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…

Movie 19: Jungle Book

September 2, 2014September 2, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

Today we get to talk about one of my all time favorites- The Jungle Book. I just watched it and it is every bit as bright and colorful as I remember.

Released in 1967 Jungle Book is the last film Walt Disney produced before his untimely death of lung cancer in 1966. He didn’t get to view the final product but did see some nearly completed drafts.

Just a quick bit of trivia. My friend Jim has studied lemurs and monkeys in Madagascar, so I asked him whether there are bears in the jungle. He said not in India. These type of bears are in Vietnam and there are no apes! It’s obviously not a realistic picture but I just thought that was funny.

Production-

It is interesting to compare Jungle Book to Sword in the Stone, which didn’t work for me. The same xerox method was used but this picture is much more pleasant to watch.

If you recall, one of my issues with Sword in the Stone is that everything looked blue and gray. In Jungle Book we get the thick outlines from the sketch xerox style which isn’t my favorite but at least it is light and colorful.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

But even the brightness wouldn’t save the picture on its own. The sharp writing and the music make it work so well.

According to the dvd extras Walt asked the storyboard writers if they had read Rudyard Kipling’s book The Jungle Book. They said ‘no’ and he said ‘good because we are doing it our own way’.

I don’t know if as an older man Disney grew weary of the darker themes in Pinocchio, Dumbo and Bambi but the later films of his life are much lighter and comedic in tone . He told the animators to take the dark scenes of the book and ‘turn them on their ear. Have fun with them’.

Originally Terry Gilkyson was hired to write the songs but Walt felt they were too dark in tone, so all of the songs except for bare necessities were turned over to the Sherman Brothers.

Sherman Brothers had written Mary Poppins and Sword in the Stone for Disney at this point and Jungle Book really shows their versatility. They could easily go from broadway style in Mary Poppins to swing music and jazz for Jungle Book.

The idea for the jazz feel came partly from Gilkyson’s song but also from thinking about the monkeys (who are much darker in the book). What do they do all day? They swing! So the king of the monkeys had to also be the king of the swingers.

Jungle Book is also the first time in a feature film Disney used ‘celebrity voices’ for it’s characters.

Phil Harris was a comic and singer of the era and Walt met him at a party and signed him on to play Baloo. Then we had Sebastian Cabot, Sterling Holloway, Louie Prima and George Sanders.

It is the final Disney appearance by the great Verna Felton. I wish they gave an Oscar for best animated vocal. They deserve it and get no recognition.

Like Sword in the Stone, Jungle Book is clearly marketed to boys with only 2 female characters- Verna’s matriarch elephant (which is her second time voicing an elephant. First time being in Dumbo), and the girl who gets the water.

I really like the watercolor feel to the backgrounds. It reminds me of Dumbo. I am sure Jungle Book was also attractive to Walt Disney because of the popularity of The Jungle Cruise in Disneyland and the easy ties which could be built into the park.

What’s strange about this period of Disney is they could produce the animation in half the time but it took longer to make the films. I’m not sure why. Walt’s priorities shifted a bit to the park and his TV show but still it shouldn’t have taken so long with the xerox process? Jungle Book took 4 years to complete but at least it did very well at the box office. 22 million in it’s first release!

Story-

But really this movie sinks and swims on the strength of it’s songs and writing. The story is very simple. Mowgli is a ‘man cub’ or human who has been raised by wolves. The wolf pack is worried about having a man cub when the great Shere Khan, the tiger, is back prowling around.

Bagheera, the panther, agrees to take Mowgli back to the man village for his safety. So, most of the movie is like a road trip (or walking trip) in the jungle with animal characters.

The first characters Mowgli and Bagheera meet on their journey are a band of militarized elephants that are very funny.

Next we meet the snake Kaa who likes to hypnotize his victims before the kill. It’s a pretty gnarly character and I like the look of his eyes. It feels hypnotic. Sterling Holloway gives another great vocal performance. He was so versatile as a voice actor. Hard to believe it is the same voice that is so warm and sweet in Winnie the Pooh.

Further down the jungle they meet Baloo the bear. He is free-living and easy with just the bare necessities. As Baloo explains his life philosophy to Mowgli we get treated one of the best Disney songs ever written. It is so much fun. I dare you not to tap your feet and smile!

