We have a high brow female pet

A tough talking street pet

The Plucky Friends Who Save the Day

Borderline Offensive Asian Stereotype

101 Dalmatian Elements-

Villain who doesn’t like pets- (And just to be clear Edgar is no Cruella. I’m just showing how the copy was attempted)

Cute Kittens/Puppies-

Long Journey to Get Back to Owners (they even both have a little one who can’t make it in the cold scene)

Finally a European city local

And you throw in a fun score from the Sherman Brothers with Phil Harris ala Jungle Book and you’ve got the Aristocrats….

The Story-

So, we know what it is derivative of. Does it do those things well?

It’s not terrible but the Aristocats is very forgettable. Here’s the story:

A rich Parisian woman named Mademoiselle Adelaide has 4 cats- a mother named Duchess (awfully similar name to Lady don’t you think?) and 3 of her kittens named Marie, Toulouse and Berlioz. They give the cats French names although none but the mother have a french accent. Why?

Duchess is voiced by Eva Gabor and to be honest I had a hard time understanding anything she said. I had to put it on subtitles. I think Disney fixed this with Gabor in The Rescuers but we will see. She is less interesting than Lady because we never feel any sense of growth or anxiety from her. Indeed when she is away from her madame she seems to be in a good mood, if a little worried about her owner. When Lady has the muzzle on her and is in the pound it feels much more desperate than anything we see out of Duchess.

Just woke up from and am in a basket in the middle of nowhere but expressions are just the same as before?

Oddly enough, the Duchess and Madame are the only characters that speak with a french accent.

The Madame decides to give all of her money to her butler Edgar but only after her cats are taken care of. This angers the Butler, so he decides to be rid of the cats.

My question is wouldn’t this make the most sense to do once the Madame is failing? Once she isn’t able to search for them or be of any help in finding them? Also, could he really not share a mansion with some cats? I mean most people would assume it was his house. I’d put up with some cats for a mansion.

Even if abducting the cats made sense for Edgar, he is just not the presence and character that Cruella was. He has very little personality and Cruella cared about looking good in furs which is so much more twisted and interesting than just wanting an inheritance sooner. Cruella has more personality in her driving than Edgar has in his whole character (which they also try to copy with Edgar as a crazy motorcycle driver to much less effect).

However, before they are abducted we get a song. It’s little Marie practicing her lessons and it’s okay not great. It kind of reminds me of the Tremaine sisters practicing in Cinderella.

In this story nobody knows the animals can talk or behave like humans and yet nobody in the story is amazed when they play instruments throughout. I find that a strange touch. At least in Lady and the Tramp the one Italian guy thinks it’s strange they are talking to dogs. In Jungle Book there is just one human and he has lived amongst the animals so he doesn’t know it is strange for them to be playing music and singing.

So, Edgar drugs the cats and puts them by the river; although, he is chased by 2 dogs named Lafayette and Napoleon, who were pretty good together. They are no Jock and Trusty, who had a lot more heart but they are pleasant comic relief.

At least they have some spunk in them. Honestly most of the time the Duchess looks bored. Even when they meet a tough talking alley cat named Thomas O’Malley she looks disinterested. There is no spark between the two cats like with Tramp and Lady or Pongo and Perdy.

I know I’m over thinking this but if you aren’t going to have an alley cat in France speak with a french accent, and you are going to name him O’Malley shouldn’t he have an Irish accent? Thomas O’Malley is an Irish name if I’ve ever heard one. I think they just had Phil Harris as the voice because he was so great as Baloo. They put him in without caring if his character or performance made any sense.

It’s an ok song but it ain’t no bear necessities….

There’s no sense of real danger for any of them like with the dalmatians. Cruella comes very close to killing the puppies and it is tense. They have to be a step ahead, smarter and luckier than their foe to make it back home. If you have both films compare the 101 scene getting onto a truck to the Aristocats getting on to a truck and there really is no comparison. The Aristocats scene is a walk in the park compared to 101.