Unfortunately in the middle of the song Mowgli gets taken by some monkeys to their leader, King Louie. They abduct him because Louie wants to find out how humans make fire. In order to charm Mowgli into telling the secret we get another great song.

It’s not only the songs which are engaging but the dialogue is also very sharp and funny. As a small example

Bagheera: This will take brains, not brawn.

Baloo: You better believe it, and I’m loaded with both.

That’s a funny line and so many of the laughs work. It kind of reminds me of a Pixar movie in that regard. The jokes feel natural and part of the plot.

One of the things that annoyed me about Sword in the Stone is there was too much teaching good lessons and not enough showing. Jungle Book does a much better job weaving those lessons into the story. I love the tender scenes where we see how much Bagheera and Baloo really care about Mowgli and vice versa. This helps give us a reason to be rooting for them. They are good friends, which is the main message of the movie. the vultures even sing about it! I love this conversation between Bagheera and Baloo:

Mowgli flees from Bagheera and Baloo and ends up with a band of vultures. They are very funny and clearly based on the British invasion bands of the 60s.

Like I said in the Dumbo review I really don’t think this scene is that different than the crows but this is clearly referencing white people not black.

Shere Khan voiced by George Sanders coming in at the end is fabulous. What a bass!

Then Kaa comes back and sings the longer version of Trust in Me and it is actually Shere Khan that saves Mowgli this time. I love that the gave a snake sinus problems and a lisp. There is something inherently funny about a hissing snake with ssssinus issues.

I also like they added two villains. Where the Sword in the Stone had only a few minutes with a villain with confusing motivation, Jungle Book has two villains with clear motivations. They want to eat Mowgli. It’s as simple as that.

Both Shere Khan and Kaa remind me of good James Bond villains- all sleek and full of vibrato.

Baloo then reappears and takes on Shere Khan. For a second we think Baloo is dead in a scene that actually recites scripture but it works, which is surprising in such a silly movie. They’ve had just enough heart with the characters to pull this scene off.

Baloo is also funny when he says ‘I wish my Mother could have heard this…’. That’s good writing!

Finally they get the village and Mowgli has the instant love trope which Disney always uses when he see’s a girl getting water . She sings a pretty song but the lyrics I could do without. I like my female characters to have a little bit more free choice in their life. Everything is pretty mapped out for this girl. (It really makes sense that I responded to Little Mermaid so much. There aren’t a lot of strong, good women in Disney films from 1960-1989.

Our final scene of the film is Bagheera and Baloo walking off arm around arm much like the end of Casablanca. You can almost hear him say ‘ I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship”

Conclusion and Review-

Much like Fantasia and its classical music, it is unlikely you will enjoy The Jungle Book, if you don’t like jazz music.. I enjoy jazz music, so I love the movie. The songs make me want to dance!

In fact, when I was 14 my Dad took my sister and I to France. We were there on Bastille Day and went to a restaurant with a band playing. To our delight they did a cover of ‘I wanta be like you’. We bought the CD and it was a favorite of our family for many years. It’s just such a happy, fun song.

But if it is not your taste you will probably find the movie rough going; although, the characters are a lot of fun and there are 2 great villains.

The male-centric messages and characters is a little annoying but I forget about that when I’m immersed in the story. The writing is sharp. Managing to be both tender-hearted and funny.

The backgrounds and character animation are the best of the Xerox films with lots of bright colors and movement. It’s not as artistically interesting to me as their more ambitious projects but just like 101 Dalmatians and Lady in the Tramp, it does what it is trying to do very well, and like I said it all comes down to good writing and music.

Jungle Book may be the Disney classic I rewatch the most. It is cheerful, sweet and has a nice message. Plus, it is appropriate for all ages with only one brief sad moment. So check it out!

Overall Grade- A (I’d give it an A+ if there was a better female character).

Movie 18: Sword in the Stone

September 1, 2014September 6, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

Let me start out by saying- I know this movie has lots of die hard fans. That is amazing but I am not in that group. I was sincerely hoping to come away with a different impression this time out as I hadn’t seen since I was little. Unfortunately, I still saw the same problems. But hopefully I can explain my problems with the film in a thoughtful way that even fans can acknowledge my reaction as plausible. Either way, I have to be honest on this blog both with things I like and dislike or there is no point to doing it at all. This is not a fact guide on Disney. It is reviews.

A Change in Demographics-

I couldn’t find as much good behind the scenes information on this movie (kind of like Peter Pan in that regard). They used the xerox process in 101 Dalmatians that give the film a sketchbook feel which worked in 101 but bothers me more in this type of fanciful story. 101 is almost all about animals (and black and white animals to boot) where Sword in the Stone is people so the sketchy style feels dirty and off-putting.

It was a pretty cheap film to make with the new advances and it made a lot of money at the box office. It is perhaps these results when compared with Sleeping Beauty’s disappointment that turned Disney off of girl-centric films to marketing to boys.

This is just my observations. I could be wrong but when we look at the Disney films from the 60-80s they are almost all led by boys, not girls. There are a few ensemble types like The Aristocats and The Rescuers but the male characters in those movies get most of the juicy dialogue and songs. Like I said there are a few exceptions like Clucky in Robin Hood but not many.

Perhaps this doesn’t matter but at the very least it explains why most of these pictures didn’t do much for me as a child. They didn’t have any characters I could relate to or fantasize about their stories.

Production-

Sword in the Stone was released in 1963 and it is based on the novel of the same name by TH White and is the last feature to be released in Walt Disney’s lifetime.

Like I said above, they used the xerox method which helped everything get finished quickly but is not my favorite technique artistically. The thick black lines of the xerox make everything look dark and a little sloppy. See how thick the outlines of the characters are in this shot of Archimedes? That is from the xerox.

As a point of contrast, here is the owl in Bambi. You can hardly see the outlines and it looks so much more natural, layered, and smooth. Both owls even have the same coloring but I like the Bambi version much better.

They also had an unexpected challenge with the boy who played Arthur’s voice changing mid-process, so there are actually 3 voices to play the boy- sometimes with a single scene there are different voices and it is very distracting! (I wish I could find a good clip for you of it. Not a ton of clips of this movie for some reason on youtube).

It is also interesting that none of the characters really have a British accent given it is about King Arthur and set in England…

Arthur is also kind of a bland hero. He is a little like Aladdin in that way but at least Aladdin shows some spunk in the beginning, sings us a song. He’s not totally influenced by other people. Plus, the supporting character in Aladdin is way more interesting and funnier than Merlin.

By the end I haven’t sensed anything so unique and special about Arthur to allow him to pull the sword out of the stone. It kind of seems like he got lucky

Most of the movie is Arthur being taught things by Merlin but at the end of one lesson he says ‘that was fun’. Not the sense of someone changing their life and preparing to be King. Nevertheless, the movie feels it has shown enough character growth and we are on to the next lesson. . Honestly Archimedes the owl shows more growth and personality than Arthur.

It’s strange that Merlin is treated like the old coot but he, not Arthur, is the one that defeats Madame Mim in the end. Arthur is more of a spectator for the duel.

The movie received mixed reviews from critics but it has a loyal fan base that like it’s style and direction.

Sword in the Stone also features our first Disney introduction to the Sherman Brothers who would later write songs for Mary Poppins and Bedknobs and Broomsticks. They are great writers but aside from a nice opening number I do not think this is their best work. Most of the songs aren’t really songs but someone giving directions with melody coming in and out with long pauses..

But part of my dislike for this movie I admit is purely subjective. To me it is unpleasant to look at. Nearly every scene looks like it has been mod-podged with a blue coating. It all looks very gray and blue and the sketchy style which worked in 101 looks dirty to me here.

Some of these were supposed to be at night or in the water which explains the blue/gray color palate but not all of them. To me it is just unpleasant to look at and for a girl who loves Disney for it’s art that’s a big problem.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Also a lot of the characters are drawn in a distasteful way. I know the wolf and Madame Mim are villains but Disney has done lots of villains that looked sleek and stylish, even the hyenas in Lion King were more pleasant to look at than these two. They should have done the wolf from Peter and the wolf. Now that was a menacing creature requiring great bravery to beat.

I don’t know I just didn’t like the designs and the characters weren’t captivating enough to make that feeling go away. I’m not crazy about some of the drawings in the Jungle Book but the personalities are so fun and songs so good I let it pass.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Story-

Let’s talk about the story. It’s pretty simple. The best part of the movie is the explanation of the legend of the sword. It is a good song, with some color (still lots of blue) but I like it.