Just as in 101 we have relief from the horse, colonel, and sergeant Tibbs, the Aristocats are helped by a cute mouse and 2 British geese (3 if you include a drunk geese uncle who is briefly seen and then forgotten about). These three side characters are the best parts of the movies. I wish the movie was about them to be honest.

Pretty quickly and with nothing but sore feet they make it to Paris and meet a group of scat musician cats. (Again nobody thinks it’s strange all these animals playing music?). But they sing and while the flashing colors during the song gets old quick it is a fun number and well written by the Sherman brothers.

I hate to keep harping on the accents but it is so distracting to have everyone else sounding like Americans with Duchess tough to understand she is so strongly French. I wish they didn’t have the little girl singing in the song because I don’t think she is good but the song is a lot of fun even if the chopsticks cat is pretty bad…

Without the Duchess even breaking a sweat they make it back home with the Madame and send Edgar to Timbuktu. Next we get a scene of Thomas domesticated just like in Lady in the Tramp. This feels hollow because there hasn’t been any chemistry between Thomas and Duchess. I guess they danced but there was no spaghetti magic!

I know I’m overthinking things again but in Lady and the Tramp and 101 Dalmatians we have 2 couples that don’t have puppies till after they are basically married (quite literally in 101). But in Aristocats the Duchess has 3 kittens at the start of the movie. The journey from kitten to cat isn’t that long so we can assume the Duchess must have had some kind of cat relationship (can’t believe I’m writing that) where she was abandoned or left with the 3 kittens. Isn’t that strange? You would think she had procreated by osmosis by this movie!

Another somewhat nitpicking point-

They are at the most beautiful city in the world and yet nearly every shot looks ugly and gloomy. Here’s an interesting contrast.

Take a look at Paris from Ratatouille (I realize different technology but hear me out)

In their version of Paris it is light and bright and your eyes are drawn right to the skyline and the Eiffel Tower. It looks magical.

In the Aristocats version

In this version the Eiffel Tower is a part of a distant blur and the skyline is cloudy and gray. It’s the smokestacks and rooftops which are most prominent. You would think the great thing about Paris was the smokestacks and the soot!

You see what I mean? The sketchy xerox style of this era already makes things look dark and dreary and the choices the artists made enhanced that not made it better. And when they did add color it wasn’t in a sparkling magical way like in Lady in the Tramp, it was distracting, like an assault to the eyes. It’s like a cat rave.

I don’t know if it was just the netflix version I was watching but some the animation was alarmingly bad on this as well. There were times when characters spoke where it didn’t quite match up to the images on the screen, especially when the Madame was speaking.

Look at this scene and see if you agree with me they are slightly off. Like when she says ‘you’re a shameless flatterer George’ her lips don’t match up with what she’s saying. It kind of reminds me of anime when the translators get really close but not quite with the English dubbing.

Movie Review-

So if you haven’t gathered this is not my favorite film. I suppose it is harmless fluff but in a world where you can watch the real deal why watch the mediocre copy of the better Disney films? I guess since it’s on netflix right now it will entertain small children. The music is fun and it isn’t offensive just kind of lazy. Even on Netflix there are better Disney films like The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh or Robin Hood. Put on one of those and then only after you have watched everything else put on the Aristocats.

I guess it was a big hit for Disney so they knew what they were doing in that regard but as a lover of Disney art this fails to impress. The music is fun but not the Sherman Brothers best.

In a way I kind of feel the same way about the Aristocats as I felt about Fun, Fancy and Free. Both felt very lazy and derivative of better films.

Plus, Aristocats has such bland characters, a boring villain and no real tension with the cats journey. The lack of accents bugged me and other story flaws like Edgar’s motivation for killing the cats at that moment didn’t make sense. Also, why is the Duchess an unexplained mother?

Those are just some of the objections but all in all it’s just a boring, lazy film.

Overall Grade- D- (my lowest grade so far because it is the movie I would least want to rewatch of all the movies I’ve seen to this date)

This is what I call Disney phoning it in…