Arthur is an orphan, called Wart, who is trying to help his foster brother Kay with his arrows when he falls into Merlin, the wizards, house. Merlin senses something in the boy and asks to be his tutor and they head back to the castle. Arthur’s foster father Sir Ector is not thrilled with the idea but agrees to let Merlin stay in the a barely standing tower of the castle.

Sir Pellinore, arrives and tells Sir Ector, Arthur and Kay there will be a tournament with the winner becoming King. Ector decides to prepare the strong Kay and for Arthur to learn to be his squire.

Arthur is actually ok with this arrangement and says to Merlin at one point ‘what is wrong with being a squire’. Merlin will have none of it and insists the boy get an education. He says things like ‘a boy has got to have an education’. Then we see them learning letters and numbers. Arthur tries to teach him about the future, where Archimedes teaches the past.

The problem with these scenes is they come off as very trite. Why not instead of simply telling us that education is good show us? Show us why the alphabet is important. Take Arthur on a journey where he needs to read, or use science or history. The three journeys or lessons he goes on are mostly about being brave and using your imagination. You don’t need to be able to read and write to do that.

Obviously I think education is good but too often this movie felt like those ‘CBS Cares’ blips after a show where some star will tell you how great an education is or how bad bullying is and that’s fine for a blip but for a movie, especially an animated movie it is unsatisfying. Don’t just tell me, show me. For example, Pongo and Perdy didn’t just talk about being brave and learn lessons, they faced situations requiring bravery. We didn’t need them to give us a lesson because their actions gave us a lesson. To me the transformation parts of the lessons were contrived and not filled with any real peril or tension, so the lessons felt hallow.

Even in the final scenes of the duel and getting the sword nothing he has learned in the lessons really helps Arthur become king. Why could he lift that sword out? Seems like it must have been destiny. Don’t need education to do that.

Anyway, I digress. Merlin decides to teach Arthur three lessons. The first lesson he gets turned into a fish.

But as someone new to the fish world Arthur begins to sink. Merlin tells him he must rely on his instincts and use his imagination. Again, doesn’t a lesson on relying on your instincts kind of negate the need for a traditional education? Anyone can respond to instincts.

So Arthur and Merlin face a pike but the owl Archimedes saves the day. (again how has Arthur proven he is the chosen one to be King? Archimedes is more courageous in this scene).

The second lesson is a long section of the movie but before that Arthur must finish washing the dishes in order to go out with Merlin . Naturally that difficulty gets fixed with magic. Arthur asks ‘won’t I get in trouble for leaving’ and Merlin says “who cares as long as the work gets done”. I’m not sure if that is the greatest lesson to be teaching a future King. How a task gets done, and managing how people feel about their work is often the most important part of a good leader.

Nevertheless, it is a cute song and probably my favorite part of the movie.

Another strange choice is they leave the spell running. Why not either speed the spell up or wait a few minutes and then go. There was not a doubt in my mind that kitchen with the spell would come back to haunt them (and they seem to be gone for hours and yet the spell has done exactly the same amount of work. I looked at it pretty carefully and the shots look exactly the same down to the dirty skillet.

So, on to the next lesson Arthur learns a little bit about gravity and then he and Arthur are turned into squirrels so they can learn about love. Again, not sure what this has to do with being a King but I suppose he will have a queen so it is fine.

Merlin can come across as kind of trite and preachy. At one point while a squirrel he says ‘just because you don’t understand something doesn’t mean it is wrong’. They kind of explore that with the squirrel but with a story about King Arthur there is so much more they could have done with it, such potential.

A girl squirrel actually falls in love with Arthur and saves his life from the wolf. Then he turns back into a human and honestly I felt bad for the squirrel. That’s a very confusing lesson for kids. They seem to be saying ‘love, it tears your heart out but ain’t it great anyway’. I get teaching kids that life isn’t fair and love can hurt but usually there is some resolution or happiness shown later. This is just tragic and it adds to the grim, gray feel of the picture.

The final transformation is into a bird so Arthur can fly because the world is round and he needs to experience it. This lesson seems totally a vehicle for Arthur to end up in Madame Mim’s house.

Arthur tells her he is working with Merlin and that he is the greatest wizard. Very offended she turns herself into a strange version of a ‘beautiful woman’. I’m sorry but look at her chest. Her breasts are going in two different directions. and the waist is so tiny it looks bizarre.

The thing is if you really believed you were ugly and had the power to change yourself into something you think is beautiful, why wouldn’t you want to stay beautiful? Is she a villain just because she likes being ugly? It’s honestly hard to say because she introduced to the story so late we don’t really get to know why she is bad.

Arthur also tells Madame Mim, ‘Merlin’s magic is useful, for something good’. Really? What in this movie has shown us that? So far he has turned people into fish, squirrels and birds to what avail? To teach Arthur I guess but not very well. The most substantial help he has given others is cleaning the dishes.

So Merlin and Madame Mim duel in a fun scene with both turning into different creatures to fight. And aside from being ugly and thinking she’s a better wizard than Merlin have we really seen any proof that Madame Mim is a bad person? Again one of those things in this movie that is explained not shown.

This clip has different music but it is the best I could find of the duel. It is a fun scene with creative animation but I wish it gave more for Arthur to do since it is supposed to be his story. Still, I don’t mind it.

After the duel Arthur is asked to go be a squire for Kay at the tournament. Merlin says he is being a sell-out settling for such a lowly post but Arthur says there’s nothing wrong with it and I agree with him. Why could he not still take lessons as a squire? It is very strange.

So Arthur and Kay go to the tournament but he forgets Kay’s sword and tries to retrieve it but he can’t. Seeing the sword in the stone he pulls it out. Quickly people realize what he has done but they ask to see it done one more time. Kay and others try to pull the sword out to no avail. Only Arthur can, but again it feels more like he is lucky then he has earned it.

At least we finally get some light and color in this scene.

Conclusion-

I kind of gave my review as I described the picture. This is not my favorite Disney film. It’s not terrible and young boys might like Arthur and Merlin but it does not work for me. The color palate is so blue and gray and unpleasant to look at. The lead characters are bland. The songs are so-so and the messages in the picture feel like an after school special instead of part of the story. The lessons seem muddled and not particularly helpful in becoming a King leaving me frustrated.

Madame Mim is all right but underused. It is played like a trifling rivalry instead of a true villain. Think about the confrontation between Ursula and Triton. That was a rivalry which glowed with animosity and passion. This seems like more of a lark.

Worst of all they didn’t give me any reason to understand why Arthur pulled out the sword. He didn’t save them from the pike. He broke the squirrel’s heart and he didn’t defeat Madame Mim. He’s fine with being squire so I guess that makes him humble but that’s about it. Also the 3 voices for Arthur is very distracting.

I’m sure fans will be frustrated by my response but I’ve got to be honest with how I feel in order for this blog to have any validity.

Overall Grade= C-

Now on to Jungle Book!

Movie 17: 101 Dalmatians

August 31, 2014September 2, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

In any genre of movies we like different films for different reasons. Some are pure entertainment. Others teach us lessons. Some help us empathize with others. Others are artistic experiences. Some have great special effects taking us to a new world and then others are just a lot of fun.

101 Dalmatians falls into that latter category. It is not one of Disney’s ambitious artistic masterpieces; although it certainly has it’s own style. But, it is an incredibly charming movie for the whole family. I watched it again today and literally every scene works. Every character is right on pitch for the story they are trying to tell. Disney’s more ambitious pictures will always be my favorites but 101 Dalmatians is it’s own version of perfection.

Production-

Released in 1961 101 Dalmatians had the unenviable job of trying to save the studio after the disaster of Sleeping Beauty. (It seems the end of a decade this happens for Disney. Always looking for that savior project!). Sleeping Beauty had taken 9 years to finish, was incredibly labor intensive and it did not turn a profit. Walt Disney at one point even considered closing down the animation department, as the live action Disney wing was doing very well.

Like so many times before Disney needed a hit.

The project actually began with Walt Disney. At this time he was minimally involved in the actual production but heavily involved with the storyboarding and brainstorming process. He had read the novel by Dodie Smith and really liked it. He then gave it to writer and illustrator Bill Peet and told him to come up with a script.

When Peet gave Disney the script he said it was ‘so perfect’ he didn’t need to be involved and handed the project over to Peet.

At the time a xerox technique had been invented where hand inking could be replaced by a camera that would copy the lines on the cells. They had tried using this for Sleeping Beauty but it didn’t look right.

Fortunately, the process looked great with black and white, black and white dalmatians that is!

This is why the style of the movie looks like a sketch book. It was where the xerox technology was and saved animators 1/2 the cost and time it would have otherwise taken.

The characters were also done using hand drawings and not the rotoscoping of previous films requiring human actor filming, which saved money as well .

On the xerox they used a spot pattern like a constellation and once they had one anchor spot they went outward. By the end of the movie they had animated 6,469,652 spots!

They also had a terrific villain that the author Dodie Smith said Bill Peet script had improved upon the book (that’s pretty cool to have an author say about a movie!)

Like Lady and the Tramp, 101 Dalmatians did very well at the box office and is still the only Disney animated movie to be remade (for better or worse). Although 2 versions of Jungle Book are coming (groan).

This is also the first time Disney had a movie set in the time period they were writing in. Previous movies had been period pieces or fantasy settings.

The Story

We start out being introduced to the male dalmatian Pongo. He tells us about his pet human Roger, who is a confirmed old bachelor. Naturally Pongo plays matchmaker after he spots a beautiful dalmatian and her equally beautiful owner.

Both pairs end up getting married.

Next we see wedded bliss and get introduced to Cruella De Vil who is a schoolmate of Anita. She is obsessed with beauty and furs. We also learn early on that she is an insane driver. Her voice performance is so funny.

She is such a great villain because she isn’t even in it for the money. She just wants to look good. The vocal performance by Betty Lou Gerson may be my favorite in all of Disney. It is so funny and over the top.

You will see in the scene above we get the main song in the movie which only has 2 full length songs- Cruella De vil and Dalmatian Plantation (which is actually not fully sung). It’s actually a pretty big departure for Disney to have so little music.

Cruella finds out when the puppies are delivered and this scene is just hilarious and I love the light in the doorway.

With no luck Cruella sends her goons Horace and Jasper out to steal the puppies in a pretty heartbreaking scene.

The humans try everything but to no avail so Pongo and Perdy send word through the twilight bark- a system of telegraphing information from dog to dog. What’s amazing about these scenes is the characters are only introduced for a moment or two and yet I like every one of them. I particularly like a set of horse, a dog named the Colonel and a Tabby Cat that saves the puppies on more than one occasion.

The Tabby Cat notices some movement over at the old De Vil place ‘Hell Hall’ (not too subtle on names here Cruella De Vil living in Hell Hall!). So they create a plan to get the puppies away. To their shock there aren’t 15 but 101!

Like I said, the Tabby Cat is pretty great and saves the puppies until Pongo and Perdy storm in!

101-Dalmatians-101-dalmatians-4760676-784-588 — I really like this tabby cat. He’s got guts!

I also like the thieves are watching a show called ‘What’s My Crime’ set up like a quiz show and a friend of theirs is the guest criminal. There are lots of little moments of humor in the movie.

Cruella finds out they have lost the puppies and becomes enraged. I find it hilarious to watch this woman drive.

The rest of the movie is a chase caper with various dogs helping the 101 Dalmatians, as well as some cows! The dogs outsmart the humans every step of the way.

I mean if that doesn’t melt your heart something is wrong with you!

They end up arriving at the house and a dalmatian plantation is in the works!

My Review-

I think little kids respond particularly well to 101 because they can relate to the puppies. They are cute and kids like stories were children (or small puppies) are smarter than the adults. That’s why kids like Home Alone so much. I remember seeing Home Alone in the theater and laughing so hard I could barely breathe. I think you have some of that same spirit with 101 Dalmatians.

It’s also very well written. Bill Peet did a terrific job endowing every character with humor and a specific personality. It reminded me this go-around of the Toy Story movies where we get to know so many of the toys. Except this was even harder because at least the toys don’t all look alike. The writing had to be pretty special to make this story work, and they pulled it off.

Cruella is hilarious in every scene she is in. It is such a preposterous notion for someone to want to kill puppies to make a coat. I am no dog lover but even I know you don’t hurt puppies! With Lady and the Tramp the conflict came from other animals- cats, rats, etc. The humans were kind of incidental carriers of the animals. In 101 there is no real barriers between the dogs world and the humans and this is established right away with the courtship scene in the park. The two worlds are basically coexisting together and the story does not treat the dogs as any less because they are owned by the humans. In fact, it may be the reverse as Pongo gets the whole story going.

After my review of Lady and the Tramp I told a commenter that ‘for what they were trying to do it is about as good as they could make it’ but where that movie needed a stronger villain, 101 has that in spades and Cruella is one of Disney’s best. Mostly because her motives are so shallow and she is completely insane. It’s a great voice performance and the animators thought of ever detail down to her long icy cigarette and her crazy driving. She’s so much fun to watch.

So yes, it’s not Disney’s most ambitious artistic film but it does have it’s own style and I just think every choice they made was right. It is just about perfect.

Evidently Walt Disney was not a great fan of 101 Dalmatians because he felt it took them away from the fantasy and dreaming of earlier projects- was more pedestrian in feel. I’d agree but it still works. I wonder if this is why the movie is basically ignored at Disneyland? No rides or other attractions despite it making a lot of money.

Oh well. I love it!

Overall Grade A+

Best and Worst of Disney 1937-1959

August 30, 2014August 31, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

As I have been doing my reviews people have asked me ‘what is your favorite of what you’ve reviewed so far?’ It’s tough because I like all of them for different reasons. But I thought it would be fun to give some highlights of the first 20 years of Disney which I just finished by reviewing Sleeping Beauty.

Overall Best Film- Cinderella

It’s really hard to decide but I’d pick Cinderella because it has the whole package. It’s got a likable heroine who we actually get to know, great songs, it’s got artistry in scenes like Sing Sweet Nightingale, a terrific villain in Lady Tremaine, brilliant voice work and just the right touch of humor.

Overall Worst Film- Three Cabelleros and Fun and Fancy Free

I gave 2 films D grades, Fun and Fancy Free and Three Cabelleros. FFF I thought was just lazy. The Bongo story is odd and kind of slow. Mickey and the Beanstalk is fine but not great. If it was a little tighter with a better villain I would have enjoyed it more. Three Cabelleros is in my opinion worse than Saludos Amigos because it only has 2 shorts and then there are songs where the characters are shouting and lots of Donald chasing human women. They aren’t awful but just for Disney they are weak entries.

Best Artistry- Fantasia

Alice in Wonderland is amazing but Fantasia is like a combination of the greatest art gallery in the world and symphony in one experience. It blows me away.

Fantasia isn’t really entertainment . It’s goals are bigger than that. It is trying to inspire creativity in hopes the viewer will not simply absorb art and music but give their own spin on it, their own interpretation. It inspires me every time I watch it and I think people who don’t like it just don’t like classical music.

Strangest Scene- Dumbo

Pink Elephants on Parade

It’s like every bad dream you’ve ever had jumbled into one crazy sequence. It is also comes from Dumbo and Timothy getting drunk which is strange and has absolutely no purpose in the story. I love it!

Strangest Character- Make Mine Music- Willie the Whale who sings Opera

Is that not one of the oddest images you've seen? — Is that not one of the oddest images you’ve seen?

Make Mine Music was full of strange moments but Willie the opera singing whale was the strangest.. He just looks so strange. He looks like a giant chalkboard eraser. And why did he have to die?The narrator actually tells the children watching “Willie’s singing was a miracle and people aren’t used to miracles. And you faithful friend don’t be too sad because somewhere in whatever heaven is reserved for creatures of the deep Willie is still singing” That’s such a strange message for kids. ‘people don’t like miracles and so they kill them and send them to whale heaven.”

Scariest Scene- Pinnochio Pleasure Island.

As terrifying as The Headless Horseman is nothing will ever top little children being turned into donkeys to be sent to salt mines. And it is even scarier to know it is never resolved. Pinocchio escapes but that’s it. Nobody saves the kids or turns them back or anything. It’s nuts!

Best Villain- Maleficent from Sleeping Beauty

From Captain Hook, to the Devil, to Lady Tremaine all the early villains are good, but Maleficent is all of those villains put together in as she puts it ‘the mistress of evil’. She’s over the top, funny, creepy, and gives the best fight of any villain in any Disney movie. It actually feels like she might get away with everything when she enchains Prince Philip in her dungeon. It isn’t until the 90s we get such a great Disney villain.

Best Song- When You Wish Upon a Star- Pinocchio

I could have also picked ‘A Dream is a Wish’ from Cinderella but it is very similar in message to When You Wish. They are both great melodies and have words about hoping for goodness and happiness in life.

Worst Song- Say it with a Slap- Bongo from Fun and Fancy Free

Here’s a great message for kids- when you really love someone slap them as hard as you can… (Red Man song from Peter Pan is probably the worst but the melody is actually catchy, just the words super uncomfortable)

Best Original Score- Bambi

Clearly Fantasia should be the winner but since it is using classical music, Bambi wins because it’s music actually becomes a character within the story. It animates the forest with wind, rain, and other sound effects in the score.

Saddest Moment- Dumbo- Baby Mine

Bambi’s mother dieing is very sad but we haven’t gotten to know her very well and it all happens quickly, not giving us much time to process it before we are moving on to love in the Spring. Dumbo’s encaged Mother singing him a lullaby is a long scene, a beautiful song and a tender moment. It’s sad but not in a bad way. Dumbo is such a satisfying picture because it has moments of all different emotions- fear, anger, laughter, sadness etc.

Funniest Moment- Peter Pan- Hook and the Crocodile

I had forgotten how much slapstick is in Peter Pan and it is all done very well. I laughed throughout the film.

Most Romantic Moment- Lady and the Tramp- Spaghetti

I think spaghetti became romantic food because of this scene. Great song, and about as romantic as dogs could be. Such a lovely little movie.

Most Underrated- Melody Time

Melody Time is the strongest of the package films. Make Mine Music is entertaining in a ‘so bad it’s good way’ but I genuinely liked Melody Time. The Johnny Appleseed short is sweet with nice songs and Pecos Bill is fun, if a little bit too long. It was tough for me to find but if you can hunt it down give it a watch. It’s gentle and sweet and I liked it.

Most Overrated- Peter Pan

There is a lot to like in Peter Pan. Don’t get me wrong. I just wasn’t as enamored with it this go-around for some reason. I don’t like the way Wendy is treated, especialy by the other female charcaters when she hasn’t done anything wrong. The slapstick is funny but nothing too memorable. The artistry and music aren’t great. Love Tinker Bell and Hook but other characters are kind of bland. It’s a lot of fun but not the masterpiece I remember it being. Plus, we have the awkward Red Man song.

Trippiest Movie- Alice in Wonderland

This movie is so trippy it doesn’t even worry about a plot. It just introduces Alice and the viewer to character after character and I love it!

Conclusion

I enjoyed watching every single one of these movies. And more importantly I learned a lot along the way. Even a movie I didn’t love like Three Cabelleros was interesting because of it was requested by the US Government, and it was quite effective in winning the loyalty of the South American countries to our cause. It makes the choices made in the movie interesting. So, there is always things to like about any Disney.

Mostly I love the artistry. I love movies but I think animation has a special ability to combine mediums and challenge the limitations of human actors in live action. You can have a child turning into a donkey where in live action the scene would be very expensive.

I also feel inspired by Walt Disney to take some risks and try new things. He was certainly willing to leverage years of hard work over risky propositions and I admire that. Of the first 16 films what are your favorites and have my reviews made you curious to watch any of the movies? I hope you do and let me know what you think!

Coming Up Next

Now on to 60’s and 70’s. Both of these periods would be less productive for Disney. In 60s Disney made and released 3 films:

1. 101 Dalmations

2. Sword in the Stone

3. Jungle Book

1970s

1. The Aristocats

2. Robin Hood

3. Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh

4. The Rescuers.

So that will be my upcoming reviews. Thanks for reading! I’m having a blast!

Rachel's Reviews

Rottentomatoes Certified Critic. Reviews of the latest movies especially animation as well as classic reviews, family movie night picks and more

Author: Rachel's Reviews

Movie 24: Fox and the Hound

Movie 23: The Rescuers

Movie 22: The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh

Movie 21: Robin Hood

Movie 20: The Aristocats

Movie 19: Jungle Book

Movie 18: Sword in the Stone

Movie 17: 101 Dalmatians

Best and Worst of Disney 1937-1959